Recruiting numbers for May have been delayed

[Embar Angylwrath]

I misspoke. Still doesn't disprove my point - they are loosening standards for soldiers because they need the bodies.

They are loosening the standards for recruits... recruits who must then complete basic training, and then complete the requisite training for their particular MOS (they still use that acronym?)

And, uh.. you haven't proved a point. You misstated some fact, and used it to support an assumption.

[Syeni Soulslasher MK6]

Yes MOS is alive and well as well as ASI

[Fetten]

That article doesn't state any standards that are being lowered other then an Army General speaking for USN/USMC personnel in regards to tattoos and it's not really something he would be privvy to, ya know being in the Army and not the Navy. In fact here's a quote from the article itself that contradicts that

An army spokeswoman said: "We are doing our best to decrease attrition level, but we have not and will not lower our standards for recruiting and retaining soldiers."

That is part of the directive for recruitment for the serviices. All the services are downsizing and the goal is to get quality members in those numbers not just numbers. In many cases the standards are being raised, not lowered.

Those problem troops have always been handled at the field level first then up through the chain and are a case by case situation. The only troops that I can think of that would not be sent home asap are those that have received bonuses associated with enlistment. So again it's not something of new shocking relevance rearing it's ugly head, it's just being presented that way.

[Dlaet]

Fetten, my question to you is in regards to your statement about downsizing. I realize that the goal has been a "light, mobile fighting force", but isn't now not the time to implement a force reduction? It makes absolutely no sense to me.

I also understand that you can do more with one highly trained, motivated soldier/sailor/marine/air[person] than you can with a poorly trained, unmotivated group. So, we have a double-edged sword - on one side we want good people, and on the other we need to fill spots. What do you do as a recruiter?

WSJ Article Regarding this issue
The actual memo, by the way, regarding retention is at the bottom of the article.

4. AS AN ADDITIONAL MEANS OF REDUCING ATTRITION, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY SEPARATION AUTHORITY FOR FIRST-TERM ENLISTED SOLDIERS IS ELEVATED FROM THE BATTALION COMMANDER TO THE SPECIAL COURT-MARTIAL CONVENING AUTHORITY (SPCMCA) FOR THE FOLLOWING SEPARATION CATEGORIES PRESCRIBED BY AR 635-200: FAILURE TO MEET PROCUREMENT MEDICAL FITNESS STANDARDS (PARAGRAPH 5-11); PREGNANCY (CHAPTER 8 ); ALCOHOL OR OTHER DRUG ABUSE REHABILITATION FAILURE (CHAPTER 9 ); ENTRY LEVEL PERFORMANCE AND CONDUCT (CHAPTER 11); UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE (CHAPTER 13); SELECTED CHANGES IN SERVICE OBLIGATIONS (CHAPTER 16, PARAGRAPHS 16-4 THRU 16-10); AND FAILURE TO MEET BODY FAT STANDARDS (CHAPTER 18 ). WITHHOLDING OF SEPARATION AUTHORITY FROM BATTALION COMMANDERS, AND ELEVATING IT TO SPCMCA LEVEL, IS DIRECTED BY HQDA PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 1-19E, AR 635-200. SEPARATION AUTHORITY FOR CHAPTERS 5, 10, 14, AND 15 REMAIN AT THE SPCMA LEVEL.

[Fetten]

Dlaet,
Downsizing and attrition are handled as seperate issues even though they interact with each other.

Downsizing has to be implemented with retention of troops in key areas otherwise those communities(read as mos/nec, job field, etc) could be left without senior leadership that would adversly affect the mission of that field. It has to be balanced by the right numbers of senior and junior troops leaving the service to not affect promotion potential, too many junior members leaving leave the job top heavy without junior level labor, too many senior people leaving results in lack of job performance.

Attrition effects alot of aspects from recruiting through retention and can be used to modify inventories of people. We track seperate attrition levels from recruiting, training, member's career path and retention. It's difficult to adjust attrition in the recruiting portion but for the Navy it seems to stay fairly static anyway. The areas we can impact are at retention and through that career path. In theory if we can convince them to stay with bonuses or other incentives we will have motivated members that have already been highly trained.

The Army's issue is they know exactly how many people are leaving the Army each month and how many are going to boot camp each month. If the numbers don't meet in the middle they will have units with missing personnel for portions of time. Also those problem soldiers being handled at the field unit for the issues stated in the article may be getting a bum rap by the unit commanders and being sent home against their wishes in some cases. In others they may not be dismissing them properly. For example for Fitness performance I've seen individuals processed out of the service because they didn't meet the height/weight/body fat standards even though they could score excellent or outstanding on the fitness exam. They were physically fit but didn't fit the mold by military standards for body compostion and still wanted to serve in the military. Those issues are compunded by the fact they are losing good soldiers as well.

There are other things the Army could do to increase recruitment and retention without suffering quality or breaking rules but at this point it won't have much affect until next year. That is unless they start offering very inticing enlistment/reenlistment bonuses soon. I also feel the Army may have reacted prematurely before getting the summer months numbers they also may not have reveiwed Delayed Entry numbers properly.

One other thing until the BRAC list is approved downsizing is an aside thought with the current recruitment issues. If it is approved as requested the Army may fair better then they think they are now.

Hope that answers some of the issues for you, if not feel free to ask I was kind of distracted at points posting this.

[Dlaet]

Yes, you answered a bevy of questions, Fetten. But I still worry, rightly or wrongly, that mustering a sufficient army may become more challenging, specifically in the event of long-term action in Iraq or Afghanistan, coupled with long-term lower recruitment numbers. As a civil engineer, I throw factors of safety into everything, and am a trained pessimist.

In essence, if recruitment keeps dropping you can expect stop-loss measures to increase and expect reserve forces to be pulled into full time duty more and more.

That is already happening, isn't it?

[Fetten]

Unfortunately yes but hopefully only temporarily
As I said before there are a number of resolutions in the mix and some are being implemented now. But with all new ideas some times they take time to implement.
Even though I think the Army will fall short of it's goal I don't think it's going to be as big as they think it will be. They really should have collected June's numbers first to see where they were before making the announcement imo. Their shortfall could also be absorbed next year and by the upcoming BRAC

[Partha]

They claim the shortfall is 25%. However, they lowered the number sought without a public announcement as well. If you were to use the number from last month, the shortfall would be ~40%.

[Klast Brell]

And in another example of the Bush Whitehouse hiding numbers it finds embarasing
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1- ... [quote]The Army and Marine Corps, as they struggle with recruiting shortfalls, will no longer announce their monthly recruiting numbers at the beginning of each month. [/quote]
Layoff numbers? Under the rug
Global terrorism numbers? Under the rug
Military recruitment numbers? Check

[Ddrak]

Replace "Bush Whitehouse" with "Pentagon" in the above post for a little accuracy.

Dd

[Kulaf]

What does accuracy have to do with it?

[Tallas Treewalker]

Just a side note. AF is still overmanned. I'm looking at either having to cross train or seperate when my re-enlistment window comes up in about a year. I just read in the AF Times a couple days ago they're considering paying people to leave the AF involuntarily. Up to six figure payments depending on rank and time in service.