Army offers officers incentives

[Rob Thornton]

Looks like main stream news finally caught up with the Army offering CPTs a 20 K bonus to stay. However, they left off some qualifiers - my understanding its targeted for CPTs between 3-8 years of service.

I think this incentive is probably inadequate - here is why:

First its a symptom treatment and not an illness treatment. The officer (and professional NCO Corps) can add and divide. Rather then a targeted incentive which seems like its objective is to turn CPTs into MAJs and put them into a position where its more attractive to stay in towards retirement then to enter into a new job from mid career - how about a strategy (with the types of incentives) that creates an atmosphere where professionals (and their families) inside the Army are content and through word of mouth and good press, attract not only quantity, but the type of quality we say we need?

I've talked to these CPTs (and other officers) weighing indefinite, repeated 15 month tours on their families. Most believe in what we are fighting for and believe in the Army - but they can add and divide - they have also been taught COA analysis in their CCC (CPTs Career Course). They also receive emails from head-hunters, and maintain a vast email network with their buddies from school and their years as LTs. They know who has gotten out, why and how much money they are making on the outside. The married ones have spouses (who also know how to add and divide) who also maintain email communications with the spouses of the officers who have separated - all the cards are on the table.

Here is the question:

So 20K divided over say 4 years equals to about 5K a year. Is the targeted officer going to make more then an additional 5K a year for leaving the Army (with what may equate to 2 x 15 month tours in that 4 years) for a civilian job with no 15 month tours?

Here are a few more questions - on the ground we saw there was a growing CPT problem about 2 years ago. We saw the survey that were trying to gauge it, and new from past surveys that the data would be filtered and dressed then go through a echeloned decision making and approval process that would water down the remedy and create delays. So, is our problem still at the CPT level only, or has it migrated to become a MAJ and LTC problem? With the acceleration of the expansion of the Army competing with an attrition of leadership - what options does that leave the Army to fill critical MTO&E positions? Where will the Army get these officers (and NCOs - I say that because the burdens become proportional to the lack of needed leaders)

Will they promote early and try to fill vacuums? What problems will become compounded as a result? NCOES, OES, the graduate school incentives also discussed?

How about the reserve and inactive officers and NCOs? How will they (and the organizations they currently belong to) be effected?

What about TRADOC and other non-MTO&E billets? Anybody who says TRADOC, ROTC, Recruiting, and functional areas are not critical fails to understand the success of our professional military - you can't just back fill these position with civilians - one because their is a relevancy issue, second because you just create more jobs that require professional military experience and will pay more for it since the contract will allow it - you've just created employment opportunity.

This goes back to several other threads. It ties in with the thread on Public Will and Sacrifice, on establishing a Corps of nation builder peace keepers and with some of the responses to the thread on Army Officer accuses GOs of Incompetence.

Generating and retaining the professionals needed for this Long War require updating the HR strategy required to do so - when only a small percentage of the population shoulders the sustained burden - the need to compensate them and their families grows. I read some of the thoughts from the other threads - some called for congressional involvement and some against. Congress recently approved a pay raise for the military - it really doesn’t do much - its more of a Cost of Living raise - for the average citizen. It does not address the increased hardships (read costs) placed on the families of deployed soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines, or the incredible pace of short notice travel placed on those men/women and their families when between deployments as they try and spend time with families, PCS, TDY enroute, etc. At 3.5% it equals out to 1/2 of one more trip to the grocery a month - or maybe an extra fill up of the tank at prices near the $3 mark.

What we need is for Congress to offer the military the $$$ and more importantly the tools to create an atmosphere of quality of life. The first part of these tools would be a real pay raise that recognizes the sacrifice of those in uniform; some of this could be applied toward targeted performance - max out your OER and NCOER and get a bonus; some for better housing (their is much more to this then just the quality of the dwelling - best people to ask about this are the spouses - (but only ask if you are serious); some of this on a return to full medical and dental coverage for families (spouses and kids hat the word dependants now- but it does accurately reflect given the hardships they endure how dependant they are on the soldier/marine/airman/sailor), educational bonuses/incentives as planned - or better expanded towards families, real child care that allows spouses to decompress occasionally while their military spouse is deployed.

All of these things cost $$$$. People cost money. Good people cost more money and the best people cost the most money - if you want to retain them past the point where they feel they have met their obligation and somebody else can shoulder the burden.

There will be a few of the best who stay for various reasons, but they are a minority. You can only appeal to patriotism and loyalty for so long without offering more.