That would require leadership's allocuting to the assertions that: 1) morale is an actual primary duty competency-affecting driving factor and 2) morale is low amongst targeted groups. There is no indication senior leadership has any genuine interest to allocuting to either of those statements. Examples abound. SecAF talking in platitudes about the realities of ICBM work, the painful teeth pulling that was hearing about "pilot's being bored" as part of their excuse for the retention problem in front of Congress et al.
Same goes for duty stations and the impact of PCS basing variances as a subset of this issue, both for stressed fields (which they can't even identify accurately without insulting the aggregate membership's intelligence) and for the general population at large.
If I was an RPA victim, I'd SIE without batting an eye. A recat to a 4 year ADSC, GI bill and restarting my professional civilian life (flying or otherwise) upon exit, would still put me ahead in a decade's time than fulfilling an unwanted job for 10 years just to have to restart a process I'd be committed to starting the very day they gave me an RPA in the first place.
Personally, that's why I went Guard/Reserve; as hard as I worked in high school and college/graduate school in order to position myself to merely gamble at the foot of the literal lottery that was getting a pilot slot, I just couldn't justify losing an entire decade's bet and getting pinched for an additional decade in a position where I wouldn't even be allowed to recover vocationally due to an extended military commitment. I would see no other place to go than SIE if they didn't offer me instant discharge or banked program like they offered folks in the early 90s.
Game is chess, it ain't checkers. Take care of número uno...and I don't mean flight lead. Good luck to all.