1,000 Retired Pilots Can Be Recalled to Active Duty

[Jaded]

50 minutes ago, Shamrock said:

Best info: out of 25 slots sitting there for all this time only 15 people even applied and none (zero) of them accepted a return. 

Why would you apply and not accept a return? Didn't like the job they offered? 

[Shamrock]

I didn’t apply. Just called for info. Not sure why they didn’t accept. They probably offered crappy jobs.

[Stoker]

9 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

 I'm in a similar position, my job should not exist and certainly not be filled by a rated officer.  I successfully lobbied to leave early and let the position go unfilled which was difficult but not impossible.  In lieu of an audit, there should be a mechanism to ID useless staff jobs.  But there isn't, so if you can leave, you should.  This organization doesn't want to be fixed.

It'd probably take a flag officer flying around basically reenacting the role of the Bobs from Office Space ("What is it you'd say you... do... here?"), but it could be done. I'm surprised the Navy doesn't have something similar for alleviating their shipboard manning problems, just a rear admiral going from shore posting to shore posting finding the manpower that's been squirelled away for some reason or another.

[BCan]

I agree this is setting the stage for something larger.  Reminds me of when the demo teams got cnx'd - what followed was grounding entire squadrons.   I don't see why you'd want to bring back retired dudes...I think the end game is a stop-loss.  It would be difficult to set a policy of who got recalled out of the retired crowd.  It be far easier to just close the door.

Just my .02

[matmacwc]

13 minutes ago, BCan said:

I agree this is setting the stage for something larger.  Reminds me of when the demo teams got cnx'd - what followed was grounding entire squadrons.   I don't see why you'd want to bring back retired dudes...I think the end game is a stop-loss.  It would be difficult to set a policy of who got recalled out of the retired crowd.  It be far easier to just close the door.

Just my .02

You are onto something, its right out of Trumps playbook which I'd imagine is starting to filter down through the government.  Demand the moon, makes lots of noise, then happily accept the 75% solution which you wanted in the first place.  (I didn't make this up, read his book).

Edited October 24, 2017 by matmacwc

[HeloDude]

Here's the latest and greatest from big blue:  About 200 pilots, all voluntary, and most will go to staff jobs with some to IP jobs.  I don't see too many volunteers other than those recently hired by the airlines who want to build seniority without the crappy schedule.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2017/10/23/air-force-pilots-recalled-under-trump-order-will-serve-as-instructors-staff/

 

[HuggyU2]

20 minutes ago, BCan said:

 I don't see why you'd want to bring back retired dudes...

As a retiree who came back in 2010, I have to ask:  "why not?"

Do you believe we are too old to do the mission?  

When I was stationed in England (yes... I wore a SAC patch then), the RAF base near us had two pilot retire the same day:  one had 38 years of RAF service, and the other had 37.  They flew nearly their entire career.  

While the retiree program may not work well in the some squadrons or cultures in the USAF, don't let your bias extend everywhere.  

[Termy]

From that af times article:

"We’re standing up F-16 graduate pilot training at Holloman [Air Force Base], so if we have some F-16 retirees that are relatively recent and current, then we would look at that option.”

hahaha. Good luck wth that. 

[matmacwc]

Another example of the AF Times, and person being interviewed, not knowing how the real world works.

[mcbush]

Also consider that the person being interviewed in this case is the BGen responsible for solving the crisis...

[sqwatch]

Glad I’m not the one that everyone looks to for a solution. I don’t know what I’d say if interviewed.

[flyusaf83]

“The Air Force’s pilot shortage largely stems from a massive hiring wave in the commercial airline industry, which sees the military as fertile recruiting ground. In an attempt to stay competitive, the Air Force has recently upped its monthly flight pay and offered massive retention bonuses of up to $455,000. The Air Force is also trying to improve pilots’ job satisfaction. But it hasn’t been enough.”

What a bunch of propaganda.

First of all... $35k/yr to 24 YOS is not a “massive bonus”, when you consider that for four of those years you’re working for half pay and losing massive amounts of money by losing 4 years of airline pay/seniority.

Secondly, the AF is trying to improve our job satisfaction? Haha, right. The only thing I’ve seen is them talking about doing that, while doing everything they can to keep screwing us over.  Has anyone here actually seen the AF actually do a thing to make our jobs better?

Edited October 24, 2017 by flyusaf83

[BCan]

1 hour ago, HuggyU2 said:

Do you believe we are too old to do the mission?  

Poor wording.  My POV was from big AF.  Better wording:  Why would the AF want to figure out how they involuntarily recall retired folk when they could start by simply closing the doors.  

If 1000 retired dudes wanted these jobs....sure that would work.  The fact is, the AF is going to be lucky to get 10 volunteers  ...and they know it...and that's the reason you got zero info on your phone investigation.  Smoke and mirrors...

[HuggyU2]

Fair enough.  Thanks for the reply.  

The reason I got zero reply, however, is that the decision was made, and will have to trickle down.  In this day or immediate internet rumors and leaks, DoD and the AF simply cannot work this type of issue quietly, and have the sub-organizations make the necessary arrangements before it is announced.  So instead, they must announce it, and then create the action plan.  

Nothing "involuntary" will happen on this recall unless something drastic happens... like North Korea going kinetic.  

As for a voluntary program, it will have no success with retirees unless DoD is willing to allow retirees to keep their retirements during the recall period.  That retirement was earned, that deal is done, playbook closed... start a new contract.  

Almost every retiree pilot I know personally is doing quite well.  Some are DoD contractors, entrepreneurs, flying for other gov't agencies, corporate pilots, charter pilots, high-end computer/tech guys, Wall Street financial folks, consultants, etc...  Not all are airline pilots.  But every single one of them would be taking a SIGNIFICANT pay cut to come back if their retirement pay was removed from the compensation equation.  Even WITH the retirement pay staying, it is a financial loss for most, as well as fraught with the other hardships all of you are familiar with.  

Will the program get retirees back if they can incentivize it financially?  I have no idea.  But if DoD/AF won't ensure that the financial hit is minimized, a voluntary recall will not attract retirees that have been out more than 12 months.  

 

Edited October 24, 2017 by HuggyU2

[ThreeHoler]

“The Air Force’s pilot shortage largely stems from a massive hiring wave in the commercial airline industry, which sees the military as fertile recruiting ground. In an attempt to stay competitive, the Air Force has recently upped its monthly flight pay and offered massive retention bonuses of up to $455,000. The Air Force is also trying to improve pilots’ job satisfaction. But it hasn’t been enough.”
What a bunch of propaganda.
First of all... $35k/yr to 24 YOS is not a “massive bonus”, when you consider that for four of those years you’re working for half pay and losing massive amounts of money by losing 4 years of airline pay/seniority.
Secondly, the AF is trying to improve our job satisfaction? Haha, right. The only thing I’ve seen is them talking about doing that, while doing everything they can to keep screwing us over.  Has anyone here actually seen the AF actually do a thing to make our jobs better?

I know a bunch of people at HAF who genuinely care and are trying to successfully implement Fingers’ reg reduction/rescinsion/simplifying. It’s not going to be easy given the timeline and pervasive AF mentality of more refs from on top...but it is being worked.

[ThreeHoler]

It'd probably take a flag officer flying around basically reenacting the role of the Bobs from Office Space ("What is it you'd say you... do... here?"), but it could be done. I'm surprised the Navy doesn't have something similar for alleviating their shipboard manning problems, just a rear admiral going from shore posting to shore posting finding the manpower that's been squirelled away for some reason or another.

A GOFO doing this would fail miserably. Get a handful of crusty Iron Majors and give them free-reign from the CSAF direct to evaluate the various jobs that “need” to be filled.

[Weezer]

17 hours ago, HU&W said:

...the B52 alert...

 

This article is interesting in regards to the B-52 alert.  If STRATCOM's not ordering it, then why is the AF implementing it?  Kind of leads you to think it's some sort of posturing.

[flyusaf83]

9 hours ago, ThreeHoler said:

 

I know a bunch of people at HAF who genuinely care and are trying to successfully implement Fingers’ reg reduction/rescinsion/simplifying. It’s not going to be easy given the timeline and pervasive AF mentality of more refs from on top...but it is being worked.

 

That’s great and all that they genuinely care, but whatever changes they think they are making aren’t making it down to the squadron level.

Until Big AF starts actually holding commanders accountable for making their communities better, nothing will happen.  We recently had an OG call in which the OG/CC had a container where people could drop anonymous questions that he could answer for them in his speech.  There was only one question. The note quoted the Chief of Staff’s memo that said the AF needs to get rid of additional duties, then noted that additional duties have been increased recently in our group rather than decreased, and asked why this community isn’t following the Chief of Staff’s guidance.  

The OG responded by giving a lecture about how we are all officers first, and we should be happy to help out by doing any additional duties that we are assigned.  And if this pilot has a problem with that, they can let him know, and he will PCS him elsewhere.

Until caustic leaders like this are fired from their jobs, nothing will change.  

[HuggyU2]

2 minutes ago, flyusaf83 said:

We recently had an OG call ...

Who is "we"?  Is there a need to protect which Ops Group Commander this is? 

If more posts like this would put a commander's name to the incident, it might be helpful.

[polcat]

14 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Here's the latest and greatest from big blue:  About 200 pilots, all voluntary, and most will go to staff jobs with some to IP jobs.  I don't see too many volunteers other than those recently hired by the airlines who want to build seniority without the crappy schedule.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2017/10/23/air-force-pilots-recalled-under-trump-order-will-serve-as-instructors-staff/

 

For LtCols and Majors who are approaching the 17-20 year mark and plan on retiring at 20 years, do you guys think it'll be easier to stay in the cockpit and avoid staff?

[Orbit]

52 minutes ago, Weezer said:

This article is interesting in regards to the B-52 alert.  If STRATCOM's not ordering it, then why is the AF implementing it?  Kind of leads you to think it's some sort of posturing.

https://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2017/October 2017/Air-Force-Not-Preparing-to-Put-B-52s-Back-on-Alert.aspx

 

Sounds like shitty journalism, not that that ever happens.  This is happening at more than a few other bases, upgrading/repairing alert facilities.  

[Jaded]

11 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said:

Who is "we"?  Is there a need to protect which Ops Group Commander this is? 

If more posts like this would put a commander's name to the incident, it might be helpful.

I think the anonymity is for the poster, not the OG. If you give out a name, it reveals what base that person is at, and post histories can be used to find out who that person is. Cue reprisal from said OG. 

[dream big]

11 hours ago, ThreeHoler said:

 

A GOFO doing this would fail miserably. Get a handful of crusty Iron Majors and give them free-reign from the CSAF direct to evaluate the various jobs that “need” to be filled.

 

But will anyone have the balls to say that your most experienced WO/EP late Capt/junior Maj pilots should not be serving exec sentences when they are most valuable in the squadron teaching the young guys?  A 2LT from MPF could function as the exec (and do a much better job..)

[Shamrock]

Here are my (very quick) numbers that I did for my cost analysis on going back.  I assumed 80 credit hours, a profit sharing check might be $10k if I get one, normal progression at the airline, and estimated taxes ( I live in a very high tax state).  I looked at different situations for if they offered the bonus or not, and whether I'd get an assignment that got partial tax free (Didn't think too much into it since it's hypothetical... think TDY to the Phillipines CZTE zone every now and then if you need to.  I absolutely would not volunteer to deploy).  Going back to the AF for 3 years would cost me $177k.  I usually do way better than 80 credit hours a month, and didn't bother to run it for any premium pay trips since the difference  was already huge.  Interestingly, if they offered the bonus and I got some tax free, it looks like the money might favor going back.  However, it's still comparing apples to crabapples.  I think the A1 would be smart to sit and try to think the way we are (including those that haven't left but are running their own numbers).  How do we make up in value the expected difference in value that someone choosing to go another path is looking at.  There's only so far an O-6 (many of whom don't really care about you personally) can go with telling you - "you should want to serve just because its service!".  Well to me (and roughly equivalent - those choosing to separate) that statement costs $175k to accept for a 3 year tour.  Do I want $175k or, having already served my country honorably, want to do another 3 years of queep, and putting up with all the stuff I'd have to put up with.  I know my assumptions are very flexible, and also that I didn't factor in an extra 7.5% retirement increase, nor any effects on a VA rating resulting from more service.

	I lose:
current expected situation	$176,877.06
assuming no profit sharing	$155,677.06
no profit sharing and 6 mos tax free (~15% taxes)	$34,261.06
no profit sharing and getting the full bonus	$71,677.06
no profit sharing, 6 months tax free and the full bonus	$ (63,738.94)
with profit sharing and the full bonus	$92,877.06
with profit sharing, the full bonus and 6 months tax free $(42,538.94)

[Jaded]

Is that O-4 or O-5?