Flamer

At least senior leadership hasn't noticed yet. I mean, how could you see a problem coming with stupid people like RAND telling you that there is a problem.

Interesting how they think hiding a bunch of pilots in the ARC will solve the numbers problem and improve retention. It will improve retention.....in the ARC.

Droopy

A couple years ago I had the opportunity to talk to one of the decision makers from AFPC for most of a day. We talked at length about this. His one and only position was that regardless what we see with Age 65, ATP rules, or anything, the statistics on retention for the last 6 - 9 years show that nothing needs to be changed. In fact, based on the statistics from the last few years, they were leaning heavily towards recommending a reduction in incentives due to historically high retention.

No matter what I said, I could not get him to look anywhere beyond the statistics from the last 6 - 9 years... You can lead a horse to water, but it really is impossible to make him drink. (Maybe something for Mythbusters there...)

Wish I knew how to include a facepalm smiley...

Droopy

Snooter

Shacked it ^. Sometimes I think I'm being selfish for wanting the Air Force to fall on its face, then I snap to and realize, they wouldn't hesitate to toss me out into the cold at the first opportunity. End of the day it's money, and I've made a clear and conscious decision to avoid any further adsc.

Snooter

okay, victory! Unlock the doors to the other forums and give me a my PM rights!

webecheck

So you are saying the statistics are wrong or that retention will make a dramatic change in the very near future?? Its a business decision and the stats don't lie. This type of thread/argument has been going on in bars, ready rooms, debriefs, etc for years. The dramatic retention change has yet to happen, and its not going to unless the pension gets altered imo.

gr8vu

AFPC story reminds me of when my wife (who has never had any interest in financial markets) called me at work to see if I was worried about the DOW being near 7,000...I knew it was time to start buying.

In my career the AF has always been fairly shorted sighted especially with pilot manning. Chief of Staff spoke to our graduating class and said that all qualified would go to pilot training--not a month or two later they limited it to 250 slots. Of course that was the same Chief who said in the same speech that he just couldn't see women as combat fighter pilots and that of course all changed within the following 2 years.

Next few years should be interesting to watch if economy continues to improve/doesn't go south and pilot industry picks up. We've had some of the greatest rentention rates the past few years at all ranks. Somebody will get promoted because they will have to fix these "unexpected" problems.

6-9 years is a fairly small aperature for complex macro level events.

LowSlowT2

No, what he's saying is the statistics are being viewed without context and consideration of what is happening beyond the walls & confines of big blue.

A business decision needs to be made with all factors considered and the AF is unable to do that. They are reactionary only. It is gobsmackingly moronic to point at these statistics on their own, without any reference or context to them, and claim, "all is well".

The retention will change when the economy picks up and the airlines start hiring en masse...just like the late '90s. Nothing the AF can do will change that...except this time, retention will be far worse than the '90s because of current AF QOL.

e6bpilot

Bam. Well said. The same thing applies for the Navy. As retention numbers grew due to the economy, airline furloughs, etc, the Navy has slowly racheted up their deployment lengths and eliminated a lot of quality of life initiatives. Granted, a lot of it has to do with the wars that we have been fighting, but there was no reason to keep two carriers in the AG/AS area for the last year and a half. In a seven month deployment that I did, the airwing dropped two bombs and had a handful of strafing runs and shows of force. I don't even want to think of how much those two bombs cost in dollars and tears. The personal cost is going to be measured in the mass exodus of people who get out when the getting is good because they now feel like they were used and abused. Of course, those same people now have alimony payments, child support, and a whole host of other issues to go with their service.
I know, I know, all volunteer force, cry me a river. I just think this alludes to what is being said above: When it comes time to actually try and retain people, I think the military is going to be very dissapointed when they try to throw cash at the smart, capable people that you want to keep in the service and they laugh on their way out the door.

webecheck

It is not my intent to get into an argument, merely to dispute this "mass exodus" theory of disgruntled pilots which has been claimed to be "about to begin" for the last 10 years imo.

I'm not sure why you say the stats arent being considered with whats happening outside big blue when the AFPC rep in the conversation mentioned some airline considerations.

How is the AF unable to make a business decision WRT retention? Retention dictates no changes needed; biz decision complete. You are claiming the AF is making the wrong choices...but there is no "market" demanding anything different. I don't think the AF is claiming all is well, but they certainly are claiming pay and benefits while on active duty are better than what most may find in the civilian world...and retention rates support that argument. As long as they have the ability to stop loss instead of pay the pipe dream 50k/year bonus mid level captains claim it would take to keep them in blah, blah, blah.......why change anything? cheaper to make stop loss payments than a 10yr 50k bonus. That my friend is a business decision.

Many people must be under the assumption the AF wants to retain people after their 10 yr commitment. I on the other hand think they don't want to. I think there are enough flag officer wanna-be's that enough will be retained regardless of what their life could be like as a civilian. And after that 11+ years a pilot has put in, probably 98% pursue ANG or AFRC so they are still retained more or less.

In regards to QOL, this thread has digressed into a smell of the typical I'm overworked because of ancillary training, deployments, and reflective belts. Well let's be honest, how much time does it really take to click through the annual ADLS tng? Fragged for an hour, done in 5. And for deployments, thats what everybody signed up for isn't it? So the beef becomes well its too many deployments for my liking. I could go on and on. Point is, name another profession that has more prima donna complain about anything people, than the pilot community. It sucks sometimes, and I'm about to leave on a 365, but bolting for the civilian world has just as many examples of regret as there are happy endings.

I wish I was home more, worked shorter days, didn't to have to go on a 365 soon, didn't have to do ancillary garbage or wear a reflective belt while deployed too. However, I will gladly make my 140k per year (on bonus) and retire with a paycheck every month in 6 years. If I had a 6 or 8 yr commitment like the good ol' days and major airlines were hiring, yep different story, punch. But, the AF made a business decision with 10yr thing, and probably 99.9% of pilot wanna be's never thought twice about it when in college, myself included. I have saved and invested over the first 14 years. Done fairly well, might even be able to retire in 6 and never work again. Would not be able to do that if I bounced at 11.8 yrs and got a civilian job. To each his own. I didn't want to work 2 jobs (assuming a TR gig), potentially take a huge pay cut, and have to worry about economic downturns, etc. The first 12 is essentially a sunk cost and no job out there will let you work 8 years and get a pension. Many ***** and moan as Captains b/c its the cool thing to do, but secretly think differently as Major staring at the 18.6 after tax bonus and the 8 more years until potentially complete freedom. Considering that, and the current state of the airlines, the USAF doesn't have to change a thing.

I would love to see the AF do a few things differently, but from a business perspective I don't see why they would have to.

Again, I have no intention to fight some battle here. I simply believe this "mass exodus" is not going to happen. My supporting argument: 10 years of prophesying from the pilot community and it still hasn't happened + record retention rates to back up the opinion that life in the USAF isn't all that bad.

Deuce130

I'm currently an airline pilot on AD orders at MAJCOM/HQ...I get peppered with questions all the time about guard/reserve, airlines, quality of life, etc. I'm as honest as I can be with the younger guys and the overriding sentiment is angst about the second half of their careers. And they're accurate when they fully realize that the second half isn't going to be nearly as much fun as the first half. Staff tours, PME, in school residences, lack of flying jobs, budget uncertainties...all weigh in on them. At the same time, they see a guy like me doing the same thing they're doing, but I'm still flying my tail off at my AFRC unit up the road and I've got a great airline job waiting for me when I decide I'm bored of the AD grind or the orders run out. Once the 10 year point hits, the future of their flying careers is extremely uncertain. After staff and school, only the chosen few will return to flying squadrons as DOs and CCs, and the reward for that is longer office hours and less flying hours. The guard and reserve is where it's at....all of it. The cost savings, the flying hours, the quality of life, the opportunities. Guys should weigh their options carefully. Frankly, our senior leadership has their head in the sand. Of course, they're products of the system they love so much, why wouldn't they defend the status quo?