Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Career Builder > Military
USAF limited period rated officer recall prog >

USAF limited period rated officer recall prog


Notices
Military Military Aviation

USAF limited period rated officer recall prog

Old 10-03-2011 | 10:25 PM
  #41  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 431
Likes: 1
From: 737 FO/Capt/FO
Default

Did folks entering the above program have to sign sanctuary waivers? I was speaking with my IMA Program Manager last week and he said this is a current practice. To prevent folks from invoking the sanctuary option on that first day of AD after the 18yr point.

Lifter
Reply
Old 10-05-2011 | 07:08 PM
  #42  
Woodro's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Default

I'll second Super Galaxy’s remark to Kikuchiyo, thanks for the excellent info! It's comforting to know others are in the same boat. I'm trying to fill a Non-Vol. position our unit has been tasked to fill, but have been told no due my established DOS of 2 Aug 2012 (3 year point). I'm one of those unfortunate overmanned mobility guys (hollow paper air force; most of our dudes are tasked on extended TDY's). Kikuchiyo, do you have any insight if they can extend tours past the four year point? If so how long? Could it be matched up with the Non-Vol. tour we have been tasked? Thanks for your time!
Reply
Old 10-05-2011 | 09:37 PM
  #43  
Kikuchiyo's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: 747 FO
Default

Originally Posted by Starlifter
Did folks entering the above program have to sign sanctuary waivers?
There was supposed to be a statement on their EAD orders to the effect that sanctuary would not be denied. I don't know if that made it onto everyone's orders. AFPC and HAF are granting it automatically. Remember, these guys came back on AD in 2009/2010, before the overmanning crisis we're in now.
Reply
Old 10-05-2011 | 09:47 PM
  #44  
Kikuchiyo's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: 747 FO
Default

Originally Posted by Woodro
I'll second Super Galaxy’s remark to Kikuchiyo, thanks for the excellent info!
You're welcome. It's nice to know that I can help.

(can they) extend tours past the four year point?
No, 4 yrs is the max that the program was established for. I don't know if that's a statutory limit, but that's as far as HAF has authority to extend us under the LPRP or RRORP. Sanctuary is a separate statutory entitlement.

Could it be matched up with the Non-Vol. tour we have been tasked?
Not for mobility guys. They simply can't justify extending mobility guys given that the community as a whole is over 140% manned, and we're throwing other guys out to get down to our total AF end-strength. The rated manning guys at HAF can't win that fight with the manpower and money guys, and the higher ups can't justify it politically to SAF, SecDef, Congress, etc.

I'm curious about said "non-vol tour." Do you mean a normal 179 deployment, or something longer? If it's a 365 iTDY or a remote, then it should have come to your unit with a name attached.
Reply
Old 10-06-2011 | 08:59 AM
  #45  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,192
Likes: 10
From: Petting Zoo
Default

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo

Not for mobility guys. They simply can't justify extending mobility guys given that the community as a whole is over 140% manned, and we're throwing other guys out to get down to our total AF end-strength. The rated manning guys at HAF can't win that fight with the manpower and money guys, and the higher ups can't justify it politically to SAF, SecDef, Congress, etc.

Wow, really? How'd that happen? For years we were always [told] we were undermanned in the 17. And based on Ops tempo, it sure seemed like it.
Reply
Old 10-06-2011 | 10:56 AM
  #46  
Kikuchiyo's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: 747 FO
Default

Correction to previous. Mobility manning is only about 130% right now. Projected to exceed 140% in a couple years. And yes, they did account for increased airline hiring. Though we'll see how accurate their projections are

Sorry for the inaccurate data in the post.
Reply
Old 10-06-2011 | 11:52 AM
  #47  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
From: Ret AD, back to AA
Default

Originally Posted by LivingInMEM
Once you enter sanctuary, even on the first day, you declare your right to extend until the 20-yr point. What they can do is send you wherever they want to, big blue owns you at that point (i.e. there is no obligation to honor any prior LPRP promises). What they will do depends on how long you have until 20 and what you are currently doing and where you currently are; that part takes a crystal ball. I don't think the USAF has a habit of purposefully slamming guys just because they made it to sanctuary.
This point is what makes many of us in the LPRP program nervous about "declaring sanctuary" earlier than we really need to. If indeed it is true that once you do so the LPRP contract is void and they are free to abuse you as needed, then it would be best to declare as late in the 2 yr window as you comfortably can. I am in sanctuary now and am happy with my flying assignment--why would I want to risk that unless somehow the AF could reneg on sanctuary and boot me to the street at 19 years and 7 months when my unextended 3 yr LPRP gig is done?
Reply
Old 10-06-2011 | 08:19 PM
  #48  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 829
Likes: 0
Default

Sanctuary is not automatic, it must be invoked by the member. There is no prohibition to a member's orders ending whenever the term is over no matter how many years of service have been accrued. If the member lets the orders end voluntarily without taking advantage of sanctuary protection, it's too late. That being said, there is no advantage to invoking sanctuary early because you are exposing yourself to the AF discretion earlier than necessary.
Reply
Old 10-07-2011 | 08:53 PM
  #49  
Woodro's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo
You're welcome. It's nice to know that I can help.



No, 4 yrs is the max that the program was established for. I don't know if that's a statutory limit, but that's as far as HAF has authority to extend us under the LPRP or RRORP. Sanctuary is a separate statutory entitlement.



Not for mobility guys. They simply can't justify extending mobility guys given that the community as a whole is over 140% manned, and we're throwing other guys out to get down to our total AF end-strength. The rated manning guys at HAF can't win that fight with the manpower and money guys, and the higher ups can't justify it politically to SAF, SecDef, Congress, etc.

I'm curious about said "non-vol tour." Do you mean a normal 179 deployment, or something longer? If it's a 365 iTDY or a remote, then it should have come to your unit with a name attached.
Kikuchiyo,

It was a 3-4 year PCS to be an Active Duty Liaison with a nearby guard unit, flying the same jet. I was in the guard for five years and would have been a pretty good fit for the job in my humble opinion. Nobody wants the job because they think it's a promotion killer. I'll pin on terminal Lt Col here soon so I'm not bothered. Again thanks for the good scoop. I'll just have to wait until the next round of recalls in two years.
Reply
Old 10-08-2011 | 07:13 AM
  #50  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,192
Likes: 10
From: Petting Zoo
Default

Originally Posted by Kikuchiyo
Correction to previous. Mobility manning is only about 130% right now. Projected to exceed 140% in a couple years. And yes, they did account for increased airline hiring. Though we'll see how accurate their projections are

Sorry for the inaccurate data in the post.
K--

I know I'm beating a dead horse that's off topic but...why stop now.

I'm not getting it, from the outside it appears the only way manning can increase is airframe reduction or accession. Are we cutting mobility airframes in the next few years? I know there are problems with cutting accessions, though that doesn't appear to have ever stopped AFPC.

What's causing the manning increase, and if it's in the future why can't it be stopped?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just feel like I'm missing something.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Riddler
Military
969
08-04-2010 09:17 PM
usa3000go
Military
27
04-30-2008 05:32 PM
gcsass
Cargo
68
03-04-2008 08:33 AM
Micro
Cargo
42
07-19-2007 06:53 AM
Tech Maven
Hangar Talk
17
10-30-2006 10:41 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices