war007afa

Except the reason we’re even talking about it was as a way to shorten an ADSC without a waiver.

The caution here is that selecting 24 and asking for 20 later then complicates asking for separation due to ADSC, requiring waiver instead of the automation in ADSC reduction associated with selecting 20. Know what you truly want and do some soul searching when you get to this junction. A lot of pieces and effects tied together. Love our personnel system 🤬

I don’t think WIC and IDE in-res are mutually-exclusive, as that math implies. But you’re right in the general statement of difficulty you’re presenting.

*dependinf on the current rules of the game The myPers site for Active Duty Officer Promotions Unser Continuation shows what the SecAF offerings are for critical career fields. Pretty much any career field with incentive to leave gives continutuation UP TO 24 YEARS. You don’t have to select 24 years. You can ask for continuation to 20. Seen it done and seen it in progress with signs of approval.

Unfortunately, the only way you’re getting out of an ADSC to retire without a waiver is if you sign continuation paperwork that expires before said ADSC. Everything else has to go to the Puzzle Palace for forgiveness. Sorry.

Staffs actually tend to do worse. Less overall DP opportunity. Ive always been bothered by our promotion construct. We take our “top XX%” bodies and move them up to staff. Then we allocate the same DP proportion to the staff bubbas as the Wing guys. So you can be 3/4 staff weenies when you would have been solidly in the DP pool if you stayed at the Wing with a 55% DP. MAJCOMs make up for some of this in the MLRs, but the Air Staff rarely has an aggregate large enough to make a difference due to the effects of staff cuts from PBD720 (less staff is good, unless you’re looking for a DP while on it).

I thought that question was mandatory over at United...

16 posts and no one asked it...must be some sort of record!

It’s amplified in select-hire organizations. The beauty of being able to pick dudes who share your values comes with the curse of homogeneous values: right or wrong.

Whereas the contamination is a serious issue... Airmen assigned to CVS: Let us bring nice things to Clovis. We need affordable and safe housing. Clovis leadership: If you don’t like it, you can always go to Iraq/Afghanistan. And buy these houses that jumped $95K after we went out to see what cost per square foot is in Florida. Can’t imagine where the snark came from.

Less than 30%. Source: A1 community message sent out to leadership in my neck of the woods.

In response to your commander, I would have emphasized that pilots are a part of that one team, and that support agencies also need occasional reminder they’re part of a greater mission. Sometimes that reminder is in the form of visual presence of an aviator. There’s a reason we consciously decide to put aviators in some support positions: the organizations have typically lost the bubble on what they’re actually there for. I’ve seen a few anecdotes where some agencies thought aircraft existed on the installation to support them, not the other way around.

If you want to know something about the SquEALs, just wait for the book to come out.

Food for thought today...

My favorite part of this story is how the SES crowd waited a year/$1M to tell y’all to stop

#MissionFocus I swear the people who worry about shit like this at a management level don’t realize a) people perform better when comfortable, so quit taking away their options; 2) we lose sleep over someone’s personal preference which adds absolutely zero to the mission; and d) apparently degrading morale over piddly uniform options is greater than our growing crisis over things like quality of life and treating people like grown-ass adults fully-capable of dressing for the day in items we’ve already spent taxpayer money to have made and authoritized as a Service. If you need me, I’ll be over here with my hands in my pockets (because it’s cold outside in Afghanistan right now). //rant: complete (P)

Almost sounds like that’s the plan, doesn’t it?

Continuation provides an option, not an ADSC. If you sign for over 20, you have the option to stick around but you don't have to stay until the last day. If you have an ADSC that takes you out past 20 (bonus acceptance, for instance) and you accept to 20, you return the unearned portion of the bonus at the DOS established based on your acceptance of 20. Make sense?

If you’re asking for permission instead of forgiveness on these queepy things, you’re doing it wrong...

“Casual status”, “awaiting training”, “connected”, or “yes, she is”.

Installation-specific when it’s released to SQ/CCs. Typically day-prior in order to enable notification to those who didn’t make it.

You should hook the whole damn bunch just for planning their off-station to CVS! I mean, there are only like 90+ airfields just in the USAF they could have chosen instead, but what do I know...

List is also created from 2014 data and completely omits inbound training installations and service academies. So there’s that...

You're going to single-handedly change society and what drives people to serve? I think we're talking past each other. I'm talking about what drives people to serve, not the environment they're serving in. Whereas there is a linkage, what makes someone sign on the line varies by background, whether that be a path to citizenship, a lineage of military service, or any of a laundry list of reasons people show up to talk to someone wearing recruiter badge. Not sure how this has anything to do with how the demographic of an individual should have nothing to do with their capability to serve or their quality of service.