Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[Liquid]

So... If I'm flying a 12 hour sortie out of an undisclosed location in Southwest Asia, am I allowed to talk about my ATP then? Or should I be bringing work on the jet so it's 100% business 100% of the time. Just wondering, I don't want a N/N Ground Eval when I land.

Damn, I hit a nerve here. I wasn't really thinking about casual talk, I was talking about doing the ATP and interview prep in the pilot shop. In my squadron, the pilot office was not that big. Several computers, a couch, a fridge, some desks a big white board. The pilot shop where you checked the schedule, your currency, your v-file and your pubs. We did not allow the pilot shop to become the airline prep office. If anyone started hanging around the pilot shop and talking about their airline hiring process, it distracted from our mission and was considered unprofessional. The "no-notice ground eval" was the evaluator pilots, me included, changing the discussion from airlines to systems and procedures and reminding those that were considering separating that we had a mission to do. There is a difference between talking about it with your friends, and doing the whole process in the open while influencing and distracting those who are not participating in the airline transition. Many people here have posted how many people in their squadrons are talking about the airlines and prepping for their airline future in the squadron. They use that observation to point out how f*cked up the AF is and how out of touch I am. After a long explanation about how we should not threaten or discredit anyone who chooses to separate after fulfilling their commitment, I added that the planning shouldn't happen at work. I am not in the squadron anymore and I have no influence on what happens in the pilot shops. But I think there should be someone who keeps the pilots focused on the mission, professional development and the technical expertise required to fight wars more than future civilian employment.

[General Condition]

Liquid,

I warned you a long time ago about attempting to “re-blue” folks on this forum. While I don’t speak for anyone but myself, I hope that most on here are at least appreciative of the fact that you’ve taken a step that most of your cohorts won’t – you listen to what people say.

However, I have seen little-to-no attempt on your part to say “great point – I’m going to tell my boss about your comment.” Instead, you demonstrate your disconnection by repeating buzzwords and AF corporate-speak.

I have my doubts about you being a “good dude.” Telling people they shouldn’t be allowed to talk about the airlines at work. Administering no-notice evals to your peers. The list goes on. Good dudes don’t do that.

Do you tell your bosses to shut their pie holes when they’re discussing the next triathlon/marathon/half-marathon they’re training for? Doubt it. I see way too many people talking about that useless stuff and never once mentioning their training plan for their student. It used to be NASCAR, then it was biking, now it’s triathlons, marathons, etc. I can’t wait to see when the next 4-star decides that they like (fill-in-the-blank) – just watch, you’ll see all their cronies rushing out to buy expensive gear, subscribing to magazines (with no women on the cover of course), and wasting hours at work discussing it. Don’t worry, it won’t actually be a sport, just some form of conditioning that was originally intended to better prepare you for something truly athletic. But we don’t want to do that because someone might sprain an ankle.

I have news for you – it IS about the money. You and your fellow “leaders” have dangled the carrot of an active duty retirement in front of your people since day one. There are tens of millions of Americans, most of them less intelligent, less skilIed, less educated, and less motivated than most folks in the AF. Somehow, they manage to feed their families, educate their children, take vacations, enjoy life, and save for retirement. If they can figure it out, so can we. Making service members feel as if they’ll be lost and destitute unless they do 20 years and ensure a paycheck and health care for the rest of their life is almost criminal. Telling them that they shouldn’t discuss future plans is criminal as well. Nice job shaking their hand as they walk out the door at 42-years of age with no job lined up. That WILL leave them lost and destitute.

You want to know why people get out? Because they’re not like you and they don’t like you. They want real friends, not temporary friends that the AF pays them to associate with for two years during their command tour, and then move on to a new set of “friends.” They don’t want to be judged against their peers, they want to be appreciated for the skills they bring to the fight. They’re tired of seeing good people lose their careers/upward-mobility over petty incidents while seeing people get promoted 2-below to O-5 for flying nukes across the country (you still haven’t addressed this BTW). You’re responsible for that. Your job is tell your boss that he’s full of shit so your people can execute the mission. If your boss can’t handle that, then he’s a piece of shit and needs to move out of the way.

Stop defending the corporation and your boss. Sit down, grab a drink, open your ears, and open your mind. You, the “leadership” keeps telling the “minions” that you’re tired of hearing excuses. Did you ever think that all of your buzzwords and AF corporate-speak are excuses? They are. They are very poor, lame excuses for a lack of courage and leadership.

Have you ever seen what happens when a Captain “mentors” an A1C outside of their organization? Several people chimed in to tell you that that Captain is ALWAYS called on the carpet in front of his/her Sq/CC for not playing nice. That’s YOUR fault. You’ve usurped your young officer’s authority and empowered the inexperienced and ignorant. Have you ever “mentored” a Sq/CC for doing this? Have you ever called in that A1C’s Commander? Of course not, you’re too busy writing Taliban-esqe rules for what type of memorabilia, media, and photos are appropriate for the “workplace.”

[xaarman]

To be fair, Liquid had a professional and universally agreed upon stance with regards to how the Safety process is disseminated, and was going to recommend the changes. Also, going up the chain about LTs asking about Masters completion instead of how to kill the bad guys on their first deployment, etc. So there is some good coming out of this...

[Karl Hungus]

Damn, I hit a nerve here. I wasn't really thinking about casual talk, I was talking about doing the ATP and interview prep in the pilot shop. In my squadron, the pilot office was not that big. Several computers, a couch, a fridge, some desks a big white board. The pilot shop where you checked the schedule, your currency, your v-file and your pubs. We did not allow the pilot shop to become the airline prep office. If anyone started hanging around the pilot shop and talking about their airline hiring process, it distracted from our mission and was considered unprofessional. The "no-notice ground eval" was the evaluator pilots, me included, changing the discussion from airlines to systems and procedures and reminding those that were considering separating that we had a mission to do. There is a difference between talking about it with your friends, and doing the whole process in the open while influencing and distracting those who are not participating in the airline transition. Many people here have posted how many people in their squadrons are talking about the airlines and prepping for their airline future in the squadron. They use that observation to point out how f*cked up the AF is and how out of touch I am. After a long explanation about how we should not threaten or discredit anyone who chooses to separate after fulfilling their commitment, I added that the planning shouldn't happen at work. I am not in the squadron anymore and I have no influence on what happens in the pilot shops. But I think there should be someone who keeps the pilots focused on the mission, professional development and the technical expertise required to fight wars more than future civilian employment.

Nice backpedal.

I'm guessing you woke up this morning and realized how stupid the concept of a no-notice ground eval for daring to talk about future career aspirations sounded.

To be fair, Liquid had a professional and universally agreed upon stance with regards to how the Safety process is disseminated, and was going to recommend the changes. Also, going up the chain about LTs asking about Masters completion instead of how to kill the bad guys on their first deployment, etc. So there is some good coming out of this...

Also to be fair, plenty of people at all levels have been pointing out how stupid the masters degree "requirement" is for years. It's not like Liquid will be the first to elevate it, although my hope is that he's doing just that. Management is very aware of the concern, and is either unable or unwilling to change it. Still waiting on that vector...

[Champ Kind]

Still waiting on that vector...

Oh yeah, that.

Probably not going to happen. And if it does, it will be nothing ground-breaking. You know, like that comprehensive review of the PT program he directed that didn't really change much.

I've said it before... I had such high hopes. He seemed like the real deal.

[deskjockey]

I think what Liquid is experiencing now is a great form of 360 feedback...what if every boss was required to maintain a forum like this and address the troops concerns? The boss clearly wouldn't be anonymous, but the troops could maintain anonymity and call him or her out on the BS thoughts, encourage them to have some real balls, and make them aware of issues and/or success within their organizations. The AF would probably find a way to f it up but maybe a contractor could do the job.

Also, an aside... slackline and any other new selects, be careful saying things like, "I'm going to school, I'll probably be running a squadron someday.". You'll have a better time at Maxwell or wherever you're going, and none of your bros want to hear you say it, even though they tell you how you're going to be chief of staff all the time. (plus, unless you're BPZ there is probably still a less than 50% chance...) YMMV, but that's just some humble advice from someone who was once in your shoes and probably said similar things. It is great to see dudes who engage on forums like this get picked up though, congrats.

Back to your regularly scheduled complaints and ACP questions. What's the over-under on when it'll come out this year?

edit: I spell goodd

Edited November 16, 2013 by deskjockey

[nsplayr]

So it's different if your next job is on Active Duty? When I was the OG Exec, my boss spent who knows how many hours on the phone with the Wing/CC and NAF/CC and others working his next assignment.

This. Have seen tons of dudes asking about how to get picked up for the 6th SOS, AIS, Olmstead, white jets, green door, etc. etc. Should we not be having those discussions either? And if it's ok to talk about moving on into those kinds of things, it should also be perfectly ok to talk about getting picked up by the airlines or B-school or Home Depot or whatever else is out there in the civilian world.

I agree that people shouldn't be spending an inordinate amount of time doing non-work related stuff while "on the clock" so to speak but to say it's totally inappropriate for people to discuss it at all (with the threat of a no-notice ground eval) is kind of a jack-booted response.

I say that because I find myself casually nodding in agreement at some of the things you say, only to read some of your true gems and find myself wanting to smash my screen because of your absolute disconnection with reality... much like a number of policies/talking points I see coming from upper management.

Absolutely...not even specifically for liquid but for most senior leaders. Most come off as intelligent and well meaning, I agree with a lot of what they say and are trying to do, but then there's something said that's so far out of left field that I do a double-take and end up wondering WTF. Seen way more of this than plain bad apples, most senior leaders I think suffer from being out of touch more than being ill intentioned or bad at their jobs.

...but hearing the Big Blue spin of guys are getting out because they are "bored" boggles my mind.

I think, as it's been pointed out, that the Chief's message in saying this was to Congress, not to the Airmen. It's an easy story to tell Congress that his pilots are getting "bored" because Congress shit the bed and couldn't come up with a predictable enough flow of money to keep everyone flying at a reasonable rate. Don't think CSAF would, in a message to us, start to think we're bored after a decade plus of war.

Your all-volunteer force has been getting worked over and getting kicked in the junk in the name of service to God and country for too long now. People just aren't buying it anymore. Good luck trying to make it more attractive to new accessions in the future and trying to sway those guys on the fence as those ADSCs run out.

Amen...I'm still a fan of the military as a career choice and think I could have a good career if I choose to stay, but the grass looks greener on the other side at his point and I can't say I've been exactly incentivized to stay by any of the AF's terrible personnel management decisions. I'm just not buying the idea that I need to participate in a choose your own adventure novel where I'm a character rather than the reader nor do I buy into even an ounce of guilt for punching at the end of my commitment. +1 that I'd take a pay cut to get even an small degree of control over my career path, which ironically is exactly the situation I'm expecting to get as a civilian starting next year.

In my squadron, the pilot office was not that big.

I've got 100 pilots in my squadron Bob, 100. No shit..the whole building is the "pilot shop." Your techniques of trying to contain any pot-stirring talk of airline hiring don't really work under those circumstances. Just a thought to add to what I said above; unless someone crosses the line and isn't doing his or her job they should be free to talk about whatever they want in terms of their future career options.

However, I have seen little-to-no attempt on your part to say “great point – I’m going to tell my boss about your comment.”

Totally disagree.

I brought up, in private, a very specific issue that liquid has the ability to affect and he told me that he'd look into it and try to make things better. Exactly what I'd expect from a good leader and I hope he's able to make a positive difference.

Don't knock someone specifically unless you've taken a problem to them personally and they've refused to act or even acknowledge the issue. I get that most of us here are fairly jaded with our leaders' ability to hear the concerns of the common man and act but generalizing about one person who actually had the balls to spend time mixing it up with us here seems like the shoe doesn't fit.

Edited November 16, 2013 by nsplayr

[Beaver]

Holy shit I would like to see a captain swing by the Reserve flight and try to give a ground eval for bullshitting or airline talk.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk HD

[hindsight2020]

Holy shit I would like to see a captain swing by the Reserve flight and try to give a ground eval for bullshitting or airline talk.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk HD

I know. It would be epic. "So Captain, stand up and tell us about yourself...." LOL

[Vetter]

Liquid probably thought Reserve-speak was only slightly less blasphemous than Airline-speak.

[Rusty Pipes]

I agree that people shouldn't be spending an inordinate amount of time doing non-work related stuff while "on the clock" so to speak but to say it's totally inappropriate for people to discuss it at all (with the threat of a no-notice ground eval) is kind of a jack-booted response.

Not directed at you nsplayr... Just want to point out a little bit of the obvious here, but if I recall... the ATP questions that I studied were actually about being A FUCKING PILOT!!!!! So if I am reading Liquid right, as a pilot it is completely appropriate to sit around the pilot office on the clock and plan the Christmas Party, set up the Habitat For Humanity project, study for my online MBA, write my own quarterly awards package, plan the Wing Picnic, work the OG Change of Command and create PowerPoint slides for the Daedalians Golf tournament... but quizzing some of your fellow pilots on questions that actually have something to do with being an actual pilot should be met with retribution? And you wonder why every pilot coming up on their ADSC has Sheppard Air saved to their favorites on every computer they use in the Squadron??? You seem to infer that you have the Chief's ear... (pssst) tell him we aren't bored with anything other than queep and senior managers who just don't get it!

Edited November 19, 2013 by Rusty Pipes

[Homestar]

https://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20131122/BENEFITS/311220011/More-pilots-than-thought-collecting-225-000-bonuses

In fiscal 2013, 212 fighter pilots were offered the Aviator Retention Pay bonus of up to $225,000 for a nine-year commitment, and 132 — 62 percent — took the bonus. That’s 5 percent higher than the average number of bonuses approved for fighter pilots over the past five years, Air Force spokeswoman Jennifer Cassidy said.

Also, 709 non-fighter pilots were eligible for the standard Aviator Retention Pay of up to $125,000 over five years,which 483 pilots accepted. That take rate of 68 percent matches the five-year average.

[Champ Kind]

See? Everything's fine, folks.

[sky_king]

Wait, your RAP is really 8 sorties per month? Ours is 2.

Ours is even better. If you're experienced, it's one. There are times I'm worried I won't make that.

[matmacwc]

Ours is even better. If you're experienced, it's one. There are times I'm worried I won't make that.

Dafuq?

[sky_king]

Dafuq?

Either 1 in the last 30, or 3 in the last 90 for look back currency. I've gone non-current twice since January because of it.

Edited November 23, 2013 by sky_king

[NotADude]

I got an e-mail the other day about this. The attachment is pretty long and in-depth, so I didn't glean too much from it (although I know enough about statistics to know that you can get them to back up almost any hypothesis), but the originator of the e-mail had this to say:

"It seems like AFPC doesn't always show us their manning cards, but fortune favors the bold. Attached is an analysis that someone took some time compiling. It definitely puts to rest some of the WOMs we've been hearing, so take a look at your leisure. Here's a Cliff Notes version if you want a quick snapshot:

The overall Aviator Retention Pay (ARP) so far is 68%; however, if you dig through the tables, Fighter take rate last year was 59% and this year is 62%. Now, if you look at the number of eligible fighter pilots, it is 211 with 131 takers. I don't think this number includes those who are getting out (eligible until they drop their paperwork for Palace Chase, 7-day opt or 3-day Deployment opt). Taking that into account would drop that percentage to a more realistic number.

Overall fighter pilot loss for FY13 (up to 30 Sept 13) is 59%. Out of 461 eligible, 276 got out. Now, take the original 131 takers of the bonus and divide that by 461 (most eligible to get out also are eligible to take the bonus assuming they are on a 10 yr pilot training commitment). The more accurate bonus take rate is about 28%.

Since 2011 our continuation rate is dropping as well as our average active rated service. Basically, 60% are getting out, only 28% are taking the bonus and our overall continuation rate is dropping. So, this paper validates that 11F manning will continue to be a problem for AFPC and that the increased bonus is not meeting their intent. Remember, AFPC wanted a 65% take rate for the bonus, and is not achieving near that number of fighter pilots.

Something will have to give and something has to change. What that is, who knows...your guess is as good as mine. Can we really sustain our current fighter force with 60% getting out??

Please share this with the bros as you see fit. I hope my queepery gives ya'll some SA on what our career field is facing."

I'll post the actual document once I figure out how. the internet is hard.

[ThreeHoler]

If you want the numbers on who got out, go read the FY13 rated retention report. It was slightly higher than FY12.

[Jaded]

I think he's saying that the report doesn't tell the whole story. Specifically, there may have been many more than 276 actually eligible.

[BFM this]

Eligibility is also a murky definition. Next year, my year group will be "eligible", but because I am prior service, I will not be eligible, in a practical sense. So I doubt that I would therefore be counted among the "eligibles".

[Hacker]

When I was a Captain and encountered pilots chatting about their airline prep in the pilot office, I would give them a no-notice ground eval to check their systems knowledge and combat readiness.

I just wanted to quote this gem for future generations of AF officers to behold.

[Bender]

You know, years later, it's kind of funny to look back at the connection between the shitty OPR writing advice thread and the eventual continuation after being passed over thread.

I wonder if we can do it again...you know, for future generations of AF officers to behold.

There is a lot of good stuff here on this website, it's just going to take a hell of a lot of beer to sift through the all the shit (although all my posts seems to have been deleted, so that should help significantly).

As for "eligible", it goes completely without saying, what they mean is "*eligible". It meant what they wanted it to mean when they released the announcement, and it means what they want it to mean now that they're reporting on it. They don't report to you! How dare you question the accuracy of these precise computations, or the conclusions drawn from it. *shakes head* How dare you...

I believe it's what my current boss refers to as the Army Planning Model (or something like that), where I just make the numbers support what he wants to do. Quite standard really...

Bendy

[HeloDude]

Good to see you posting again Bendy!

[Champ Kind]

I got an e-mail the other day about this. The attachment is pretty long and in-depth, so I didn't glean too much from it (although I know enough about statistics to know that you can get them to back up almost any hypothesis), but the originator of the e-mail had this to say:

--Words--

I'll post the actual document once I figure out how. the internet is hard.

Just out of curiosity, who was your source? Someone at AFPC (as in, a functional?) or is this bro-speak?

[stract]

I got an e-mail the other day about this. The attachment is pretty long and in-depth, so I didn't glean too much from it (although I know enough about statistics to know that you can get them to back up almost any hypothesis), but the originator of the e-mail had this to say:

"It seems like AFPC doesn't always show us their manning cards, but fortune favors the bold. Attached is an analysis that someone took some time compiling. It definitely puts to rest some of the WOMs we've been hearing, so take a look at your leisure. Here's a Cliff Notes version if you want a quick snapshot:

The overall Aviator Retention Pay (ARP) so far is 68%; however, if you dig through the tables, Fighter take rate last year was 59% and this year is 62%. Now, if you look at the number of eligible fighter pilots, it is 211 with 131 takers. I don't think this number includes those who are getting out (eligible until they drop their paperwork for Palace Chase, 7-day opt or 3-day Deployment opt). Taking that into account would drop that percentage to a more realistic number.

Overall fighter pilot loss for FY13 (up to 30 Sept 13) is 59%. Out of 461 eligible, 276 got out. Now, take the original 131 takers of the bonus and divide that by 461 (most eligible to get out also are eligible to take the bonus assuming they are on a 10 yr pilot training commitment). The more accurate bonus take rate is about 28%.

Since 2011 our continuation rate is dropping as well as our average active rated service. Basically, 60% are getting out, only 28% are taking the bonus and our overall continuation rate is dropping. So, this paper validates that 11F manning will continue to be a problem for AFPC and that the increased bonus is not meeting their intent. Remember, AFPC wanted a 65% take rate for the bonus, and is not achieving near that number of fighter pilots.

Something will have to give and something has to change. What that is, who knows...your guess is as good as mine. Can we really sustain our current fighter force with 60% getting out??

Please share this with the bros as you see fit. I hope my queepery gives ya'll some SA on what our career field is facing."

I'll post the actual document once I figure out how. the internet is hard.

I'm sorry, this is a little flawed, as not all 461 dudes were necessarily eligible for the bonus. Your bro would need to go look and see how many of the 461 met the eligibility requirements. As mentioned, prior E, prior service, other factors are in play here. Once your bro knows the true number of the 461 who met eligibility requirements, only then will we know what the true % takers was.