View Full Version : Army hopes higher bonuses will attract recruits
Kyobanim
01-18-2006, 04:16
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10897030/
WASHINGTON - After falling well short of its recruiting goals last year, the Army has set even higher monthly targets for this summer, hoping that bonuses as high as $90,000 will encourage soldiers to re-enlist and recent graduates to join.
A new law will allow the Army to give larger financial bonuses for enlistments and re-enlistments — doubling the maximum payment to new active duty recruits from $20,000 to $40,000, and from $10,000 to $20,000 for reservists. It also will let older recruits sign on by raising the top age from 35 to 42. And the top re-enlistment bonus for active duty soldiers would increase from $60,000 to $90,000.
Goggles Pizano
01-18-2006, 08:40
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10897030/
WASHINGTON - After falling well short of its recruiting goals last year, the Army has set even higher monthly targets for this summer, hoping that bonuses as high as $90,000 will encourage soldiers to re-enlist and recent graduates to join.
A new law will allow the Army to give larger financial bonuses for enlistments and re-enlistments — doubling the maximum payment to new active duty recruits from $20,000 to $40,000, and from $10,000 to $20,000 for reservists. It also will let older recruits sign on by raising the top age from 35 to 42. And the top re-enlistment bonus for active duty soldiers would increase from $60,000 to $90,000.
Perhaps it's not only my view but why believe throwing money at the problem will solve it? There will always be patriotic people to step up to the plate to defend this nation. Perhaps if the upper echelon personnel did a bit more legwork and took an honest look at policies that have driven good soldiers to take early exits they could solve this issue?
Roguish Lawyer
01-18-2006, 09:37
Perhaps it's not only my view but why believe throwing money at the problem will solve it? There will always be patriotic people to step up to the plate to defend this nation. Perhaps if the upper echelon personnel did a bit more legwork and took an honest look at policies that have driven good soldiers to take early exits they could solve this issue?
If you were correct, there wouldn't be a recruiting shortfall. How many AD guys have left for private contractor jobs? Nothing unpatriotic about providing for your family. We should pay soldiers better and provide strong incentives for reenlistment.
Kyobanim
01-18-2006, 09:51
If you were correct, there wouldn't be a recruiting shortfall. How many AD guys have left for private contractor jobs? Nothing unpatriotic about providing for your family. We should pay soldiers better and provide strong incentives for reenlistment.
This is one of the reasons my son is getting out after 10 years. The other reason is they won't let him leave Ft. Bliss, (he's been there for 2.5 years) and get back to the 82nd or any place else for that matter. His next re-enlistment is an indef. You'd think that they would do what they could to retain good people. Maybe the money will help.
CoLawman
01-18-2006, 10:06
Perhaps it's not only my view but why believe throwing money at the problem will solve it? There will always be patriotic people to step up to the plate to defend this nation. Perhaps if the upper echelon personnel did a bit more legwork and took an honest look at policies that have driven good soldiers to take early exits they could solve this issue?
I am for any means to increase the pay for those serving their country. I would prefer the base pays be addressed, rather than the bonuses. I assume it is cheaper for the govt to give bonuses rather than pay increases. It is probably that "compounding" issue that scares the govt..........we have dealt with that on a regular basis during contract negotiations.
I agree that there would be plenty of people willing to step up if we were attacked on our shores...........but question whether the same can be said about the current war.
Just my opinion.
VelociMorte
01-18-2006, 10:20
I think that if we as a society are willing to pay someone FIVE MILLION DOLLARS a year to hit a ball with a stick, or throw a ball through a hoop, we should certainly be able to pay someone who is defending our way of life a decent wage.
CPTAUSRET
01-18-2006, 10:33
Out troops deserve a salary commensurate with putting their lives on the line.
Probably won't happen.
I didn't stay because of the money, or bonuses! Just about unheard of in my day.
Terry
Roguish Lawyer
01-18-2006, 11:53
I didn't stay because of the money, or bonuses! Just about unheard of in my day.
That was only because they weren't paying any more at the buggy whip factory. :D ;)
CPTAUSRET
01-18-2006, 11:58
That was only because they weren't paying any more at the buggy whip factory. :D ;)
Yup, and we can blame Henry Ford for that.:)
Terry
Goggles Pizano
01-18-2006, 12:38
I think that if we as a society are willing to pay someone FIVE MILLION DOLLARS a year to hit a ball with a stick, or throw a ball through a hoop, we should certainly be able to pay someone who is defending our way of life a decent wage.
I agree with you. My opinion is why use money in bonuses to attract and then leave the soldiers to wither on the vine of low pay, spartan housing, and low prospect of advancement (school availability, choice of base transfers, changing an MOS without having to ETS, etc.)? Is morale not better served when soldiers pay increases go toward retirement rather than a "c'mon in!" up front/one time bonus? I believe that should answer your question RL.
Before I went in to talk with the recruiter I happened across an article about the bonus increase. I did quite a bit of research and tracked the bill through Congress last November and December. I knew I was going to sign up anyway, but I thought that some extra money would be nice. I finally got tired of them putting off the bill so I sat down and calculated up how much more money it would actually be. Ultimately, I came up with a $1,750 per year difference based on a 4 year College degree, Airborne and a 5 year 18x contract ($27,000). I know that they have seasonal bonuses as well, but I calculated what I knew at the time.
$ 8,000 - Hi Grad +
$ 3,000 - Airborne +
$16,000 - 5 yr 18x
$27,000 - $10,000 (Completed MOS) = $17,000
$17,000/4 yr = $4,250
$10,000/4 yr = $2,500
Difference = $1,750 per year
To me $1,750 wasn't worth waiting for when I had no idea when they would even implement it.
Let me know if I calculated any of that wrong or if I missed something.
JwB
My link won't work, so here's the article:
Philadelphia Inquirer
January 19, 2006
More Soldiers Are Signing Up For Another Tour
The Army said reenlistments in 2005 hit a five-year high. But recruiting was its lowest since 1999.
By Drew Brown, Inquirer Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON - Reenlistments for the Army in fiscal 2005 were the highest they have been in five years, nearly enough to make up for a shortfall of about 7,000 new recruits last year, Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey said yesterday.
More than 69,500 soldiers reenlisted in the 12 months that ended in September, Harvey said. But last year also was the Army's worst for recruiting since 1999, the last time it failed to meet its annual goal. A study produced for the service in 2004 indicated that a high chance of being sent to Iraq or Afghanistan was keeping many young people away.
Harvey said he believed new recruiting and referral bonuses and other perks would help.
"We've now made our recruiting objectives for the last seven months, and the future looks promising," he said.
New measures signed into law this month include a $40,000 enlistment bonus, a $1,000 referral fee for soldiers who encourage new recruits to join, and down-payment assistance for soldiers who are first-time home buyers.
The Army has already recruited 25 percent more new troops this year than at the same point in fiscal 2005, Harvey said.
The recruiting shortfall in 2005 is one of several factors that have caused some analysts and retired military officials to worry that the Army may again be "broken," a reference to the late 1970s post-Vietnam era, when the service experienced an exodus of seasoned enlisted men and officers and was chronically short of recruits and new equipment. The critics worry that the Army may be about to repeat that experience partly because of the strains produced by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Harvey said reenlistment by troops in Iraq "was the best measure" of the Army's health. For example, he said, the Third Infantry Division, now in Iraq, recently exceeded its reenlistment goal by 36 percent.
David Segal, director of the Center for Research on Military Organization, said many young soldiers joined the Army after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and many reenlisted because "they want to stay until the job is done."
Another reason to reenlist, Segal said, is the bonus, which is tax-free for troops in the war zone.
New recruits also will be attracted by today's record enlistment bonuses and other perks, he said.
The Army needs to sign up about 80,000 new recruits each year to maintain its current strength of 492,000 active-duty personnel. Last year, the service fell short of that goal by roughly 6,600 troops, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
To stay on track for this year, the Army needed to sign up 11,000 recruits by mid-January, but recruiters had already signed up 11,522 by the end of December, said S. Douglas Smith, a spokesman for Army Recruiting Command.
Last year the Army doubled the number of its recruiters and began to offer $5,000 to everyone who joined. It also offered a 15-month enlistment, compared with the standard three to four years.
CPTAUSRET
01-19-2006, 12:21
lrd:
I wasn't aware of the 15 month enlistment, sounds worthless to me...By the time you get someone trained up, you have to let him go.
Not to mention the specialized mos's which themselves require more than 15 months.
Hope you guys are doing well.
Terry
During the Clintoon administration a Marine General, mention that many of his troops qualified for food stamps. Because it is a patriotic act to serve it does not mean a person should NOT be REASONABLY compensated. Look at the monster salaries congress people get and what their retirement is like.
GOOD for the Army in helping their people get a little more remuneration for the duty they are doing. I would like to see them get better pay. A E 4 over 4 should be able to provide for their family on E 4 wages. Young married soldiers with dependents should have a reasonable dependent allowance and should NOT have to be on food stamps or have a second job. The military is naturally hard on married life, a second job will only add greatly to problems of a married life. The kids need their parents when mom or dad is not on duty.
Look at the deterioration of PX/BX benefits. The Civie store owners whined over and over so congress has restricted how low PX prices can be. It would be good to see the restoration of benefits and salaries more in line to the duties performed and inherent risk involved in military life.
lrd:
I wasn't aware of the 15 month enlistment, sounds worthless to me...By the time you get someone trained up, you have to let him go.
Not to mention the specialized mos's which themselves require more than 15 months.
Hope you guys are doing well.
Terry
Terry,
I remember us discussing the 15-month enlistment when it was proposed, but I don't remember reading anything about how it has affected cost or performance. Seems like double the work...
I can't remember if the 15-month term is just for re-enlistments, or if it applies to new recruits as well.
(We are doing great!)
aricbcool
01-19-2006, 20:30
I'd like to bring up a couple of things, if I may:
First, let me say that I agree that our servicepeople should be compensated more.
Second, many of you have said that money is not the reason you stayed in. My question is, what made you decide to stay in? I'm wondering, with the change in advertising companies for Army recruiting, if these reasons could be put across effectively to the public to attract not only more soldiers, but the right kind.
Third, I think that the aforementioned article: "More Soldiers Are Signing Up For Another Tour" may be indicative of the effect the MSM is having on recruiting. While soldiers who have been fighting the war on terror are reenlisting at unexpected rates, it seems likely (to me at least) that the MSM's slanted, if not inaccurate portrayal of the GWOT is having a detrimental effect on recruiting new soldiers. Is there some way that Army recruiting could combat this directly?
Regards,
Aric
brewmonkey
01-19-2006, 21:23
Out troops deserve a salary commensurate with putting their lives on the line.
Probably won't happen.
I didn't stay because of the money, or bonuses! Just about unheard of in my day.
Terry
What they also need to address is housing for soldiers. Housing on post has been substandard for far to long, when you can get it. The lists for houses when I was a young NCO were years long. My wife and I waited for almosy 2 years for housing when we were at Irwin and I came down on levee before we even got quarters. Pathetic.
I also agree the pay should be much better then it is, but then how many of us like Terry said joined for the money?
brewmonkey
01-19-2006, 21:26
During the Clintoon administration a Marine General, mention that many of his troops qualified for food stamps. Because it is a patriotic act to serve it does not mean a person should NOT be REASONABLY compensated. Look at the monster salaries congress people get and what their retirement is like.
GOOD for the Army in helping their people get a little more remuneration for the duty they are doing. I would like to see them get better pay. A E 4 over 4 should be able to provide for their family on E 4 wages. Young married soldiers with dependents should have a reasonable dependent allowance and should NOT have to be on food stamps or have a second job. The military is naturally hard on married life, a second job will only add greatly to problems of a married life. The kids need their parents when mom or dad is not on duty.
Look at the deterioration of PX/BX benefits. The Civie store owners whined over and over so congress has restricted how low PX prices can be. It would be good to see the restoration of benefits and salaries more in line to the duties performed and inherent risk involved in military life.
When I was stationed at Irwin as an E-5, Married (waiting for housing and living in Barstow) and with 1 child we qualified for Food Stamps and WIC. We took the WIC because they provided formula but I would be damned if I was going to take food stamps. I know some guys though who had to or their kids would have not been eating daily.
Second, many of you have said that money is not the reason you stayed in. My question is, what made you decide to stay in?
Management classes will tell you that the are several reasons a person works for a organization, money is not the # 1 reason. Sometimes people can leave and get better pay at another organization but they don't.
Check out the management therories, X, Y, and Z. Most schools today teach therory Y or Z.
The smart, sane thing to do is bring back the draft. Pfft...no more recruiting problems. :)
How much money would that save the military to spend on more equipment/training??? A lot??? Makes for a better/stronger country too.
VelociMorte
01-20-2006, 07:49
The smart, sane thing to do is bring back the draft. Pfft...no more recruiting problems. :)
How much money would that save the military to spend on more equipment/training??? A lot??? Makes for a better/stronger country too.
For some reason, I think that giving disgruntled inner-city gang-bangers and slack-jawed morons automatic weapons and explosive devices, and the training to use them, would cause more problems than it would solve.
Interesting thoughts Vel, but just because there is a draft it doesn't mean everyone is automatically "in."
Jackass, punk gangsters are almost guaranteed to have at least something serious regarding a criminal record, so these losers would not even be considered for military duty under a draft since the "pool" would be so enormous, the military could pick and choose who they want.
Don't forget the greatest war ever fought, WW2. Was the draft helpful there - Yes. Could WW2 have been won without a draft - NO.
Also, there was a lot less socialism/liberalism/anti gun agenda/soft people/etc. when there was a draft. When there was a draft, most homes had firearms in them, kids didn't accidently shoot themselves or their friends, and they sure as hell didn't take guns to school and shoot other students.
When there was a draft, we acted with a lot more common sense as a country...
Every able-bodied young man had to do 2 yrs whether they wanted to or not. What's wrong with serving your country for two years??? It's the least a young person can do, considerning the "greatness" we enjoy in the U.S. is directly proportional to the efforts and sacrifices made by our veterans in every war.
The draft meant the average guy walking down the street had qualified with a rifle, knew basic infantry tactics & first aid, and had experienced military structure, dicipline, and physical/mental conditioning. Does that make for a tougher average civilian "population" or for a weaker one???
Would our country today as a whole be stronger or weaker if the majority of able-bodied people had experienced military life??? Or, are we stronger today by having the majority of people avoiding military service, and jerking off at the local Starbuck's on their cellphone???
Bring back the draft - it's just common sense...
The draft also meant more potentially dangerous criminals in a sense- the Hell's Angels for one.
BMT (RIP)
01-24-2006, 05:32
I don't see too many FOG's jumping in on this thread!! There isn't many in this group that served when the draft was in force.
:D :munchin
BMT
VelociMorte
01-24-2006, 08:11
Interesting thoughts Vel, but just because there is a draft it doesn't mean everyone is automatically "in."
Jackass, punk gangsters are almost guaranteed to have at least something serious regarding a criminal record, so these losers would not even be considered for military duty under a draft since the "pool" would be so enormous, the military could pick and choose who they want.
Don't forget the greatest war ever fought, WW2. Was the draft helpful there - Yes. Could WW2 have been won without a draft - NO.
Also, there was a lot less socialism/liberalism/anti gun agenda/soft people/etc. when there was a draft. When there was a draft, most homes had firearms in them, kids didn't accidently shoot themselves or their friends, and they sure as hell didn't take guns to school and shoot other students.
When there was a draft, we acted with a lot more common sense as a country...
Every able-bodied young man had to do 2 yrs whether they wanted to or not. What's wrong with serving your country for two years??? It's the least a young person can do, considerning the "greatness" we enjoy in the U.S. is directly proportional to the efforts and sacrifices made by our veterans in every war.
The draft meant the average guy walking down the street had qualified with a rifle, knew basic infantry tactics & first aid, and had experienced military structure, dicipline, and physical/mental conditioning. Does that make for a tougher average civilian "population" or for a weaker one???
Would our country today as a whole be stronger or weaker if the majority of able-bodied people had experienced military life??? Or, are we stronger today by having the majority of people avoiding military service, and jerking off at the local Starbuck's on their cellphone???
Bring back the draft - it's just common sense...
Back then (the last time we had a draft), most people felt a sense of social responsibility and a duty to serve their country. Boot Camp was tough enough to weed out the people who were incompatable with military service. Today, fewer people are willing to take responsibility for their own actions or safety, and many feel entitled to a life of handouts, free from any obligation or sense of duty. Boot Camp has become "kinder and gentler" , and has much less of a filtering effect on malcontents and misfits. We've spent the last couple of generations paying the least productive members of our society to breed while encouraging an entitlement mentality with no sense of responsibility to Country or fellow man.
CoLawman
01-24-2006, 08:58
I don't see too many FOG's jumping in on this thread!! There isn't many in this group that served when the draft was in force.
:D :munchin
BMT
I was part of the Army that was transitioning away from the draft in the early 1970's. The majority of draftees I served with had alot in common with the person serving a jail sentence. They were not serving their country they were "serving time." Drug use was prevalent and alcohol abuse was all too common. Racial tensions were very real and very volatile.
A stark difference between the WWII draftees and the Vietnam era draftees was the public's attitude toward military service. Service during WWII was seen as noble and "expected".
Service during the Vietnam era was .........well you get the picture.
Obvioiusly there were those that were drafted that served with honor. But they were the exception, not the norm.
BMT (RIP)
01-24-2006, 09:15
What about SECDEF Mac's PROJECT 100,000. The Army was forced to use 100,000 CAT 4 people!!
:munchin
BMT
CoLawman
01-24-2006, 09:39
What about SECDEF Mac's PROJECT 100,000. The Army was forced to use 100,000 CAT 4 people!!
:munchin
BMT
Oh Yeah.............LBJ's War on Poverty. Admit individuals who would normally not qualify under AFQT standards. This resulted in 300,000 men being admitted into the armed forces who were unable to read beyond a comic book level of comprehension. I remember the training manuals born out of this social experiment.
Studies later found that those individuals who took part in Project 100,000 were no better off today than their counterparts when socioeconomic status was considered.
These individuals contributed to that era's problems, and did not benefit from the experiment.
Velocimotor, you commented that Basic Training weeded out the problems, when in fact it did not. I can assure you that the worst of the worst were pushed, pulled, and coddled through. Quantity trumped Quality in those days. The only way they were weeded out was through dessertion or eventual incarceration for criminal acts.
War on Poverty..........Only a Democrat could come up with such a hair brained social experiment!
The Reaper
01-24-2006, 09:56
The draft also meant more potentially dangerous criminals in a sense- the Hell's Angels for one.
Huey:
I am not sure that you are sufficiently well armed with facts to participate in this discussion.
Looks like you have gathered the majority of your info about American history from B Movies and the pablum that passes for the mainstream media.
Please cite your sources for info on the draft, US crime statistics, and the HAMC.
Overall, I think that we are appealing to the wrong senses and kids when we offer more money and appeal to kids with an "Army of One" campaign.
Look at Marine recruiting as a different example.
TR
I agree with TR on this one. Most of the people who I've talked to during my multiple excursions to MEPS are joining up because they feel it is important to give something back to their country.
The advertising for the AD army doesn't attract the people who want to do something for their country, it sells a more selfish reason for joining. The new ads that I've seen for the Army Reserve should be what the AD advertising is like, harping on protecting your loved ones and your country, and also doing something important.
I'm also going to have to disagree with Detcord. I'm not sure if you've read Starship Troopers but in it there's a quote by LT. COL. Dubois(sp?) that says something along the lines of you can't force a person to have moral responsiblity towards their home. That's why the draft would probably not succeed in today's society, because there are so many people who don't care about our country at all, and there are even some who would want to see us fail.
I know that when I go in I'd rather have 1 person next to me who wants to be there and volunteered then 5 people who are forced to be there.
I had the interesting experience of visiting MEPS recently as a 32 y.o. professional. Of the ten recruits with whom I spent the day:
3 were 17 y.o. and needed their parents' signatures to enlist
5 were joining the Army (including all 3 of the 17 y.o.'s)
1 was joining the USAF (family tradition; squared-away kid)
1 was joining the Navy ("the training is easiest and they'll pay for school")
2 were joining the USMC
1 was a prior service Marine with experience in OEF and OIF, volunteering to return
When I walked into my hotel room the night before, the three 17 year olds were there. They bolted like rabbits and did not come back until (they thought) I was asleep. One then spent the rest of the night crying on the phone to his mother.
The USMC recruits and the one Marine veteran were very solid, mature individuals. They viewed their path as a choice, not a fall-back plan. The Army recruits seemed pretty freaked out the entire time and avoided me like the plague. They did not seem to have any clue about how they got there or what was coming next. The USMC recruits were gregarious and wanted to make friends quickly.
I can't draw any conclusions because of the small sample size, but the difference between the USMC and Army recruits was striking.
I think the problems with movies, is that they over simplify any topic and often the movies connection to reality is purely accidental. There are pros and cons to the draft. One con was the Judge would tell the defendant, "You can enlist for two years, or spend four years on the honor farm". Some people did benefit from that choice enlisting under those condition some did not. I think some form of mandatory national service is a great idea for society. The military draft would just a part of that.
A general feeling in the Corps at the draft time was, it was ruining the Corps. I think any small unit that demands Espres De Corps would not fair well with draftees. The media convinced the majority of draft age males that the draft meant being a combat soldier in Viet-Nam with was not true. When about 80% of the military is non combat, and the majority of combat billets were filled by enlistees that was the case in RVN War. (review the stats on RVN)
People are often painted as one way or the other. Most people fall in the middle of issues. Such as; not every is either patriotic or unpatriotic. Some the middle people need the draft to move them in the right direction. Defense and securing our liberties and freedom is EVERYONE'S job.
Second, many of you have said that money is not the reason you stayed in. My question is, what made you decide to stay in?
Aric
I'm married to a soldier who just went over 29 yrs active duty. Money has never had anything to with it. Don't get me wrong, it's nice to see the paychecks get bigger but the it's the job and the satisfaction that matters above all else. He says he's never had a job he didn't like or find interesting.
I'm sure there are times when it sucks but overall he's happy doing something that he's good at so why not stay with it? He could make bigger bucks elsewhere but by being active duty he also gets the honor of defending our nation against all enemies foriegn...etc etc ;)
Two of my brothers were in the service - one National Guard and one Navy. I don't recall money being a big part of their decision to join. My son was active and his favorite line was "The Army gives you 3 hots and cot and little money on the side. Doesn't get better than that." He cared more about the high-speed equipment they let him than about the money.
I think the bonuses are kind of like a hook to draw you in then they get you with the job satisfaction. Just my take on it.
Second, many of you have said that money is not the reason you stayed in. My question is, what made you decide to stay in? I'm wondering, with the change in advertising companies for Army recruiting, if these reasons could be put across effectively to the public to attract not only more soldiers, but the right kind. first let me say this...i have no problems with anybody willing to stay in a war-time Army getting a "big" bonus...when one of those checks is equal to what an athlete gets for playing games we played in high school, it may be getting out of hand...that said...
i won't stay in a civilian job for money...it helps, but recently, when discussing issues with my present boss, the "issue" of money came up...he had a hard time believing it was a non-issue, although he "understood" my comment that when it is time for me to leave, i wouldn't want to stay because the contents of the company piggy bank got put into my checking account...
i stayed in the Army because of the guys to my left and right...i stayed in the Army because i believed in what i was doing...i stayed in the Army because i was doing what i believed i was meant to do...
i believe, bonus money aside, the folks staying these days stay because of their comrades, because they believe in what they are doing, because it is where they can best put their talents to use...i seriously doubt that anyone who has ever heard a bullet whiz by their head will stay just for the money...
just my $0.02...
Huey:
I am not sure that you are sufficiently well armed with facts to participate in this discussion.
Looks like you have gathered the majority of your info about American history from B Movies and the pablum that passes for the mainstream media.
Please cite your sources for info on the draft, US crime statistics, and the HAMC.
Overall, I think that we are appealing to the wrong senses and kids when we offer more money and appeal to kids with an "Army of One" campaign.
Look at Marine recruiting as a different example.
TR
Fair enough TR. I'll withdraw and do some reading and come back if I can.
The Reaper
01-24-2006, 17:07
Fair enough TR. I'll withdraw and do some reading and come back if I can.
You are welcome to play, just avoid generalizations about our Army and criminals.
TR
What about SECDEF Mac's PROJECT 100,000. The Army was forced to use 100,000 CAT 4 people!!one of those guys was my squad leader when i was in the 307th Eng. Bn (RIP)...he was SDed to the Division Lawn Mower shop...an E6 whose career consisted of sharpening lawn mower blades and making a monthly formation...
a friggin' draft is the last thing we need, IMNSHO...
of course, i may not be a FOG by your standards...:D
You are welcome to play, just avoid generalizations about our Army and criminals.
TR
Certainly. I like to play. I made some leaps in this case I shouldn't have though.
aricbcool
01-24-2006, 17:26
i seriously doubt that anyone who has ever heard a bullet whiz by their head will stay just for the money...
Very well put.
i stayed in the Army because of the guys to my left and right...i stayed in the Army because i believed in what i was doing...i stayed in the Army because i was doing what i believed i was meant to do...
I'd love to see them put the above across in a recruiting commercial.
I think the bonuses are kind of like a hook to draw you in then they get you with the job satisfaction. Just my take on it.
That's a point I never thought of before... It certainly looks to be true with the large percentage of reenlists these days.
Thanks for the insight.
Regards,
Aric
i stayed in the Army because of the guys to my left and right...i stayed in the Army because i believed in what i was doing...i stayed in the Army because i was doing what i believed i was meant to do...
Agree with aricbcool. That right there should be the "advertising campaign" vice their last...
The Reaper
01-24-2006, 20:24
"Band of Brothers" as the ad theme.
There is a real motivator.
TR
"Band of Brothers" as the ad theme.beats the "Army of One" IMNSHO...
Excellent suggestion, TR. Too bad the PR firms don't seem to consult with those of you who've been there.
Excellent suggestion, TR. Too bad the PR firms don't seem to consult with those of you who've been there.any officer on active duty who comes up with a good idea regarding enlistment and retention is likely to wind up in Recruiting Command...TR would be loathe to drop that idea in the local suggestion box..."Great idea, TR...you're just the man to head up our new retention marketing program..."
i suspect such an assignment would make him most unhappy...
aricbcool
01-24-2006, 20:41
"Band of Brothers" as the ad theme.
There is a real motivator.
TR
Agreed. Scuttlebut (is that an Army term?) over at armyocs.com is that they show episodes of BOB at OCS as object lessons on leadership. I hope to one day find out for myself.
--Aric
Agreed. Scuttlebut (is that an Army term?) over at armyocs.com is that they show episodes of BOB at OCS as object lessons on leadership. I hope to one day find out for myself.RUMINT is probably more appropriate here...we toured Andersonville for an ethics seminar...later, in the Advanced Course (okay, five years later), we watched Breaker Morant for the same purpose...
if you go to OCS, there are some door handles at Wigle Hall that might need some Brasso since last i saw them..:D
any officer on active duty who comes up with a good idea regarding enlistment and retention is likely to wind up in Recruiting Command...TR would be loathe to drop that idea in the local suggestion box..."Great idea, TR...you're just the man to head up our new retention marketing program..."
i suspect such an assignment would make him most unhappy...
LOL good point!
I suspect your last comment could be the understatement of the year...
aricbcool
01-24-2006, 20:53
RUMINT is probably more appropriate here...we toured Andersonville for an ethics seminar...later, in the Advanced Course (okay, five years later), we watched Breaker Morant for the same purpose...
I was raised in a Navy family. Still trying to adapt to proper phraseology. :D Thanks.
Breaker Morant... Found it on amazon.com on DVD. I'll definitely check it out.
if you go to OCS, there are some door handles at Wigle Hall that might need some Brasso since last i saw them..:D
Oddly enough, I'm looking forward to it.
Regards, and thanks for the movie recommend.
--Aric
Breaker Morant... Found it on amazon.com on DVD. I'll definitely check it out."Shoot straight, you bastards...don't make a mess of it..."
Oddly enough, I'm looking forward to it. :D :boohoo :rolleyes: LOLOLOLOL,,,
but i have no leg to stand on either...
best of luck, though.
aricbcool
01-24-2006, 21:11
:D :boohoo :rolleyes: LOLOLOLOL,,,
but i have no leg to stand on either...
best of luck, though.
No really. After sitting here for the last 3 months doing nothing but staring at a computer monitor waiting for servers to break, some menial labor sounds fun. Of course you won't hear me saying that to the TACs... :D
I should get my degree by October. After that, the real work begins.
Thanks,
Aric
Of course you won't hear me saying that to the TACs... :D
I should get my degree by October. After that, the real work begins.
there are many environments within the Armed Forces where the Grey Man approach is called for, if you get my drift...
aricbcool
01-24-2006, 21:19
there are many environments within the Armed Forces where the Grey Man approach is called for, if you get my drift...
Roger that, Sir. :cool:
--Aric
I'm a prior service 11C1P, currently a Law Enforcement Officer. 33 yrs old. I haven't found anything about an enlistment bonus for the NG SF Groups. Is there such a thing? Someday soon I hope to have the guts to make the commitment. I did find the POC list on this site. I figured someone on this site would be able to answer without me bothering one of the guys at the Unit with elementary questions. Thanks in advance.
The Reaper
10-29-2006, 22:56
That is what a recruiter is for.
Call him and ask.
TR
Interesting thoughts Vel, but just because there is a draft it doesn't mean everyone is automatically "in."
Jackass, punk gangsters are almost guaranteed to have at least something serious regarding a criminal record, so these losers would not even be considered for military duty under a draft since the "pool" would be so enormous, the military could pick and choose who they want.
Don't forget the greatest war ever fought, WW2. Was the draft helpful there - Yes. Could WW2 have been won without a draft - NO.
Also, there was a lot less socialism/liberalism/anti gun agenda/soft people/etc. when there was a draft. When there was a draft, most homes had firearms in them, kids didn't accidently shoot themselves or their friends, and they sure as hell didn't take guns to school and shoot other students.
When there was a draft, we acted with a lot more common sense as a country...
Every able-bodied young man had to do 2 yrs whether they wanted to or not. What's wrong with serving your country for two years??? It's the least a young person can do, considerning the "greatness" we enjoy in the U.S. is directly proportional to the efforts and sacrifices made by our veterans in every war.
The draft meant the average guy walking down the street had qualified with a rifle, knew basic infantry tactics & first aid, and had experienced military structure, dicipline, and physical/mental conditioning. Does that make for a tougher average civilian "population" or for a weaker one???
Would our country today as a whole be stronger or weaker if the majority of able-bodied people had experienced military life??? Or, are we stronger today by having the majority of people avoiding military service, and jerking off at the local Starbuck's on their cellphone???
Bring back the draft - it's just common sense...
Back then (the last time we had a draft), most people felt a sense of social responsibility and a duty to serve their country. Boot Camp was tough enough to weed out the people who were incompatable with military service. Today, fewer people are willing to take responsibility for their own actions or safety, and many feel entitled to a life of handouts, free from any obligation or sense of duty. Boot Camp has become "kinder and gentler" , and has much less of a filtering effect on malcontents and misfits. We've spent the last couple of generations paying the least productive members of our society to breed while encouraging an entitlement mentality with no sense of responsibility to Country or fellow man.
I propose this “Pipeline” for all US Citizens, it is just my .02
The “Pipeline to Responsible Citizenship”, or my dream world.
• Attended K-12 within a quality public schools system, restore school to a place where you learn both life skills and knowledge to better understand the world, not simply to take test and cover the A** of the administrators and politicians.
o Between the ages of 10 and 18 required involvement in a community service organization of some sort, I am a fan of the Boy Scouts of America, but that shows my bias as well.
• 2 years required military service
• 2-4 years of higher education at a affordable cost through programs and benefits that are dependent on your years of service and type of service. OR a free education if contracted to return to service post-graduation.
Disclaimer: I am young and those with a better understanding of the world may disagree in principle or practice with this idea, but as I said at the start it is just my .02.
The Reaper
10-30-2006, 10:40
I propose this “Pipeline” for all US Citizens, it is just my .02
The “Pipeline to Responsible Citizenship”, or my dream world.
• Attended K-12 within a quality public schools system, restore school to a place where you learn both life skills and knowledge to better understand the world, not simply to take test and cover the A** of the administrators and politicians.
o Between the ages of 10 and 18 required involvement in a community service organization of some sort, I am a fan of the Boy Scouts of America, but that shows my bias as well.
• 2 years required military service
• 2-4 years of higher education at a affordable cost through programs and benefits that are dependent on your years of service and type of service. OR a free education if contracted to return to service post-graduation.
Disclaimer: I am young and those with a better understanding of the world may disagree in principle or practice with this idea, but as I said at the start it is just my .02.
Starship Troopers, by Heinlein
I agree with your premise, but would allow for non-military service as well.
Also like the position Heinlein takes that you can decline service at the cost of full citizenship.
I would send every American possible outside of the US for at least a couple of weeks to see what the real world is like. The Mormons are all over it with this one. IMHO, that also sets them up to do much better in SF.
Not everyone is suited for higher education. Trade schools or job training is a good alternative for those people.
We spend an incredible amount on public education in this country. The problem is not funding, it is failure to adhere to standards, poor administration, a culture that demeans educational achievement, low-quality teachers being retained, lack of discipline among the students, little competition and few alternatives, and most of all, parents who fail to play an adequate role in their child's education. Maybe we should issue report cards to schools, administrators, teachers, and most of all, parents. If you can't get your kids up, fed, dressed, well-rested, with all necessary paperwork and to school on time on a regular basis, maybe you should not be a parent.
I have kids in elementary school. I can walk into their classroom right now and ID kids who are only there because of the free meals and babysitting. Their parent(s) (usually only one) don't care and are not involved. Of 26 kids in the classroom, only a half-dozen parents or so will volunteer to help out at least once in the school year with PTA, classroom events, field trips, holiday parties, etc. I suspect that many do not even ask the kids if they have done their homework. This lack of discipline and personal responsibility are killing this country. It isn't the teachers' job to educate your child. It is yours. I think to some degree, parental participation should be required, or you can just send your kid directly to jail (or the Soylent Green factory) where they will eventually go after they drop out of school, baby up, and get fired from the fast food industry.
If you become pregnant before graduating high school, you may have a problem. If it happens two or more times, you definitely are missing the cause and effect lesson and should be removed from the gene pool.
This is not to say that a single parent cannot do a good job of raising a child, but if you have to earn the family living while simultaneously doing the feeding, household maintenance, errands, mentoring, parenting, shuttling, and maintaining a decent social life, it is going to be more than twice as hard. If you are attempting it without at least a high-school education and involvement by the father, it is going to be an almost insurmountable challenge.
Step up, cowboy up, and raise a healthy, well-educated, contributing member of society. IMHO, it is as important a mission as defending our great nation.
Just my .02, YMMV.
TR
I would send every American possible outside of the US for at least a couple of weeks to see what the real world is like. The Mormons are all over it with this one.
Not everyone is suited for higher education. Trade schools or job training is a good alternative for those people.
I completely agree, I learned so much about myself, my country, and how lucky I was growing up where I did when I was in locations such as Quito, Paris, and London…
Step up, cowboy up, and raise a healthy, well-educated, contributing member of society. IMHO, it is as important a mission as defending our great nation.
Just my .02, YMMV.
TR
As Shaft used to say, "Solid!"
And try to pull at least one other kid out of the fire... Someone did it for me -- I was headed to jail or an early grave, as sure as the sun sets in the west.
incommin
10-30-2006, 11:43
I was an Air Force brat along with my three brothers. Our dad worked an extra job to provide things like clothes for school, birthday presents, and Christmas. All four of us boys served in a branch of the military. Money was not the issue or motivating factor. When I retired I had an associates degree..... one of my brothers had a masters in business and continuing his education....
Life in and around the military has always been substandard by civilian standards........ society sees it, a standing military force, as a necessity but does not want to pay for anything it calls frills......
Ages ago I thought dropping the draft was a terrible thing. Now I have come to believe that a professional army beats one filled with people who's hearts and minds are elsewhere. Now my concerns for the military is this downsizing and handing over combat support jobs to contractors......
Oh yea, I got a reenlistment bonus of 9K back in 1969 and thought I had hit the lottery.....
Jim
Anyone know of any programs kids can get involved in where they can spend some time in another country. I am talking high school age. Something like exchange programs. If I ever spend time a a fairly safe place I would like to get my family to spend time there. For the military they have to increase the Base pay and benefits period. Bonuses work but not in the long term.
x SF med
10-30-2006, 17:14
Keith-
there are Student Exchange Programs and Summer Overseas programs - I have no clue what they're called anymore but you might want to check wit hthe kid's schools to see what's there.
Rumblyguts
10-31-2006, 07:50
Mr. Kgoerz,
I'm no expert on exchange programs, but in addition to schools, various civic organizations also do exchanges. I believe the Rotary Club has an exchange program, but I haven't had any experience with it. I know for certain that YMCA has an exchange program as well. Through the latter, I've worked with staff from Africa, Europe, and Central America.
Hope that helps,
Bill
Links:
Rotary International, Youth Exchange: http://www.rotary.org/programs/youth_ex/
YMCA: http://www.internationalymca.org/
Note: The ICCP prgram seems to be the most widely used.