Leaderboard

Oh, this shit again? Jesus, how little memory this place has.... Yeah, this is just going to attract the unhirables period dot. No offense to the retirees who can't or won't do the airlines and wouldn't mind playing jet pilot for a paycut, this is statistically not going to carve up enough qualified volume to matter. I know I know, broad brush, but we went through this shit when they tried to ram the ART conversion at DLF. In the end they had to relent and give us the carve out to the policy. There were simply no takers of consequence. It's always been the same shit with ARTs, prototypical dudes who value getting any federal job as long as it's in this one town, or with townie-dependents, plus an unwillingness or, more often than not, outright inability to get hired at the airlines. And the toxicity that arises from ART leadership out of that demographic is a well established quantity amongst TR circles. None of this is new. The problem in this particular variation of this bad idea, is that from a straight GS perspective, it gets even worse because the payscale delta gets ridiculously worse from the AGR/AD benchmark. And we haven't even dealt with the survivor benefit issues when a civilian pulls military ejection handles vice ARC, vice AD. RegAF guys simply have no clue on these nuances. You guys think it's merely about living the simple life post-retirement and getting to fly a fun(ish) clapped out jet, but work dynamics are much more complicated than that. Don't be naive, the friction associated with doing the same job as the other guy for an almost 50K paycut does not go unnoticed. You can't keep AGRs and ARTs from each other's throats, and you think a non-SSR table -2181 series GS making flat GS-13 like a goddamn border patrol guy schmuck, is not gonna dagger at the ARC full-timers or AD green suiters over what he deems a fair level of participation in the organization for his paycut? And now you have an AD OPCON SQ/CC that has to tolerate the same level of title V scoff as they currently tolerate from the sim cadre leadership? Look, I get the schadenfreude for giving UPT IPs a paycut is strong on here, but the second tier effects of this proposal will make the UPT environment more toxic than it already is, by opening up the doors for these statistical-outliers to keep doing this job for a paycut in proverbial Del Rio. Extremely myopic. And I do know that the dynamics of places like Pensacola were not as rosy as described on here either. I know because we have a guy from there who double dipped as a green suiter and tan suiter, and is now at United when they finally gave him the finger about GS-13 as a T-1 pilot for the nav program down there. The level of toxicity was incredible at that outfit, and people left in droves. And that's in P-cola, CBM DLF and END have no chance of this gaining critical mass. The only proposition of this bad idea we had heard about on the ARC side "town hall" early this year that I think might have gained traction, was civilian contractor UPT at KAFW. Internationals only, all civilian run, fort worth in order to get these yahoos enough of an geographic incentive to do my job for 50K less, with that crappy FERS retirement, without the ART SSR pay even. The reality is that the people who could staff these billets as qualified (aka mil retires) are statistically insignificant. This isn't conjecture, we literally went through this exercise in 2013. The rest of the applicants will be the broken toys from the OPM/USAJOBS cesspool who mine that hiring system. Complete unqualified retards. We had anywhere from affirmative action web-footed african american lesbian secretary, to a no-shit ARMY tank driver with a PPL, to a female Affirm action UND graduate 23yo fresh CFI with no turbine experience.. all flagged as qualified for my job (when I was a T-6 IP). Let's stop wasting each others time. And it went nowhere when informed and rational heads prevailed. We just wasted hundreds of man hours repeating ourselves until it predictably went nowhere. And lost people to the airlines due to nothing more than lack of predictability in the midst of this terrible idea being proffered as a threat to their career prospects within the ARC. Stupid. The fact that this end should have been self-evident to the people in charge, was my only gripe over the entire god damn question. You guys keep tilting at them windmills though.

People will die. Period. Hope it’s worth lives.

It will work if UPT opens at Alliance.

The "guys with 19 kids"/BAH-is-welfare angle of the argument seems a bit strange to me since there's only a with-dependents rate and a without-dependents rate, i.e. the dependent rate does not increase based on the actual number of dependents. The extra ~$350 a month will surely get stretched pretty thin once the clown car's on the road.

2 I am not sure where the dam breaks but it must. I suspect that a win in the assignment process (pushed to a market driven system where volunteers select and are hired by commanders) is the necessary first step. That could be the first domino to end or massively reduce AFPC, distribute A1 functions to the and under the command of Wings & OGs, etc... the other necessary changes could come afterwards...

Maybe they are putting all these “sure to fail ideas” out there as bait for stop loss?

ers this should be about who should get paid more if you have dependents or not. This thread should be about the year to year ass raping DOD has doled on its members by screwing us out of pay for housing. Housing that in many cases has gone up and we continually get paid less.

Watched a presentation Kane did on his book "Bleeding Talent" at the Hudson Institute on ideas for reform. Disband AFPC, eliminate A1 as a separate directorate, get rid of Up or Out, decentralize the assignment systems and distribute HR functions mostly to Wings/Groups/Squadrons, reform the retirement system (presentation is 2013), tie promotions to some assignments / billets, etc... Not a bad list, keep fighting the good fight

If you opened a new UPT base and co-located it with an ARC RPA unit you probably could get some takers. Fly the UPT line for a few weeks, pick up some orders and direct the droid. Rinse lather repeat. Decent location, civilian flying job and ARC duty in one location and ZERO AF BS when not flying, this could turn out to be a decent deal if done right.

Mark1, So what's the point of all this? To me it comes off as just some John Galt fever dream about "fairness" and rationalism but I've been wrong before. Like, is the goal to save money by dropping everyone to the single rate, or is it to treat people the same with the happy byproduct of saving money, or do you want to treat people the same by just bumping everyone up to the with-dependent BAH? I guess I'm asking is this an ideological argument or a financial one or a mix? Why does this in particular grind your gears? Coming from someone who's engaged in a ton of pointless online debates, I'm curious. You've called out having to unfairly cover for married dudes on deployments even though your memory is sketchy on just how many you went on, which is pretty incendiary. Not sure what community you grew up in but where I come from it's one team, one fight man. I've covered for both married and single people when they had family duties to attend to and they've covered for me when I had the same, that's what being on a team is all about.

Because in the admin logs I can see that Gearpig was merged with another account and then both were deleted. Either the individual that is Gearpig had decided to create a fake account and then merge both and delete all previous content, or somebody was able to gain access to his BO account and then performed the merge and delete operation. The reason I'm trying to get a hold of Gearpig is to warn him that if somebody was able to get into his BO account, there's a high likelihood that it's because they already had access to his e-mail account. Or to see if he had some kind of reason for doing such a strange thing and then leaving BO.

AA has historically had the worst contract of any airline. Right now, we're in a post-bankruptcy JCBA with an incredible number of items not implemented (despite being over 3 years old). The contract itself was completely written by the company, with provisions that absolutely screw the average line pilot. In the wake of all of the Christmas drop fiasco, APA had unprecedented leverage. Instead of capitalizing on it, APA president Carey acted unilaterally and secured a deal that only benefits a small number (200% for people who pick up "Designated trips"... meaning two people could be on the same trip and one could be flying his PBS bid for straight pay while the other gets 200%). He then made a "handshake agreement" for Length of Service for furloughed pilots and improved calendar day/duty rigs. The company basically said "check's in the mail" and now we may be facing concessions (yes, concessions) to get either of those things despite the highest profitability we've ever had and the aforementioned leverage. What that means is that going into 2019/2020 for the next contract, our union has proven weak and divided. It is unlikely we'll get an industry standard contract, much less industry leading. We are the world's largest regional airline. We have a very fractured and splintered pilot group due to all the mergers and the "I got mine" senior guys on top. It's not going to get better until the retirements start happening, and even then I'm not sure it's possible. APA is by far the worst negotiating group I've ever witnessed (Famous for the line "We asked and they said no") We may have the most upcoming retirements, but I think you'll enjoy better quality of life and more money over the course of your career at literally any other airline - unless we can completely flush the upper echelon of the union and start over very soon. Some other things to consider as a new hire: - You won't get 16% company contribution until one year on property. - You cannot use sick leave in your first six months. - Year 2 pay doesn't start at year 2. We have this goofy thing called Classification Date, which is the date you finish training. That means year two pay could be anywhere from 14-16 months from your date of hire, depending on how backed up training is. - On reserve, you'll work 18 days per month. As a lineholder, you could work up to 20 for an 86-90 hr month. In January, I was awarded 86 hours with 11 days off. - Premium at AA is only 150%. - Our recovery obligation and reassignment rules are some of the worst. The company can take you up to 4 hours OR to 0159 home base time after your trip footprint, and the verbiage states "WHICHEVER IS LATER." For straight pay. It's not all doom and gloom, but unless you live or want to live in an AA domicile, I would definitely consider all options or at least keep apps in at better airlines. Just my .02.

I second the career impact for spouses. In fact the extra $100/mo doesn’t even come close. My wife has a Masters degree and is way more talented than I am. However moving every 3 years means she is pretty much starting over every PCS. I can’t even thing about how much money it has cost us to serve our country. I personally think single dudes should just be forced to live in the barracks, I mean since we are talking about what’s really best for the service right Mark1?

Since the families are a huge part of retention calculus, I don't think your crusade against service members with families is likely to go anywhere.

I'll throw my 2 cents in. I've been to Rucker and seen how their civilians implement and by and large it seems pretty well managed/run given that the civilians only teach contact (transition I think they call it) and instruments then the green suiters teach all the other stuff. I could see something similar working in T-6's. The big thing I worry about is if the AF made it all civilian. At that point you turn it into the same shit show that sim land is, the majority of the sim IP's are way out of touch, spend most of the time talking about the Tweet or having 'nam flashbacks in the middle of a sim, and care more about how accurate your instrument cockpit check was than actually teaching a kid how to fly instruments. At many points during my tour as an IP did I have to re-explain basic instrument things to a student because the sim IP was focused on crap that hasn't mattered since the 60's. I mean hell I told a sim IP I used the GPS to go direct for 300+ miles in the -38 and you would have thought the world was ending because I used the GPS and not ground based NAVAIDs.

Not true. The F-22 5th gen capes were used a few weeks back to penetrate hostile Afghanistan airspace and drop GPS guided bombs on poppy processing facilities. Rumor has it the targets were highly defended by pitchforks and shovels.

And tell us what you got dickwad.

Title 5 will make all of this happen, I don't think we should use it, but the law is there for it to happen.

And if you graduated with > 3.5? Whether you received a GPA above or below 3.5 is somewhat immaterial in the grand scheme of things. The question you need to ask yourself is: even if I don't get into TPS someday, will I think my time spent working on a Master's was worthwhile in its own right? If you enjoy learning and think you can devote extra time to an advanced degree, in a relevant field, then pursue one. If, on the other hand, you are merely trying to grasp the golden ring that is TPS, I would advise against such a pursuit, but I have a different philosophy. To answer your question, having a Master's will generally help your package regardless of undergraduate GPA as long as the Master's GPA is sufficiently high (above 3.25 or so) and in a relevant field.

But not surprising for a guy named sparkle

At no point in pilot training was I ever afraid of a green suit IP. (3 years ago) They knew there was a fine line and if they hurt feelings to much aka swearing at a student they would being have a talk with the CC. There were some crusty old civilian sim instructors that would absolutely destroy you and your entire life, they gave 0 fucks and knew it was about impossible to fire them. Couple of them really knew how to put the fear of god in you.

As someone who went through UPT with a marriage on the rocks, my advice to you is this. If you are convinced that this is a marriage that’s not going to work, it’s not worth the stress you’ll endure trying to keep your marriage afloat. 12-14 hour days plus home study isn’t conducive to building or fixing relationships and is difficult for even the strongest of marriages. That being said, if you think there’s something to be saved then by all means make your marriage the priority, fess up about your situation to your CC, get the marital help you need, THEN worry about UPT. UPT is only the start of your new career. Your marriage is your life.

510 is what I got in the ANG.

This is complicated, and I don't claim to have the full picture, but here is what I think it really takes. TL;DR: Congress, the Joint Staff, and the USAF all have a role to play. All must take unprecedented steps to fix this, but the potential gain is beyond anything we've ever known. Congress: 1. Eliminate the vast majority of queep driven by federal law. 2. Bring pilot pay up to 75% of airline pilot pay with similar seniority/qualification. 3. BRAC Cannon yesterday, everywhere else tomorrow, and mass forces at superbases near major metro areas. Build a DFW-worth of runways to support and make the airspace Class B if needed. JCOS: 1. Inform COCOMs that their staff requirements will be combined (Navy flyer for USA/USAF/USMC/USN rated job, etc) or eliminated, to the scale or 50-75% or more. 2. Annihilate 179s as a thing. One fvcking day? Are you kidding me? Give people the credit for their service. This is one example, but i think the trend is clear: shorter deployments, where the service pays a premium to get people home to their families, and if not credits the time served, rather than allowing a cowardly bureaucrat to steal that credit. USAF: 1. Divorce rated promotions from non-rated. Separate boards, with separate quotas. To make a long story short: you can replace an MPF 0-3 with about 30 grand. To replace a (good) pilot is 100 times that amount. Time to recognize return on investment, kids. 2. Make the non-verbal signals clear: stop the anti-ops "you're all officers and equal" jihad. I won't rant about why. 3. Man the queep positions so that pilots/rated only do DOT, DOV, etc jobs aside from flying, aka those that require their expertise. 4. In Robin Olds' words: "If I can order a man to combat 24 hours a day, he can get paid 24 hours a day." I truly do not care if MSG folks have to work 12 hours shifts; they will support. If they quit, I do not care; I will replace them for the cost of a single aircrew TDY. Run the numbers and tell me I am wrong. However, I will also massively increase incentive flights and the like to connect Ops to MX to MSG and MDG. I would unite the factions so that they would SEE what their worth ethic empowers. 5. Inform COCOMs that their "rated requirements" will be manned at about the 10% level or lower. And see [JCOS] part. 6. Start researching how to finally quit the AEF and move to a better, more cohesive, more predictable model. Don't go full Army, because that is just retarded, but find a way for families to know that "this" deployment is just the one in 4 years, or whatever. 7. Most important: CSAF has to get out there, to every base, and every squadron bar, with nametags off and interview the pilots/CSOs/STS dudes with beer in hand and no entourage. This is the hardest part. He/She MUST establish credibility by allowing the rank and file to speak truth to power at the risk of being disrespectful. This will be a self-sustaining process; if the CSAF showed up here, paid my bar tab and got me a DD, I would whiteboard out the cycle of factors, at the FGO level, that are ensuring our mission failure - but only if I trusted him. 8. I'd overhaul Lackland to look more like an Army basic training unit than the clown show it is now. Kill the "but the queep reg says" buffoonery, and make 50% or more personal combat skills. I could go on on this point, but this is the essence of "expenditionary skills" and would motivate people that want to be part of a warfighting organization. Those who don't: quit. They will be replaced at their least expensive point. Folks, it's time to steal from the USMC model and challenge our people to be part of an elite combat unit, not an office camo welfare unit. And the take-away, folks: trust. This will require huge risks by leadership to change the paradigm, but if they can restore trust, then the rest will follow. Their biggest challenge now is that no one trusts the leadership, even if they make valid arguments and really want to change the culture.

Implement the things in Bleeding Talent would be a good start. Also based priority for all support based on proximity to the fight. For example: Personnelist or finance dude works overtime to get the queep right for the MX troop who's working nights to fix jets. MX troop busts his hump because pilots need the jets to launch on time. Pilots double turn and stretch their min fuel to get a bomb down supporting the JTAC on the ground. JTAC stands exposed on a rooftop to get in comms so that his guys don't get overrun. Find your approximate place in that workflow and demand excellence from those behind you in priority and provide excellence serving those ahead of you.

It's a crusade because I've only talked about BAH related issues in a thread focused on BAH rates? I mean, if you want me to discuss more important issues here, I could, but I feel like they're suited for other threads with topics dedicated to them. That's why they call it service and not a job. The thought that married guys have a monopoly on the sacrifice is precisely the problem. And for the record, on the outside I'm traveling 40% of the month for work and have relocated twice in 4 years for the same. My employer doesn't give a shit about the impact that has on my wife's earning power, nor should they. They employ me, not her. They offer a compensation package commensurate with my value to them, and I decide if it's best for the family for me to take it. A single guy with similar skills would get the same offer. We're talking about compensating servicemembers based on their value to the organization, not their personal circumstances. I fail to see how instituting more dissimilar treatment based on personal circumstances is in line with what I'm saying. I don't think forcing barracks on guys is a good idea personally, however, if that's what you want I don't have a massive objection...just as long as it applies across the board. Single, married, otherwise. You can meet your wife off base after hours at her place and figure out how to make your budget work with the kids on the same pay that your single buddies are getting.

The assumption that impact of military life on a married servicemember is more significant than that for a single one is stunted thinking, indeed. There are plenty of things a single guy could be into that are severely impacted by military service. The service shouldn't concern itself with any of them. They're personal choices and should be dealt with personally by the member. I was on single BAH for more than half my career, but it was about even between single/dependent BAH over the period of my CMR time, so I don't think bias has anything to do with it. Quite the opposite in fact. I'm able to look at a situation and come to a logical conclusion even if it's bad for me personally (doesn't impact me at all anymore, except as a taxpayer, but I would have said the same when I was collecting dependent BAH). Got dat pair of panties. Of course not. Once you hand out an entitlement, you can never take it back. The uproar would be tremendous. This forum certainly seems to know that...just selectively when it impacts others and not themselves.