FY 14 Force Management Program (RIF, VSP, TERA)

[MC5Wes]

General Chang

So with 10 percent of the Active Force reduction. Are we going to see a greater reduction on the Civilian side? We already proven with the furlough that we cut 20 percent and still have operations continue.

[Helo Kitty]

At what point does the Air Force match cuts to aircraft and Airmen with reduction in excess infrastructure? I have read about Gen Schwartz and Gen Welsh requesting for additional basing reductions, but nothing seems to come of it.

My troops feel that top brass are only eliminating aircraft and Airmen because 'its easy' compared to working with congress to actually ID and cut some excess bases.

[Fuzz]

I tell you guys MONTHS ago that these programs were coming, and now you are calling Liquid and me out? Really?

BL: We must get smaller. Our senior leaders have determined that 10% fat legitimately remains to be trimmed. These programs are the first steps in that multi-year fat-trimming process. We serve at the pleasure of our senior leaders, and when our usefulness expires, so do our careers. Just the facts, nothing personal.

And we all heard you, however, it seems like too much to ask for you to put out a coherent message and information. Instead now we have 14 pages here on BODN and endless hours of speculation and rumors in the squadron and the bar; not to mention you just slap up a matrix at 1630 on a Friday before Christmas with the most vague details possible and pull chocks till the new year.

Edited December 23, 2013 by Fuzz

[Bender]

At what point does the Air Force match cuts to aircraft and Airmen with reduction in excess infrastructure? I have read about Gen Schwartz and Gen Welsh requesting for additional basing reductions, but nothing seems to come of it.

My troops feel that top brass are only eliminating aircraft and Airmen because 'its easy' compared to working with congress to actually ID and cut some excess bases.

"The Budget also requests authorization for another Base Realignment and Closure round in 2015 to close or realign excess infrastructure and avoid wasting limited resources maintaining unneeded facilities. The actual closing of any bases would involve a multiyear process that would not start until 2016, after the economy is projected to have more fully recovered."

And we all heard you, however, it seems like too much to ask for you to put out a coherent message and information. Instead now we have 14 pages here on BODN and endless hours of speculation and rumors in the squadron and the bar; not to mention you just slap up a matrix at 1630 on a Friday before Christmas with the most vague details possible and pull chocks till the new year.

It is too much to ask to put out a coherent message and information at this point; they honestly believe they are doing everyone a favor by releasing this matrix prior to the holidays.

The "funny" part is that everyone involved is working way too hard to get this done, while we have known for a long time it was going to happen. It's quite standard really, but I don't need to say that...do I?

The intent of the law is interpreted by the Air Force as an attempt to trim the force voluntarily first, they can target whom they please and deny whom they please. After that is "complete", they will non-voluntarily target the force...again, targeting whomever they please and removing whom they please.

I tell you guys MONTHS ago that these programs were coming, and now you are calling Liquid and me out? Really?

He was asking for your opinion as the only "senior leader" he has any direct line too. If you don't want to be "called out", you should probably just go back to lurking. While I do not believe for a second that anyone should be looking for clarification from you (no one has any idea who you are or what you are qualified to answer), this is the situation you have developed. If you have the capacity to add value, you (and you alone) have added that obligation to yourself.

We serve at the pleasure of our senior leaders, and when our usefulness expires, so do our careers. Just the facts, nothing personal.

This, if you recall, is an all voluntary force. What you have just written is not true; we serve at our pleasure...for the values that we hold. This "usefulness" you speak of is purely political jargon for "I have no control over it". While I believe this viewpoint may have merit for O-6's and above, I am surprised you took the time to log in to write that. I suppose he did say, "Any comments?"...perhaps he should be more specific next time...or go ask someone that cares more.

That said, I hope you have a good Christmas...but, I hope everyone at A1 isn't taking Christmas off. I'm not (again, while I serve at other's pleasure).

Personally, I think you should try again...Perhaps with a little more value or empathy...your choice.

Bendy

Edited December 23, 2013 by Bender

[Spaceballs]

"The Budget also requests authorization for another Base Realignment and Closure round in 2015 to close or realign excess infrastructure and avoid wasting limited resources maintaining unneeded facilities. The actual closing of any bases would involve a multiyear process that would not start until 2016, after the economy is projected to have more fully recovered."

It is too much to ask to put out a coherent message and information at this point; they honestly believe they are doing everyone a favor by releasing this matrix prior to the holidays.

The "funny" part is that everyone involved is working way too hard to get this done, while we have known for a long time it was going to happen. It's quite standard really, but I don't need to say that...do I?

The intent of the law is interpreted by the Air Force as an attempt to trim the force voluntarily first, they can target whom they please and deny whom they please. After that is "complete", they will non-voluntarily target the force...again, targeting whomever they please and removing whom they please.

He was asking for your opinion as the only "senior leader" he has any direct line too. If you don't want to be "called out", you should probably just go back to lurking. While I do not believe for a second that anyone should be looking for clarification from you (no one has any idea who you are or what you are qualified to answer), this is the situation you have developed. If you have the capacity to add value, you (and you alone) have added that obligation to yourself.

This, if you recall, is an all voluntary force. What you have just written is not true; we serve at our pleasure...for the values that we hold. This "usefulness" you speak of is purely political jargon for "I have no control over it". While I believe this viewpoint may have merit for O-6's and above, I am surprised you took the time to log in to write that. I suppose he did say, "Any comments?"...perhaps he should be more specific next time...or go ask someone that cares more.

That said, I hope you have a good Christmas...but, I hope everyone at A1 isn't taking Christmas off. I'm not (again, while I serve at other's pleasure).

Personally, I think you should try again...Perhaps with a little more value or empathy...your choice.

Bendy

We absolutely do serve at the usefulness of our leaders. The only control we have over our jobs is to check the boxes and play the game. We are a number to our leaders and nothing more. I shudder every time I have to sit through a brief of some O-6 or O-7 telling us how each and every airman personally means the world to them and they would go to hell and back for every single one of us. That's funny considering how few of them take the time to even give a halfway respectful returned salute to a lieutenant.

Granted we all volunteer and continue to stay in the job through our own will, we have little control over how long our careers will be. Too much of the military is driven by politicians, not warrior generals.

[NotADude]

I tell you guys MONTHS ago that these programs were coming, and now you are calling Liquid and me out? Really?

BL: We must get smaller. Our senior leaders have determined that 10% fat legitimately remains to be trimmed. These programs are the first steps in that multi-year fat-trimming process. We serve at the pleasure of our senior leaders, and when our usefulness expires, so do our careers. Just the facts, nothing personal.

The thing that kills me about this is that a lot of us have been trying for the last few years to get out, but the AF keeps saying no. On the one hand, leadership can't wait to get rid of us, while on the other, we're too valuable to be let go. I don't know any Capt right now (pilot/rated type) that has any desire to serve past their commitment, and I know quite a few who are actively looking for ways to separate early. Just don't be too peeved if you get what you ask for...

[Bender]

We absolutely do serve at the usefulness of our leaders. The only control we have over our jobs is to check the boxes and play the game. We are a number to our leaders and nothing more. I shudder every time I have to sit through a brief of some O-6 or O-7 telling us how each and every airman personally means the world to them and they would go to hell and back for every single one of us. That's funny considering how few of them take the time to even give a halfway respectful returned salute to a lieutenant.

Granted we all volunteer and continue to stay in the job through our own will, we have little control over how long our careers will be. Too much of the military is driven by politicians, not warrior generals.

Sigh, I'm sorry that you feel that way and I know that your feelings are not rare. I don't really agree with your opinion here in full, but I am not without some connection.

The "leaders" you are speaking of are not my leaders. They may be my bosses, and they may be my managers...but they are not my leaders.

If you want a good chuckle, go read the leadership article M2 just posted and look for the connection with an "O-7 telling us how each and every airman personally means the world to them".

Bendy

[Danny Noonin]

He was asking for your opinion as the only "senior leader" he has any direct line too.

Not sure where everyone got the idea that this clown was a "senior leader". Liquid is. This guy is not.

[sqwatch]

We serve at the pleasure of our senior leaders, and when our usefulness expires, so do our careers. Just the facts, nothing personal.

...Perhaps with a little more value or empathy...your choice. Bendy

I know one guy that didn't check his email and missed the "dignity and respect" data burst. I want to believe Chang is a troll, but the hairs raise on my neck when I consider that he is in some sort of position if influence. Kurtz would be proud.I get what your saying Chang, and I don't disagree. It's just some times you drive a point home with a heavy dose of Aspergers and a side of Tourettes. Edited December 23, 2013 by sqwatch

[Dave Koza]

I tell you guys MONTHS ago that these programs were coming, and now you are calling Liquid and me out? Really?

Chang,

I read on af.mil FAQs that the intent was to give individuals time to make informed decisions. How can we do this with such incomplete information? Even the matrix released Friday afternoon provides no actionable details. I would very much appreciate your insight on the following isssues:

1) My WG/CC stated that if you aren't eligible for voluntary separation, then you won't be subject to RIF.

2) He said if someone's VSP is denied, then no one in that group will meet RIF board. Example: 198 '03 11Ms apply for VSP but only 37 are approved. That RIF board doesn't meet.

3) Everyone will know by 1 January if they are eligible.

4) The 2009-2012 pilots & navs all show red on the matrix. Am I safe in assuming that we won't have to waste time writing RRFs on these young officers?

We are getting conflicting "official rumors" from senior leaders. Any clarification from someone with actual insight would be much appreciated this holiday season.

Edited December 23, 2013 by Dave Koza

[Danny Noonin]

I tell you guys MONTHS ago that these programs were coming, and now you are calling Liquid and me out? Really?

BL: We must get smaller. Our senior leaders have determined that 10% fat legitimately remains to be trimmed. These programs are the first steps in that multi-year fat-trimming process. We serve at the pleasure of our senior leaders, and when our usefulness expires, so do our careers. Just the facts, nothing personal.

1. Wow, you must be omniscient or something. You really knew these programs were coming? You must be a real insider. Stop it. Everyone knew this shit was coming. You get no credit.

2. You are also illiterate. Read what you quoted. The issue wasn't with the surprise that these programs were coming, it was with the Friday afternoon before Christmas-week release of conflicting, useless information about a potential career and life altering program that left these guys stressing with more questions than answers. And all you can say is "when our usefulness expires, so do our careers? Fuck you. Until you A1 clowns can get a grip on the fact that there are real humans involved in each of your little projects, you'll continue to buffoon them by treating everyone as a number merely serving "at the pleasure of our senior leaders". Just like you have every single time something like this has come out. Own it. Own the fact that the A1 world has fucked it up over and over again before. Then maybe you'll stop being so clueless and arrogant when you institute new programs like this. And maybe you won't leave us digging out from the mess you made for years like you have every time before.

3. Why do you not correct these guys when they talk like you are a "senior leader"? You and I both know that you are not, yet you say nothing. There's nothing wrong with not being one, but there is something wrong with letting that misperception go unchecked. Grow a pair. Or does it feed your troll ego to let guys think you are more of a big shot than you really are?

[Homestar]

We serve at the pleasure of our senior leaders, and when our usefulness expires, so do our careers. Just the facts, nothing personal.

Helluvaway to treat the men and women who have been doing the leadership's bidding in Iraq and Afg for the past 12 years.

That's cool.

[Whitman]

Is anyone aware of Palace Chase options before ADSC associated with the FY 14 force management program?

[BB Stacker]

"The Budget also requests authorization for another Base Realignment and Closure round in 2015 to close or realign excess infrastructure and avoid wasting limited resources maintaining unneeded facilities. The actual closing of any bases would involve a multiyear process that would not start until 2016, after the economy is projected to have more fully recovered."

That's what was in the budget request from the WH, here's the language from the FY2014 NDAA that was actually passed into law:

“nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize an additional Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round, and none of the funds appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations contained in this Act may be used to propose, plan for, or execute an additional BRAC round.”

This type of language explicitly forbidding spending any funds on any sort of planning or even proposing for a BRAC has been SOP for the past several NDAAs. The lack of a (much needed) BRAC is pretty much solely on Congress at this point.

[outlaw05]

Does anyone know if VSP causes any loss of certain benefits? One rumor I heard was that those who VSP will not be eligible for GI Bill benefits. That doesn't make any sense to me, but I wouldn't put it past our government to have such a rule.

[ucf_motorcycle]

Has anyone seen any dates/deadlines for applying for VSP? I'll be going on leave till the mid month and don't want to miss my chance in case I decide to put in for it.

[usaf36031]

It seems unlikely to me that we'll see any RIF'ing from the "blacked out" AFSC fields. The AF wants very badly for people to leave voluntarily so they don't have to non-vol people who want to stay. If they're saying that an entire AFSC is ineligible then I don't see them allowing fighter, rescue, or RPA dudes out. Voluntary or otherwise.

[ARAMP1]

I just have to say it : MERRY CHRISTMAS FROM THE USAF!

Hiding behind the weekend with bad news releases like always….how do these "leaders" sleep at night? Chang, Liquid? Any comments? Come on down and joint he conversation about your awesome USAF institution….i'd seriously like to hear your thoughts and comments right now…don't be shy!

We find it's always better to fire people on a friday. Studies have statistically shown that there's less chance of an incident if you do it at the end of the week.

[MC5Wes]

I thought the Air Force Restructure Commission was an Air Force only BRAC?

The Commission, pursuant to Section 363(a)(1) of Public Law 112-239, is studying the structure of the Air Force to determine whether, and how, the structure should be modified to best fulfill current and anticipated mission requirements for the Air Force, in a manner consistent with available resources.

The Commission, no later than February 1, 2014, will submit a report containing a detailed statement of the findings and recommendations to the President and the Congressional Oversight Committees. The report will be prepared in accordance with Section 363(a)(2) of Public Law 112-239.

[Dupe]

I've got a duty AFSC, a 2nd AFSC, and a 3rd AFSC... Which of those do I use to figure out if I'm VSP-eligible?

[AA]

My money is on core AFSC.

[matmacwc]

Does anyone know if VSP causes any loss of certain benefits? One rumor I heard was that those who VSP will not be eligible for GI Bill benefits. That doesn't make any sense to me, but I wouldn't put it past our government to have such a rule.

VSPd, not true.

[BB Stacker]

I've got a duty AFSC, a 2nd AFSC, and a 3rd AFSC... Which of those do I use to figure out if I'm VSP-eligible?

Core ID...it'll be listed as a separate item on your SURF and should just be two numbers followed by a letter (i.e., just 21M instead of 21M3A, just 11F instead of K11F3B, etc)

[AnimalMother]

Serve at the pleasure of our senior leaders?!

That is perhaps the most obsequious and pusillanimous statement I've ever heard from our officer corps. I think what you meant to say was that you service the pleasure of your senior leaders. Noonin was spot on.

If you want to contribute to this board, then by all means, please do, but make it something useful. You might start by helping us figure out whether we're actually eligible to apply for this debacle or not.

[discus]

Serve at the pleasure of our senior leaders?!

That is perhaps the most obsequious and pusillanimous statement I've ever heard from our officer corps. I think what you meant to say was that you service the pleasure of your senior leaders. Noonin was spot on.

If you want to contribute to this board, then by all means, please do, but make it something useful. You might start by helping us figure out whether we're actually eligible to apply for this debacle or not.

Bonus points for using "Pusillanimous" correctly in a sentence!