Jump to content

Gen Welsh - USAF Chief of Staff


busdriver

Recommended Posts

I have always looked at Gates crusade against the Air Force as one of the many driving factors behind our recent personnel/manning problems. What do you all think about him?

He said he got tired of the USAF always asking for money and weapons to fight "future wars" instead of focusing on the current wars. When he asked Mosely to do a study on increasing RPA caps he'd want to talk about more F-22's. He said the real reason why he fired the SECAF/CSAF was due to the nuclear incidents.

Edited by Azimuth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He said he got tired of the USAF always asking for money and weapons to fight "future wars" instead of focusing on the current wars. When he asked Mosely to do a study on increasing RPA caps he'd want to talk about more F-22's. He said the real reason why he fired the SECAF/CSAF was due to the nuclear incidents.

And by study on RPA caps, you mean he said the AF would fill whatever request the ground units put forth at whatever the cost was without regard to money or manning.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always looked at Gates crusade against the Air Force as one of the many driving factors behind our recent personnel/manning problems. What do you all think about him?

Curious...compared to our brothers and sisters in other services, our personnel system is a bright light. We have cut our requisite bottom 10% performers (which became only the bottom 2% or so, thanks to voluntary separations) and are not facing involuntary separations in 2015. If sequestration hits again, thanks to last year's VSP, we can get rid of a few more underperformers without extreme stress on the system, but we're anticipating that will not be required. We revamped the EPR. Our list of stressed career fields is remarkably low, and we have a plan to retain our critical RPA officers by offering more money. Trust me, we are the envy of the other three services. Have some pride in your AF leadership, particularly in A1, because we've made remarkable strides shaping the force for the 2020s.

  • Downvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious...compared to our brothers and sisters in other services, our personnel system is a bright light. We have cut our requisite bottom 10% performers (which became only the bottom 2% or so, thanks to voluntary separations) and are not facing involuntary separations in 2015. If sequestration hits again, thanks to last year's VSP, we can get rid of a few more underperformers without extreme stress on the system, but we're anticipating that will not be required. We revamped the EPR. Our list of stressed career fields is remarkably low, and we have a plan to retain our critical RPA officers by offering more money. Trust me, we are the envy of the other three services. Have some pride in your AF leadership, particularly in A1, because we've made remarkable strides shaping the force for the 2020s.

Oh GODDAMMIT...

Do you actually listen to the shit that comes out of your mouth?!? Happy green squares on a staff meeting .ppt do not an effective A1 make.

Christ, it's like playing cards with my brothers kids...

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really think the bottom 10% were the ones who took VSP? Good God you're an idiot...

That's not what he said. He said we cut 2% of the bottom 10% because the other 8% came from VSPrs. I'm not good at math though so I may be wrong...

We all know that the 8% came mostly from the top 50, or higher. Lucky bastards and bastardettes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me, we are the envy of the other three services.

NO, we most certainly are not.

Maybe in the hallowed halls of the Pentagon the AF is envied, but definitely not "down in the trenches" by anyone who is capable of independent thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious...compared to our brothers and sisters in other services, our personnel system is a bright light. We have cut our requisite bottom 10% performers (which became only the bottom 2% or so, thanks to voluntary separations) and are not facing involuntary separations in 2015. If sequestration hits again, thanks to last year's VSP, we can get rid of a few more underperformers without extreme stress on the system, but we're anticipating that will not be required. We revamped the EPR. Our list of stressed career fields is remarkably low, and we have a plan to retain our critical RPA officers by offering more money. Trust me, we are the envy of the other three services. Have some pride in your AF leadership, particularly in A1, because we've made remarkable strides shaping the force for the 2020s.

When compared to other broken bureaucracies, ours is the least dysfunctional!

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When compared to other broken bureaucracies, ours is the least dysfunctional!

Smartest kid in special Ed.....

What are we doing as a military when that is the brass ring we are aiming for.

Edited by Lawman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious...compared to our brothers and sisters in other services, our personnel system is a bright light. We have cut our requisite bottom 10% performers (which became only the bottom 2% or so, thanks to voluntary separations) and are not facing involuntary separations in 2015. If sequestration hits again, thanks to last year's VSP, we can get rid of a few more underperformers without extreme stress on the system, but we're anticipating that will not be required. We revamped the EPR. Our list of stressed career fields is remarkably low, and we have a plan to retain our critical RPA officers by offering more money. Trust me, we are the envy of the other three services. Have some pride in your AF leadership, particularly in A1, because we've made remarkable strides shaping the force for the 2020s.

This statement makes me very angry. We did not cut the bottom 2%. For example, in the B-1, one of the guys that got RIFed was an instructor/evaluator WSO with a Masters Degree, ACSC complete, and about 5 deployments. He was also the Chief WSO in OGV and had normal progression throughout his career. He is known as one of the sharpest guys in the community. Please explain how that is considered "the bottom 2%"!

Nobody is going to "have pride" in A1 leadership. To say that you made "remarkable strides" is spin and an absolute joke. What strides? Please tell us!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the Marine and Army officers here at the wayward school by the river who already have their assignments (in some cases have had them for months) really seem to be envious of the dozens of AF officers who are still completely in the dark as to where they're going in 4 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious...compared to our brothers and sisters in other services, our personnel system is a bright light. We have cut our requisite bottom 10% performers (which became only the bottom 2% or so, thanks to voluntary separations) and are not facing involuntary separations in 2015. If sequestration hits again, thanks to last year's VSP, we can get rid of a few more underperformers without extreme stress on the system, but we're anticipating that will not be required. We revamped the EPR. Our list of stressed career fields is remarkably low, and we have a plan to retain our critical RPA officers by offering more money. Trust me, we are the envy of the other three services. Have some pride in your AF leadership, particularly in A1, because we've made remarkable strides shaping the force for the 2020s.

You've gone full retard.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This statement makes me very angry. We did not cut the bottom 2%. For example, in the B-1, one of the guys that got RIFed was an instructor/evaluator WSO with a Masters Degree, ACSC complete, and about 5 deployments. He was also the Chief WSO in OGV and had normal progression throughout his career. He is known as one of the sharpest guys in the community. Please explain how that is considered "the bottom 2%"!

Nobody is going to "have pride" in A1 leadership. To say that you made "remarkable strides" is spin and an absolute joke. What strides? Please tell us!

Don't forget...we cut a current, qualified evaluator WSO, completely qualified in the newest block of the B-1 (one of like 8 dudes dual-qualified)...and in the mean time, 12B manning was so bad we brought back a guy who has been out of the aircraft for 8 years, non-instructor, as a LtCol, to go back through the B-course. Good dude, sure...but is that really a great trade? What's the ROI on a guy who could train dozens of new guys on the newest evolution of the jet versus a guy who isn't a qualified instructor and will be lucky to fly twice a month, when the squadron isn't trying to train the new guys for the next deployment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget...we cut a current, qualified evaluator WSO, completely qualified in the newest block of the B-1 (one of like 8 dudes dual-qualified)...and in the mean time, 12B manning was so bad we brought back a guy who has been out of the aircraft for 8 years, non-instructor, as a LtCol, to go back through the B-course. Good dude, sure...but is that really a great trade? What's the ROI on a guy who could train dozens of new guys on the newest evolution of the jet versus a guy who isn't a qualified instructor and will be lucky to fly twice a month, when the squadron isn't trying to train the new guys for the next deployment?

No system is going to nail the perfect solution, and despite the botched information flow from A1 in 2014...I'd say we hit a homerun on the non-voluntary reductions.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No system is going to nail the perfect solution, and despite the botched information flow from A1 in 2014...I'd say we hit a homerun on the non-voluntary reductions.

Sounds familiar..."it would be unrealistic to expect perfection"....where have we heard that recently?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No system is going to nail the perfect solution, and despite the botched information flow from A1 in 2014...I'd say we hit a homerun on the non-voluntary reductions.

Yeah, your whole "got rid of the bottom 10%" wasn't the case at McChord. We lost about 20 guys, of those I would say 1-2 might have fallen in that category and that's stretching it. The rest were 2nd and 3rd assignment ops to ops IP/EPs, former FTU IPs and lead airdrop pilots, more like the top 10% of the community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, your whole "got rid of the bottom 10%" wasn't the case at McChord. We lost about 20 guys, of those I would say 1-2 might have fallen in that category and that's stretching it. The rest were 2nd and 3rd assignment ops to ops IP/EPs, former FTU IPs and lead airdrop pilots, more like the top 10% of the community.

The C-17 FTU lost about 18+ IP's during this past round of VSP's, including a lot of their lead airdroppers. Those guys/girls were 2-3 assignment folks who were definitely not in the bottom 10%.

Edited by Azimuth
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, your whole "got rid of the bottom 10%" wasn't the case at McChord. We lost about 20 guys, of those I would say 1-2 might have fallen in that category and that's stretching it. The rest were 2nd and 3rd assignment ops to ops IP/EPs, former FTU IPs and lead airdrop pilots, more like the top 10% of the community.

Did these guys go to ANG / AFRES? In a way, I'd rather have these fine Americans producing airlift sorties for more than 20 years in a scalable and flexible way. The AF's loss is the AF's gain. My god, that's fucked up. I hope it worked out for them both in family life and professionally.

Edited by Dupe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did these guys go to ANG / AFRES? In a way, I'd rather have these fine Americans producing airlift sorties for more than 20 years in a scalable and flexible way. The AF's loss is the AF's gain. My god, that's fucked up. I hope it worked out for them both in family life and professionally.

Most attempted too, some were successful, the rest last I heard were still rushing units along with the rest of the masses that stampeded for the door. Ironically several crossed over to other airframes (mainly tankers), so sure they take their airmanship skills with them but as for passing down theirs years of MWS specifc airlift/airdrop experience well not so much.

Most guys were beyond happy (hear that Chang, you're top 10% were looking for a way out) to take large paycheck and head for the a-word, RES/ANG or anything that wasn't the active duty. Several were even brand new majors.

Chang keep believing your programs worked, and as a whole yes they cut the numbers down to what was required by Congress. However, it did not, cut the specific people you were hoping to cut, you got some of them but lost way more of your top preformers (see Azimuths comment about the FTU). We'll not even rehack the abortion that was the process itself. But keep up your "good work", the one bright spot is that if I ever become too incompetent to command an aircrew and jet, I'll still be able to get a job at AFPC, and even be told I'm doing a good job no matter how much I underperform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No system is going to nail the perfect solution, and despite the botched information flow from A1 in 2014...I'd say we hit a homerun on the non-voluntary reductions.

So, your plan was to make the AF suck soooo bad, that when the time comes to give dudes the opportunity to voluntarily separate, they jump like rats from a sinking ship? Bravo… well done, sir.

And BTW, when you say things like "we can get rid of a few more underperformers without extreme stress on the system," you are broadcasting your unbelievably low SA and making your entire A1 community look like a bunch of clueless jackasses. If you had a clue, you'd realize that the last rounds of cuts took already stressed communities to the brink, and another round conducted like the last one will take some communities beyond dangerously low experience levels. And I'm talking real-world, no-shit danger, not some yellow/red slide bubbles, but cockpits manned by inexperienced young bucks that are gonna get somebody killed type of danger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious...compared to our brothers and sisters in other services, our personnel system is a bright light. We have cut our requisite bottom 10% performers (which became only the bottom 2% or so, thanks to voluntary separations) and are not facing involuntary separations in 2015. If sequestration hits again, thanks to last year's VSP, we can get rid of a few more underperformers without extreme stress on the system, but we're anticipating that will not be required. We revamped the EPR. Our list of stressed career fields is remarkably low, and we have a plan to retain our critical RPA officers by offering more money. Trust me, we are the envy of the other three services. Have some pride in your AF leadership, particularly in A1, because we've made remarkable strides shaping the force for the 2020s.

First, saying we do something terribly, but better than the other guy does not win you many points.

Second, we don't know if we cut the bottom, top, or middle. We don't know how to measure this! Having the skills to write a strong "C" on your OPR is a poor indicator of talent and skill in both your primary AFSC and leadership abilities. On the E side, everybody is a winner as well. It's amazing that all our children are above average! Until we figure out how to measure our talent pool, we won't have more than a hazy idea of who we want to keep and who should go.

Third, what do you consider "extreme stress on the system?" Is that too few people to fill nominal billets, too few people to operate normally, or too few to win the war? From the ground level, I sometimes wonder.

Fourth, throwing money at people won't retain your best talent. Some may be great, but bonuses tend to attract those who either already want/plan to stay or those who don't see better options. Heck, I barely read anything on personnel/talent management and I realize this! More money is nice and all, but pay is not the top reason most people decide to stay or leave.

Finally, I have GREAT pride in parts of the Air Force. Those parts would be the airmen doing their jobs with care and precision, getting the mission done regardless of the enemy or other obstacles. The personnel system looks more detached, disconnected, and arbitrary just about every time I read about it. Why should I take pride in a system that is so inefficient and reactionary?

If that sounded like a bit of a rant, you are right. I know I see things at the micro level, but I'm not an idiot, nor are the people I work with. Your cheery picture does not fit the reality that they and I are experiencing.

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...