Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[Vprdrvr69]

Repetitive words... your a number... $$$ fixes everything... "thanks for your service"

The bonus DOES project forward, and it sees a future issue in the -11F community. No issues in spec ops, helos, UAVs, and ESPECIALLY mobility as far as the numbers are concerned. I cannot argue emotion or individual frustrations- please feel free to vent, but I cannot have a constructive argument with you, because the numbers don't support your frustrations. I am sorry.

The ACP has been around for years, and $$$ have always worked to fix the imbalance. Each and every time, it has worked (sometimes it took a couple of years, but it worked none-the-less). There is no quantitative evidence that $$$ will not continue to work in the future. If one year's retention is suboptimal, the A1 will tell the CSAF what needs to happen, and the CSAF will adjust the ACP. Simple as that. No emotion, no thoughts about quality of life. Just money to fix the problem. And it works. Why would the GOs change something that works?

Speaking of "no issues in spec ops, helos, .....", the recently released AFPC Stressed Career Fields specifically highlights 11S and 11H at the very top of the list. Having first hand experience in the 11S world, I can tell you the imbalance that GO's currently predict in the 11F world are even worse in the 11S world. We'll just wait for it to become blatantly obvious and let the knee jerk. I suppose the fix at that point will be to throw more $$$ and pretend like any someone cares. Hard to talk about core values when the institution will treat you like a number, abuse the complete shitt out of you and then cover it up with $$$- because that works every time right? Nice integrity but better yet, great way to lead by taking care of your people with $$$ as a substitute for quality leadership. Sadly I learned long ago two lessons that many folks never learn. First, your just a number. Second, timing is everything.

AFPC reference from FY2013 2nd QTR: http://access.afpc.a...Z1pub1&_debug=0

The only way in which the bonus looks "backwards" is at retention number trends over time. Other than that, the bonus looks forward. Similar to a promotion, in that you are being promoted because of your potential to lead in the next rank, except promotions have a backward-looking "achievement" component. The bonus does not.

You referenced it here and mentioned in a previous post that pilot retention is great. According to the AFPC A1 FY2012 Rated Retention Analysis Report, which I am sure you are briefed on, the rate of separations/ retirements for FIRST TIME ELIGIBLES was an astonishing 90%! The synopsis in the report actually reported "Rated officer losses in the active duty Air Force were significantly higher in FY12 than in the previous several years." As a matter of fact, according to the Table 5., Fighter pilot losses percentage wise were the second lowest behind UAV's. Spec Ops and CSAR were considerably higher. They summarize that total losses are minimal overall, but it fails to account for the severe decrease in experience levels that are actually measured and quantified in the report. Any thoughts to these numbers? (Reference is the same as above, just click on the appropriate report)

As for the glut that you reference, I feel that you may be correct in many of your points. Unemotionally, you point out some hard truths. I have seen many guys that probably shouldn't be afforded the continued to 20 option and are a drain on officers below them (sts). I'll save that for comments in the PRF/ Promotion thread.

So...Big Blue is needing -11F's bad, why?

11S and 11H not so much, why? Plans to kill some platforms and free up more bodies we can RIF?

What about UPT first assignment UAV guys? They going to get a shot to go fast too? For that matter, what about the screwed over TAMI guys like myself? I've actually seen and heard a few guys making their way back? Unfortunately, even those are still talking about punching out.

[BCan]

BCan,

Respectfully, you are in the service and you complain about the honor and tradition of wearing a uniform? You describe it as a "f***ing haze" to wear our service's uniform? Wow. Now I am numb.

No...I'm complaining about the fact that half a fighter squadron is in Service Dress on a Monday, the squadron is flying a 10x8, a dude falls off the schedule...and now I have to find a dude who brought his flight suit with him to work so he can perform his J-O-B...be a fighter pilot for the day. Or better yet, how about we create a new game called simulator Monday where everyone can wear a flight suit. I wish I could have been it that room when the CSAF brought this idea up...cause my educated guess is no one had the guts to tell him it was a horrible idea. But hey, everyone will love it cause its honor and tradition?

There is no "mess" here, BCan, and there never was.

OK...you got me. I only see landscape at the Squadron level...my FOV is narrow. However, sure looks like we lose a lot of talented aviators.

Just money to fix the problem.

Yep. Oh...wait, what?

[Vprdrvr69]

BCan,

Respectfully, you are in the service and you complain about the honor and tradition of wearing a uniform? You describe it as a "f***ing haze" to wear our service's uniform? Wow. Now I am numb.

There is no "mess" here, BCan, and there never was. The ACP has been around for years, and $$$ have always worked to fix the imbalance. Each and every time, it has worked (sometimes it took a couple of years, but it worked none-the-less). There is no quantitative evidence that $$$ will not continue to work in the future. If one year's retention is suboptimal, the A1 will tell the CSAF what needs to happen, and the CSAF will adjust the ACP. Simple as that. No emotion, no thoughts about quality of life. Just money to fix the problem. And it works. Why would the GOs change something that works?

I get that many of you have been screwed by this or that, and I understand complaining about it in this forum. All I am trying to relay, as unemotionally as possible, is that the bonus program (and I'm only talking about the bonus here) is ALL about 1's and 0's, nothing more, nothing less. It is not a pat-on-the-back, it is not a thank-you. The only way in which the bonus looks "backwards" is at retention number trends over time. Other than that, the bonus looks forward. Similar to a promotion, in that you are being promoted because of your potential to lead in the next rank, except promotions have a backward-looking "achievement" component. The bonus does not.

The bonus does not cry for prior enlisted who do not get it. They did not get it because they will stay through 20 (in fact, guys just hitting their 15th year will stay through 20, to the tune of 90+%, regardless of bonus money, so count your blessings if you're between 15-16 that leadership gave you a payout).

The bonus does not weep for late rated people who are ineligible. They are ineligible because they will stay through 20. Give them bonus money? Why, Rusty? So they can stay past 20? The Air Force does not need you past 20. They need you to (mostly) work the staff & (a small few of you) fly the line now, but after 20, you're in the way of the promotion system. There is plenty of talent in the pipeline to become the next "experienced pilot" behind you (actually, they're already the "experienced pilot" behind you, as folks hit EP at the senior Captain rank), and they are much cheaper than you are. Simple math, just like the private sector. Why would the taxpayer give you a crapload money and get zero "net effective return" on that money? Ergo, no bonus for you. And low and behold, Rusty, you are staying, which prooves the CSAF's point. You do not deserve the money. You do not NOT deserve the money. You just don't get the money, because enough of your type are staying (to include you), and then leaving at 20, which is what the Air Force needs, and that's what matters.

The bonus does not cheer for fighter pilots who just hit the lottery. There is no conspiracy among fighter pilot GOs at the Pentagon to give "their own" more money. Hogwash. It's ones and zeros. What does a four-star get out of giving an O-4 an extra pile of cash? If he's lucky, nothing. If he's not lucky, he gets an earful from a Congressman or woman that he must sit there and listed to, diligently, out of respect for his or her office. Conspiracy? Please. Get over yourself.

The bonus does not give a sigh of relieve for the glut of -11Ms who just hit paydirt. If you read my first post, mobility guys, you should realize why I later said "gratitude" is the word of the day. Besides the upcoming Air Force contraction, staffs will contract over the next few years. Fewer -11Ms will be needed to backfill -11F positions. Additionally, # of squadrons are contracting in some weapons systems (take the Herk world, for example; once transformation is complete, there will not be nearly as many "J" pilots walking around as there were "E" + "H" pilots- fewer squadrons- simple math). UAV mid-career transfers may be topping out in the next few years (speaking strictly on the heavy, non-armed side-of-the-house) as the formal UAV training pipeline continues to ramp up and add capacity. And yes, while C-17 pilots are hurting from the tempo, it is simply not a manning issue. It is a mission issue, and should be addressed in that manner (I'm sure to hear the most response from this comment, but it's true: the C-17 community has the manning to accomplish the mission it should be doing. Maybe things will get better for that community as OEF wraps up next year- I am crossing my fingers). As for the airlines, there is no mass hire, there won't be a mass hire anytime soon (probability very, very high), and if there is, the Air Force will correct with money, and it will be very successful with that tool as it always has been.

The bonus DOES project forward, and it sees a future issue in the -11F community. No issues in spec ops, helos, UAVs, and ESPECIALLY mobility as far as the numbers are concerned. I cannot argue emotion or individual frustrations- please feel free to vent, but I cannot have a constructive argument with you, because the numbers don't support your frustrations. I am sorry.

The bonus is a tool. Nothing more, nothing less. It is $$$, and money rebalances the Air Force's "personnel portfolio," if you will...

Hopefully this response is a little more "even-keeled"--I apologize for calling a pilot a "pansy" in the other forum- I will try to stick to the facts from here forward.

Enjoy your weekend. Enjoy your bonuses. Can't wait for Coney Island Hot Dog contest this week!!

GC,

Someone else mentioned here that serving in the USAF must now be treated simply as a JOB. It is so sad, because the vast majority of every single one of us joined for such patriotic reasons that had little to do with self-serving interests. To this day, aside from being a number and being treated as such, I take exceptional pride in wearing the uniform and serving my country. Unfortunately, like many, that obligation is towards my country and not my employer. At a time where so few a expected to do so much, you would think leadership would do more than treat everyone as a number, and try to fix their problems by throwing some peanuts and cash at them when morale or retention is poor. Leadership is so much more than that at every fundamental level. I have had an amazing time doing things I am so proud of in the USAF. I've been a fighter pilot, a special ops pilot and have had the honor of leading at a time of war. I've saved guys and been responsible for executing missions of great proportion. I'm proud of my accomplishments and what I have done for my country. More likely than not, I will continue to serve my country in some manner, but it will not be in the USAF. This is a 99% certainty even though my boxes are checked and the future is bright. Sadly, this is the opinion of most folks in my position. At a time when resources are tight, the USAF really needs to keep the best and brightest. Somehow the USAF is able to recruit some of the best this country has to offer. I've had the privilege of working beside them. Why do we treat them in this manner while they rush the exits? The glut that you will be left with is not the force that you need while operating at the lowest manning levels since force inception. I am cautiously optimistic that Gen Welsh will continue to work things in the right direction; my fear is that it is too late to right this ship. The saga of this ACP are not helping things either, and it likely will have zero impact on -11F take rates. We'll see soon.

[Rusty Pipes]

The bonus does not weep for late rated people who are ineligible. They are ineligible because they will stay through 20. Give them bonus money? Why, Rusty? So they can stay past 20? The Air Force does not need you past 20. They need you to (mostly) work the staff & (a small few of you) fly the line now, but after 20, you're in the way of the promotion system. There is plenty of talent in the pipeline to become the next "experienced pilot" behind you (actually, they're already the "experienced pilot" behind you, as folks hit EP at the senior Captain rank), and they are much cheaper than you are. Simple math, just like the private sector. Why would the taxpayer give you a crapload money and get zero "net effective return" on that money? Ergo, no bonus for you. And low and behold, Rusty, you are staying, which prooves the CSAF's point. You do not deserve the money. You do not NOT deserve the money. You just don't get the money, because enough of your type are staying (to include you), and then leaving at 20, which is what the Air Force needs, and that's what matters.

I think the part that you are missing the boat on is talking about it from just a numbers perspective and constantly saying to take emotions out of it. Those 15-20 year guys are the leaders of your Squadrons. I assure you that very few young to mid-level pilots are looking towards their golden boy 2 BPZ Squadron Commander for leadership and mentorship. In fact the incessant Blue Kool Aid rants about all being warriors and continious badgering about AADs, SOS in Cor etc (shit most of them don't believe in themselves) means that your average young pup has already tuned them out within about the first year of flying the line. Sure they will pretend they are listening, but unfortunately they now learn even as LTs that they are just playing a game. These guys aren't inspiring anyone for the most part... neither are their OGs or CVs or Wing CCs; mostly because they are all essentially clones of each other. When it comes to actual leadership in the AF today the majority of those in what are considered leadership positions (Sq CC on up to GOs) couldn't lead a bowling ball down a hill... and even most bowling balls wouldn't be willing to follow if they had a choice!

What is missing is that with this group of guys (15-20 yrs) the AF probably SHOULD consider the emotional aspect of it. Just look at the tone of this group today compared to just 10-12 years ago. Back then all you would hear from these guys to the young kids was, "Dude this is awesome... we actually get paid to fly jets for a living!" In fact I remember back then even having Commanders that (God forbid) were even slightly inspiring! Just look at this forum as an example... the majority of those guys in this thread alone in that demographic are mostly saying the same thing, "I'm just sitting back and counting the days until 20." It is the queep from above and the constant focus on the irrelevant that has changed this attitude from the gray beards between then and now... and that attitude spreads like a virus. Now when cruising across the pond for 7 hrs at 3 am and the senior Capt who is picking the brain of that guy 18 yrs in, the advice more often than not given will be, "Hey dude, I'm here because I have to be... if I were you I'd be pulling chalks and joining the Guard/Res ASAP! In case you haven't figured it out yet, Big Blue does not give a shit about you or your family... you are just a number!" The 8-10 yr guys listen to those 15-20 year guys... they watch very closely how they are treated because the very question they have to themselves is, "Do I want to be him 5 yrs from now?" They haven't been treated very well lately and if you ask any C-17 Sq or OG CC (and I have several good friends who are currently sitting in those jobs) they will tell you they are concerned about the number of experienced guys who have recently been jumping ship as soon as that ADSC is up.

Edited June 29, 2013 by Rusty Pipes

[Fuzz]

No emotion, no thoughts about quality of life. Just money to fix the problem. And it works. Why would the GOs change something that works?

Because leaders should actually care about the people they lead?????????? I haven't gone to SOS yet, but I do remember being hammered over and over again in 4 years of ROTC that the number one priority of a leader is to take care of his people. However, it looks to me like you found the easiest route to fix your problems, bribe people to stay, instead of actually addressing the problems.

[Vprdrvr69]

GC/ Liquid,

As a test bed, how about pushing through automatic approvals for Palace Chase to help reduce the glut of pilots? I hear that most of those application get rejected at the Pentagon. Most guys I know are waiting until they are inside of 1 year to even think about applying. There are many pilot waiting in line. Go back and check the statistics from the VSP fiasco- the numbers are telling. Of more than 15 guys in my squadron (at the time) eligible for the VSP, every single person EXCEPT for me applied! I had this conversation with the Sq/CC; he was in disbelief that so many folks wanted out ASAP and I had to explain some of the reasons why. I was waiting for a memo to be signed to allow me to apply for another program; apparently there was no chance of that MFR getting signed so in hindsight, I would've applied for VSP as well. The overall VSP program stats were alarming. The vast majority of applicants, well over 69%, were pilots. All were lied to and damn near all were disapproved. If retention is so great, open the door for Palace Chase. Offer another VSP and use integrity this time. I'm afraid that your perception of retention would be tested to the limit; while many guys may stay in because of the economy, the amount that will leave will be staggering. Time will tell. I have no vested interest if folks stay or leave but I am happy to wager a cold beer on it for entertainment value.

[AnimalMother]

Not to derail the current discussion, but holy shit, can you tell us anything about the FY14 force shaping? ie will pilots be eligible (for real this time)? I know it's probably close hold but my inner terrets has taken over and I can't refrain from asking any longer.

[Rusty Pipes]

Not to derail the current discussion, but holy shit, can you tell us anything about the FY14 force shaping? ie will pilots be eligible (for real this time)? I know it's probably close hold but my inner terrets has taken over and I can't refrain from asking any longer.

Hey Chang... you say we don't need all of those 15-20 year Maj and Lt Cols (esp 11Ms)? Lets do a little force shaping with an early retirement offer. Think of all the money the AF would be saving by not having to pay these guys $120K for the next few years and only need to pay 40-45% retirement instead of 50%. You say they would be doing all of us a favor by just shutting up and just retiring at 20... thanks for your service, right? You thought the line was long for pilots applying for VSP???

[Guest ThatGuy]

Not to derail the current discussion, but holy shit, can you tell us anything about the FY14 force shaping? ie will pilots be eligible (for real this time)? I know it's probably close hold but my inner terrets has taken over and I can't refrain from asking any longer.

Don't know if this helps to answer your question. Found this in an AF Times article. An unidentified MSgt basically said the AF needs to not downsize by hitting the enlisted side. Instead, reduce the number of general officers. Former SECDEF Gates decided in March 2011 to reduce, reallocate or eliminate 140 general and flag officer positions. Since then the department has eliminated 17 AF general officer positions. Many of the remaining positions are cobditions based and tied to operations within and supporting Afghanistan. The number of eliminations should increase from 2013-2014.

[Fifty-six & Two]

Hey Chang... you say we don't need all of those 15-20 year Maj and Lt Cols (esp 11Ms)? Lets do a little force shaping with an early retirement offer. Think of all the money the AF would be saving by not having to pay these guys $120K for the next few years and only need to pay 40-45% retirement instead of 50%. You say they would be doing all of us a favor by just shutting up and just retiring at 20... thanks for your service, right? You thought the line was long for pilots applying for VSP???

I think this idea is actually on the front of the Army times. They are going to offer 15 year retirements as a way to force shape. Don't have access to the site so I don't know the criteria. If the AF did it, 11M's wouldn't be eligible.

[General Chang]

Hey Chang... you say we don't need all of those 15-20 year Maj and Lt Cols (esp 11Ms)? Lets do a little force shaping with an early retirement offer. Think of all the money the AF would be saving by not having to pay these guys $120K for the next few years and only need to pay 40-45% retirement instead of 50%. You say they would be doing all of us a favor by just shutting up and just retiring at 20... thanks for your service, right? You thought the line was long for pilots applying for VSP???

Ok, Rusty, I'll bite. The AF drew the line at the 16 year point this year for the bonus, so let's use 16 years for your scenario.

Current early retirement rules = lose 3.5% per year early. In this scenario, the Major retiring at 16 years would be awarded 36% of "top 3" pay.

Top 3 pay would equal an average of $7000 per month.

$7000 x 36% = $2521.26/month x 12 months = $30,255.12/year

Average lifespan around 77. Assume said Major was 40, that's 37 years x $30,255.12 = $1,119,439. Yikes. Inflation not taken into account on either side of the ledger (value of tomorrow's dollars or annual increase in retirement dollars).

Using your number ($120K/yr), AF saves $480,000. Even with inflation, doesn't come close, because the $1.12M would have to be adjusted upward as well, albeit by a smaller margin, since the payments are happening over 37 years.

Rusty, we've looked at these scenarios, and the taxpayer loses money to keep you from working. They'd kick you out before you hit the 18 year point, but contrary to popular belief, there are Generals at the Pentagon who have a heart and look for other solutions.

[Van1]

Hey Chang... you say we don't need all of those 15-20 year Maj and Lt Cols (esp 11Ms)? Lets do a little force shaping with an early retirement offer. Think of all the money the AF would be saving by not having to pay these guys $120K for the next few years and only need to pay 40-45% retirement instead of 50%. You say they would be doing all of us a favor by just shutting up and just retiring at 20... thanks for your service, right? You thought the line was long for pilots applying for VSP???

Why offer 15-16 year Majors an early retirement when Big Blue can simply give them a check for $130k and tell them to get the puck out.

[addict]

Now when cruising across the pond for 7 hrs at 3 am and the senior Capt who is picking the brain of that guy 18 yrs in, the advice more often than not given will be, "Hey dude, I'm here because I have to be... if I were you I'd be pulling chalks and joining the Guard/Res ASAP! In case you haven't figured it out yet, Big Blue does not give a shit about you or your family... you are just a number!" The 8-10 yr guys listen to those 15-20 year guys... they watch very closely how they are treated because the very question they have to themselves is, "Do I want to be him 5 yrs from now?" They haven't been treated very well lately and if you ask any C-17 Sq or OG CC (and I have several good friends who are currently sitting in those jobs) they will tell you they are concerned about the number of experienced guys who have recently been jumping ship as soon as that ADSC is up.

Rusty, I don't know your situation, but to address your hypothetical: The 18 year guy who's flying the line as an O-4 or O-5 has the best job in the world. Especially if he is actually in the squadron and isn't the SQ/CC or DO. He has gotten good at saying NO because the O-2's and O-3's in the squadron don't. He's 2 years from joining the check of the month club and probably has already figured out how to stay on station for the remainder of his 20. Hell yeah he'll keep flying. There are some people like him who do great things commensurate with their rank and experience that have a great positive effect on the organization.

I agree here: the organization is currently f'd up. There are countless problems, mostly around throwing inexperienced people into a squadron, getting experience, and then removing them, all at the EXPENSE of the squadron. The experience is getting yanked well before the ADSC ends.

[Rusty Pipes]

I think this idea is actually on the front of the Army times. They are going to offer 15 year retirements as a way to force shape. Don't have access to the site so I don't know the criteria. If the AF did it, 11M's wouldn't be eligible.

Wait, but you've heard Chang... we apparently have more 11M FGOs than we know what to do with, right? Just go to all of those C-17 Sqs and you'll just see the halls filled with FGO pilots just sitting around wondering what they will do with all of their free time! Just sooooo incredibly overmanned, remember?!?

And yes, while C-17 pilots are hurting from the tempo, it is simply not a manning issue. It is a mission issue, and should be addressed in that manner (I'm sure to hear the most response from this comment, but it's true: the C-17 community has the manning to accomplish the mission it should be doing. Maybe things will get better for that community as OEF wraps up next year- I am crossing my fingers). As for the airlines, there is no mass hire, there won't be a mass hire anytime soon (probability very, very high), and if there is, the Air Force will correct with money, and it will be very successful with that tool as it always has been.

Yeah, we've heard this same tune being played for the past 6-7 yrs... especially after OIF ended. Biggest misconception in the AF and looks like even those in the puzzle palace are starting to believe themselves on this one. Airlift is very simple... we are going to Airlift the top 5% of cargo no matter where it is or where it is going. Yesterday it may have been MRAPs to Iraq, today it could be retrograding equipment from OEF, tomorrow it may be ping pong balls to Mongolia. The amount of Airlift we do will not change, just what we are carrying! POTUS will most surely be touting how OEF is over/winding down and how things will be slowing down for our military (especially during the 2014 mid term campaign)... and a dozen C-17s will be flying around the country daily filled with limos, Secret Service, HMX 1 helos and equipment so he can prove how things are slowing down, right? (Caveat... not too many C-17 bubbas will complain about doing this as opposed to being anywhere in Crapistan; just saying that the MAF world will always be busy, especially the C-17 community).

[TnkrToad]

Just trying to give some tools to GC here. If it helps, it's forward looking, per his stated purpose of the ARP . . . check out Audries Aircraft Analysis at http://www.audriesaircraftanalysis.com/airline-pilot-demand/airline-pilot-demand-comparison/ , and pan down to the "Total Pilot Demand Among Major Airlines due to FleetGrowth/Pilot Retirements" chart; I think you'll find it illuminating. We can nitpick the numbers, but if the Majors alone are going to need 2k/yr plus (peaking at over 4k a year in the not-too-distant future), would it not seem wise to "lock in" as many pilots as possible into long-term commitments so as to blunt the effect of this rapidly approaching storm? Don't forget that the ARC has half of Big Blue's airlift/tanker capacity, and has its own retirement problem . . .

GC:

- I'm providing data. You've provided nothing other than "trust me, I know what I'm doing"

- Surely, without going into FOUO or above material, you can point to some statistic that in some way at least partially validates your point

- In the absence of data to support your assertions, your arguments are as emotional and irrelevant as you purport those of your detractors are

- You've clearly missed the point and lost your audience on an emotional level. You've lost the argument on a logical/factual level, since you've done nothing to refute any data/statistics/anecdotal evidence presented

Can you explain in a factually/logically defensible way why the 11H and 11S communities are suddenly healthy and can be expected to remain so? After 12 years of post-9/11 airline bankruptcies, followed by increase in airline pilot retirement age from 60 to 65, can you further explain how the "historical" data can possibly have any validity in predicting retention over the next several years?

No factual/reasonable support for your assertions? I didn't think so . . .

[Rusty Pipes]

Rusty, we've looked at these scenarios, and the taxpayer loses money to keep you from working. They'd kick you out before you hit the 18 year point, but contrary to popular belief, there are Generals at the Pentagon who have a heart and look for other solutions.

So the numbers make sense to both the Army and Navy, but don't make sense to the AF? Still trying to make sense out of the thought process that says we don't need to offer a bonus to guys (esp 11Ms) past 16 yrs (logical actually) because they know they will stay to 20, but in the same breath say that we are overmanned and have a "glut" of FGOs that they are trying to get rid of.

So maybe I'm just a dumb pilot and don't get math, but if you take that same guy and pay him $120,000 for the next 4 yrs and then have him retire at 20 yrs, using 50% of base pay top 3 ($7000) $42,000 for 33 years comes to $1.4million in retirement alone... plus the $480,000. How does this work out better for the tax payer? I'm pretty hung over, so please excuse me if my brain isn't working and I'm missing something here (very possible).

[Fifty-six & Two]

So maybe I'm just a dumb pilot and don't get math, but if you take that same guy and pay him $120,000 for the next 4 yrs and then have him retire at 20 yrs, using 50% of base pay top 3 ($7000) $42,000 for 33 years comes to $1.4million in retirement alone... plus the $480,000. How does this work out better for the tax payer? I'm pretty hung over, so please excuse me if my brain isn't working and I'm missing something here (very possible).

There must be two of us as I had those same numbers. So offer early retirement and save $750,000 PER PERSON over their lifetime. Unfortunately, we are the ones who just don't get it.

[addict]

Ok, Rusty, I'll bite. The AF drew the line at the 16 year point this year for the bonus, so let's use 16 years for your scenario.

Current early retirement rules = lose 3.5% per year early. In this scenario, the Major retiring at 16 years would be awarded 36% of "top 3" pay.

Top 3 pay would equal an average of $7000 per month.

$7000 x 36% = $2521.26/month x 12 months = $30,255.12/year

Average lifespan around 77. Assume said Major was 40, that's 37 years x $30,255.12 = $1,119,439. Yikes. Inflation not taken into account on either side of the ledger (value of tomorrow's dollars or annual increase in retirement dollars).

Using your number ($120K/yr), AF saves $480,000. Even with inflation, doesn't come close, because the $1.12M would have to be adjusted upward as well, albeit by a smaller margin, since the payments are happening over 37 years.

Rusty, we've looked at these scenarios, and the taxpayer loses money to keep you from working. They'd kick you out before you hit the 18 year point, but contrary to popular belief, there are Generals at the Pentagon who have a heart and look for other solutions.

Another WTF. The math you presented makes the 20 year retirement the MOST EXPENSIVE option to the taxpayer.

Time value of money, compare the annuity cost of a 20 year retirement (4 years in the future) with a 16 year retirement (TODAY).

36% of 7000 = 2520 ish

50% of 7200 = 3600 ish

From an annuity calculator: 2520/month, 37 years of payout, 3% growth - annuity value present day is $677K

Switch up the numbers......: 3600/month, 37 years of payout, 3% growth - annuity value at start day is $967K - Throw it 4 years in the future and it DECREASES in present day dollars to about 900K.

Those are the annuity values, more or less. Whichever RATE you use to calculate, a 16 year at your 14-point discount comes 28% cheaper to the gov't. Reverse that, the 20 year is 43% more expensive (at the same term of 37 years). It costs the taxpayer 43% more to keep him until 20. So yeah, get the phuck out, you're too expensive. Thanks for your service.

Now let's talk wages:

The extra 4 years also costs North of $480K to employ this guy. If it is overmanned - that's pure excess. He's getting 7,000 base per month + increasing his payout every year 3.5 POINTS. To go from a 36-POINT retirement to a 39-POINT retirement is nearly a 10% increase in one year. Awesome deal for someone at 16 to get "paid" an additional 220K over just 4 years. He gets nearly 500 in wages and 200 to his retirement pot - 700K increase in cost if we're overmanned...

Let's talk old guy retirement:

Retire at 30 years, and 75%, but your payout is only 27 years!

If he had somehow remained at 7000 base pay (today's dollars), his annuity over the next 10 years only goes up from 0.97 M to 1.17M. Now this is 14 years in the future - Today you'd only need 66% of that money (770K) to save away - This is an amazing deal for the taxpayer (comparatively). Every 2.5 Point increase has a marginally smaller value to the annuity payout. Each year, the member loses a year of payout, and the marginal increase of 2.5 points is worth less against the rate. Going from a 50% to a 52.5% is just a 5% increase. That last year going from 72.5 to 75 is worth just a 3.4% increase. That would be like contributing $0 in your last year of employment to a 401K and just letting it grow 3.4% with a bond fund. Stupid. Get out now GC.

Happily, the old guy (O-6) sees his base pay also increase 50% in that 10 year time period, and the annuity is worth 1.75 M. At 66%, he costs the taxpayer TODAY 1.15M.

Of course, I used math that assumes you could save money. It will be a loan from China that bankrolls all of this.

Edited June 29, 2013 by addict

[BigE]

Funny thing about the bonus -- 'back in the day' options included (with an 8 year UPT commitment) the 'big bonus' that was 25k per year to 20 years aviation service (half up front if you wanted it) - meaning 11 years of bonus money. Somewhat similar to the 11F bonus this year except it was for everyone - and more money. Or you could sign a 5 year at 25k per. Then after 5 years take another 5 year for 25k (shit you negative). We also had the 'boots on the ramp' policy with respect to the bonus. And we even had years with a bonus to 25 years aviation service - guys would get off the 'big bonus' to 20 and then get another 25k for 5 (that might have actually only been 15k for 5 when going from 20 to 25 years aviation service, I forget).

A couple years back when the 25k for 5 first showed up the 'rumor' was the AF would offer another bonus when the first 5 year only bonus guys were taking a pay cut. Thought being that squadron commanders would be making less money than the ADOs and the AF wouldn't have that... we've seen how that has played out.

And bonus money doesn't solve everything - it really doesn't - ever hear of stop loss, rated recall, etc? All things we have seen in just the last 10 years.

Been lots of talk about how the bonus isn't really a bonus anymore, but a part of the compensation plan for pilots -- for a long time (minus no adjustments for inflation) it was getting better with more options. Then the 5 year only plan kicked in. But even that hasn't been around all that long. Majority of O-6s around today, and all the GOs, grew up on the AF paying them significantly more money (in the order of 125k+) than what we are paying guys today. And they wonder why they look like hypocrites when discussing the 'bonus'? Not too long ago, when you crunched the numbers (I'm sure there's still spreadsheets you can find already made), it made more financial sense to get out at 19 years and go airlines (even Southwest) than stay to 20. Don't be surprised when that becomes a reality again.

Here's a thought - if we are so overmanned - kill the 10 year UPT commitment - heck, drop it back to 5 or 6 years instead of 8 (make it retroactive). Our AB to idle and spreedbrakes, bang-bang guidance pilot manning policies over the last 15 years is quite honestly, disheartening. And we wonder why we can't keep talent?

When the BS gets to be too much guys have and will continue to vote with their feet.

Point being -- as evident by the discussion on these boards -- A1 doesn't know their ass from a f-ing helmet bag when dealing with pilot manning -- never has, probably never will. Serve because you want to (lots of reasons, different for everyone). Your reasons (I know mine are) for continuing to serve are probably different than what they were when you first got in. That's ok. Do a kick ass job taking care of the mission because that's what you're supposed to do and when a new chapter in your life opens up - don't forget to invite the bros to your fini-flight so we can drink your free beer and booze and say thank you. If you did it right, the bros and your family will know, and who cares about anything else than that when discussing a military career?

e

[Herk Driver]

Funny thing about the bonus -- 'back in the day' options included (with an 8 year UPT commitment) the 'big bonus' that was 25k per year to 20 years aviation service (half up front if you wanted it) - meaning 11 years of bonus money. Somewhat similar to the 11F bonus this year except it was for everyone - and more money. Or you could sign a 5 year at 25k per. Then after 5 years take another 5 year for 25k (shit you negative). We also had the 'boots on the ramp' policy with respect to the bonus. And we even had years with a bonus to 25 years aviation service - guys would get off the 'big bonus' to 20 and then get another 25k for 5 (that might have actually only been 15k for 5 when going from 20 to 25 years aviation service, I forget).

Funnier thing about the bonus was that 'back in the day' (before the early-2000's that you speak of) the max amount you could get was 12K...back then there was also a feet on the ramp policy. There was also a TAFMSD restriction that did not allow it to be offered to 'late-rated' guys...funny how the pendulum swings back and forth.

[AnimalMother]

It will be a loan from China that bankrolls all of this.

Eventually yes, but initially it's a loan to ourselves (US Govt)...from the people, and it doesn't come from taxes. Actually, it's not really a loan at all...

[GBock]

Maybe things will get better for that community as OEF wraps up next year- I am crossing my fingers).

If you were in-tune with mobility plans and the commanders on the ground, this wouldn't be a question.

[General Chang]

There must be two of us as I had those same numbers. So offer early retirement and save $750,000 PER PERSON over their lifetime. Unfortunately, we are the ones who just don't get it.

We have to keep some folks through 20 (hence costing more money) for two primary reasons:

1. We actually need a few O-4/O-5 types between 15-20 years (again, mostly at the staff level, not in the cockpit, ergo we need people to take the bonus now to lock them in)

2. If we start cutting people like we should between 16-18 years in order to save money, BIg Blue feels younger pilots may start to get concerned and worry the Air Force is disingenuous re: the 20 year retirement system. Hence, they could be much more skeptical about the bonus, and take rates would fall. So Big Blue feels it has to be very careful and selective about when we cut officers between 16-18 years (doesn't happen very often).

The scenario I outlined was offering early retirement pay vs. just the pay between 16-20 years. You cannot take the 20 year retirement into consideration in that argument, because it is a "sunk cost," unless the third option (Air Force cuts force structure like it needs to between 16-18 years) becomes a legitimate alternative.

Honestly, in my opinion, 15-18 year cuts should be on the table for the sake of saving our Air Force. We have to cut cost wherever possible, and senior Majors/junior Lt Cols are costing us a fortune. I agree with "addict" and "56-&-2": it doesn't make sense to let "the glut" retire at 20. It makes no fiscal sense at all. We need to cut.

Step 1 should have been to transition everyone's thought process through a "no bonus" year for all but -11F's, then reinact the bonus next year to make the pilots feel special, but that is not what happened- everyone gets the bonus this year yet again (sigh).

Had we enacted the "no bonus" plan this year, starting in 2014, Step 2 could have used CONSISTENT force shaping cuts from 15-18 years every year so that officers don't get pissed off due to being "weened onto" the program (of course "eliminated officers" would be pissed the first couple of years, but the bad feelings would taper quickly). Potentially being cut late in one's career would become part of the personnel culture, and as a result, officers would strive for greater excellence in their careers in order to not be "caught" in that bottom 10-20%. If you don't have your record "in order" at 15-18 years, and you get cut, blame only yourself (the pattern will be there- again, after the first few years).

When the service gets smaller in the near future, and the money's not there for personnel, and we have to cut high cost officers, where is the best place to cut? 15-18 years. Every time, no questions asked. It's an easy numbers game for the GOs. So, if you're one of those Majors out there who doesn't have his "i's" dotted and "t's" crossed, and you're at the 12-13 year point (hmmm....sounds like this year's bonus eligibles), you probably should reprioritize and get your stuff done (always easier to get it done today than tomorrow, when you have more responsibility, more family obligations, etc). YOU have the power to ensure that YOU don't fall into that bottom 20%.

You can call me a tool, a troll, a Pentagon personnel weenie...whatever makes you feel better when your head hits the pillow tonight. I can take it, and I won't react. However, deep down, think about what I've said here. If you fall into the "gray" area and want to retire, you might need to think about reprioritization in order to "publicly declare" your value to the Air Force when the cuts start flying.

Just go out, be the best (leader, pilot, officer, all of those), get your stuff done (yes, PME and degree), work your tail off, and you'll be fine. Easy peasy.

"The higher, the fewer." - Alexander R.

Keep the faith.

Edited June 29, 2013 by General Chang

[Danny Noonin]

Ironic that personnel geeks don't understand people at all.

[Rusty Pipes]

2. If we start cutting people like we should between 16-18 years in order to save money, BIg Blue feels younger pilots may start to get concerned and worry the Air Force is disingenuous re: the 20 year retirement system. Hence, they could be much more skeptical about the bonus, and take rates would fall. So Big Blue feels it has to be very careful and selective about when we cut officers between 16-18 years (doesn't happen very often).

Wow, brilliant analysis there Chang!!! So what you are saying is that if young pilots start seeing guys who have 18 yrs in getting shown the door with nothing but about $100,000 in separation pay that they may be CONCERNED the AF is being disingenuous??? I really hope this type of utterly clueless understanding of our crew force mentality isn't common with the people in A1 who are anywhere near this decision process. If Big Blue started cutting guys between 16-18 years the only guys you will get to stay 1 day past their ADSC are the morons who are so out of touch with reality that they think this is actually a good idea.