Mountain Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 Yeah me too...god damn it. In other news this came out FSS: Important guidance regarding TERA (as I'm reading this, if you're twice passed over don't expect to be contined but you will be allowed to apply for retirement): As outlined in the FY14 Force Management program, the Secretary of the Air Force has authorized Temporary Early Retirement Authority, or TERA, to those members eligible to apply. As the CY14 Promotion Board schedule begins, TERA will be available as a part of post-board actions. If a member is a two-time non-select for promotion, is not offered selective continuation, and is TERA-eligible, they will be given the opportunity to apply for TERA after the public release of the promotion listing. Specific instructions will be included in their non-select letter. The Retirement Date associated with this targeted TERA window will be the mandatory DOS established by the board (1st day of the 7th month following approval of results by USD P&R). Iiiiiiiiiiiiineresting. This certainly aligns with my belief that the selectively continued officers' eligibility clause means Big Blue really doesn't want us passed-over folks around. To me, it makes sense: If I've been here 15 years, they have to assume I'm staying until 20, ESPECIALLY if they've already offered selective continuation. If they can get out of paying me my six-figure salary for the next 4 years, and replace it with a 38.4% retirement (I'll have 16 years as of August), they come out ahead. In four years they'll save ~$90K/year, then about $10K every year after that as long as I continue to stink up the planet. Plus they get rid of a guy who's clearly no longer interested in any flavor of Kool-Aid they offer. For me, it's an escape to go be an airline guy and get in on a lower seniority number, but with something to show for my 16 years. For BB, it's a chance to get rid of a dude who doesn't fit their paradigm, and is also kind of expensive to pay. And before anyone reminds me that the grass might only appear greener over there, understand this: I'm not interested in leaving because the grass is greener over there. I want to leave because the sh*t is chin high and rising over here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnkr Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 And before anyone reminds me that the grass might only appear greener over there, understand this: I'm not interested in leaving because the grass is greener over there. I want to leave because the sh*t is chin high and rising over here. Shack. Like I've told people at the office: I'm not angry at the AF. I'm angry that the institution I've spent my entire adult life in, the one that is supposed to exemplify 'excellence in all we do', should be executing at this level (/holds hand over head/) but is acting like it is down here (/holds hand down by junk/). I want the service that I've sacrificed for to operate at the same level it has expected me to operate at. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crewdog135 Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Well, here's hoping I see you guys in an airline training class soon. As it is, I'd just like to know one way or the other. I'll give them until the first week in March to let me know, then I'll bug the hell out of them. I mean, if they want us out 1Aug they owe us an answer sooner rather than later. And yes, I said owe. That's just common courtesy (yeah, yeah. I know. I don't expect it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FBomb Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) Excerpt from new article on af.mil w/SecAF's perspective on force management: "She feels the Air Force’s No. 1 priority, above aircraft, weapons or equipment, is its people. 'Having the right people in the right job at the right time, who are trained and developed should be our number one priority.' The Secretary added that, 'taking care of people means to me recruiting, retaining and reshaping our force, so that we have the right people in the right jobs for the immediate future, as well as thinking ahead to the longer term. We are going to be smaller. We will be going through a force-shaping set of procedures, which will include mostly voluntary measures. We may do some involuntary as well, but this will be a big deal over the next year or two.' " http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/473409/secaf-outlines-top-priorities-during-state-of-af-address.aspx Edited February 25, 2014 by FBomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champ Kind Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Oh... now it's a year "or two". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olevelo Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 I may be missing something, but for the twice passed over folks, why would they offer TERA instead of just non-continuing them? Wouldn't that allow the AF to just cut ties with a minimal payout? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSCguy Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 I may be missing something, but for the twice passed over folks, why would they offer TERA instead of just non-continuing them? Wouldn't that allow the AF to just cut ties with a minimal payout? Because of the shit storm that happened in 2011 when the AF cut loose a bunch of twice passed over majors. As posted in another forum somewhere on here continuation is normally offered to officers twice passed over within five years of twenty. It's cheaper to let the passed over dudes retire at 15 or 16 than continue them to 20, and also cheaper than possibly defending a huge class action lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mish_Hacker Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Anybody else applying for VSP still at "Referred to Sq CC"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olevelo Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 But if you're non-continued, you just get seperation pay (similar to RIF pay) right? The lawsuit from a couple years ago, I never heard they actually won that? So surely the AF doesn't really care about the black eye, as long as it gets the numbers down as cheaply as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Pipes Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Iiiiiiiiiiiiineresting. This certainly aligns with my belief that the selectively continued officers' eligibility clause means Big Blue really doesn't want us passed-over folks around. Well... except for the fact that every one of them that I know who was a continued pilot and applied when the window was opened has already been denied TERA. Apparently there is one of those pilot shortage things going on... cue Butters. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aston.martin Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Yeah me too...god damn it. In other news this came out FSS: Important guidance regarding TERA (as I'm reading this, if you're twice passed over don't expect to be contined but you will be allowed to apply for retirement): As outlined in the FY14 Force Management program, the Secretary of the Air Force has authorized Temporary Early Retirement Authority, or TERA, to those members eligible to apply. As the CY14 Promotion Board schedule begins, TERA will be available as a part of post-board actions. If a member is a two-time non-select for promotion, is not offered selective continuation, and is TERA-eligible, they will be given the opportunity to apply for TERA after the public release of the promotion listing. Specific instructions will be included in their non-select letter. The Retirement Date associated with this targeted TERA window will be the mandatory DOS established by the board (1st day of the 7th month following approval of results by USD P&R). Very interesting news. If you don't mind me asking, what is the source? Was this sent out via e-mail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butters Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Update: that LtCol in my SQ was approved for TERA.. Well, on 17 Jan someone was approved. I know a passed over Nav that was approved, so they are not denying them all. I think they want to see how may they can separate that do not have ADSCs before they approve guys with one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Excerpt from new article on af.mil w/SecAF's perspective on force management: "She feels the Air Force’s No. 1 priority, above aircraft, weapons or equipment, is its people. 'Having the right people in the right job at the right time, who are trained and developed should be our number one priority.' The Secretary added that, 'taking care of people means to me recruiting, retaining and reshaping our force, so that we have the right people in the right jobs for the immediate future, as well as thinking ahead to the longer term. We are going to be smaller. We will be going through a force-shaping set of procedures, which will include mostly voluntary measures. We may do some involuntary as well, but this will be a big deal over the next year or two.' " http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/473409/secaf-outlines-top-priorities-during-state-of-af-address.aspx Our number 1 priority is people. That's why we're getting rid of 25,000 of them. Anyone else feeling just a tad cynical about the prospects of "applying for TERA" if you are passed over? I mean, it doesn't say "will be automatically approved for TERA". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techsan Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Very interesting news. If you don't mind me asking, what is the source? Was this sent out via e-mail? Yes...I saw it today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Pipes Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Well, on 17 Jan someone was approved. I know a passed over Nav that was approved, so they are not denying them all. I think they want to see how may they can separate that do not have ADSCs before they approve guys with one. I have heard of a continued Nav or two approved, but haven't heard of any pilots approved for TERA although I'm sure there are a few out there. I know the whole first batch of guys who applied when the window opened were denied because the Retirements office at AFPC didn't even know that Continued types were eligible... geniuses. I know another example of a pilot (not continued) who was just denied TERA with 19+ yrs because he had 1 month left on an ADSC for training. If they won't approve TERA for a pilot with over 19 yrs due to 1 month left on an ADSC I have no idea who they are willing to let go. I guess they don't really save anything by letting someone retire at 19 yrs and 9 months, but that one seems like a no-brainer. Anyone else hear of any weird cases like this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 The Nav or two you mention are the first I've heard of actually getting approved. There are lots of us just waiting to hear something. I'm still holding out hope that no news is good news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-21.Pilot Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I got that email too from our execs here at Randolph. originated from AFPC.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nasty2004 Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I have heard of a continued Nav or two approved, but haven't heard of any pilots approved for TERA although I'm sure there are a few out there. I know the whole first batch of guys who applied when the window opened were denied because the Retirements office at AFPC didn't even know that Continued types were eligible... geniuses. I know another example of a pilot (not continued) who was just denied TERA with 19+ yrs because he had 1 month left on an ADSC for training. If they won't approve TERA for a pilot with over 19 yrs due to 1 month left on an ADSC I have no idea who they are willing to let go. I guess they don't really save anything by letting someone retire at 19 yrs and 9 months, but that one seems like a no-brainer. Anyone else hear of any weird cases like this one? Why would someone apply for reduced retirement with a year to go? What bad deal could possibly come down between now and then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TarHeelPilot Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Line number 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Pipes Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Why would someone apply for reduced retirement with a year to go? What bad deal could possibly come down between now and then? Line number, pending PCS, wife has a great job lined up, wife/kids live on the other side of the country, so kids can move before school starts, Chang just moved in next door... lots of valid reasons where the 49.69% retirement vs 50% makes more sense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-21.Pilot Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Maybe I'm ignorant, and most would agree -- but why is line number a distractor. This will be my situation -- will have a line number and should pin-on with 1 year to go before 20. Why would I need/want to get out at 19? I'm not familiar with a rank carrying an ADSC - but am familiar with the 3 yr rule to retire in the rank. What am I missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butters Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) What am I missing.They are talking about your line number at the bankrupt airline that is going to pay you 30 cents on the dollar for the retirement you earned over X number of years. Edited February 26, 2014 by Butters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chim richalds Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 I'll take a bankrupt airline over a clown show like active duty has become Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyjetz Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Why would someone apply for reduced retirement with a year to go? What bad deal could possibly come down between now and then? Stop Loss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzdude Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Isn't stop loss only authorized during a contingency? And isn't the war supposed to end this year? As far as potential PCS, can't you just 7 day opt out? Not trying to add fuel to the fire, just curious. I can see the line number argument or unique family situation as being factors. I'm nowhere near retirement and have no dependents, so just trying to get insight into the decision making process 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