Jump to content

Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)


Toro

Recommended Posts

It has been a while since I posted anything - but if you guys don't mind helping me out with a project I'm working on with some guys from the CAF.  Help me out and feel free to complain and tell me to pound sand. I have 2217 days left on my commitment, I think you know where I stand.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/pilotshortage

Are you the same person as J-ay Mike that posted this same survey in addition to another one a week or so ago for an SOS project?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, LoneStar said:

It has been a while since I posted anything - but if you guys don't mind helping me out with a project I'm working on with some guys from the CAF.  Help me out and feel free to complain and tell me to pound sand. I have 2217 days left on my commitment, I think you know where I stand.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/pilotshortage

So are the last 69ish surveys about the same subject invalid?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFPC's site has the somewhat final numbers for this year.

http://access.afpc.af.mil/vbinDMZ/broker.exe?_program=DEMOGPUB.static_reports.sas&_service=pZ1pub1&_debug=0

366 pilots signed the bonus which puts it at 48.5% take rate.

233 pilots signed the early bonus which is 16 more than last year. 

The numbers are near 12 year lows in percentage and raw numbers, but beats me how Big Blue will spin this.  Are the numbers pretty darn good, or will they up the bonus next year, believing it will make a difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Duck said:

Wow. 48.5%. That actually surprises me that it is that high. I believe they say 65% is target though.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Gonna be pretty difficult for Big Blue to spin this positively. Average take rate for past 5 FYs = 64%:

- FY11: 70%

- FY12: 67%

- FY13: 68%

- FY14: 59%

- FY15: 55%

I'm no math major, but 49% seems substantially worse than 64%. The take rate was 65% or higher for 11 years, from FY03 through FY13. There's a downward trend, even though Big Blue has steadily expanded the number of AFSCs who could take the $25k/yr bonus to 20 yrs aviation service option (used to be just 11Fs and I think RPA drivers, as I recall, that got the enhanced bonus option). The problem for the AF is that, while take rates are decreasing, numbers of eligibles are increasing. There were 750 FY16 pilot eligibles. There'll be 820 pilot eligibles next year. What will be interesting to read in the FY16 report is the Overall Loss Breakdown--between separations, retirements, permanent DNIF, & promotion to O-6, how many pilots did we lose? I suspect the Air Force's total pilot inventory will have shrunk yet again this year.

TT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is possible that the line is not linear as well, as more and more people have references from individuals at each airline. 

One thing I noticed last year was that the number of eligible slowly decreased as the year went on. I don't understand what the mechanism was for that, but it would have the effect of slightly increasing the take rate percentage. I did not keep a good track of it this year to see if the same thing happened. Obviously there are incentives at AFPC to make it look like it isn't as bad as it actually is. Someone should keep a close eye on that number as this year goes on, as this could very well be the year that breaks the current system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a phase III UPT instructor around 07-08, what I remember is substantially smaller classes and not many fighters dropped.  I remember picking up a track select of 3 T-38 dudes per class for a while, this will come home to roost soon as well.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is possible that the line is not linear as well, as more and more people have references from individuals at each airline. 
One thing I noticed last year was that the number of eligible slowly decreased as the year went on. I don't understand what the mechanism was for that, but it would have the effect of slightly increasing the take rate percentage. I did not keep a good track of it this year to see if the same thing happened. Obviously there are incentives at AFPC to make it look like it isn't as bad as it actually is. Someone should keep a close eye on that number as this year goes on, as this could very well be the year that breaks the current system. 


I may be wrong, but I do not believe it accounts for people who quit during the window, which is why the number of eligible members drops. So if you 3 day opt out of a 365 during the window, you would drop out of the eligible pool.

It makes the numbers look better, which is scary considering how bad they look


Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Duck said:

Wow. 48.5%. That actually surprises me that it is that high. I believe they say 65% is target though.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

So for C-17s, the number looks like it will be slightly over 50%, which surprises me as well, since I know very few people who talk about taking the bonus. I guess the sport bitching sessions around the squadron, where you start to wonder If there will be anyone left, doesn't necessarily translate into reality. Are the bulk of the '04 year group bonus takers already on staff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So interesting thought, I would suggest to big blue that they offer a bonus for continuation to 15 years with early retirement on the end of that, why haven't they considered that?  I mean aren't they always worried about the near term threat?  That buys them three years to get the next group of leaders to figure it out.  What does the group think?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is Big Blue's head is too big to fit through a hangar door and by the time someone without their head up their arse figures out what's going on (Fingers), it's too late. Any fix.at this point requires drastic measures to be taken most likely not approved by congress for a while. Remember, this is all 15 years in the making.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gazmo said:

The problem is Big Blue's head is too big to fit through a hangar door and by the time someone without their head up their arse figures out what's going on (Fingers), it's too late. Any fix.at this point requires drastic measures to be taken most likely not approved by congress for a while. Remember, this is all 15 years in the making.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 

This. In my corner of the world in the ANG, the rumored tech bonuses are stalling and rumors are circulating about more AGR slots. The problem is that rumors don't recruit people, actual positions with $ tied to them recruit people. Even our leadership has flat-out stated that the train needs to full-up crash into us before meaningful change will happen. 

The catch-22 is this: dudes with birds and stars on their shoulders need to actually say "no" and cut classes. They need to Ops CNX or MND lines regularly to show we are broken. Doing this will crush their metrics, however, and hurt their chances of promotion. It's in leadership's best personal interest to chug along on fumes rather than let the system start to show cracks, which is ironically required to enact any meaningful change. Why is NGB going to throw a boatload of cash or AD going to commit a bunch of billets (AGRs) to a problem they've yet so see can't be handled with current means/measures?  This catch-22 exists in both the RC and AD and it takes a truly dynamic leader to break the mold and act on foresight rather than just react to problems. We don't have a lot of those kind of leaders, and the ones who fit the bill likely got out to work for less dysfunctional companies. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best part is the fighter pilots now have more taskers and award packages to draft removing more cockpit time on a thinly-manned force...yes we've shot our own foot in some regard with this "fix"...or perhaps our new Orderly rooms will absorb this

  • Upvote 3
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...