Aviation Job Search’s Post

Fewer Airmen to Receive Bonuses for Tough Jobs in Fiscal 2025 The Air Force's latest budget request proposes cuts to its special duty assignment pay program, impacting over 700 airmen in critical roles. While the total number receiving bonuses decreases slightly compared to FY24, the cuts target those in the highest and lowest pay tiers. #AirForce #MilitaryLife #BonusPay

"The US Air Force is reopening its Voluntary Retired Return to Active Duty Program to address critical manpower shortages amid concerns about recruitment and retention. With challenges in meeting recruiting goals and retaining pilots, the program aims to tap into retired talent to fill essential roles. The Air Force faces difficulties in attracting and retaining personnel, with a recent Pew Research Center poll highlighting negative views of the military among young adults. The VRRAD program, which opens the door to as many as 1,000 retired service members, offers an opportunity to bridge the Air Force's gaps in manpower if it garners enough interest. However, some critics argue that the program lacks incentives. The program originally launched in 2017, and this revived version is open for applications until Jan. 31, 2026." #USAirForce #ManpowerShortages #RecruitmentChallenges #VRRADProgram #MilitaryRetention #ManpowerSolutions

The US Navy has only 4 major shipyards in the US, which is 1/2 of the shipyards we had in 1989. That does not include the yard at Subic Bay in the Philippines, where the US had a major repair facility. There are 154 private shipyards actively building ships, but only a handful build military vessels for the US Navy. There are 300 private shipyards that have the ability to build ships but are choosing not to do so. The US Navy and Merchant Marine are desperately short of ships and qualified sailors. Shipyards are equally short of qualified workers. Both parties in Congress must allocate budget and resources to resolve this problem. Moreover, Congress, the Executive branch, State governments and private industry need to develop a plan to fast track solutions for both of these problems.

Yes I know that Skillbridge is a luxury - but we miss the point if we oversimplify this. It’s the decision calculus of the commander that destroys the trust we have for them. If commander insists on overworking a non-deployable Marine in their last 180 days(Easing, LIMDU, etc) because no one else can do the job, we are essentially treating Marines as a means to an end rather than valuing them as part of the end goal. (Troop Welfare Always…right?) We often justify this by citing Mission Readiness and Unit Readiness (Whatever that means), effectively preventing one person from enjoying the benefits provided by Congress. It's as if we're saying to junior Marines and NCOs “it's your fault for having the wrong MOS.” As a former XO at a battalion, I can affirm that there's no member in a unit who cannot be replaced immediately. I would say this: "Why are you only taking 45 days?Take more than 90 days - hell ask for the whole 180. Let us figure out how to fill the gap now because we must solve the problem immediately rather than waiting." Even setting aside the luxury of Skillbridge, if a Marine can accumulate 60 days of terminal leave, they should be able to get at least 60 days of Skillbridge - no matter how critical the MOS. What's the commander going to do – deny Skillbridge but approve terminal leave? I've seen this happen.

Well well, here is another 'Rejecting' offer from the professional machinists. How will this effect ALL things flight travel and the military as well, within the pipelines of Supply Chain and the other aux., business that support them as well. #supplychain #aviationdisruptions

It's very rare that I ever post proper rants on this platform, but a recent article in the Telegraph denigrating the Royal Fleet Auxiliary has properly upset me. Grant Shapps can I just say the following..... Yes they're striking, but have you actually looked into why? You talk about changing their contracts because it doesn't make sense that they can strike, but...... Are you going to pay them the same as the armed forces? You don't at the moment - they get 20% less than the Navy and yet do a lot of their work. It wasn't the Navy that went out when the Palestine & Israel issue broke out, it was the RFA, despite what the Navy PR machine said. In fact will you pay them more than their compatriots in the Navy, because the reality is that they are way more qualified, having had to do merchant marine qualifications to get their promotions and progress up the ladder? And will you also take into consideration that they are the first in the firing line if we ever properly go to war? Because why on earth would you bomb an armed Navy ship when you could bomb an unarmed RFA ship. An RFA ship which supplies the fuel for the Navy ship to run, and all the fighter jets & helicopters to do their job? Which once removed, incapacitates the Navy. And that's before I even start on the other benefits that you will need to consider, which they currently get none of. The reservists get more than the RFA. Grant Shapps, they are only asking to be paid fairly. To be paid the same as the compatriots they are always having to cover for - and believe me that includes Christmas cover when the Navy want to be in port. Stuff still needs to be done so they just leave the RFA to do it. If you were to change their contracts to be armed forces, fine. But assuming it's done in the fair way it should be, it would create a far greater cost than if you gave them the pay rise they're asking for now. So why can't that be agreed to? After all those 28 new ships aren't going to be finished to the end of the decade and there's still 6 years to go - if it ever happens!! Please do tell me. https://lnkd.in/ef8tYzrg

A major step in the right direction. Here's hoping domestic rotations change from an average of three years to instead established four or even five years. I heard a lot of reasons (established in the 20th century), why 24-36 month domestic rotations are needed, but those reasons hold less water in the 21st century, especially given 21st century recruiting/retention challenges. I served on the staffs of five 3-star Marine generals (two subsequently promoted to prominent 4-star positions) and was privy to many manpower topic discussions that sometimes included how 24-36 month domestic rotations impacted especially the married/family Marines and sailors. I recall no senior general (though no doubt I missed discussions) saying how much the 24-36 month domestic rotations were truly needed to keep the forces ready.

Attn: United States Air Force Leadership. We can’t fill the posts at our cold weather military bases because we’re thinking about the problem in the wrong direction. Dr. Amos Tversky and Dr. Daniel Kahneman helped us understand “Anticipated Regret” as it pertains to human decision making. A bigger financial bonus is nice but, it won’t solve the problem. Rather than emphasis on the incentive, we should be applying laser-focus on “minimizing perception of potential regret.” Practically speaking this means a better approach might include guaranteeing follow-on orders or, making cold weather service a condition of promotion and/or lateral transfers within the service. Rather than throwing money at the problem, we should conduct a survey to discover why Airmen have an expectation of regret if assigned to a cold weather base. Our incentives should be customized to address these concerns. It’s not a money thing. It’s a “I won’t get those years of my life back” thing. These decisions are too big to be left to senior leaders’ “gut instincts”. Afterall, our guts are full of something aren’t they 😅

I can't say I am surprised by this, and there's already enough folks pointing out how this is only going to further hurt morale (and exacerbate retention problems) that I don't need to comment further here (there are some good memes about it, though...) Although this move may be* necessary to meet deployment requirements, the fact that it's not accompanied by ADDITIONAL policy changes to help assuage the core problem is a shame. The Navy is missing a grand opportunity to use some creative thinking to improve their retention problem in a CONSTRUCTIVE way. One of the biggest issues we consistently see from the DoD is, when faced with a problem, leaders appear to look to a very (very!) limited toolbox for solutions. That toolbox is largely "what did we do in the past?" and it only gets smaller as time goes on. A colleague summed it up nicely this morning on an unrelated topic: "most of the leaders don’t know how to [do things] except using their own previous experiences." This assertion seems to be true here, as well: Manpower (retention/recruiting) problems? Stop-Loss. What about other, more creative solutions? 10 minutes of brainstorming with an old squadron-mate yielded some interesting ideas... -Offer a "re-hire" opportunity for former aviators who resigned. Come back for a Cat-Other syllabus in the FRS, one sea tour (guaranteed, no commitment extension), with an option (at request/PERS approval) to be re-commissioned full-time. -Offer a "low-hanging fruit" re-screening of prior waiver denials and get NPQed aviators back in the cockpit. Is the aeromedical risk of a SNFO who got diagnosed with a bee allergy really more significant than the forced retention of aviators who did 4 deployments in 2 years? (I'd consider coming back for the above if NAMI reconsidered my denied waiver...another three years in the Hornet sounds great!...provided I trusted I wouldn't get extended forever and ever after that...) -Incentivize Aviators from other (healthy) communities to transition. P-3 DH bonus acceptance rate is ABOVE target (while F/A-18 pitifully low). -Offer an accelerated pipeline for NFO-to-pilot applicants staying within T/M/S. Strike/Fighter WSOs would need to be taught stick-and-rudder skills (takes time), but already are proficient in tactics (saves time). How fast could you get a WSO through SNA training and an accelerated FRS syllabus? ...the list goes on. Plainly none of these could happen overnight. Some would even take a literal Act of Congress. But wouldn't Congress, and all of us, be better served with more creativity than simply, "we have an input/output problem, so we're just going to stop the output [at the further expense of morale and retention]"? What are some great ideas you have for getting the Strike/Fighter community "healthy" again? *I have no idea whether it's necessary or not, and unless you're at NAVPERSCOM, you probably don't either. Let's assume it is for purposes of discussion.

I often talk to members of the Military Community about considering the "Four C's" when selecting a job: 1. Compensation - because of course it's important, along with other employee benefits 2. Culture - just as important as compensation... no one is going to want stay long in an unsupportive, negative work-environment 3. Contribution - fulfilling and meaningful work, contributing to an important mission... it's why so many of us joined the military 4. Commute - I'm talking about an overall positive Work-Life Balance and use "commute," an important component of WLB, so I can just call it the "Four C's," which is more catchy than "Three C's and W" At General Dynamics Information Technology, we're on a journey to be a company with a soul that delivers for our customers and we're investing in our people and leaders to make it a reality. We highly value and appreciate the experience, training, skills, and leadership that members of the the military community possess... 30% of our employees are veterans. If you are interested in working for a company that values you and delivers on the "Four C's" then check out the careers that GDIT may have available for you. https://lnkd.in/eZuiKses #GDIT #militaryemployment #veteranemployment #militaryspouseemployment