Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[BashiChuni]

11 hours ago, Ram said:

The military retention problem will end as soon as our entire defense establishment shows senior CGOs and junior FGOs that it cares about ONE THING ONLY:

WINNING.

 

I'm talking everything from MWS selection, development, fielding, and utilization.  All the personnel woes.  Training for combat in a way that matters, and recognizing those who do well.  Executing our mission in ways which is meaningful, in conflicts chosen smartly / fought smartly / with an end state actually in mind (and attainable).

 

MAKE US WIN AGAIN AND WE WILL WORK FOR FREE.  I WANT TO PLAY FOR A WINNING TEAM, but more importantly, I WANT TO PLAY FOR A TEAM THAT CARES ABOUT WINNING.

 

Seriously, it's that simple.

fck yes

[Sprkt69]

8 hours ago, No2bonus said:

You will need to change out leadership in order to make this happen. I have noticed some of our leaders at the top are human and act like politicians. Ultimately, they do what's best for themselves in the long run. 

There was no way to win in Afghanistan. You can't blow up every Taliban member. Their sons and daughters witness their deaths which solidifies a younger generation of Taliban. 

I remember talking to a JTAC via chat while orbiting. He told me they gave food, candy, and ice cream to a bunch of kids in Afghanistan. After the goods ran out, the kids started to flick the troops off and tell them they hate Americans and love the Taliban. In my opinion, you cannot conquer an uneducated society, especially when you are viewed as an occupying force. Your ultimate demise is solidified in stone going against a society who is uneducated, born to fight, and will never surrender.

Been saying that for years

[tac airlifter]

Totally agree RAM.  I want to be part of a winning organization and if the USAF was one, we would not have a retention problem.  But I also understand we've been tasked with "unwinnable" missions.  How to reconcile these seemingly incompatible factors?

First, a winning organization means one built, soup to nuts, with winning wars as a clear and obvious function.  That means rewarding people who are good at the mission, not assuming we're all equal and using non mission factors (party planning, masters, etc.) as delineators.  In an ops squadron, my entire day should be focused on refining my lethality, and base agencies should be rated on their ability to support us.  For example.... If a short notice deployment pops up and I need a guy to get CATM, CATM should jump through their ass to make it happen and be happy they found a way to enable our mission.  That's what a winning organization looks like.  One that is focused on successful prosecution of combat, not all the distractions we talk about.

Second, if we're given impossible tasks whose pursuit hurt our readiness, I expect LEADERSHIP from the senior ranks to say so.  Don't say morale is pretty darn good, say morale is terrible because our political masters have sent us on fools errands without an end state.  Have some balls.  Risk your career to speak the truth.  If the ROE won't let us win, say that too.

That is what a winning organization looks like.  It's structurally built to incentivize combat success, and it's led by people who care about maintaining that organizational focus.  I don't need a bonus, and I'd give up the one I have to work in a winning organization.

[Guest No2bonus]

1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:

That is what a winning organization looks like.  It's structurally built to incentivize combat success, and it's led by people who care about maintaining that organizational focus.  I don't need a bonus, and I'd give up the one I have to work in a winning organization.

Did someone spike your kool aid with Flint, Michigan drinking water? 

I think the bonus serves as a diversion tactic for your wife and kids who have to suffer through your deployments, TDYs, and a future 365. Especially when you have to miss your kids high school playoffs run.  I don't think the wife would condone giving one red cent of the bonus back for a winning mindset or culture in the AF. Don't know if you played sports, but sometimes you have to lose in order to figure out how to win. With lives on the line you always want to win, but unfortunately that's not how this world works. 

If I did take the bonus, I wouldn't give a dime back to make the AF fall under the definition of winning you described. You can pull a Kevin Durant and run over to a winning team at Delta, United, Fed Ex, or UPS. Will the AF care if you 7 day opt like a free agent?  No, because you are just a DOD ID number to the AF. There was a mindset the AF could easily replace you as smoke is being blown up politician rear ends about our morale, mission readiness, and end strength.

I did not take the bonus because I am going to change the AF culture by saying no thank you. Essentially, dropping the mic and walking away like Tony Romo just did serves as a good example. (I'm not a Cowgirls fan by the way.) You leave people, aka the AF wanting more when you just walk away. I think that's the message our community is sending to leaders at the pentagon and politicians in congress when we don't take the bonus and leave for the airlines. The value of a pilot increases the more aviators say no to the bonus. Essentially, you force the AF hand and they will actually have to show up to the bargaining table.

 

Edited April 6, 2017 by No2bonus

[tac airlifter]

43 minutes ago, No2bonus said:

Did someone spike your kool aid with Flint, Michigan drinking water? 

I think the bonus serves as a diversion tactic for your wife and kids who have to suffer through your deployments..... 

If I did take the bonus, I wouldn't give a dime back......

I did not take the bonus....

 

So you didn't take the bonus but have an opinion on my rationale for taking the bonus?  And you think my opinion is crazy?

Thanks for your service.

[Guest No2bonus]

14 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

So you didn't take the bonus but have an opinion on my rationale for taking the bonus?  And you think my opinion is crazy?

Thanks for your service.

I'm just questioning you returning bonus money in exchange for "winning." Once the money hits your account, I highly doubt you will exchange the money for "winning." I think your actions wouldn't be the norm. I am not speaking for everyone. Nor am I saying you shouldn't have taken the bonus.

Edited April 6, 2017 by No2bonus

[tac airlifter]

1 minute ago, No2bonus said:

I'm just questioning you returning bonus money in exchange for "winning." Once the money hits your account, I highly doubt you will exchange the money for "winning." I think your actions wouldn't be the norm. I am not speaking for everyone. 

I think you missed the point bro.  If the AF worked, there wouldn't be a need for a bonus.  It doesn't, so there is.  Your hypothetical "we've won so let's return the money" scenario is not what I intended by that comment.

[Guest No2bonus]

Just now, tac airlifter said:

I think you missed the point bro.  If the AF worked, there wouldn't be a need for a bonus.  It doesn't, so there is.  Your hypothetical "we've won so let's return the money" scenario is not what I intended by that comment. 

A bonus is necessary. Some enlisted career fields receive a reenlistment bonus too. If the AF functioned as intended and stopped offering a bonus across the board, we would hemorrhage enlisted and officers. You don't think money or a bonus matters? I ask E's if they are interested in becoming aviators. All the E's I spoke with said they would only fly RPAs and that's only if they receive equal pay to an officer.

I can't speak for everyone, but take away the bonus for pilots and watch how many leave at the end of their commitment.

[BashiChuni]

1 hour ago, No2bonus said:

A bonus is necessary. Some enlisted career fields receive a reenlistment bonus too. If the AF functioned as intended and stopped offering a bonus across the board, we would hemorrhage enlisted and officers. You don't think money or a bonus matters? I ask E's if they are interested in becoming aviators. All the E's I spoke with said they would only fly RPAs and that's only if they receive equal pay to an officer.

I can't speak for everyone, but take away the bonus for pilots and watch how many leave at the end of their commitment.

You're missing the point

[tac airlifter]

20 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

You're missing the point

 

[Karl Hungus]

2 hours ago, No2bonus said:

I can't speak for everyone, but take away the bonus for pilots and watch how many leave at the end of their commitment.

Taking away the bonus for pilots wouldn't change a thing.  The only people who take the bonus in its current form are those who were going to stay in anyway.

[ViperStud]

59 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

You're missing the point

No, He's not. I'm mostly in Karl's camp but the bonus does keep a few people in: fence-sitters and path of least resistance types that might have had an ok opportunity on the outside. More importantly it keeps them (and the ones that would have stayed past initial commitment regardless) predictable for a period of time. Many would 7-day opt a shit deal without a bonus; the bonus eliminates that option by tagging them with an ADSC. 

 

I get it; it's cool to talk about how if everything were great in the AF no one would care about the bonus, but that's hyperbole. Our pay/rank system is antiquated. I'm worth more to the AF as an 11F than a similar-aged SkyCop, LRS officer or personellist. So are doctors, lawyers and other career fields that are incentivized. Once the wide-eyed 20-something ideals of slaughtering ISIS and fighting for your country grow old and you've got a family to love and provide for, financial stability and QOL start to trump kicking ass for most. Sure, some (a few) would be overcome with pride to work for our organization if it were really top-notch and they'd do it for pennies on the dollar. Most would not. 

[Day Man]

3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Thanks for your service.

I love how this is code for "fuck you" around here.  

[tac airlifter]

2 minutes ago, Day Man said:

I love how this is code for "fuck you" around here.  

Not meant that way at all bro.  Just a bit of common ground between folks on this forum who disagree.

[Snooter]

5 hours ago, Day Man said:

I love how this is code for " you" around here.  

I gotta admit every time I see that in mass blast email I throw up in my mouth a little...

[Guest No2bonus]

6 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Not meant that way at all bro.  Just a bit of common ground between folks on this forum who disagree.

I agree. We were having a sound debate and didn't need to resort to low blows because the topic is not that serious. Just bros agreeing to disagree. Only if our politicians could be on our level. 

Break Break

Anyone notice how the younger generation of officers and enlisted say whats on their mind, no matter the rank of the individual they are having a conversation with? Makes me chuckle a bit and shake my head. Not trying to derail the topic.

Edited April 6, 2017 by No2bonus

[Kenny Powers]

Anyone notice how the younger generation of officers and enlisted say whats on their mind, no matter the rank of the individual they are having a conversation with? Makes me chuckle a bit and shake my head. Not trying to derail the topic.

Isn't that something everyone is wishing their leadership would be doing?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[the g-man]

Isn't that something everyone is wishing their leadership would be doing?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Yeah let's not dance around the topic or be scared to say the truth


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[guineapigfury]

There's no rank on this forum, at least not any I care about since I promoted myself to Mister.  Frankness is a virtue.

[SurelySerious]

That would be like a hospital firing neurosurgeons and cardiologists to make room for more accountants and HR people because they had more volunteer hours and face time with the administration.

[Duck]

As long as they don't "fix the glitch" before I get out...


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Guest No2bonus]

On 4/6/2017 at 7:31 PM, Kenny Powers said:

 

Isn't that something everyone is wishing their leadership would be doing?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 

 

From your perspective you want leadership to be forthright when asked, which is definitely true. I'm talking about those from the Snapchat, Twitter, and YouTube culture who always say what's on their minds 100% unfiltered. Go to YouTube and read the comment sections if you want to see what type of culture I'm talking about. Multiply those types of personalities times 4 in a tactics shop or while trying to instruct on a sortie.

Some people need to really think about what they say before opening their mouth. If people speak their mind 100% of the time and without filters is going to cause issues following orders and maintaining good discipline. Not to mention the Twitter and Snapchat culture haven't learned how to speak with tact and remove emotional aspects from their verbal communication skills. Why? Because the younger generation has grown accustom to texting friends sitting at the same table as them. I think we can all agree verbal and written communication is somewhat important.

I'm coming from the days when AF leaders could curse you the hell out and threaten you. 

 

Edited April 8, 2017 by No2bonus

[uhhello]

58 minutes ago, No2bonus said:

From your perspective you want leadership to be forthright when asked, which is definitely true. I'm talking about those from the Snapchat, Twitter, and YouTube culture who always say what's on their minds 100% unfiltered. Go to YouTube and read the comment sections if you want to see what type of culture I'm talking about. Multiply those types of personalities times 4 in a tactics shop or while trying to instruct on a sortie.

Some people need to really think about what they say before opening their mouth. If people speak their mind 100% of the time and without filters is going to cause issues following orders and maintaining good discipline. Not to mention the Twitter and Snapchat culture haven't learned how to speak with tact and remove emotional aspects from their verbal communication skills. Why? Because the younger generation has grown accustom to texting friends sitting at the same table as them. I think we can all agree verbal and written communication is somewhat important.

I'm coming from the days when AF leaders could curse you the hell out and threaten you. 

 

Thank you for your perspective and service.  

[ViperMan]

7 hours ago, No2bonus said:

From your perspective you want leadership to be forthright when asked, which is definitely true. I'm talking about those from the Snapchat, Twitter, and YouTube culture who always say what's on their minds 100% unfiltered. Go to YouTube and read the comment sections if you want to see what type of culture I'm talking about. Multiply those types of personalities times 4 in a tactics shop or while trying to instruct on a sortie.

Some people need to really think about what they say before opening their mouth. If people speak their mind 100% of the time and without filters is going to cause issues following orders and maintaining good discipline. Not to mention the Twitter and Snapchat culture haven't learned how to speak with tact and remove emotional aspects from their verbal communication skills. Why? Because the younger generation has grown accustom to texting friends sitting at the same table as them. I think we can all agree verbal and written communication is somewhat important.

I'm coming from the days when AF leaders could curse you the hell out and threaten you.

Ever heard of a "no-stepper"? Try it out sometime. It'll fix SNAPs pretty quick. And, it can be fairly therapeutic:

 

[pawnman]

On 4/6/2017 at 8:39 AM, No2bonus said:

A bonus is necessary. Some enlisted career fields receive a reenlistment bonus too. If the AF functioned as intended and stopped offering a bonus across the board, we would hemorrhage enlisted and officers. You don't think money or a bonus matters? I ask E's if they are interested in becoming aviators. All the E's I spoke with said they would only fly RPAs and that's only if they receive equal pay to an officer.

I can't speak for everyone, but take away the bonus for pilots and watch how many leave at the end of their commitment.

The same number that are leaving at the end of their commitment now, I would guess.  If the bonus were an effective tool, we wouldn't be looking at a shortage of over 1000 pilots.