2007 Pilot Retention Rates
09-10-2007, 03:54 PM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 129
Originally Posted by AFPirate
Roadking...you'll find plenty of folks willing to discuss 777 orders at CAL on one of the other forums. This is more of a military discussion thread/board.
To redirect - I saw that they added 11F and 12F to their list of AFSCs which are ineligible for force shaping. And I quote "due to overall manning and AFSC sustainment considerations". I'll bet that same line shows up on stop-loss in a year or so. When Gen Mosseley culls the force by another 20k of folks next year, maybe they'll get rid of all the enlisted cooks and cater all of our meals? Ridiculous.
I've heard some say stop loss and I've heard some say larger bonus. I think stop loss can only go so far (ie you can only impliment it for a year or two)...larger bonues will have to emerge to keep guys from taking off for the airlines, which by the looks of it are coming back from 9-11.
To redirect - I saw that they added 11F and 12F to their list of AFSCs which are ineligible for force shaping. And I quote "due to overall manning and AFSC sustainment considerations". I'll bet that same line shows up on stop-loss in a year or so. When Gen Mosseley culls the force by another 20k of folks next year, maybe they'll get rid of all the enlisted cooks and cater all of our meals? Ridiculous.
I've heard some say stop loss and I've heard some say larger bonus. I think stop loss can only go so far (ie you can only impliment it for a year or two)...larger bonues will have to emerge to keep guys from taking off for the airlines, which by the looks of it are coming back from 9-11.
Lichte (AF/A1) regarding a question that came up about pilot bonuses and
VSP at a conference that I recently attended.
===============Break, Break=================
Art, (Lt Gen Lichte: AF/CVA)
I understand during your recent world travels that you were cornered on
bonuses. In particular, we understand you were asked why we would
continue to pay retention bonuses to pilots at the same time we were
offering separation incentive pay and conducting Force Shaping programs.
BLUF: Both programs are necessary to ensure we retain our warfighting
skills while we also meet our goals for end strength and skills mix.
ACP provides us the retention incentive to bridge the gap between when
pilots end their initial ADSC and when retirement proximity helps with
retention. The long term ACP contracts we use provide stability and
help us maintain warfighting capability. Without the incentives the
long lead times, high training costs, and volatile external pilot market
could rapidly degrade our warfighting capability. In contrast, the
force shaping programs are designed to reduce specific skill sets and
year groups to ensure we meet end strength and skill mix goals.
Sometimes these programs overlap as we incentivize some to get out while
also paying some to stay in. Remember that the force shaping programs
are temporary measures to help us reach the right size and shape of our
force. The bonus programs are longer term efforts to make sure we
compete for and incentivize airmen in high demand, hazardous duty, or
hard to fill programs.
My folks have provided two talking papers on the subject of ACP and
bonuses in general.
Bottomline: this is not about "good guys", or even about who "deserves"
a bonus (a case which even general officers continually try to make to
me).....this is about a business case related to what it takes to
sustain a force.
Roger (Lt Gen Brady: AF/A1)
09-10-2007, 05:35 PM
#42
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Desk :(
Posts: 44
Always remember this simple fact: AFPC has their heads so far up their collective kiesters, that they have no idea what the hell they are doing... The system is hard broke. We'll have a stop loss soon enough and people screaming that the sky is falling. And to think, these cycles seem to be happening faster and faster. I think twice now in my career...
09-11-2007, 03:41 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: The IPA EB speaks for me
Posts: 520
So to read the quoted general.... How little can we pay folks to stay in until the promise of retirement keeps them here vs. how little can we pay overages to leave before we have to give them a retirement check.
Tcha, as if... the real BLUF (Bottom line up front, or the buzzword for the Attention Deficit Disordered Generations)- Go ANG or Reserves. Active duty doesn't want your business.
Tcha, as if... the real BLUF (Bottom line up front, or the buzzword for the Attention Deficit Disordered Generations)- Go ANG or Reserves. Active duty doesn't want your business.
09-12-2007, 11:07 AM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Ending the Backlog one claim at a time
Posts: 486
Fts
Originally Posted by BDGERJMN
The Navy is in the same boat(no pun intended). The Hornet community next year will not have enough bodies "opting in" for dept head screen board. I am sure other fixed wing communities are the same. This year VFA had a surplus of 2-7 bodies(for 65 DH slots) depending on which spreadsheet you look at. That included 2nd screen guys that didnt make it last year. I've also heard, not confirmed, that the Naval Aviation was short some 150 new accessions this past FY. I wonder what that will do down the road.
I just recieved an email from my CO telling me that the Commodore would like to sit down with those of us that opted out and find out our reasons why. I guess it has the Bureau's attention. Gee, I wonder why. 6-8 month cruise followed by 6-9 months(working up) at home followed by 4-6 months on the boat gain, followed shortly thereafter by a year in Iraq or Afghanistan. That pill is a bit hard for those of us trying to have a family to swallow. I could care less what Congress does for the bonus. They could make it $50/grand a year, and the QOL of getting out would still be worth it in the end. My $.02
I just recieved an email from my CO telling me that the Commodore would like to sit down with those of us that opted out and find out our reasons why. I guess it has the Bureau's attention. Gee, I wonder why. 6-8 month cruise followed by 6-9 months(working up) at home followed by 4-6 months on the boat gain, followed shortly thereafter by a year in Iraq or Afghanistan. That pill is a bit hard for those of us trying to have a family to swallow. I could care less what Congress does for the bonus. They could make it $50/grand a year, and the QOL of getting out would still be worth it in the end. My $.02
09-12-2007, 11:36 AM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Brown
Posts: 1,126
Originally Posted by LarianLeQuella
Always remember this simple fact: AFPC has their heads so far up their collective kiesters, that they have no idea what the hell they are doing... The system is hard broke. We'll have a stop loss soon enough and people screaming that the sky is falling. And to think, these cycles seem to be happening faster and faster. I think twice now in my career...
Truer words have never been written on this forum. In my 10 years of AD I came to that conclusion as well. Thankfully the USAF can fly extremely well. It sucks at everything else to include personnel, security, services and CE. I spent my first 3 years in the USAF in the Support Group as a cop officer. All every officer in the Support fields do is think of ways to get promoted and attract attention. There are thousands of support positions that should be contracted out. Releasing pilots early now is absolutely absurd. Paying them to separate so close to their committments expiring is FWA IMO. Take advantage of it if you can though.
10-15-2007, 11:37 PM
#47
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: BBJ Evaluator
Posts: 25
FY 07 results are now at AFPC under personnel statistics. Talk about fudged numbers!! The first slide shows Total FY07 "initial" eligibles at 853. The number they use for all of their computations are what they are calling the FY07 current initial eligibles at 746. Hmmm...a good 107 less pilots? So according to their graphic they had a take rate of 62.7%. Do the numbers with the "initial" eligibles and the rate drops to 54.8%. That's a lot closer to what the AF expected at 50%.
Any news on this years ACP? Going up?
Any news on this years ACP? Going up?
10-16-2007, 05:53 AM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: The IPA EB speaks for me
Posts: 520
Rand Corp has a report from 2007 that says the USAF lost little by getting rid of the 20 year ACP bonus in 2005, but would Lose 15% of it's officers if it removed the ACP bonus of 5 years, keeping w/ the spirit of the email from Gen Brady above.
Don't expect to see ACP go away. It may go up, but probably not. I think AFPC's massaging of the numbers shows a healthy outcome for them, I didn't get the feel that the numbers fell short. If the USAF needs a 50% take rate- they got it on AFPC paper.
ACP take rates are only a part of the story. VSP, Regular Separations at end of ADSC and Palace Chase numbers are not readily integrated yet into numbers I've seen. I think they whipped up a little "perfect storm" in the last 2 years and haven't figured out how to explain it on paper yet.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR470/
http://wwa.afpc.randolph.af.mil/demographics/
Under "Retention Analysis" tab, follow the "FY 07 Pilot ACP Summary" Link
Don't expect to see ACP go away. It may go up, but probably not. I think AFPC's massaging of the numbers shows a healthy outcome for them, I didn't get the feel that the numbers fell short. If the USAF needs a 50% take rate- they got it on AFPC paper.
ACP take rates are only a part of the story. VSP, Regular Separations at end of ADSC and Palace Chase numbers are not readily integrated yet into numbers I've seen. I think they whipped up a little "perfect storm" in the last 2 years and haven't figured out how to explain it on paper yet.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR470/
http://wwa.afpc.randolph.af.mil/demographics/
Under "Retention Analysis" tab, follow the "FY 07 Pilot ACP Summary" Link
10-16-2007, 09:03 AM
#49
Abused Spouse of PBS
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 439
Due to the public nature of this forum, I can't give specific numbers but this info came first hand from a Charleston buddy. Manning numbers are healthy on paper. The problem is that the types of pilots are very junior. The number of Instructor Pilots and some of the AD C-17 bases is jaw dropping low. I really mean it...JAW DROPPING LOW! They are heavy on co-pilots and the senior captains/junior majors are leaving because of separation/PCS (most guys are going UAVs or to Altus). A huge vacuum of experience has been created.
It will be interesting to watch everything unfold. Moose and I both received emails asking us to take a survey about how we felt about coming back on active duty. I recall using language in my response something to the effect of p!ssing into the wind. However, I admit that I will prostitute myself out for the right price. I just need to make sure I have my established line number with whatever airline I decide to go to (still haven't made a final decision yet...I likely will make it by the end of the week).
It will be interesting to watch everything unfold. Moose and I both received emails asking us to take a survey about how we felt about coming back on active duty. I recall using language in my response something to the effect of p!ssing into the wind. However, I admit that I will prostitute myself out for the right price. I just need to make sure I have my established line number with whatever airline I decide to go to (still haven't made a final decision yet...I likely will make it by the end of the week).
10-16-2007, 09:35 AM
#50
China Visa Applicant
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Midfield downwind
Posts: 1,919
Originally Posted by USAFAviator
FY 07 results are now at AFPC under personnel statistics. Talk about fudged numbers!! The first slide shows Total FY07 "initial" eligibles at 853. The number they use for all of their computations are what they are calling the FY07 current initial eligibles at 746. Hmmm...a good 107 less pilots? So according to their graphic they had a take rate of 62.7%. Do the numbers with the "initial" eligibles and the rate drops to 54.8%. That's a lot closer to what the AF expected at 50%.
Any news on this years ACP? Going up?
Any news on this years ACP? Going up?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
