Army saving money by keeping Soldiers at a duty station longer. Thoughts?

2015-05-09T22:04:57-04:00

So my question is would it make sense to allow Soldiers to "homestead" to save money? We can all agree the PCS moves cost the Army thousands of dollars for each Soldier. While I enjoy moving around, there are many Soldiers who prefer to remain at a certain duty station as long as possible. Soldiers stationed at larger bases such as JBLM, Benning, and Bragg could still gain the experience required to advance in their careers due to the diversity available to them. Thoughts?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 9 at 2015 11:27 PM

2015-05-09T23:27:17-04:00

I will approve when I PCS to Vicenza or Hawaii.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made May 9 at 2015 11:29 PM

2015-05-09T23:29:06-04:00

Needs of the Army really. It's a case by case, but deployments shouldn't be too long. That is how troops become complacent and mistakes are make. Simple things become overlooked.

Response by SGM Eric Lobsinger made May 10 at 2015 1:06 AM

2015-05-10T01:06:12-04:00

My observations are that many of us reflect on our moving every 1.5 to 2.5 years of service at a duty station as a badge of honor. To an extent, it is. However, if there is an opportunity to extend those tours to 4 to 5 years, then do so, families deserve it. If the installation is large enough, then move the soldier every couple of years within that installation to facilitate a more well-rounded experience. If not, then PCS the soldier to the next duty station. There is no reason that our family members should not experience some stability -- and our soldiers as well.