BitteEinBit

Liquid, this is not an attack on you brother, I'm just trying to make sense out of what you're saying... Now, I don't claim to be a rocket surgeon or brain scientist...nor do I claim to know anything about the Air Force personnel system...but seriously, don't you think we should have done this: "This next year will be challenging, as we assess and announce those AFSCs and year groups that we will cut" before we announced to do this: "HQ AF decided to cut force structure over the FYDP, around 25k airmen" especially since we don't know this: '"A1/AFPC does not know where we can take cuts yet." and the reality is this: "The reality is that we can't cut 25k Airmen without significantly impacting our missions and those who want to continue to serve." We've been talking budget and personnel cuts since 2007. Hard for me to believe no one saw this coming. How can you know you want to cut 25,000 airmen (nice round number by the way) and not know which ones you want to cut? If someone came up with a 25,000 figure (about 8.5% of the active force) they had to at least thought about how to cut it before making an announcement and opening a volunteer window for it. I understand a lot of this is budget driven by decision makers well above CSAF, but it is very difficult to believe that we are anything more than just beans counted on a spreadsheet who's decisions to cut/keep are being made by people so far disconnected from the realities of these cuts. All the manpower calculations formulas can't fix the mess that has been caused by this fiasco and the amount of distrust that now exists because of it. We have a budget issue because we mismanage our force because we have been trying to manage it as if we have unlimited funds and that our experience we are forcing out the door can just be easily replaced without some cost...that mixed in with a little bit of off-target focus. Remember, there is a human element to personnel management that has to be considered when making decisions at this level of impact. I try pretty hard to understand the logic...and I'm certain there is a bigger picture out there, but how off am I when I just have an expectation that the people in charge of managing personnel could just manage personnel. Am I asking too much?!? To put it into caveman tac airlift pilot speak, I guarantee you if I tried to do this: "Green light!" before doing this: "Verify drop clearance, DZ coordinates, run-in, winds, ballistics, chutes, CARP" I would get a big fat one of these: Q3. All those Masters degrees out there and we are having this difficult of a time figuring this shit out? Money well fucking spent for sure. Do I sound a little disgruntled?!? Ok, I'll get back to planning an airdrop mission...I don't know enough to talk A1 shit... BT

We just have a sensitive force these days.... I wonder how that "mass e-mail" would have gone over. I've seen a Jr FGO try to embarrass a new LT with a mass e-mail for a mistake the LT made...it did not end well for the Major. If the Lt Col was even remotely offended or thought the comments were directed at him, he should probably take a look in the mirror. Most professionals I know would have blown those comments off...especially coming from a civilian interweb site nonetheless. The real leader would have taken the mentorship path instead of pulling rank and making threats. If you have to pull rank to get your point across, you are not a leader...you're just higher ranking than the person you're talking to, and by today's standards it doesn't mean much.

So, let me get this straight....a Lt Col sees a post on a civilian interweb forum, gets butt hurt because he thought someone was talking shit about him, so he tries to pull rank and makes threats to expose someone?? REALLY? That is professional?!? Makes sense. These are the kinds of "get-your-feelings-hurt" types we have in our military...such a sensitive Lt Col. (where in the fuck do we find these people??)

Bendy, What you describe above is exactly what I'm worried about with our drawdown. We are either cutting too much experience involuntarily because those IPs who have been flying the line don't have the magic squares filled to get promoted and continued, or we are just opening the door and letting good dudes walk on their own because we keep giving them BS taskers that don't relate to their jobs...all while keeping the line IPs who could only fly if it was a "tax free" mission for the month because they "had too much going on at the office" to fly a local training sortie during the week. Great staff bubbas, terrible instructors. I'm seeing too many of them staying around, and they are the ones we are going to be counting on to keep our young inexperience "safe." When I was growing up in the flying world, I expected to see more "instruction" from the IPs I flew with. I'm certain it was not because I was just that sharp in the jet, but rather, it just seemed like it was more important to get home for the day than to give extra instruction or a thorough debrief. Or maybe they were just scared of offending me by giving me honest feedback...I don't know why the extra time wasn't given. Either way, I've tried not to be that kind of IP. Hopefully the right people are staying...but from what it sounds like, all the "good" ones I know are out or trying to get out, while the staffers who only fly "good deals" are sticking around hoping to make O-6. Scary. Our business is dangerous, and we need people who care enough to spend the extra time to make sure we're doing it right...not "just good enough" Not saying that was the case with this incident...I'm posting in general. Edit to clarify I'm not saying this IP didn't care...

Gift? Is that why she said she had surprise for me?!? Thanks man! I love a good scotch!

They sell douchebags at Home Depot?

Come on...we all know memos like that only come out on Friday of a 3-day weekend

I hope that is a joke...and if it is not, I hope it isn't who I think it is. Why is an ADO creating policy?? WTF is the DO doing? Nevermind...I try not to understand this AF anymore.

I fully expected that A1 would not understand authorization and restrictions or this drawdown....really, this is not a surprise to me. Again, when your people are focused on the wrong shit 96% of the time, when you need them to focus on what is really important (ie, their primary jobs), they have to play catch up. Like I've always said before, we can still get the job done, it just won't be timely or pretty. I expect this trend to continue for at least another generation of "leadership." The CSAF and A1 didn't know about VSP delays/shenanigans? Really!?!? Who the fuck was making the decisions on that if not the top two dudes in the reporting chain who are supposed to be directing this thing? Is Chang up there making decisions without talking to the boss?!? Great staff work! I've seen people fired for much MUCH less. How can you not brief THE boss on progress to cut 25,000 airmen? Good luck A1...we're all counting on you!

This is where we should have been about 5 months ago...

...and this is where the AF is missing the mark in my opinion.

I LOLd FIFY

We always hear about take rates (I.e Air Force meeting their goal) but we never hear about numbers of eligibles who separate. I'm willing to bet the numbers who separate won't change much even without the bonus. Like RP said, most of the people who take the bonus were going to stay anyway. The only thing not having a bonus will change is in the way AFPC has to manage the rated force...they don't have the leverage anymore and they may actually have to plan ahead. My prediction: They will fail miserably.

Hopefully the Japanese dude knows Karate... Keep the drawdown coming...this is nothing we need to worry about. This is 80s era foreign policy. My "leaders" assure me that there is no threat here, and I believe them. The rest of the world will remain threat free...we've seen this kind of thing before. How about those Oscars? Shiny things!

Fuck yeah! Baltika 9s for all my friends!!

Yeah, "Pacific Pivot"...timing is perfect. I'm not worried...we have this all under control. Really, the world is becoming a better place and we will do less with less. For reals this time... Think about it...other than hot women, what does Ukraine really have for us. Ok, hot women are enough of a reason...pack your bags boys, we're going to Kiev!!

AFPC should take your advice and basically just "plan anything and think about Force Management" before "re-releasing 13-130" amendment 6 to change 9. All I can do is shake my head in disbelief...

When senior managers have time to make rules like that....it is how you know the war is over. If we aren't out there trying to kill people and break things, what else are we going to focus on? But hey, everyone has to feel like an important manager. We really should start tracking how many uniform violations have been corrected and make an OPR/EPR bullet out of it....would make a great push line in today's Air Force.

Dupe, what you're saying makes perfect sense and if those are the problem areas I'd rather not see "fly jets" on that list at all. Good point. It really should be a given that flying jets is a wing priority if that is the wing's mission. Don't get me wrong, if the things on that list are problem areas, by all means fix them, but there should be no other reason to put "flying jets" on that list unless you're intentionally trying to show that flying is not the focus of a flying wing (which makes sense in today's Air Force culture climate). All this does is reinforce the "everyone is the tip of the spear concept" when in reality, the tip of the spear is essentially the mission for which your wing is appropriately named, and everything else supports that mission. I really think we are moving away from that concept. Yes, the support functions are ALL important in accomplishing the overall mission, but they are not all tip of the spear...unless they want to be the AFIS Implementation Wing or Travel Voucher Processing Wing, then yes, flying is not as important unless we need to fly in order to support travel voucher processing. I'm a graduate of the old PME courseware so I may be wrong here, but I think there is supposed to be a reason it is called an AIRLIFT Wing and not an AFIS Implementation Wing. The bottom line is that everything on that list still supports the wing's ability to perform its tasked mission...flying jets...period. Maybe it is me who is out of touch. Now I wonder why a Missile Wing is called a Missile Wing. I can't imagine what their mission could be....I better research that one.

^This. Worse is that the only thing below flying on that list is something they are expected to do anyway...integration...why would that even need to be a priority? It is your fucking job! UFB is right. That list is going to bite someone in the ass the next time ANY level of mishap occurs with bent metal. ...and from the Reserve side too. Time to go...

Please don't tell me this is a whole new area ripe for embarrassing the Air Force in the news in the near future. WTF is wrong with people?! Seriously...where are we getting these managers?!!? Is this the shit they are teaching at in-res PME?! I have to assume these managers have served in the same Air Force I have over the past 15 years...where the f*ck are they learning this shit?!

It actually appears to me that those at the top are finally realizing they are so far disconnected from the realities of the "workerbees" and now they're trying to figure out how things really work. I like this idea. This is one of the critical first steps to changing that "culture" we all complain about. Yes men (or women) can no longer lie to their bosses and say "We have burgers and tots, everything is great." I like it.... Edited for misplaced modifier

Their version of TIB?

ALLEGATION, that Brig Gen Kevin B. Wooton The preponderance of evidence supported the conclusion that Brig Gen Wooton engaged in an inappropriate intimate and/or sexual relationship with Ms. [REDACTED]. ALLEGATION 1, that Brig Gen David C. Uhrich, from on or about 28Jan13 to on or about 15 Feb 13, engaged in an inappropriate relationship with Ms. [REDACTED], Brig Gen Uhrich engaged in a romantic relationship with Ms. [REDACTED] ALLEGATION 1 that Brig Gen Robert Givens, from on about Sep 2010 to on or about Aug 2012, engaged in an inappropriate relationship with Mrs. [REDACTED],. ALLEGATION 2. That beginning on or about April 2011, Colonel Scott C. Long engaged in an unprofessional relationship with Ms. [REDACTED] Wow, that Ms Redacted is a whore!

So basically no one with any credibility.... (sarcasm) I have turned into a cynical bastard....and I like it!