I know you did not mean it without some context, which is why I wanted to make sure folks know that some of the guys I see taking the bonus, are good folks and are just taking advantage of what I'll call "recognition of their worth". If they have made it to the rank of CPT, then they have probably been afforded the opportunity to deploy and serve with distinction. Our own RTK is a guy that falls into this category, and if I were holding the purse strings I'd pay him that and then some to make up for the "above and beyond" hard work he's done (BTW - the majority of his incentive was spent repairing his house that probably was in disrepair partly due to the fact that he spends a majority of his time, and energy away from while doing Army business. - if the Army had not come along and offered up the bonus he'd of had to come out of pocket - so did he really get an incentive?)and the bad are being kept (who do you think is most likely to stay in for those "bonuses" anyway?).
However, it is true I think that those who take the bonus were probably going to stay for awhile anyway - their rational for staying currently outweighs the rational for leaving. What we have to do is find ways to increase the rational for staying and decreasing the rational for leaving to the broader officer population - we might have to approach each officer on an individual basis either through the CoC (not through a survey) or through a personal communication (besides and email) that asks them what is required, and then finding ways to act on it. It'll require giving CDRs the same authority and latitude to retain their officers as we give them in making other decisions relevant to the mission and the health of the command. We've got to make this attractive to the families as well, and we've got to allocate money for that purpose beyond Installation maintenance and housing - make the money available and make it flexible so the community leaders can address the concerns of FRGs - this will make some uncomfortable who count each dollar and insist on following a process that does not allocate funds toward a problem until that problem has festered and migrated, or requires planning so far out that it cannot possibly predict what those problems will be.
We need to look at what things stress the families of deployed soldiers - in some cases for leaders its actually problems associated with other families who cannot who face a myriad of problems - I mention it because we have to make better services available for the spouses and families of all our soldiers - E-1 thru 06 (that covers everything in a BCT). We need better health and dental - no co-payments, and no waiting! We need free day care - that can be scheduled and available for a full day the day prior and and for up to three hours the day of - the spouses of deployed families are often running wide open - and trying to keep it together while their military spouse is gone for 15 months - not to include the time spent during the deployment train up, or the TDY that is endemic to an Army at war.
Speaking of that - we need our support infrastructure updated to match those realities - right now at DFAS if you turn in a voucher its upwards of 5-6 weeks before you get reimbursed for the money you spend doing what the military tells you to go do. This also creates stress in a family - above and beyond the time spent away - we now induce further financial stress because we have an inadequate pay system which forces money out of the soldier's pocket and cannot meet the time limit to reimburse them before their Govt. Credit Card bill comes due and they show up on somebody's hit list - not to mention the GCC is often capped and cannot cover the expenses unless they are paid month to month - more financial stress.
If we are going to send servicemen TDY enroute for anything over a month after they've been deployed - lets make our installation policies adaptable to bringing their families, and lets put it in their orders. This should be a no brainer - but we've just not caught our support systems up with the fact that the Army is at war.
We've got to reduce the stress on the families, and where possible within an Army at war, we need to reduce the stress on the leaders. I think if we spend our limited resources with this in mind, we'll create the conditions where we can change the proportion of the rational for staying or leaving.
Finally, I'd say tackle the tough issue of recruiting the folks we want to fill out the ranks for our expansion. Part of this is showing the types of benefits that demonstrate compassion for what we are asking our volunteer military to do, part of this is showing clearly that their are opportunities for those who may enter without a family, but can envision raising one in a military that is also in persistent conflict. We're going to require compatible pay, a retirement plan that truly incentivizes staying past 20, better educational benefits (I read something about overhauling the GI Bill in the E-bird today), and opportunity to excel (this one we got in spades). Ultimately, if we are going to grow the Army we are going to have to get more folks - a flash of the obvious, but it requires more then just getting them to sign up for a 4 year hitch. Only by replacing the officers we've lost, keeping the ones we have and filling those new billets will we be able to create the long term conditions to sustain a force of the caliber we require.
I know allot of guys who are in my shoes - they are coming to a cross roads - be it the 20 year mark, kids coming of high school age and tired of being displaced, a spouse who is stressed out and looking for the type of stability that allows them to do more then just survive when the other half of the parent team is deployed, TDY or training in the field. Their decisions are not entirely their own - their familes gets a vote. I heard an anecdote from a friend here on the SWC who told me he attended a dinner where a GO joked about seeing so many recently retired leaders now serving in other capacities - that GO may have been joking, but he knew what was up.
Patriot remarked we better do something before our CPT problem turns into a MAJ and LTC problem, I think we already have one, they've made up their mind, but have just not left yet - it ma not be a huge portion of that population, but at a time where we are trying to expand - every good officer is critical. As we go forward, those remaining will inherit ever increasing responsibilities because there will be less to shoulder them - more billets will go unfulfilled, but the work will likely increase, not decrease - the stress on both leaders, their families and the soldiers will increase. The rational for leaving will increase and the rational for staying will decrease.
An all volunteer service full of the "best and brightest" is a hard thing to sustain under good conditions, under trying conditions such as sustained war with no mitigation of the stress on individuals and families, it may be too hard - unless you take steps to compensate for what you are asking them to do. You know, there are allot of guys and gals who love the Army, but they love their families more. You gotta show these folks that we will take care of their families in a concrete manner that goes beyond the concept of placing the burden on the leaders and their spouses ala a FRG (command and spouse run Family Readiness Group), and ACS Centers (Army Community Services ) that are more aligned and staffed for a peace time Army.
The next three years are going to be critical I think - I heard recently that in 2010 a significant part of the federal work force is going to retire - the military, as always will be called on to fill gaps in creative ways at home or abroad; as such they will have employment opportunities to serve in other agencies. The challenges continue to grow.
Best, Regards, Rob
Bookmarks