snafu Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 So is this a hail mary to co-exist with the massive costs of the F-35? Or am I way off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so.it.goes Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) Get to a stand alone Guard squadron and hope it doesn't shut down. Stiff arm TFI as long as humanly possible and enjoy the last bastion of the good life! So what is it that's keeping the Guard such a "good deal"? The State funds keeping the AD mentality out or something else? Edited February 4, 2014 by so.it.goes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hindsight2020 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) So what is it that's keeping the Guard such a "good deal"? The State funds keeping the AD mentality out or something else? Nope. It's the basic tenet of a culture that doesn't view the volunteer's desire to 1) exclusively pursue their primary duty, and 2)to do so in the company of peers who feel the same way in a traditional-cultural politically incorrect social environment of brotherhood-in-arms in such pejorative light. The rest of the cultural differences that distinguish the QOL between AD and the ARC are but mere corollaries of that basic principle. ADCON is the legal measure that allows the ARC component to get away with it. Remove that, and the culture is quickly usurped by Active Duty. The problem with the latter is that since there is no formalized economic incentive to tolerate an antagonistic culture in the Reserves (the incentive is mainly cultural) like there is in the Active Duty, the proposition of retaining quality personnel on a formula of Active duty life with Reserve pay is an immediate non-starter. Active Duty arrogantly assumes that the ARC will be there in its present capacity even in the presence of their cultural takeover. They base all their economies of scale regarding expanded reservist numbers base and participation on the assumption of such supposed inelasticity. They are of course, fatally wrong. They don't care of course, as AD is a virus, spreading and infecting cancer into healthy organisms, until there's nothing left. People in the Reserves are largely folks with options, generally unafraid to combine civilian employment exigencies into their military voluntary service. They are generally not a group of people to find themselves economically bound/dependent to the shit sandwiches of a dismissive and ungrateful military employer. They get enough of that as civilians to know better than to pigeonholes themselves that way. It may seem like hyperbole to an Active Duty koolaid drinker, to witness a Reservist quit over cultural issues, but he would be wrong. It isn't hyperbole, it's the reason said Reservist probably left Active duty for Reserve life in the first place. Many have, and many will if these changes come to pass. The remainder will be an inexperienced hollow force of young guys who resemble AD in every way except they don't get paid like Active Duty. This of course, will never materialize. Even young people without experience to leverage, can count with their fingers. You want to change the paradigm? Flip the culture over. Make Active Duty a place where flying your ass off and going home without people fucking with you in garrison, is not viewed pejoratively. A place where the few who will end up at the top do the practice bleeding. That will never happen of course, this place jumped the shark a long ass time ago. Contrary to popular belief, money's got dick to do with it. Most independently wealthy individuals I've met in my professional and academic life, have in fact been Reservists. Active Duty is clueless. Edited February 5, 2014 by hindsight2020 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) Dude. This report is bad. There's some huge game-changing nuggets in there for those who care about life after Active Duty service... Page 32: Recommendation to DISESTABLISH the Air Force Reserve Command, along with disbanding ARC numbered AFs, wings and squadrons. Um, WTFO? You've GOT to be shitting me. Then they go in great detail about the establishment of these so called i-Wings. If you care about divesting yourself from Active Duty stupidity in your attempt at flying military jets for a living, iWings is the last thing you want to work under. It's a complex spider-web of memorandums of agreement/understanding (MOA/MOU) that keeps this teeter-totter from flipping over in the current form, but I'll stick to the punchline. Here's the important thing you AD bubbas need to grasp about your own perception of QOL in the Reserves in the context of this report: It all hinges on a little known word called ADCON. <snip> The report seeks to recommend stripping the AFRC from exercising ADCON by disbanding the command, leaving that responsibility fully within the spectrum of Active Duty Commanders. FUCK. THAT. SHIT. Understand what this means: Active Duty life for a part-time paycheck. If this comes to pass... I'm out. I will not work an AD-level of committment for anything less than a full-up AD paycheck and AD benefits. I don't work off the clock at my .civ job; I sure as shit won't do it at my .mil job. edit: fix quote Edited February 5, 2014 by JarheadBoom 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 So instead of a much needed BRAC, we could get this instead... Well, one thing is for sure--times are getting very interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 So instead of a much needed BRAC, we could get this instead... Well, one thing is for sure--times are getting very interesting. BRAC is recommended many times through the report. The commission recommends many things. The recommendations for increased utilization and integration with AFRC/ANG are just the larger cultural change (depending on how you classify the deployment comments in the report). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 The BRAC has also been recommended 'many times' before...yet, no recent BRAC that has been substantive. But the idea of saving money without closing bases (ie shifting more to the reserves) will probably make the politicians come in their pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosepileit Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 The retired 4 star from AMC is also tied into the BRAC board. He did not appear to be a fan of AFRC owning iron or sharing in AMC's glory during his tenure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddy Spike Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 If this comes to pass... I'm out. I will not work an AD-level of committment for anything less than a full-up AD paycheck and AD benefits. I don't work off the clock at my .civ job; I sure as shit won't do it at my .mil job. edit: fix quote Want to see this in real time? Check out the Navy Reserve. Individual Involuntary Mobilizations for all my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so.it.goes Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Individual Involuntary Mobilizations for all my friends! What does that actually mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddy Spike Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 What does that actually mean? It means you, as a reservist, could be involuntarily mobilized (not the unit, as is generally the case in the ARC, YOU) to do a 365 to the AOR or a ship. And it's not a rare or random thing - CNAFR gets a certain number of mobilizations per year. Some billets get volunteers, but others are involuntary and passed down to the units to pick candidates. Once you are picked, you cannot separate (IRR) or turn it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spur38 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Nope. It's the basic tenet of a culture that doesn't view the volunteer's desire to 1) exclusively pursue their primary duty, and 2)to do so in the company of peers who feel the same way in a traditional-cultural politically incorrect social environment of brotherhood-in-arms in such pejorative light. The rest of the cultural differences that distinguish the QOL between AD and the ARC are but mere corollaries of that basic principle. ADCON is the legal measure that allows the ARC component to get away with it. Remove that, and the culture is quickly usurped by Active Duty. The problem with the latter is that since there is no formalized economic incentive to tolerate an antagonistic culture in the Reserves (the incentive is mainly cultural) like there is in the Active Duty, the proposition of retaining quality personnel on a formula of Active duty life with Reserve pay is an immediate non-starter. Active Duty arrogantly assumes that the ARC will be there in its present capacity even in the presence of their cultural takeover. They base all their economies of scale regarding expanded reservist numbers base and participation on the assumption of such supposed inelasticity. They are of course, fatally wrong. They don't care of course, as AD is a virus, spreading and infecting cancer into healthy organisms, until there's nothing left. People in the Reserves are largely folks with options, generally unafraid to combine civilian employment exigencies into their military voluntary service. They are generally not a group of people to find themselves economically bound/dependent to the shit sandwiches of a dismissive and ungrateful military employer. They get enough of that as civilians to know better than to pigeonholes themselves that way. It may seem like hyperbole to an Active Duty koolaid drinker, to witness a Reservist quit over cultural issues, but he would be wrong. It isn't hyperbole, it's the reason said Reservist probably left Active duty for Reserve life in the first place. Many have, and many will if these changes come to pass. The remainder will be an inexperienced hollow force of young guys who resemble AD in every way except they don't get paid like Active Duty. This of course, will never materialize. Even young people without experience to leverage, can count with their fingers. You want to change the paradigm? Flip the culture over. Make Active Duty a place where flying your ass off and going home without people ######ing with you in garrison, is not viewed pejoratively. A place where the few who will end up at the top do the practice bleeding. That will never happen of course, this place jumped the shark a long ass time ago. Contrary to popular belief, money's got dick to do with it. Most independently wealthy individuals I've met in my professional and academic life, have in fact been Reservists. Active Duty is clueless. The continued frustration by both AD and ARC which has developed into a polarizing fist fight can, is in my estimation, be attributed to the historic feud of funding and real estate control by myopic leadership on both sides. Poor leadership resounds. Down at the trench level, the hearts and minds are very similar between the two organizations. "Give me the shit I need to do the job, take care of my family and I'll fight for mom and apple pie". The cultural differences that have evolved as hindsight2020 points out is exactly on point and very eloquently stated. Those of us who have lived in both worlds really understand the accuracy of what "hindsight" says. The question remains, how do we carry with a collective notion of "One Team, One Fight". It won't happen if we continue to express our frustration by blaming it on the "other guy". It really comes down to the strength of the SECDEF and his/her ability to be mindful of the protective mission for the country and the obvious need at the state level (Governors and their needs to provide for they're states, in the case of the ARNG and ANG assets). Its a mess but I realized and conformed to the cultural side of the tenants "hindsight' ascribes after 10 yrs. of AD and moving into ARNG for the next 30 yrs. There is a very big distinction in the differences between the two. As an AD member you have and develop an attitude that the "Week End Warrior" is without capability...totally wrong and without merit. As an ARNG member you have the great foundation that was provided by AD but with a better resolve for how to be combat ready and more proficient in your duties without the interference of iniquitous bull-shit that you experienced on AD. The results for me on my last Title 10 deployment really showed me the difference. Our Guard aviation unit had an average aviator flight time of over 7,000 hours of experience, gained through the years of AD and similar civilian flying jobs and National Guard "Part Time" accumulation. Average total service time, 18-20 years credible service both Active and Guard. We were under the administrative command of AD folks with 20% of our experience. But we listened and followed directives until they became uncomprehensible and clearly counter to our mission/combat experience and that's when we developed a "make-me" attitude and a "lets get real and stop thinking about our personal annual "Report Cards" and get on with the mission. The feeling I got from the AD guys was that they're "life blood" was dependant upon what the boss thought of them or how he would/could determine they're fate with a pen. Certainly not their fault but a cultural anomaly. There was a complete lack of "thinking outside the box' or scared to even think about it....mindless follower's, yes sir, yes sir, three bags full! My guys, were a pain in the ass, bringing up "Why are we doing it that way or why do we have do do it this way?" But we were of a collective mind, arguing like siblings but hadly ever taking it to the personal level. Just making educated, collective decissions and moving forward, getting the job done and having a great time and sense of mission accomplishment. Always knowing that we would get out of the shit-hole at some point, go back to some normalcy with our families and civilian or full-time Guard employment and be ready for the next time we had to go. Now, as a retired guy, sitting on the sidelines and loving the BO discussions and very the important role it has keeping constructive, meaningful and hysterically funny contributions, I have nothing but the highest admiration of all of you who are Active, Reserve or Guard and appreciate all you do for all of us! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SocialD Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 So what is it that's keeping the Guard such a "good deal"? The State funds keeping the AD mentality out or something else? Lack of AD influence... I wouldn't even consider the Reserves, especially a unit that is on an AD base or one that is embedded with an AD wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Working at 10AF, I did the TFI SATAF meetings. As we merged the Reserve side closer to the AD, the thought that kept running through my head is that life as a Reservists isn't going to be much different than someone on AD....except you get paid less so who would want to do the job? A reserve unit with AD associate might be okay but not so much the other way around. The AD view of the Reserves was also entertaining. Saw a couple WG/CCs step on their schwantz because of it. Nothing more entertaining than watching ACC send in a 2 Star to tell the 1 Star to shut up and color. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dupe Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) As we merged the Reserve side closer to the AD, the thought that kept running through my head is that life as a Reservists isn't going to be much different than someone on AD....except you get paid less so who would want to do the job? A proposition where a guy could fly for his entire career at one unit, never move, while making a six figure salary, and retiring at 60 sounds like a good one to me. Essentially, this is how every other AF in the world runs ...I think we can make it work. The real problem everyone seems to be hitting on isn't really the idea of an integrated wing, its the fact that there's way to much bureaucracy on Active Duty. That's a significant problem, and it has nothing to do with how we organize the reserve forces. It's been quite some time (Persian Gulf I), where we actually used our reserve forces in a reserve capacity. Now, they're every bit as vital as the active units ...we should organize as such. Edited February 6, 2014 by Dupe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 Want to see this in real time? Check out the Navy Reserve. Individual Involuntary Mobilizations for all my friends! The Navy also has a large number of Reservists in IMA billets, which could account for the large numbers of individual mobilizations. Then again, that was true in the late '90s/early '00s; things may have changed since then... The AFRC KC-10 community has been in a partial mobilization for over 2 years now, so we're all used to the "individual" involuntary mobilizations. I personally don't mind this too much, because we have enough volunteerism in my SQ in general (and the boom shop in particular) that we can, to some extent, pick and choose when we deploy and who we crew with. So for 80-89 days, I'm making a full-up AD paycheck with AD bennies. Other AFRC -10 folks disagree, for their own reasons. Some disagreed so much with this mobilization that they voted with their feet and retired/separated. Now if this conceptual iWing AD leadership management were to put me on an 89-day order, have me off orders for a day or two, then put me on another 89-day order, lather, rinse, repeat for the next X years... that would be as fucked up as a football bat. That would be my definition of an AD level of committment, for TR pay & benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B.M. Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 ...put me on an 89-day order, have me off orders for a day or two, then put me on another 89-day order, lather, rinse, repeat for the next X years... Optimist. My guess is 30 day orders... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 (edited) If you're gonna go that far, might as well make 'em 28-day orders. No expensive Tricare for family members to pay for. edit: Damn, probably shouldn't give them any ideas... Edited February 8, 2014 by JarheadBoom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SocialD Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Optimist. My guess is 30 day orders... Just a note...my like was that I could see this happening, not that I want it too! Think of all the $$$ they'll save in BAH! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now