Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

...to combat high retention rates.

Well, it's the economy, stupid. Of COURSE they'd rather stay in. They know that their civilian buddies are dealing with unprecedented unemployment. But what's dumping another 3K bodies on the market going to do to the economy? It's certainly not going to help. And what's it going to do to those who are "graciously" allowed to stay in? Well, they're already frazzled due to the high OPTEMPO. Again, this is just going to make things worse. And it's not just the Navy. All of the services are resorting to this trash. The Army's got it the worst, losing about 22K to the old forced exit.

This problem will be exacerbated by a true quirk. Usually, RIFs start at the high end to make room for those lower to move up. That's a common tool when the advancement works get clogged by people staying in too long at the uppper ranks. Well, not this time. Now, they're targeting E-4s. That's people who are just getting started in their jobs. So instead of people who would be snapped up by headhunter outfits to be CEOs and high-ranking executives, we'll be looking at MORE people competing for scarce jobs flipping burgers at Mickey D's or stocking shelves at COSTCO.

This administration REALLY doesn't know what they're doing. They're in WAY over their heads.



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07 ... r-surplus/

This isn't new.

There was a very large reduction starting around 1992. It was that particular downsizing that helped me make my decision not to go to Quantico that summer and just stay in the Navy.

The last time the Navy did this, they went after the fatties. I can remember one CPO who was a total load, and was complaining that he was being picked on. Maybe he should have pushed away from the chow lilne and gone running a little more often. It's the military, dude.

A RIF happens at the end of just about every period where we are involved in one conflict or another. That previous one came on the heels of Desert Storm. Plus, we are in a long. slow downsizing that began as a result of the end of the Cold War, and I expected that we might see something happen again once Iraq and Afghanistan started to wind down.

Never fear, however. After the end of every downsizing, there is a correction.

In 1995-ish I received a letter from the Air Force. Seems they downsized too much in the early 90s and did not have enough C-17 pilots, and could not coax enough United and US Airways guys back into the Guard. The letter basically offered me a spot in flight school if I would not turn 28 by the end of my training.

You're right to some degree, especially PRT failures. But generally the emphasis is getting rid of the old people or those who just can't cut it in their jobs. There are usually some incentives to get out, like a bonus of some sort. What's new here seems to be the emphasis on getting rid of the people who do the "real" work.

I don't like it.



(Of course, MY opinion wasn't asked.)

How else do we rid our armed forces of rubber nuts?

SuperHornet wrote:You're right to some degree, especially PRT failures. But generally the emphasis is getting rid of the old people or those who just can't cut it in their jobs. There are usually some incentives to get out, like a bonus of some sort. What's new here seems to be the emphasis on getting rid of the people who do the "real" work.

I don't like it.



(Of course, MY opinion wasn't asked.)

Um, what don't you like about getting rid of those who just can't cut it in their jobs?

Rob Iola wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:You're right to some degree, especially PRT failures. But generally the emphasis is getting rid of the old people or those who just can't cut it in their jobs. There are usually some incentives to get out, like a bonus of some sort. What's new here seems to be the emphasis on getting rid of the people who do the "real" work.

I don't like it.



(Of course, MY opinion wasn't asked.)

Um, what don't you like about getting rid of those who just can't cut it in their jobs?

That's the problem, Rob. That's not what this is about. They're dumping people REGARDLESS of whether or not they can do their jobs. That does NOT bode well for mission accomplishment.

SuperHornet wrote:

Rob Iola wrote: Um, what don't you like about getting rid of those who just can't cut it in their jobs?

That's the problem, Rob. That's not what this is about. They're dumping people REGARDLESS of whether or not they can do their jobs. That does NOT bode well for mission accomplishment.

Right between the eyes, Wedgie!

So you want to keep a bloated federal government, keeping people on the federal payroll JUST to give them a job?



Sarah and Michelle DO NOT Approve

dbackjon wrote:So you want to keep a bloated federal government, keeping people on the federal payroll JUST to give them a job?



Sarah and Michelle DO NOT Approve

But is Sarah Michelle Gellar the evil spawn of ... OMIGAWD!!!

SuperHornet wrote:...to combat high retention rates.

Well, it's the economy, stupid. Of COURSE they'd rather stay in. They know that their civilian buddies are dealing with unprecedented unemployment. But what's dumping another 3K bodies on the market going to do to the economy? It's certainly not going to help. And what's it going to do to those who are "graciously" allowed to stay in? Well, they're already frazzled due to the high OPTEMPO. Again, this is just going to make things worse. And it's not just the Navy. All of the services are resorting to this trash. The Army's got it the worst, losing about 22K to the old forced exit.

This problem will be exacerbated by a true quirk. Usually, RIFs start at the high end to make room for those lower to move up. That's a common tool when the advancement works get clogged by people staying in too long at the uppper ranks. Well, not this time. Now, they're targeting E-4s. That's people who are just getting started in their jobs. So instead of people who would be snapped up by headhunter outfits to be CEOs and high-ranking executives, we'll be looking at MORE people competing for scarce jobs flipping burgers at Mickey D's or stocking shelves at COSTCO.

This administration REALLY doesn't know what they're doing. They're in WAY over their heads.



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07 ... r-surplus/

The article said people between 7 and 14 yrs service. If someone is still an E4 (is that 3rd Class Petty in the Navy?) then they probably are dead weight and doesn't hurt to let them go.

BDKJMU wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:...to combat high retention rates.

Well, it's the economy, stupid. Of COURSE they'd rather stay in. They know that their civilian buddies are dealing with unprecedented unemployment. But what's dumping another 3K bodies on the market going to do to the economy? It's certainly not going to help. And what's it going to do to those who are "graciously" allowed to stay in? Well, they're already frazzled due to the high OPTEMPO. Again, this is just going to make things worse. And it's not just the Navy. All of the services are resorting to this trash. The Army's got it the worst, losing about 22K to the old forced exit.

This problem will be exacerbated by a true quirk. Usually, RIFs start at the high end to make room for those lower to move up. That's a common tool when the advancement works get clogged by people staying in too long at the uppper ranks. Well, not this time. Now, they're targeting E-4s. That's people who are just getting started in their jobs. So instead of people who would be snapped up by headhunter outfits to be CEOs and high-ranking executives, we'll be looking at MORE people competing for scarce jobs flipping burgers at Mickey D's or stocking shelves at COSTCO.

This administration REALLY doesn't know what they're doing. They're in WAY over their heads.



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07 ... r-surplus/

The article said people between 7 and 14 yrs service. If someone is still an E4 (is that 3rd Class Petty in the Navy?) then they probably are dead weight and doesn't hurt to let them go.

Spot on. In fact, most technical ratings in the Navy offer automatic promotion to E4 on graduation from A School, so there are many sailors who first hit the fleet as E4s. We called them "Pushbutton E4s".

Who cares........Navy's gay as hell..

Besides, you are a complete tard if you're still an E-4 after 7 years, regardless of MOS, or rating....or whatever it is you squids call it.

EWURanger wrote:Who cares........Navy's gay as hell..

Besides, you are a complete tard if you're still an E-4 after 7 years, regardless of MOS, or rating....or whatever it is you squids call it.

Not necessarily true. Some ratings are rather tight on promotion. In those, one should build in some leeway.

SuperHornet wrote:

EWURanger wrote:Who cares........Navy's gay as hell..

Besides, you are a complete tard if you're still an E-4 after 7 years, regardless of MOS, or rating....or whatever it is you squids call it.

Not necessarily true. Some ratings are rather tight on promotion. In those, one should build in some leeway.

The reason for that is actually going away and the ratings are opening up again.

The main reason it happened is because of the end of the Cold War. There were ratings like the EW (Electronic Warfare Technician) rating that went away in the 1990s. It was folded into the OS rating, which caused a glut of OS's. That problem has mostly corrected itself now. They still hand out the E4 rank to guys finishing any rating that requires the ELTECH C School, so it shouldn't be much of a problem these days to single out the non-performers.

For the mergers, that's pretty much true. But there are those like my old rating of RP that are traditionally tight beyond third class. That will probably be true for all time.

Transfer assignment is also a problem for RPs because girls are not allowed to be assigned to green-side sea duty below the regiment level. That limits where guys can go because the girls get more shore duty billets (even those girls who prefer sea duty).

Edit: The EWs actually merged with the CTT rating (cryptologic technician -- technical).

SuperHornet wrote:For the mergers, that's pretty much true. But there are those like my old rating of RP that are traditionally tight beyond third class. That will probably be true for all time.

Transfer assignment is also a problem for RPs because girls are not allowed to be assigned to green-side sea duty below the regiment level. That limits where guys can go because the girls get more shore duty billets (even those girls who prefer sea duty).

Edit: The EWs actually merged with the CTT rating (cryptologic technician -- technical).

Actually, I think the EWs had something of a choice depending on their rank. EWs below E5 could go OS because they had not been to ELTECH yet. Over E5 and they could go CT. Maybe I'm wrong on that, because I got out before the merger, but I had a buddy who told me he was given the option. All things considered I think I would have gone CT.

That's entirely possible, CID. One never knows EVERYTHING that goes on in mergers when one's own rating is not involved.