Can money improve the retention of personnel in the military? Will this attract better recruits?

2016-04-25T22:23:55-04:00

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2016 10:34 PM

2016-04-25T22:34:46-04:00

Money always talks! However, if the SM still doesn't feel like they belong, contributing, or even valued there isn't enough money in the world to keep the "best" Soldiers!!! Soldiers still want to be valued and in today's Military it's hard to feel like we are valued!

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2016 10:36 PM

2016-04-25T22:36:42-04:00

MAJ David Vermillion Sir, It may attract more potential recruits to choose from. It may also encourage current service members to stay in. I would hope that folks still join in order to serve their country, and not because of money.

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Apr 25 at 2016 10:40 PM

2016-04-25T22:40:16-04:00

Retention? Thought the Govt. was drawing down. Did I miss a meeting?

Response by MAJ James Woods made Apr 25 at 2016 10:48 PM

2016-04-25T22:48:24-04:00

Nope. It hasn't made that much of an impact the last 20 years. Don't expect it ever will.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2016 10:50 PM

2016-04-25T22:50:51-04:00

I can't speak for Active Duty, but the NG is working hard to retain soldiers. The problem is to stay for what? The guys who didn't want to deploy are long gone, and now the guys who stayed for the deployments are leaving. Retention bonuses are nice, but one won't keep me. For the Guard side, they would do much better taking the money they blow on bonuses and using it to fund schools. Soldiers can't get on the EPS list because they haven't completed NCOES that they can't get a slot for, but they can get a 12,000 reenlistment bonus? I'd reup for EOCA, crap, even Combative level one! Fact is, they don't care what I'd re-up for, because I'll re-up anyway. Unless I can go AF EOD.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2016 11:00 PM

2016-04-25T23:00:21-04:00

I think if bonuses were more realistic. Entry level bonuses of 15-20K you wouldn't see that in the private sector. Bonuses need to be smaller and tax free. Secondly, money only entices. We need to stop pandering to likes and dislikes. The military has standards and traditions.

Response by MAJ Raúl Rovira made Apr 26 at 2016 1:17 AM

2016-04-26T01:17:37-04:00

I met a 92L (Petroleum Lab Specialist) who came into the Army with a huge bonus. The chain of command placed him in the training room. His leaders knew that he received a bonus and kept him in the company training room. His morale was low. He may have ETSed. His commander and 1SG missed the opportunity here. There are many more soldiers like this out there.

Around 2006 the army was giving retention bonuses to officers. Many of my friends in year group 99 and 00 took the 25K-30K bonus. They had already plan to stay in anyways. Then most of them were kicked out through the OSB and were able to retire under TERA. Awesome, Pay them to stay and kick them out with lifetime of benefits.

I know I mixed bonuses for recruits/retention with officer retention bonuses in my response. The point is, throwing money at the problem rarely fixes it. It is a temporary bandage. For those in hard debt it sounds like a great escape.

Adjustment of the Base Pay tables can yield a different set of results, or problems if poorly adjusted.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2016 1:22 AM

2016-04-26T01:22:44-04:00

The answer is.?.look at the bonuses they give to Special Forces personnel with experience to stay in instead of going to good-paying private security companies!

I recall how in 2008 they offered me $10 grand as a Civil Affair's Captain to stay in another 3-5 years. This was offered to most Civil Affairs. I can't remember the details but some of you recall.

They were losing too many (leave the service/resigning) during the surge in Iraq/Afghanistan. Money talks and BS walks. Civil Servants don't work at GS-1 levels all their lives. Some Officers and Senior Enlisted contemplating a move out of the service will stay if given incentives especially if the latest sensing in the military is the feeling is (right nor wrong) that higher does not care about them or that training is truncated due to lack of funds due to the sequestered budget in a high optempo environment like the last 3 years.

What do you think, Rallypoint?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2016 1:26 AM

2016-04-26T01:26:57-04:00

Is the graphic an actual label pin? Where can I get one? It fits with active VFW, American Legion,DAV, etc. working members.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2016 3:26 AM

2016-04-26T03:26:36-04:00

This is really an economic issue: trends show retention/recruitment is easy during bad economic times and harder during good economic times.

Throwing money at a problem can help when the economy is good, because when the economy is doing well, those in the military can leave the military and find good jobs. When the economy is bad, throwing money at the problem probably doesn't help----folks aren't getting out of the military when the economy is bad for reasons related to pay.

I think most of us in the military would be ok with making more money. I doubt that most who think they are under compensated really understand the value of their total compensation package.

Response by CPT Mark Gonzalez made Apr 26 at 2016 6:45 AM

2016-04-26T06:45:12-04:00

For officers in the medical corps and medical services corps it would have to be a lot of money. We serve due to patriotism or ADSO's and many will continue to serve beyond their ADSO as at that point they are already so invested. For the others though it would have to be a tremendous amount of cash as the military cannot even come close to matching the private sector compensation. All the money would do is retain people who were already staying or average to below average talent. The money has to be really targeted and in order to properly target you have to improve a terrible talent management system.

Response by PO3 David Fries made Apr 26 at 2016 6:48 AM

2016-04-26T06:48:25-04:00

Sir, money for what though? Higher pay? More ESRB's? Higher ESRB's? More special duty pays?
At the end of the day, I don't really believe that money is the answer. An unmotivated SM will not magically be more motivated when there is more money on the table. It may also keep more subpar SM in (that aren't being sorted out normally).

Response by MAJ Michael Pauling made Apr 26 at 2016 7:40 AM

2016-04-26T07:40:00-04:00

not as much as belief and value..........Recruits of quality need to know they can believe the Military will do right by them and not use/abuse/lose them when the budget roulette game spins........Army needs to show value that is not just in dollars but in development, nurturing and more importantly fairness or opportunity.

Response by SSgt Dan Montague made Apr 26 at 2016 9:35 AM

2016-04-26T09:35:51-04:00

I was never a fan of tossing money to recruit or retain people. You are still going to find that even the shitbirds would stay in for a check with 3-4 zeros on it. I honestly believe the newer generations are just getting spoiled. Maybe at the time of recruitment they are promised the world. We can go back 50+ years when it comes to quality of life in the military. Just in the last 15 years that quality supersedes a lot of civ life styles. I don't think money is the answer.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2016 9:43 AM

2016-04-26T09:43:20-04:00

Hi, Major Vermillion.

In the short time table and broad scheme, maybe. Recruits could flock to recruiters if there were high enlistment offers, and people might stay for high reenlistment bonuses.

But people are going to get out, for a wide variety of reasons. More money would only be an unsustainable stopgap. Minimizing that crack in the military’s knowledge base and retaining that expertise when they leave requires refilling it from the bottom with new recruits, in levels that facilitate a continuation of that expertise. According to the Pentagon, more than two-thirds of America’s youth would fail to qualify for service due to physical, behavioral, or educational shortcomings. (http://www.wsj.com/articles/recruits-ineligibility-tests-the-military [login to see] ).

We have an outflow of highly trained experts, and an inadequate pool from which draw for their replacement.

You may use the "Back" button in your browser to return to the previous page or click Home to return to the WSJ.com home page.

Response by LT Erik Frederick made Apr 26 at 2016 10:13 AM

2016-04-26T10:13:55-04:00

Id like to think the military is listening to TOP PERFORMERS when they exit to understand why and solving for that. Ive been out since '94 and remeber very few people getting out simply to make more money though I do think there needs to be a higher minimum for junior enlisted with families.

Response by MAJ Mark Smith made Apr 26 at 2016 1:38 PM

2016-04-26T13:38:27-04:00

Recruiting and retention are two separate topics.
My youngest son (3.8 GPA and Eagle Scout) wants to join the Army but is having major difficulties getting in. They are being nit picky about the most mundane issues that were taken for granted a few years ago. Plus, the jobs available are, well, not good ones and offer absolutely no incentives, i.e., bonuses, location, or schools (airborne, air assault, etc). A good friend of mine's son (honor student from private HS, and BA graduate) just went in. He just graduated as honor student from infantry school (11B) and was chosen for SF training, but because he had a grease-fire burn on his arm (from working in fast food) they automatically stated it was a self-inflicted wound/self-harm and pulled him from the training. It's as if they are looking for any reason not to recruit quality soldiers.
The retention question is bizarre now, in that, I keep reading and seeing guys at the VA being given pink slips. So its not really a matter of wanting them to stay, but more about letting them stay.

Response by SPC Rory J. Mattheisen made Apr 26 at 2016 2:29 PM

2016-04-26T14:29:46-04:00

I believe that reinstating standards, and an in-house problem-solving policy is the only way to bring soldiers back to the military. Not one of the "career soldiers" I was in with made it to 10 years, the ones who stayed in were the game playing, politicking, shit bags that should have never made it out of Basic.

Response by MAJ Matt Williams made Apr 26 at 2016 9:09 PM

2016-04-26T21:09:53-04:00

Retention and recruiting are two different things. Often large recruiting bonuses attract folks that only stay for one enlistment.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 27 at 2016 8:26 AM

2016-04-27T08:26:42-04:00

MAJ David Vermillion Yes, it seems true for most professions, why would it be any different for the military. However there is this pesky fear of getting killed in a war-zone thing that deters a great many folk from military service.

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Apr 27 at 2016 10:39 AM

2016-04-27T10:39:28-04:00

Honestly, I don't believe money has anything to do with it. You either want to be a part of the military or you don't. Money isn't going to make putting up with the daily crap any easier. Money won't make you any less frustrated when you are standing in front of your superiors because the service members in your charge can't be trusted to act like the grown adults they are.

Hell, I knew Marines who popped on a urinalysis right after cashing their reenlistment bonus check.

Don't get me wrong, everyone loves money. But money can only make you put up with so much and in our line of work, there isn't enough money for what we deal with.

Response by MAJ Ray McCulloch made Apr 28 at 2016 7:59 PM

2016-04-28T19:59:57-04:00

I would say review the information regarding the Captain Career Retention Bonus information to find out how many people took the money versus all the other options available.