Jump to content

Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)


Toro

Recommended Posts

Who gets to sit at these committee meetings and actually tell the truth? Congress is pretty short sighted and may not remember that the last pilots WE PAID TO SEPARATE, JUST LEFT THE SERVICE TWO YEARS AGO. Our leadership is now talking about stop loss? Someone needs to look our civilian leadership in the face and tell them AF leadership has zero credibility on this issue and if they hadn't fvcked up so bad the situation would not be this dire.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who gets to sit at these committee meetings and actually tell the truth? Congress is pretty short sighted and may not remember that the last pilots WE PAID TO SEPARATE, JUST LEFT THE SERVICE TWO YEARS AGO. Our leadership is now talking about stop loss? Someone needs to look our civilian leadership in the face and tell them AF leadership has zero credibility on this issue and if they hadn't fvcked up so bad the situation would not be this dire.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


'That was the last set of generals. I inherited this problem and am doing the best I can with the hand I was dealt.'

What if Generals faced more scrutiny in confirmation, but then stayed in the job until they decide to retire or are relieved? Stop the turnover every few years and let one individual be able to make, execute, and follow through on long term planning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, jazzdude said:

 


'That was the last set of generals. I inherited this problem and am doing the best I can with the hand I was dealt.'

What if Generals faced more scrutiny in confirmation, but then stayed in the job until they decide to retire or are relieved? Stop the turnover every few years and let one individual be able to make, execute, and follow through on long term planning.
 

 

But without all the turnover we'd be taking away opportunities from all those deserving O-6s!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, the last COS began screaming about manpower issues mid 2015, less than 6 months after VSPers separated on 31 Dec 2014 which all happened on his watch. What a disappointment he was.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MechGov said:

 


Some good gems in there like this:


“If I don’t have pilots to fly, the enemy has a vote, and if I can’t put warheads on foreheads, then (ISIS) is winning,”


Buzzword, buzzword, buzzword. Mike drop


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

 

I just chuckled that this quote about warheads came from the AMC commander of all people. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GENERAL CARLTON D. EVERHART II

1983 Bachelor of Science degree in Agriculture, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 
1989 Squadron Officer School, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 
1989 Master of Science degree in Business Management, University of Arkansas 
1995 Air Command and Staff College, by seminar 
1996 Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan. 
2001 Air War College, by seminar 
2002 Master of Science degree in National Security Strategy, National War College, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C. 
2006 Leadership for a Democratic Society, Federal Executive Institute, Charlottesville, Va. 
2007 Air Force Enterprise Leadership Seminar, Kenan-Flagler Business School, University of North Carolina 
2010 Capstone General and Flag Officer Course, National Defense University, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C.
2010 U.S. - Russia Security Program, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 
2011 Joint Force Air Component Commander Course, Air University, Maxwell AFB, Ala.
2012 Joint Flag Officer Warfighter Course, Maxwell AFB, Ala.
2014 Pinnacle Course, National Defense University, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C.
2014 Leadership at the Peak, Center for Creative Leadership, Colorado Springs, Colo.

 

Please don't let all this education go to waste by resorting to the simplest solution to resolve the most critical issue you will likely ever face.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But without all the turnover we'd be taking away opportunities from all those deserving O-6s!

I was primarily focused on the 4 star level with my previous comment, like the MAJCOM/COCOM/CSAF level. That way there could actually be some long term vision/plan for the organization, and accountability for decisions. It'd be insane for a company to constantly change out CEOs every 2-4 years just to give someone else a turn at it for career progression; why do we do it in the military?

On a semi-related note, "The Generals" by Thomas Ricks is a interesting read, basically documenting the decline in leadership at the General level in the army over the years. A lot of what is discussed is easily relatable to the Air Force's current leadership problems.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, FlyinGrunt said:

OK, so CH mentions in the other thread that there are rules for stop-loss, such as a time period, etc.  Looks pretty unrestricted to me . . .

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/12305

(USC Title 10 12305)

Am I missing something?  Are there some EOs out there putting out more guidance?

Might be my poor reading comprehension, but the focus of the website you linked to is on activating the ARC, rather than stop lossing AD. This brings up a good point, though. Before implementing Stop Loss on AD members, the AF should pursue fuller use of the ARC, CRAF and/or other civ contract air transport (and even air refueling). No need to abridge AD airmen's freedoms, when there are already other valid means to achieve the desired effects. 

Don't get me wrong; the Air Force is still screwed, due to a combination of personnel decisions over at least the last two decades. If we more heavily utilize the ARC to backfill the AD, the ARC will hemorrhage people even faster than now. If we attempt to limit the pain to AD through Stop Loss, while maintaining the current level of ARC utilization, (1) the ARC won't get the prior-AD bodies it needs to stay healthy, and (2) the AD will suffer all manner of morale issues, which will have impacts for years to come. Just see all the consternation on this forum over a policy that hasn't even been implemented yet. More heavily utilizing civ civilians to do airlift, AR, aggressors, etc., will only drive up external demand for prior-AD talent even more. 

The only near-term fix that occurs to me, although it might just be a drop in the bucket (I don't have access to valid data), is for the Air Force to look very hard at where it has its rated talent. I'm reasonably familiar with the current situation at USAFA: why do we have 11Fs as AOCs at USAFA? Some of the brightest, shiniest pennies in the 11F community, yet they spend three years out of the cockpit, contributing nothing to the war fighting community. Simultaneously, there are rated USAFA faculty members who are not currently flying, and the airfield needs them to fly IOT train/inspire future aviators, but there are so few attached flying billets that those who are available and want to fly can't. These kinds of situations, multiplied across bases/units around the world, would at least help address our manning crisis. The AF needs to keep looking harder internally before Stop Loss can be considered as a viable option.

TT

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TnkrToad said:

Might be my poor reading comprehension, but the focus of the website you linked to is on activating the ARC, rather than stop lossing AD. This brings up a good point, though. Before implementing Stop Loss on AD members, the AF should pursue fuller use of the ARC, CRAF and/or other civ contract air transport (and even air refueling). No need to abridge AD airmen's freedoms, when there are already other valid means to achieve the desired effects. 

Don't get me wrong; the Air Force is still screwed, due to a combination of personnel decisions over at least the last two decades. If we more heavily utilize the ARC to backfill the AD, the ARC will hemorrhage people even faster than now. If we attempt to limit the pain to AD through Stop Loss, while maintaining the current level of ARC utilization, (1) the ARC won't get the prior-AD bodies it needs to stay healthy, and (2) the AD will suffer all manner of morale issues, which will have impacts for years to come. Just see all the consternation on this forum over a policy that hasn't even been implemented yet. More heavily utilizing civ civilians to do airlift, AR, aggressors, etc., will only drive up external demand for prior-AD talent even more. 

The only near-term fix that occurs to me, although it might just be a drop in the bucket (I don't have access to valid data), is for the Air Force to look very hard at where it has its rated talent. I'm reasonably familiar with the current situation at USAFA: why do we have 11Fs as AOCs at USAFA? Some of the brightest, shiniest pennies in the 11F community, yet they spend three years out of the cockpit, contributing nothing to the war fighting community. Simultaneously, there are rated USAFA faculty members who are not currently flying, and the airfield needs them to fly IOT train/inspire future aviators, but there are so few attached flying billets that those who are available and want to fly can't. These kinds of situations, multiplied across bases/units around the world, would at least help address our manning crisis. The AF needs to keep looking harder internally before Stop Loss can be considered as a viable option.

TT

To your AOC comment, because that's what they put for their first choice for school. I'm sure a lot of them actually like AOC for a school gig especially since it's a command tour. Not to mention USAFA AOC is a very high indicator for O-6.

 

For the attached flying billet thing, the pilot Dean of the Faculty guys need to press their Respective flying coordinator to get USAFA/A1K to change more billets to P prefix and update the API codes IAW USAFAI36-3503 Management of Flying Personnel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ARC cannot backfill AD any more than we do now without REAL mobilization. They've given us mobilization authority at the unit level to make unit-level leadership the bad guys without having to publically advertize that our national interests are so great that we are relying heavily on the ARC to fight our wars... eerrr.. peace-keeping missions... eerrr.. whatever you want to call what we are doing right now. Jesus H Christ, Al Udeid has got to be 75% ARC right now on the tanker side. 12 years ago we (when I was on AD) were manning the Deid, Manas and Al Dhafra at the same time, but AD decided to get rid of a super-tanker wing (Grand Forks) and Robins. Most of those jets went to the ARC. Guess who's back filling the tanker mission now. The ARC.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To your AOC comment, because that's what they put for their first choice for school. I'm sure a lot of them actually like AOC for a school gig especially since it's a command tour. Not to mention USAFA AOC is a very high indicator for O-6.
 
For the attached flying billet thing, the pilot Dean of the Faculty guys need to press their Respective flying coordinator to get USAFA/A1K to change more billets to P prefix and update the API codes IAW USAFAI36-3503 Management of Flying Personnel.


So in other words, it's like I said--USAFA represents a way in which the AF could work to solve its own shortage:

- 11F in-res school select: "I wanna go learn how to be a counselor, then be a USAFA AOC!"
- AFPC: "Thanks for your interest in national defense; we'll send you to ACSC/CGSC/wherever, then you'll be off to a validated 11F-required billet in Joint/HAF/ACC/whatever staff, where you're really needed."
-- In order to ensure USAFA can still inspire cadets to be pilots, it sends 11Ms/11Rs/11Hs/whatever pilot AFSC is at least notionally healthy instead.

Likewise with faculty attached flying--as you indicated, it's an internal AF issue (A1K needs to create more P-prefix billets at USAFA)

Physician, heal thyself...


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ARC cannot backfill AD any more than we do now without REAL mobilization. They've given us mobilization authority at the unit level to make unit-level leadership the bad guys without having to publically advertize that our national interests are so great that we are relying heavily on the ARC to fight our wars... eerrr.. peace-keeping missions... eerrr.. whatever you want to call what we are doing right now. Jesus H Christ, Al Udeid has got to be 75% ARC right now on the tanker side. 12 years ago we (when I was on AD) were manning the Deid, Manas and Al Dhafra at the same time, but AD decided to get rid of a super-tanker wing (Grand Forks) and Robins. Most of those jets went to the ARC. Guess who's back filling the tanker mission now. The ARC.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk




Assuming the AF gets its own house in order and maximizes utilization of the pilots it has (a long shot, I know), then it seems AF leaders would go to the meeting with something other than simply threatening Stop Loss. Assuming we can't get any relief from tasked missions (again, good luck), it seems the primary COA would be partial mobilization of the ARC (for the elements that are truly undermanned), in conjunction with Stop Loss for the AD (again for the same AFSCs that are mobilized). No matter what, it'll be bad news for the AF and airlines. Airlines will be shorted of both the ARC folks they already have on property, as well as supply of folks coming off AD. The AF will have a crap storm on its hands, with disgruntled ARC and AD folks.

I don't think the AF should talk Stop Loss without simultaneously discussing further ARC mobilization.


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, pilotguy said:

And I love how they will use this stop loss option at the table with the airlines to threaten them and force them to play ball...screwing us all over in the process.  I love feeling like a piece of property

Isn't there a green dot or sarc you can call for that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gazmo said:

They should worry about saving their bonus money and hiring more support troops. FM, FSS, admins, bring the orderly rooms back, etc... let the pilots do their primary jobs.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
 

I will quote an old DO that told me "your an officer first and foremost, the flying doesn't really matter" as I was voluntold to help plan the Christmas party.  And he is an O-6 CV now while I'm in the Guard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

why do we have 11Fs as AOCs at USAFA? Some of the brightest, shiniest pennies in the 11F community, yet they spend three years out of the cockpit, contributing nothing to the war fighting community. Simultaneously, there are rated USAFA faculty members who are not currently flying, and the airfield needs them to fly IOT train/inspire future aviators, but there are so few attached flying billets that those who are available and want to fly can't. 

TT

Have you seen the retirement benefit for teaching at USAFA?  Your retire as an O-7, no shit, no matter what rank below that you actually retire at.  Somebody will call BS and look it up, but it's true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you seen the retirement benefit for teaching at USAFA?  Your retire as an O-7, no shit, no matter what rank below that you actually retire at.  Somebody will call BS and look it up, but it's true.

Umm, no.

Retiring as an O-7 (get the retired rank so they can feel good about themselves, but not the pay) only applies to O-6 permanent professors.

Extremely few of those, and given how long folks stay in those billets, really rare for the opportunity to even come around. Non-perm prof O-6s and below retire like normal. There is no special retirement benefit for simply teaching at USAFA.

Regardless, we're digressing from the main point--rated aviators at USAFA, who could be actively flying at USAFA--where there is a demonstrable need for them--are going unutilized because of nothing but misguided Air Force policy (too few coded billets at USAF, in this case).

This is just one example of what I'm sure are many around the Air Force where the AF could address manning problems through better personnel policy, rather than crude tools like stop loss. If senior AF leaders want to be taken seriously by Congress, much less airline execs, they should ensure the AF house is in order first.

TT


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does it take for inactive reservists to get activated? Is it done at the same time as a regular activation, or is it a different and more difficult process for the USAF?

I ask because if stop loss combined with ARC activation is in the future, it may be time to hang up the spurs. Getting activated to fight for our country is one thing; getting activated due to perpetual personnel mismanagement is methinks a bridge too far.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Traditional deployments for ARC used to come in AEF cycles and were mostly filled on a volunteer basis. As we know, the AEF concept went down the shitter over a decade ago so now most of us "rainbow" for continuous ops. Most of us have a crew or two in CENTCOM on a continuous basis. Fighter units are more AEF centric, but the tanker world right now fills a rainbow. After 9/11 many tanker units were activated and sent to CENTCOM for OEF. These days, individual wings are given mobilization authority at the WG/CC level so if the whole unit says, "Screw you! We're not going!", the Wing King has authority to mobilize crews to fill the tasking. Most of us still volunteer as it means doing a 30 day rotation vs. a 60 day one. Some people like getting mobilized because of USERRA and the associated protection they receive with mob orders. Not so shockingly enough, there are some employers out there giving reservists/guardsmen shit for volunteering. It does the ARC no good volunteering, but we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, matmacwc said:

Have you seen the retirement benefit for teaching at USAFA?  Your retire as an O-7, no shit, no matter what rank below that you actually retire at.  Somebody will call BS and look it up, but it's true.

I call BS. It's department heads that are O-6s while in the position - after they are done, they then retire as O-7s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I call BS. It's department heads that are O-6s while in the position - after they are done, they then retire as O-7s.

This is correct. And they usually spend a decade plus as dept head to get that benefit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you seen the retirement benefit for teaching at USAFA?  Your retire as an O-7, no shit, no matter what rank below that you actually retire at.  Somebody will call BS and look it up, but it's true.

No...

 

Saw Tanker Toads explanation and he is correct.

 

Changed to avoid further digression.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...