Jump to content

Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)


Toro

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

Frankly I find the failure of two FY NDAAs in a row to address inflation parity, a bigger source of retention woes than the bonus offering, going forward.  

Ooh, an auto inflation-adjusted AvB…not parity (dare instead I say equity AND equality), but something to drift in the right direction…Blue’s “system” is still broke regardless of $$

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was referring to base pay inflation parity, when referencing the last two FY NDAAs. But sure, add AvB inflation adjustment to the wish in one hand shit on the other collection plate while we're at it.

--brk brk--

Said it a dozen times but I'll say it again. The USAF can and will always play run the clock offense. Certainly much better than the airlines ever could. I mean what are we going on, 209 pages and  almost two decades of this thread? No bonus improvement of consequence. If you need another decade to figure out where you stand vis a vis the AF offense playbook....

 

Edited by hindsight2020
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

Frankly I find the failure of two FY NDAAs in a row to address inflation parity, a bigger source of retention woes than the bonus offering, going forward.  

Well...neither are any other employers within our career field, if we're being completely intellectually honest about it.  In fact, I'm not sure any career other than finance or corporate senior execs are coming close, but I am standing by for correction.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

Said it a dozen times but I'll say it again. The USAF can and will always play run the clock offense. Certainly much better than the airlines ever could. 

It's a close race at the moment 🤘, but I think the airlines are leading; my particular outfit hasn't seen a raise since 1/1/2019.  Zero, zip, nada.

Edited by BFM this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BFM this said:

Well...neither are any other employers within our career field, if we're being completely intellectually honest about it.  In fact, I'm not sure any career other than finance or corporate senior execs are coming close, but I am standing by for correction.

In the defense of industry though the pay is generally higher all around. You don't need to be *as reactive* with these things when you're paying people on par with their skill set to begin with. 

I also think a major problem for the DoD at the moment is the moral injury left by the defeat in GWOT. When you rely on "service to your country" as a significant portion of your compensation package but then fail to deliver ends in that nature you're going to have a whole generation of young people saying "couldnt I do more good for the world somewhere else?" And the problem is.... right now, they absolutely can.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What’s the game-plan when most everyone leaves for the airlines at 10 years? Increase production from 1,200 to 2,000? With what new UPT base/IP cadre?

Everyone I know is prepping for exit (I think I only know 2-3 dudes who are in for the 20 years). Not that I know everything/it’s a small pool of people-but I’m guessing the consensus is the same across most of the communities.

things are about to get interesting…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

20 year pilot commitment would be the nuclear option but I guarantee a lot of young & dumb dudes would sign it for a chance to fly mil jets. Probably not enough, but we already don’t have enough. I hope they figure out another way!

A 20 year UFT RSC (Guard/Res)? Sure, I can see that preserving accessions traction. A 20 yr UFT ADSC? No chance that'd gain any traction.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, viperdriver1313 said:

What’s the game-plan when most everyone leaves for the airlines at 10 years?

I don't think the AF feels that it needs pilots for 20 years in order to get a return on the investment. Sure, they want some to stay to be Sq/CCs, Wg/CCs, etc., but generally I think that they're not too concerned about the 10 year attrition rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 year pilot commitment would be the nuclear option but I guarantee a lot of young & dumb dudes would sign it for a chance to fly mil jets. Probably not enough, but we already don’t have enough. I hope they figure out another way!

It’s bad enough when we have pilot GOs running things. Imagine if Navs ever took charge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nsplayr said:

20 year pilot commitment would be the nuclear option but I guarantee a lot of young & dumb dudes would sign it for a chance to fly mil jets. Probably not enough, but we already don’t have enough. I hope they figure out another way!

There is currently no shortage of eligible candidates who want to attend pilot training and incur the current ADSC.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, CaptainMorgan said:


It’s bad enough when we have pilot GOs running things. Imagine if Navs ever took charge.

Just to be clear, I in no way support a 20 year pilot ADSC, I’m just saying that’s the ultimate way to assure retention - not letting people leave from day 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, I in no way support a 20 year pilot ADSC, I’m just saying that’s the ultimate way to assure retention - not letting people leave from day 1.

Sadly it would also raise the collective quality of individuals at the higher echelons of career.

It’s no secret a whole lot of quality people with options and brains to be successful by and large leave, especially now with the pension having been changed to less lucrative from what it was. We are left with a depleted total talent pool to make LtCols out of… now while you effectively make the careerist mindset more cutthroat you also make it far easier to S-can that guy who can barely spell and shouldn’t be running a lemonade stand much less a squadron.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could also see the AF pitching 20 year pilot ADSC's.

Which should be considered a predatory loan or some sort of indentured servitude, though. There needs to be some sort of mechanism to protect enthusiastic, misguided, brainwashed 21 year-old's from an exploitative and unfair contract.

I could totally see enthusiastic, ROTC cadet, past me signing that. And, in that scenario, current me would 100% hate and loath my former ROTC Cadre for basically being willing to knowingly sell me into an unfair, biased, and unconscionable contract.

Let's hope that COA (and stop loss) are never seriously considered by the geniuses at the ARTF & AFPC.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guarantee I would’ve signed that at 22.

“I’m gonna get to fly Jets right?”

Let’s just admit the only difference better the 20 year old versions of ourselves and others who decided to trade it in for something is the type of couch we were sitting on when we “agreed to it.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, StoleIt said:

Which should be considered a predatory loan or some sort of indentured servitude, though. There needs to be some sort of mechanism to protect enthusiastic, misguided, brainwashed 21 year-old's from an exploitative and unfair contract.

If 20 years is “predatory”, then what isn’t?  18 years, 16 years?…10 years?

And young people sign contracts/documents that can change their lives all the time…a regular enlistment, purchasing a house, a school loan, changing your genitals, you name it.  You’re either an adult (who can vote for a president with the ability to destroy nations), or you’re not.

It’s not that young people don’t often know what they’re signing…it’s just that at the time they’re ok with it.  How many people are happy when they get married vs those who get divorced.  It’s a future-them problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

If 20 years is “predatory”, then what isn’t?  18 years, 16 years?…10 years?

And young people sign contracts/documents that can change their lives all the time…a regular enlistment, purchasing a house, a school loan, changing your genitals, you name it.  You’re either an adult (who can vote for a president with the ability to destroy nations), or you’re not.

It’s not that young people don’t often know what they’re signing…it’s just that at the time they’re ok with it.  How many people are happy when they get married vs those who get divorced.  It’s a future-them problem.

I could at least believe, or stomach, that it's a 10 year ADSC because of the "cost" of training us...or so I was told. Has the cost gone up? I'd argue it's gone down with all the cuts in flying training. Allegedly, the ADSC used to be part of a financial investment calculus...if they increase it any it's just a retention tool, IMO.

Also, all those other contracts you mentioned (except school loans), you can bail on in some way or another (and Biden gave the school loan people $10k anyway).

Imagine if marriage really was until death...how many Kings created new branches of Christianity just because they changed their mind?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StoleIt said:

I could at least believe, or stomach, that it's a 10 year ADSC because of the "cost" of training us...or so I was told. Has the cost gone up? I'd argue it's gone down with all the cuts in flying training. Allegedly, the ADSC used to be part of a financial investment calculus...if they increase it any it's just a retention tool, IMO.

Also, all those other contracts you mentioned (except school loans), you can bail on in some way or another (and Biden gave the school loan people $10k anyway).

Imagine if marriage really was until death...how many Kings created new branches of Christianity just because they changed their mind?

I doubt it’s a cost thing because the Navy doesn’t require 10 years, and I doubt they have the WalMart brand F-18s just to save money. 
 

When I was in Navy flight school, after winging helo guys only had a seven year comittment, everyone else had eight. They changed it to eight for everyone around 2006-7.


If I were to guess, the AF set it at 10 because they felt that’s what they could get dudes to agree to without negatively impacting accessions. I know if I was 22 and told I had to sign a 20 year contract, I have said hell no. 


 

 

Edited by Bigred
  • Upvote 1
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...