0 Votes
Fighting for Dollars
To counter flagging officer retention the U.S. Army has announced that it plans to institute several significant changes in order to entice officers to longer careers. Among these incentives are benefits such as:
- Greater graduate school opportunities
- Cash bonuses for officers who stay beyond their initial obligation
- Reducing the time it takes for promotion to captain and major
Despite these planned measures the Army states that its current rate of retention is adequate for the short term. It admits, however, that the war is taking a toll and that the Army’s current plan for expansion will require more officers. Of course, this new system once again raises the ‘mercenary’ question. Will bonuses and other economic incentives create a ‘mercenary culture’ within the Army? Will the ideals of duty and patriotism be replaced by cold hard cash?
Similarly tagged OmniNerd content:
- Offensive Cyber Units, by VnutZ 2 months ago
- Women Now Allowed Into Combat Roles, by VnutZ 4 months ago
- China Uses Top Gun Movie Footage in Media Release, by VnutZ over 2 years ago
- Gitmo Prisoners Resume Terrorism, by VnutZ over 2 years ago
Print Friendly
Write an Article
it finally happened by willwaddell
You know, I have mentioned many times in conversation that a cash bonus for officers would signal the death knell of the professional officer corps as we understand it. (You’ll have to take my word that I’ve had that conversation) Now it has happened. If this really goes into effect the Army is admitting, whether it knows it or not, that it is in serious trouble. I take these measures as open admission of a failing belief in the ‘cause’ in Iraq. Perhaps I’m wrong. Any dissenters?
Already in practice by Anonymous
I know for a fact that the armed services give large bonuses for important career fields be they officer or enlisted. If you talk to enough military you start to realize that patriotism is not the reason most people serve. Paychecks, benefits, adventure, travel, and free college are common motivators.
Bad Idea by jmarkdavison
Let me say two things up front:
1. This is a bad idea.
2. I am still getting out when my committment is up (June 2006).
I find it hard to believe that just 10% of West Point junior officers got out this year. I assume they’re talking about the class of 2000 (you know, dumb-looking class crest). I think the Army’s fudging those numbers.
Anybody have any data on that class, or ours?
Okay…why this is a bad idea: officers are already overpaid. That’s right. So are NCOs and soldiers (with a lower-case "s," darn it!). I disagree with romanizzo that:
>I could walk away from the Army after my next tour and make a metric ass ton of money.
Maybe Roman can, but most of us will take a pay cut, at least the first couple of years: my brother (Army) and brother-in-law (Navy) did when they got out. I am expecting at least $10,000 drop in my annual salary, probably more when considering that I’ll have to pay for housing and health care. But I’m getting out anyway.
The reason we’re overpaid is reflected in the "Army as a welfare system" effect: 75% of the dirtbag/lazy/incompetent officers I’ve seen are just good enough to stay in. But why would they stay in? Because they’re making far more with Uncle Sam writing their paychecks than they’d ever make if they brought their abilities to the civilian world. Let’s be honest: all you have to do is not get a DUI or kill anyone for 20 years and you can retire at least as a major.
I enlisted in the Army over eleven years ago. I’ve seen the world, gotten a great education, and had the privilege to serve under and with several truly great leaders. I’m not knocking the Army or people who stay in it. We need leaders and patriots to protect America, and serving in the military is the purest way of doing that.
If the pay and benefits were lower, officers in the "dirtbag" category would decide the sacrifices weren’t worth the pay and would get out.
I have the solution to our retention problems. Reducing OIF/OEF tours to six months.
This would help far more than grad school, branch of choice, or quicker promotion to major (personally I’d rather be a captain for ten years and go straight to Lt. Col…anyone who’s had a stressed-out, miserable Bn S3 or XO, a 40-year-old man going gray over track pads and QTBs, knows what I’m talking about). My office mates say to put M1s and such on the Installation Property Book down there and rotate just personnel, and leave them there for six months. Think of the cost savings! Probably the reason we’re not doing this is either 1. Nobody’s asked me and my buddies, 2. Stubbornness on the part of our senior military and civilian leaders, or 3. The influence of shipping contractors and the other members of the Military-Industrial Complex.
It’s about time spent away from family for me. 90% of the people I talk to say the same thing. You could offer me $200K a year and I’d turn it down if there was a chance of me not seeing my wife and son for a year. Roman, I surmise you cared more for the Army than your ex-wife, and at least you admit it. A lot of folks talk a big game about "family first" but are either lying to their families or just can’t get weaned off DFAS’s nipple. Most of the guys who are getting out are choosing family over the Army.
These new initiatives may increase retention but they’ll have the opposite effect on quality of the officer corps.
perspective from the bottom up by LordDilly
Well, a bunch of captains have put their $.02 in, and I have to wonder if this is one of those deals where things look bleak from the "middle" perspective, as it where, but maybe you guys don’t know what it looks like from the bottom up. Keep in mind, this is just my experiences, as a lowly Corporal, from the Iraq tour and the other 8 years in the Guard, so take from this what you will, as I can’t speak for anyone else. You guys have discussed the shortcomings of the bureaucracy, the lazy asses taking up space, boondoggles and pointlessness of some of what the officer corps does, but I never saw any of that, really. Sure, there are always directives that come down from on High that are silly and pointless, and we grumble and complain, but you get that in the civilian workplace too- even I have to put up with goofy crap, and I cut stone in a quarry for a living.
Whatever goes on above the collective heads (echelons above reality) of the soliers, somehow it seems to work itself out as it filters from Battalion down through the company commanders, lietenants, and NCOs, and we get the job done. Every LT but one I’ve ever dealt with has been competent and professional. Of the four company commanders I’ve had, they did their jobs well- except one, which was the same incompetent LT, who went on to become our CO in Iraq. Fortunately for everyone (including him) we didn’t operate as a company in country, but were tasked out by team as needed.
My point is this: it might be that you O-Nerd Captains actually see too much of the big picture, and miss seeing that the men on the ground get by, more or less, in spite of it all. I liken it to a mortal looking up and seeing a seething, roiling, cloud covered sky, flashing with lightning, signifying that the gods are fighting. The mortal might tremble at the gods’ fury, but would say "well, as long as they keep the fight up there…"
Why Officers Leave the Military by tomtolman
I’ve been reading this post with interest for the past couple weeks and I think that people leave the military for many of the same reasons they would leave any job or organization. And it has little to do with money.
Leigh Branham in Keeping the People Who Keep You in Business discusses the reasons people quit their jobs. One of the arguments the author makes, and backs up with several studies, is that people do not leave because of pay. Most managers feel their retention problems can be solved by increasing pay but that usually misses the issue. Yes, pay is important, but if people feel they are generally being compensated at a level comparable to what they could earn else where pay is not the driving factor behind retention.
The author proposes six reasons why people leave their jobs. Here they are with some of my thoughts and observations after reading everyone’s posts.
*1. They see no link between their pay and their performance. *
Twabulldogg wrote about promotions, "I believe that somehow the Army needs to look more at individual qualities, skills, and potential rather than a five minute review of a packet and then a bulk promotion where <2% fail to get promoted. Right now promotion for all officer ranks up to major is about 98%(+). All you have to do is have a pulse and you will make O4." * lose motivation when they do not see rewards for their performance. This is more about the link between pay and performance than the actual pay. Two people with the same rank doing the same job in different units will get promoted at the same time despite significantly different performance and results.
*2. They don’t perceive growth or advancement opportunities. *
Twabulldogg is staying in because he sees growth and advancement opportunities. He posted, "I planned on getting out and if you asked any Omninerd who knows me, I am the last person who was likely to stay in. However, I currently have a slot to attend graduate school next fall and am in the process of applying to teach at West Point….I am willing to give the Army a few extra years to pursue my goals."* Twabulldogg was going to get out but has decided to stay in for growth and advancement opportunities. Others who don’t see or have these same opportunities are leaving.
*3. They don’t see their work as important or their contributions are not recognized and valued by others. *
Many have complained about deployments being too hard on soldiers and their families. This can be a source of retention problems (see #5 below) but can also help retention if the soldier feels he is making a meaningful contribution. Wayne Keeler writes, "When I was in Iraq in 2003 with 3rd BDE, 1AD we reenlisted record numbers of soldiers. These were combat arms soldiers who were in the thick of the ‘battle.’ They were away from home and missed their families and friends, their hobbies and organizations and clubs…yet they reenlisted. MY OPINION is that their priorities were set to dedication to their unit, fellow soldiers and nation for the long haul."* These soldiers saw their work as important.
On the other hand, an anonymous poster fighting the same war feels differently, "…I still can’t believe that the war was worth it either. Where’s that leave me? ….and if I still can’t get a straight answer about this war… then why am I still here?”"*":http://www.omninerd.com/comments/comments.php?cid=3189&ht=0&rt=0
Patriotism and a belief that our work in the military is contributing to a better America and world is a motivating factor for people to join and stay in the military. When those ideals are weakened or lost some, like our anonymous poster, will leave. Others, despite reservations, might stay in for other reasons on this list.
*4. They don’t get to use their natural talents. *
VnutZ79’s post illustrates this point, "…Almost nine years later, the Army has never tapped me for my computer skills despite repeated contact with 1st IO, LIWA, HRC and the local G6 for the command I was assigned…After I got married, I decided my wife was more important to me than continuing to gamble the Army might put me in a job that matched my knowledge rather than just a body filling a slot. A lot of us probably fall into this boat (maybe more of the non-combat arms guys) – came in under false expectations of skills utilization, found something else in the meantime and want to move on."*
*5. They have unclear or unrealistic expectations. *
Deployments can actually help retention if a soldier sees he is making a meaningful contribution. A solider practices for years and waits for the opportunity to come off the bench and play the game. However, if the deployments come more often and are longer than expected they can create retention problems. VnutZ79 said, "I joined with an open mind. Deployments were a fact of the job, although, a near guaranteed lifetime of them were not what I had in mind."* Deanmorrison has similar concerns, "I’m getting out of the army because I’m tired of being away from the wife. Yes, I expected that when I came into the army. However, what I didn’t expect was to be deployed twice and be away from home for 2/3 of my first tour."* In addition to deployment expectations, how often do you see soldiers leave the army when their expectations of travel, training, money, etc are not met?
*6. They will no longer tolerate abusive managers or toxic environments. *
An anonymous poster who is leaving the Army wrote, "I spend fifty percent of my day taking care of other people’s mistakes or laziness, and the other fifty percent of my day taking care of meaningless administrative tasks that don’t make the war any more winnable."*
Personally I think that job satisfaction is more about who you work with and who you work for than about what you actually do. I’ve been lucky to have great supervisors in every job that I’ve had in the Army. I’ve also worked with great soldiers in every assignment.
An abusive or toxic environment is described in Leigh Branham’s book as “excessive demands for personal sacrifices, continual crisis, demands on employees to be available at all hours, employees subject to unreasonable deadlines and ‘Pony Express’ management (‘ride ‘em ‘til they drop’).” The military does require significant personal sacrifice and the nature of war and training for war creates an extreme ‘toxic environment.’ The military must mitigate this by linking pay to performance, provide additional growth and advancement opportunities such as grad school, ensure soldiers are inspired and find meaning in their deployments and assignments, and match the right soldier or officer to the right job.