A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Retention Deficit



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old January 17th 04, 01:09 AM
Steven James Forsberg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Retention Deficit


B
: positions, and fewer still in the media, know anybody in the enlisted
: ranks. It's also an easily supportable case, since all enlistees sign
: a contract that provides the government with the option of extending
: enlistment indefinitely. Objections from soldiers or airmen whose
: retirements are delayed can easily (and to some degree, accurately)
: be dismissed as the timeless griping of the enlisted. (Stop-loss also
: applies to officers.) The idea that such treatment has so far created

Of course, there is an even greater danger that lurks in the very
important 'contract' that military members sign. The US government can,
at any time and without prior notification, alter pay and benefits to include
eliminating them. The current military paradigm is centered on the idea that
the *worst* possible things is temporary pause in the increase of benefits.
If, however, the US runs short of money -- particularly in the context of a
weak economy that may bring more potential recruits -- there might be a
need/want to *reduce* military compensation levels.
The 'all volunteer' military means different things to different
people. To many, it means a military that operates on "market principles"
that include wages and benefits sometime going down in accord with supply
and demand, not always up. Others, however, take a more "union" approach
that military members "deserve" a certain level of pay and benefits, and
that market principles should not be applied.
One of the key ongoing struggles wrt the Navy is the 'deployment
pay' issue/fiasco. Congress passed the law, and the people stuck on long
deployments sure as heck want the money, but the executive branch doesn't
want to spend the money and the program is still not implemented (maybe
in a few years, say those resisting). This is a case over disagreement on
the raising of compensation -- you could imagine the screams if the government
ever tried to lower levels of compensation. As unlikely as such a track might
seem, it is something to seriously think about.

regards,
----------------------------------------------------------------



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Europe squadrons honored for high retention rates Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 January 10th 04 08:14 PM
Hei polish moron also britain is going to breach eu deficit 3% rule AIA Military Aviation 0 October 24th 03 11:06 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.