Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[sputnik]

8 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:

I know several AFSOC mission hackers who then got passed over for O-5. Maybe AFSOC believes in primary job duties, but the promotion boards don't. I would not advise anyone to join AD until they've exhausted their options with the Reserves and Guard.

Geting passed over sucks, but I flew every assignment.  I asked myself if I'd rather retire an O5 who spent years on staff, or an O4 who didn't.   Surprisingly easy question to answer.

[Trogdor]

2 hours ago, sputnik said:

Geting passed over sucks, but I flew every assignment.  I asked myself if I'd rather retire an O5 who spent years on staff, or an O4 who didn't.   Surprisingly easy question to answer.

I think this hits a huge question on every pilots mind when deciding whether to stay or leave, which I think a good percentage of pilots that wish to stay flying and not chase the proverbial command or promotion.  On top of all the other queep that everyone complains about, it is whether or not the Air Force is going to decide to give you the boot at 15 years.  All the VSP and RIF's done in recent years are fresh in everyone's mind.  If I make conscious decisions to stay in the jet, thus increasing my chances of getting passed over to O-5.  Am I going to get the boot as an O-4 at 15 years or get non-vol'd into the next 365 dropped to our wing?  Even after I have already deployed 13 times in the last 10 years, not to include all said TDY's on top of that. 

I think there is a huge percentage of pilots who like the idea of choosing this exact career path (me included). However, the Air Force has institutionally established an environment that makes the idea of flying on the outside attractive, regardless of money.  Make more money and have more control over your life, that's also not dependent on the pendulum swings of Congress or the current CSAF, easy decision for some.

Edited May 23, 2016 by Trogdor

[Guest]

I think this hits a huge question on every pilots mind when deciding whether to stay or leave, which I think a good percentage of pilots that wish to stay flying and not chase the proverbial command or promotion.  On top of all the other queep that everyone complains about, it is whether or not the Air Force is going to decide to give you the boot at 15 years.  All the VSP and RIF's done in recent years are fresh in everyone's mind.  If I make conscious decisions to stay in the jet, thus increasing my chances of getting passed over to O-5.  Am I going to get the boot as an O-4 at 15 years or get non-vol'd into the next 365 dropped to our wing?  Even after I have already deployed 13 times in the last 10 years, not to include all said TDY's on top of that. 

I think there is a huge percentage of pilots who like the idea of choosing this exact career path (me included). However, the Air Force has institutionally established an environment that makes the idea of flying on the outside attractive, regardless of money.  Make more money and have more control over your life, that's also not dependent on the pendulum swings of Congress or the current CSAF, easy decision for some.

I'd rather hold out and make O-5 w/o the bonus and have some control over my life than take the bonus and roll the dice only to end up an O-4 committed to getting screwed w/o lube.

[Abchawg]

On May 21, 2016 at 9:09 AM, ThreeHoler said:

Requires congressional approval. AF is lobbying for it.

Looks like the house is lobbying for $60k a year cap on the bonus along with raising incentive pay to up to $1k a year. That could be decision making money there. Screenshot of the House draft NDAA for FY17 for your arguing pleasure.

[sputnik]

10 hours ago, Trogdor said:

.... it is whether or not the Air Force is going to decide to give you the boot at 15 years....

Yeah, my response was a little bogus.  The year after me is when they booted all those dudes with effectively zero warning.  That incident had to change the decision making math for a lot of guys.

[ViperStud]

10 hours ago, Abchawg said:

Looks like the house is lobbying for $60k a year cap on the bonus along with raising incentive pay to up to $1k a year. That could be decision making money there. Screenshot of the House draft NDAA for FY17 for your arguing pleasure.

It's a step in the right direction, but actually falls a little short of the rumors our CCs heard at NGB recently.  Rumint: tiered bonus of X/yr for pilots, Y/yr for IPs and Z/yr for patches, with amounts approaching $100k at the top end.  The attached warning was that it was "several years" down the road.  Technician rumint: ~30% bonuses (comprised of 3 components) with quicker implementation because 2/3 of the mechanisms are already in place.

I still think the AD piece won't make the numbers right without changes directly affecting QOL - bring back CSS, hire full-time/full-function schedulers, eliminate BS staff & deployed billets, etc.  Even at $60k/yr, the airlines still make more financial sense.  Also, there is a lot more than money driving people to the airlines.  That all being said, at least big blue is listening...well actually - reacting.  "Listening" would mean a lot of this would have been done 4 years ago.  Yep, they're reacting.

Heed the warning though, young ones - everything points to the fact that HAF is doing this begrudgingly and way too late.  If our resident staff weenie Chang really does pass an accurate picture of what his bosses think, numbers on Excel files are far more important than substantive QOL improvements.  In the meantime, expect a lot more 1.X% raises and deployments.

[ThreeHoler]

11 hours ago, Abchawg said:

Looks like the house is lobbying for $60k a year cap on the bonus along with raising incentive pay to up to $1k a year. That could be decision making money there. Screenshot of the House draft NDAA for FY17 for your arguing pleasure.

That matches the RUMINT from A3. "Want it at $35K/yr now, would like it at $60K/yr, and want to make the decision to stay or leave to be 'difficult.'" They don't want to retain everyone, but around 65%. I would not listen to Chang at all, but that is just me.

[Sprkt69]

So they would rather QOL suffer instead of hiring people to do the qweep, sounds about right

[Lord Ratner]

Think of how many permanent schedulers, planners, training managers, equipment custodians, building custodians, deployment managers, records managers, voting reps, security managers, resource advisors, purchase card holders, and DTS reviewers we could hire for 60k per year...

[Bode]

Think of how many permanent schedulers, planners, training managers, equipment custodians, building custodians, deployment managers, records managers, voting reps, security managers, resource advisors, purchase card holders, and DTS reviewers we could hire for 60k per year...

My thoughts exactly. If only one person per unit takes the bonus that's one person per year each unit can hire.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chuckschwartz]

Can you imagine if, instead of doing this for pilots, they just hired 6-9 full time civilians per squadron to do those shitty jobs? I'd be interested to see if they expect 6-9 pilots per squadron to accept, but something tells me that's probably less than 5.

[Bode]

I had a guy I worked with the that analyzed how many pilots you needed if we didn't have additionally duties. If I remember correct we could have cut 1/5 of the unit.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gazmo]

It's a step in the right direction, but actually falls a little short of the rumors our CCs heard at NGB recently.  Rumint: tiered bonus of X/yr for pilots, Y/yr for IPs and Z/yr for patches, with amounts approaching $100k at the top end.  The attached warning was that it was "several years" down the road.  Technician rumint: ~30% bonuses (comprised of 3 components) with quicker implementation because 2/3 of the mechanisms are already in place.

I still think the AD piece won't make the numbers right without changes directly affecting QOL - bring back CSS, hire full-time/full-function schedulers, eliminate BS staff & deployed billets, etc.  Even at $60k/yr, the airlines still make more financial sense.  Also, there is a lot more than money driving people to the airlines.  That all being said, at least big blue is listening...well actually - reacting.  "Listening" would mean a lot of this would have been done 4 years ago.  Yep, they're reacting.

Heed the warning though, young ones - everything points to the fact that HAF is doing this begrudgingly and way too late.  If our resident staff weenie Chang really does pass an accurate picture of what his bosses think, numbers on Excel files are far more important than substantive QOL improvements.  In the meantime, expect a lot more 1.X% raises and deployments.

"Several years"... ha! There won't be anyone left except Lt's and Capt's in several years.

As far as ART bonuses go, some units are offering them now, but not many pilots are taking them. One big issue is that the bonus money needs to come out of the units' civ pay pot, which means less on-the-spot bonuses and temp-ART positions for the entire unit. We don't get extra money from NGB for bonuses.

It all comes down to this: It ain't all about the money. You can go to one of the "Big 3" legacy carriers or even SWA and make $140,000 a year by your 4th or 5th year. The thing to realize is that the airlines value your time so greatly that they're willing to pay you $120+ an hour for your time. What does a GS-13 make per hour? $50, but you work 200 hours per month instead of 75. Or you can sit short call reserve an hour from the airport and possibly get the whole month off. Jesus H, I don't think I'd know what to do with myself with a month off while getting paid and what's that you say? When I do work, I only have to worry about flying an airplane for a few days with no queep or pushing a pencil? Sold... it's not about money. It's about QOL/flexibility and while noone should have joined the military for supurb QOL/flexibility, it gets old getting shit on all the time and sooner or later, people are going to walk.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[TnkrToad]

On May 24, 2016 at 9:30 AM, ViperStud said:

Heed the warning though, young ones - everything points to the fact that HAF is doing this begrudgingly and way too late.  If our resident staff weenie Chang really does pass an accurate picture of what his bosses think, numbers on Excel files are far more important than substantive QOL improvements.  In the meantime, expect a lot more 1.X% raises and deployments.

To back up your point, and others on this forum, the biggest problem is that we are well past decision speed with regard to retaining good folks who are leading us now, and will be into the future. I've seen complaints on this forum--can't remember if in this thread or another one--about the current crop of O-6s. There's a reason for that; it's called rated force management, of which the ACP is just a part. Force management, if done right, not only ensures an adequate supply of line flyers and O-4/O-5 staffers, but also an adequately-large pool of potential senior leaders. 

- Rant on - 

The '92-'97 (ish) year groups were undermanned for pilots from the beginning of their flying careers (we had this post-Cold War drawdown, so we just didn't need that much new blood). Folks like GC, who like to stare at Red Line/Blue Line charts that show if particular year groups/AFSCs are over- or undermanned relative to AF requirements, were well aware of this dynamic two decades ago, and knew--shockingly--that undermanning within those year groups could only get worse. Quixotically, right around the time when most of the folks from those year groups started coming up on the ends of their SUPT commitments, they got rid of the 20 and 25 years of aviation service options (which had been offered in prior years) starting in FY '05. Not only that, but in later years rated force managers like GC cut into manning further by allowing/encouraging/forcing a substantial number of folks from those year groups to separate through VSP/early retirements/forcing out those twice passed over/etc. 

Guess what? Those '92-'97 year groups are the ones who met O-6 boards over the past few years, or--in the case of '96 and '97--will meet their primary O-6 boards in the next couple years. So:

- The last several groups' worth of 11x O-6s were selected from a small pool of 11x O-5s--not a good way to ensure quality

- Owing to airline hiring/the inability for the Air Force to compete monetarily/in terms of QoL/ineffective effort by A1 to lead-turn the problem, the next several year groups of folks who hit the O-6 board will be those few who bothered to stay in, when their peers (who only had 5-year commitments and have a golden opportunity to get on with the airlines when the hiring's good) retire in droves

It's going to be awfully difficult, even if/when Big Blue finally gets the authority to offer bigger bonuses and/or funds civilians to cover queen so flyers can do their jobs, when our senior leaders are selected more by virtue of remaining on active duty and being able to fog a mirror than quality/experience/education/training. By the time increased flying pay/higher bonuses are put into effect and squadron queep-doers are hired, the long-term damage will be done. 

By the way, folks like GC could have known all this by just looking at their spreadsheets. Complaints from the field simply amplify what they already should have known. 

Maybe every single one of those from the early-to-mid 90s year groups who bother to stay in and managed/manage to get promoted to O-6 and above will be super-awesome folks, who are exactly what the service needs to lead us into the future, while of course also meeting all the necessary diversity targets. My experience indicates we don't have the depth and breadth of talent we need in the aforementioned year groups, but I could be wrong. I sure hope so, considering some of those who were selected for O-6 by virtue of being the best of those who are left will stay on active duty for another 10-15 years.

- Rant off - 

TT

[Jaded]

Weren't there some year groups with like less than 10 people eligible for promotion in certain career fields? 

[Tonka]

On 5/24/2016 at 7:07 AM, ThreeHoler said:

That matches the RUMINT from A3. "Want it at $35K/yr now, would like it at $60K/yr, and want to make the decision to stay or leave to be 'difficult.'" They don't want to retain everyone, but around 65%. I would not listen to Chang at all, but that is just me.

Win!  Does anyone else see the brilliance in the way this came together?

I can imagine a couple of aviators were sitting at a bar and someone made a bet... "I bet I can I get the bonus to go up... and I bet I can more than double it." That same pilot realized that the only way he could get the bonus to go up was to somehow make pilots want to leave the best job in the world.  So he created CBTs.  He realized he barely made a nick in the manning numbers, so he decided to turn to "do less with more".  Then he decided to make them remotely control their planes... and they still stayed.  He then doubled-down and put the prospect of Hillary running the country, and the pilots finally left and there was no choice but to raise the bonus...  5 bucks is 5 bucks, well done good sir, well done.

As soon as the bonus is raised he has a plan to rescind all the troubles he inputted... life will be good again.

[RTB]

From this morning's Air Force Magazine Daily Report:

Air Force Seeks Pilot Bonus Bump —WILL SKOWRONSKI

To stave off a fighter pilot exodus and reduce the growing pilot shortage, Air Force planners are considering a myriad of approaches. But they believe increasing the retention bonus could have the most immediate impact. Notably, about 800 pilots will be eligible to sign new commitments in exchange for a bonus in Fiscal 2017, planners told Air Force Magazine. In March, Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh Welsh told members of Congress the service would be seeking legislation to increase the retention bonus from the $25,000 a year that has been in place since 1999 to $35,000 a year. But even that might not be enough. Last year, the airlines hired 3,500 pilots and are expected to hire at the same rate, if not higher, for the next 10 years. Air Force studies indicate a $48,500 bonus will be needed to maintain the pilot inventory when the airlines hire just 3,200 pilots a year. Between $54,750 and $61,500 would be required if the airlines hire between 3,500 and 3,800 pilots a year, according to the Air Force.  It costs an average of $10 million to train a fighter pilot, so planners see the bonuses—even when they amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars for extended commitments—as worthy investments. "We retain experience using the bonus," Lt. Col. Robert Butkovich, chief of rated force policy, said. "If we lose that experience, it's going to continually erode the Air Force's position." Offering the right amount, Butkovich said, could return the bonus take rate to the ideal 65 percent within two to three years.

[pawnman]

On 5/20/2016 at 10:54 PM, General Chang said:

Ok, a couple of you appear upset, but for the young guys on this forum, I'll state a similar message to my post on the SOS/ACSC board, then pull up my tent stakes on this issue.  Our Air Force is honorable, lethal, and excellent.  It is an organization that many in society would kill to be a part of.  Some members of this forum have thrown that opportunity down the tubes during an emotional event.  If you decide to leave, make sure you do it for the right personal reasons.  The future opportunities in our AF will be incredible.  You will be personally, monetarily, and professionally satisfied and rewarded.  Get excited and be a part of it.  It's your future.

Well, you'll be satisfied and rewarded for a little while.  Obviously not long-term, or we wouldn't have this pilot retention problem...

[pawnman]

On 5/20/2016 at 11:19 AM, General Chang said:

Absolutely join...don't let these sour grapes force you into any kind of hasty decision.  You will regret that forever.

Once in, work your tail off and be the best in your unit.  Your leadership will fall over themselves to give you the choice assignments you want, all the way to Colonel.  If you don't "have excellence," yes, you could find yourself like some on this forum, fulfilling needs of the Air Force that don't align with your plans.  However, uphold the core values, and you won't need to worry about that. 

Be the best and you will rise to the top.

Because GC really, really needs you to finish UPT and make the excel sheet look a little better for rated manning.

[pawnman]

On 5/24/2016 at 9:07 AM, ThreeHoler said:

That matches the RUMINT from A3. "Want it at $35K/yr now, would like it at $60K/yr, and want to make the decision to stay or leave to be 'difficult.'" They don't want to retain everyone, but around 65%. I would not listen to Chang at all, but that is just me.

So, about that 12x bonus...

[schokie]

2 hours ago, pawnman said:

So, about that 12x bonus...

Shut up nav.

 

Just kidding. the 12F manning problem is even worse than the 11F since we have a shorter ADSC. But since there are fewer of us it's not as big of a concern to the staffers. 

 

There is a 12F bonus, but not for my year group. But I think I'm passed the point where the AF is going to offer me additional money to stay in.

 

[08Dawg]

3 hours ago, schokie said:

Shut up nav.

 

Just kidding. the 12F manning problem is even worse than the 11F since we have a shorter ADSC. But since there are fewer of us it's not as big of a concern to the staffers. 

 

There is a 12F bonus, but not for my year group. But I think I'm passed the point where the AF is going to offer me additional money to stay in.

 

The 12B outlook ain't lookin' that good either...

[Champ Kind]

So with rumors of the FY17 rates going up any talk of the maximum time in service increasing?

[scoobs]

On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Gazmo said:

"Several years"... ha! There won't be anyone left except Lt's and Capt's in several years.

As far as ART bonuses go, some units are offering them now, but not many pilots are taking them. One big issue is that the bonus money needs to come out of the units' civ pay pot, which means less on-the-spot bonuses and temp-ART positions for the entire unit. We don't get extra money from NGB for bonuses.

It all comes down to this: It ain't all about the money. You can go to one of the "Big 3" legacy carriers or even SWA and make $140,000 a year by your 4th or 5th year. The thing to realize is that the airlines value your time so greatly that they're willing to pay you $120+ an hour for your time. What does a GS-13 make per hour? $50, but you work 200 hours per month instead of 75. Or you can sit short call reserve an hour from the airport and possibly get the whole month off. Jesus H, I don't think I'd know what to do with myself with a month off while getting paid and what's that you say? When I do work, I only have to worry about flying an airplane for a few days with no queep or pushing a pencil? Sold... it's not about money. It's about QOL/flexibility and while noone should have joined the military for supurb QOL/flexibility, it gets old getting shit on all the time and sooner or later, people are going to walk.

Sent from my SM-G900V using 

 

You're working a lot more than 75 hours at an airline. You might be credited for 75 but you're still working 10 to 12 hours a day 15 days a month. But you're working less and getting paid more. 

[Gazmo]

"Work" has many different meanings in this thread...

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk