FY 14 Force Management Program (RIF, VSP, TERA)

[shweaty]

They are also sending out a new psdm 14-08 dated 13 March 14. Update RRA which talks about the recoup of VSP money if you get a retirement later on.

[Mish_Hacker]

The new 14-08 has minor adjustments to: 1) Date of separation for FSB eligible applicants who want to VSP (such that their separation date allows them 6 years TOS), 2) Specifying that an O-6 or GS-equivalent must coordinate (recommend or not recommend) your application, and 3) adds an exception to the IRR agreement regarding the recoupment of VSP funds in the event you qualify for disability.

It also says that you do not have to have a justification for ADSC remaining in the remarks when you apply. It then keeps the reference to 13-65 and ADSC waivers....

No word yet on UPT ADSC waivers, but now that we've cleared up these major issues with 14-08, I guess it is time to apply?

[lossofclocklossofdata]

The new 14-08 has minor adjustments to: 1) Date of separation for FSB eligible applicants who want to VSP (such that their separation date allows them 6 years TOS), 2) Specifying that an O-6 or GS-equivalent must coordinate (recommend or not recommend) your application, and 3) adds an exception to the IRR agreement regarding the recoupment of VSP funds in the event you qualify for disability.

It also says that you do not have to have a justification for ADSC remaining in the remarks when you apply. It then keeps the reference to 13-65 and ADSC waivers....

No word yet on UPT ADSC waivers, but now that we've cleared up these major issues with 14-08, I guess it is time to apply?

So no new 13-130 which is supposed to cover RIF and VSP for RIF eligible officers. Can we safely assume that 14-08 supercedes 13-130 now for RIF eligible officers applying for VSP?

[lossofclocklossofdata]

Fantastic stall technique. Next AF.mil story: "Force management programs are on hold for the next few weeks while we allow all airmen time to accept and sign the new IRR agreement in PSDM 14-08."

[BitteEinBit]

BT,

I don't know. CSAF decided to protect LRS-B by cutting force structure. 500 aircraft and a bunch of people. You would think personnel cuts would be related to aircraft cuts but they didn't look at that early on. They only looked at "overmanning" in AFSCs and year groups. This FMP has been an absolute fiasco and people should be fired. They won't be fired because we are too nice to each. We tolerate incompetence and mission failure. We only fire people if they embarrass us, which is wrong. I would love to know how many people A1 and AFPC have ever been relieved of their duties. Not many I guess. You are not asking too much. Our senior leadership has let down many people and this loss of trust will be difficult to regain. Keep nailing the PI and TOT and try to not get too frustrated by the uncertainty.

Liquid,

Thanks for the honest, straight-forward post. I expect to see this from the people running this FSP or at least admit that mistakes were made...but of course, nothing. Again, we've been doing these cuts annually since 2007...and we did the EXACT SAME THING in 2011 but on a smaller scale. I'm having a difficult time believing no one saw this coming. If they didn't see it, then we have the wrong people managing this force. It is embarrassing, so yes, people should be fired.

BT

[MooseAg03]

This is ridiculous. I've already submitted 2 different IRR agreements, and my second application hasn't made it past the "Referred to Wing Commander" stage.

[lossofclocklossofdata]

This is ridiculous. I've already submitted 2 different IRR agreements, and my second application hasn't made it past the "Referred to Wing Commander" stage.

Did you upload it via vMPF by "changing your application?" If so you should have uploaded via mypers. It won't reroute to sq/wg CC. I made the same mistake with the SOU. Called TFSC and they skipped it through the wickets with a note that there was no actual change to the app, just a doc upload. Cool thing was, TFSC changed the wg/cc coordination from recommended disapproval to approval. ???

Edited March 17, 2014 by lossofclocklossofdata

[BamaC-21]

VSP or 365, how are you applying for more than one program at once? I was only able to apply for one at a time in MyPers.

[lossofclocklossofdata]

VSP or 365, how are you applying for more than one program at once? I was only able to apply for one at a time in MyPers.

I think Moose is saying he selected the change application option in vMPF IOT add the IRR which reroutes the app back through the sq/wg CC, not that he added another app. Edited March 17, 2014 by lossofclocklossofdata

[MooseAg03]

Where do you go in MyPers to upload it?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lossofclocklossofdata]

"My account" at top. Should show your incidents which will include a cms # for TFSCs request for you to upload SOU (in my case). If you click on an incident you can upload a new doc. If you've already changed the app in vMPF though I'd call TFSC so they can "fix the glitch" and avoid T'ing off the wing king and changing his mind.

[zach braff]

What happens when Airmen denied VSP are subsequently RIFed other than leadership's loss of what little credibility they still have?

The Force shaping PDSM was amended to state that if somebody is denied a VSP then subsequently cut, they can reapply for VSP - so they can still deny you but then boot you, but if they do you can get the 1.25% sep pay.

I imagine they'll do the same for RIF. But who knows.

[shweaty]

A little more in depth explanation for the ADSC waivers.

https://mobile.airforcetimes.com/article/20140317/CAREERS/303170022

[Lumbergh]

A little more in depth explanation for the ADSC waivers.

https://mobile.airforcetimes.com/article/20140317/CAREERS/303170022

From the article...

"The Air Force could not make these waiver delegation determinations earlier because the service needed to have a better idea of who was going to apply, he said.

'You don't know who's applying,' Cox said. 'Before you can go get a delegation of authority, you need to understand what it is that you need to waive, if it's required.'"

So, basically, we told everyone they were eligible in Dec, then wasted your fvcking time because we didn't know who would apply and what waivers we would need. And we suck at doing our jobs and managing the force. Did I miss something?

How about we research what is needed to voluntarily or involuntarily separate every AFSC that requires a reduction in manning and then release the appropriate information to the masses?

HOLY INCOMPETENCE BATMAN!!!

Edited March 17, 2014 by Lumbergh

[BitteEinBit]

From the article...

"The Air Force could not make these waiver delegation determinations earlier because the service needed to have a better idea of who was going to apply, he said.

'You don't know who's applying,' Cox said. 'Before you can go get a delegation of authority, you need to understand what it is that you need to waive, if it's required.'"

So, basically, we told everyone they were eligible in Dec, then wasted your fvcking time because we didn't know who would apply and what waivers we would need. And we suck at doing our jobs and managing the force. Did I miss something?

How about we research what is needed to voluntarily or involuntarily separate every AFSC that requires a reduction in manning and then release the appropriate information to the masses?

HOLY INCOMPETENCE BATMAN!!!

LOL. Dude, I must misunderstand what it is that AFPC does for a living. I must have it all wrong.

Here is what I think they are supposed to do: Come up with manpower requirements/billets to meet NSS objectives. If there is an overage in some areas, target the cuts to manage those overages. If you have a shortage of say Intel Officers, you don't cut them. If you have an overage of Cops, you cut them. Seems simple right?!?

Here is what they actually do: Identify both critical and non-critical overage and shortage AFSCs, cut evenly across the board. Scratch head and wonder why we still have overages and even more shortages.

I can only imagine what goes on at those staff meetings. I almost feel like I'm watching an SNL skit.

[Mish_Hacker]

A little more in depth explanation for the ADSC waivers.

https://mobile.airforcetimes.com/article/20140317/CAREERS/303170022

So, does this mean no UPT waivers? If so, are no officers with a UPT ADSC going to be RIF eligible? How could you have 5,000 of 10,000 applications not eligible -- Answer: Unclear guidance. If you didn't know what you were doing when you started, don't try to blame it on those poor saps who applied...

[Bender]

I would love to know how many people A1 and AFPC have ever been relieved of their duties.

I have no idea how many have been relieved of their duties (if I were to guess, I would guess low), but I can tell you how many have been promoted right in the middle of it. The answer is notably not zero.

Bendy

[Bender]

LOL. Dude, I must misunderstand what it is that AFPC does for a living. I must have it all wrong.

Here is what I think they are supposed to do: Come up with manpower requirements/billets to meet NSS objectives. If there is an overage in some areas, target the cuts to manage those overages. If you have a shortage of say Intel Officers, you don't cut them. If you have an overage of Cops, you cut them. Seems simple right?!?

Here is what they actually do: Identify both critical and non-critical overage and shortage AFSCs, cut evenly across the board. Scratch head and wonder why we still have overages and even more shortages.

I can only imagine what goes on at those staff meetings. I almost feel like I'm watching an SNL skit.

Every year the line of the Air Force competes multiple AFSCs against one another to promote an overall specific number into the next grade as authorized. There is no consideration for manning within a specific AFSC (i.e. we need more captains in SF, or less Majors in Rated positions [also not individually accounted for a la 11M vs. 11F]). That said, it's "unfair" to begin doing it differently once an AFSC is overmanned, meaning no promotions within that AFSC that year. It needed to be done all along to maintain the correct experience levels within each AFSC.

I'd be curious to know the promotion percentages within each AFSC and overall if promotion boards considered records by AFSC. I wouldn't be surprised if overall, they were very similar to the percentages that are used by the Line of the Air Force promotion boards. A little lower here one year, a little higher there one year...

It's not ideally about how to "force reduce" correctly, it's more about how to "force produce" correctly. That takes preparation and use of Force Management processes that are permanent parts of the way of doing business.

Bendy

[MSCguy]

Bender, if you log into mypers and find the promotions section you can find all the stats you would ever want. It breaks down each board via promotion rec, pme status, and aad within each occupational area. Non-rated ops tends to do the best with navs usually the worst. There is also a spreadsheet that compares board percentages across time-not surprisingly the O6 board fluctuates the most.

[FLY6584]

Hey fellas, tomorrow I will be attending a town hall meeting held by the SECAF at my deployed location and I can assure you I will be the first to ask whether she is planning on granting approval to waive UPT ADSC's and why were we allowed to apply in the first place if they weren't even sure they would let anyone out.

[Bender]

Bender, if you log into mypers and find the promotions section you can find all the stats you would ever want. It breaks down each board via promotion rec, pme status, and aad within each occupational area. Non-rated ops tends to do the best with navs usually the worst. There is also a spreadsheet that compares board percentages across time-not surprisingly the O6 board fluctuates the most.

I'm not seeing it. There are some sets of data presented in PowerPoint presentations, but while important, I'm not interested in breakdowns of minorities, females, etc. Maybe I'm just missing this treasure trove of data you're describing.

Any statistics provided, should you help me find them, will be breakdowns generated by boards considering looking for the "best qualified" records from multiple AFSCs. This is only the comparison data I was referring to. The promotion rate within each individual AFSC, under this current construct, is less important than the overall board promotion percentage aimed to producing the total number in grade at any given time. That overall number still holds value, as it cannot be exceeded (as the line number increments roll through). The "Line of the Air Force" is a convenient grouping that prevents multiple promotion boards by individual AFSC or groupings of similar AFSCs (the order of which would also be contentious and a facet that would require significant critical thought).

Only by comparing records within a single AFSC can the promotion process both select the "best qualified" individuals, while maintaining a specific, calculated, capabilities based number of individuals (within that specific AFSC) to serve in the next grade. If the promotion rate within a specific AFSC is capped to prevent "overages", then there would be no "overages".

This, of course, does not mean that "force reduction" would not happen...a draw down is a draw down. It would however mean actively managing the force, selecting the most qualified based on how many you need. This requires you to know how many you need...if we can say we have "overage" in a specific AFSC, then (assuming that statement, thus those matrices are valid) we already knew that. Well...we know that, we should have known that...it's an assumption that we knew that before these programs were initiated (only that the end strength was too high).

There are more moving parts to this, and it cannot be done correctly by only looking at one process. That said, the promotion process is a large and important component of force management.

Hey fellas, tomorrow I will be attending a town hall meeting held by the SECAF at my deployed location and I can assure you I will be the first to ask whether she is planning on granting approval to waive UPT ADSC's and why were we allowed to apply in the first place if they weren't even sure they would let anyone out.

Go get'em Tiger!

Bendy

[FlyFastLiveSlow]

I call bullshit on this article.

You say the delay was for waiver authority. What about all of the applicants that don't require any waiver? Mine sat for a month and a half with no movement. No ADSCs and eligible. Isn't that what the eligibility check was for?

You say you didn't know which waivers you'd need. The ADSCs you said you would consider waiving were listed in the PSDMs. How about get approval for those. You didn't know pilots had UPT ADSCs?

You say 5,000 people applied that weren't eligible. Maybe some, but I doubt 5,000 people couldn't read their PSDMs and figure out if they were eligible. Thousands couldn't figure out they didn't have 15 years service by 31 Jul?

Not sure what's going on here, but this is a line of crap. And why would you want to attempt this again next year?

[Duck]

I read:

"We just wanted to push the button to see what would happen. We didn't actually have a plan or anything."

[chizz]

I love how you all still have hope that pilots are going to get the VSP. Too much green beer

[LookieRookie]

I read:

"We just wanted to push the button to see what would happen. We didn't actually have a plan or anything."

That big red button is pretty irresitible.

A fellow I know at AFPC says that UPT ADSCs won't be waived, for what that's worth.