With the Potential of Future Benefits Dwindling is the Military Still Worth a 20 Year (plus) Career?

CCMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 15:36:06 -0500

With what lately seems like an ambush (or dare I say an all out assault) on much of our pay, benefits, and entitlements; is anyone else finding it more and more difficult convincing our younger troops to consider staying in the military for the "long-haul" and making a career out of it?<div><br></div><div>Now I'm sure many of us didn't sign up for the money... but from my perspective and humble opinion, after 20+ years of service in the Armed Forces, I find that there's the potential to become less and less marketable for employment in the civilian sector. Just speaking in my case, as I plan to serve the entire 30 years, and with then by reaching the age of 50, I don't expect a whole lot of employers showering me with opportunities necessarily. </div><div><br></div><div>This is one of the main reasons I see in the benefit of retirement pay... too off-set and/or compensate for dedicating a large part of your life in service to our country and sacrificing other career opportunities for ourselves (and family even). </div><div><br></div><div>Again, I love what I do and wouldn't change a thing as my career in the Air Force has been good to both me and my family.  Though just curious as to what other leaders are doing to convince the future generation of leaders (that we'll need to replace us) to stay and make a career out of the military?</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks in advance for your responses... </div>

Response by SFC James Baber made Mar 8 at 2014 8:25 PM

SFC James Baber — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 20:25:22 -0500

CMSgt,

I understand exactly what you are saying, I did 27 years and figured I would be greatly marketable with a Law Enforcement background with emphasis on Anti-Terrorism/FP discipline, but whether it was private, state or federal, I was looked at kind of like having the plague. I truly feel much of it was a combination of the stigma of being a multi-combat veteran and the age factor, but as we all know both are hard to prove in the market as they can always use the excuse of they decided to go a different direction.

I think that while benefits and perks are being cut left and right, the aspect of convincing our younger troops to stay in for the long haul actually would be a simple task, think about it from this point of view, with the current market being as weak as it is for employment opportunities for even our younger troops who get out after 1st term of service they are in the same boat, but if they remain there is the opportunity to at least have some future benefits and the potential for some of the current employment and stability issues to be resolved by the time they come up for retirement as well. Another aspect if they get out now and don't have a degree, they won't be able to work on a degree which is going to be needed to be competitive not only today but for the future, so that is another incentive to utilize as well. There are many benefits still available, as we as senior NCOs know there are can be utilized to convince, sometimes we have to break it down to their level for them to understand and comprehend the benefits as well, even though they are currently being reduced, they can always be reinstated again just as many that were taken away after Vietnam were put back into place and increased in the late 80s/early 90s.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2014 10:11 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 08 Mar 2014 22:11:34 -0500

<p>CMSgt,</p><p>I would say that if the benefits where not what they currently are I would have probably left after my first tour. Realizing I would be giving up 20+ years of my life, my time with my family, my body for the promise of a retirement check at the end was the agreement. The money wasn't the reason I joined but it was the kicker that made me stay in so long. </p>

Response by BG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2014 7:36 PM

BG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 19:36:48 -0400

To put things in perspective, the Reserve Component SMs work for the same career tenure and pro-rate thier retirement pay as one day equals one point with monthly drill pay being double pay and points. The total of all those points are pro-rated at retirement compared to an AC retiree at twenty years. So a typical reservist earns perhaps 2000 points which compares to 7200 points (20 yrs. times 360 days). Obviously, those of us with AD time and multiple deployments have earned more. The result calculates the retirement pay which is not received until the retiree turns 60. And if you think Reservists work only one weekend a month, you will believe anything a recruiter says. Yes, that's what we knew when we signed up, but compare that with what AC receives before you complain too much.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2014 8:17 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 20:17:40 -0400

CMSgt, I think everyone's situation is different with this. I believe that an SM with a family to provide for has more of a reason for staying in for the stability and benefits to take care of their loved ones. I am a single Soldier who is going to ETS in two months. I want to continue towards my degree, stay marketable as not being too "old" for some career fields, and not prematurely age my body any more than I have too. For myself personally, I do not think the benefits of staying in until retirement are worth it for my own situation. Different strokes for different folks.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2014 8:30 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 20:30:43 -0400

CMSgt Davis,

I think your answer is in your question. I think the design of the future benefits is to make people steer away from the 20 year retirement or make it harder to achieve, thus saving the government money in retiree pay and compensation.

I will however say this. I interact with a lot of young people on a pretty routine basis as a recruiter. I can maybe count on one hand, the amount of them that ask about the long term benefits. As far as they are concerned right now, the opportunity to serve no matter how long it may be, still outweighs the benefits of their current situation. I think what we will continue to see, is that the younger service members will begin to take a better advantage of the benefits that are offered to them earlier on in their career in the hopes of being better than that next guy/gal. This will be the only way to EARN that privilege of being called a retiree from the Armed Forces.

SFC Rosenlund

Response by SFC Gary (Bigsarge) Portier USARMY RET. made Mar 9 at 2014 9:10 PM

SFC Gary (Bigsarge) Portier USARMY RET. — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 21:10:38 -0400

I still don't know what the so called Benefits are supposed to be after Retirement. Please remind or convince me of them.

Response by LTC Yinon Weiss made Mar 9 at 2014 9:24 PM

LTC Yinon Weiss — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 21:24:36 -0400

CMSgt, this is a great question.<div><br></div><div>I echo the thoughts of another poster, in that few people join the military for retirement pay... it become a major incentive for people at 10+ years to stay in. I therefore don't think that any change in retirement pay will significantly influence many junior troops. Those already in, should be grandfathered in though.</div><div><br></div><div>I remember that as a 2nd Lieutenant, I met a bunch of junior Majors who didn't enjoy their time in the military and were not very motivated. When I asked why they were still in, I recall comments like "well, only got 8 more years to go. Can't get out now!" I do not believe that is the kind of incentive structure that is healthy to our force. Maybe you've met some people like this too.</div><div><br></div><div>By reforming military retirement pay to be more in line with modern standards (matching 401K funds, and not an "all or nothing" structure), it creates more flexibility for people to get out when they want... and avoids those Majors (and their enlisted equivalents) that I described above.</div><div><br></div><div>I obviously don't think the military should go back on anything promised to anyone, but I do think that modernizing its retirement system is a good thing.</div>

Response by SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL made Mar 9 at 2014 10:49 PM

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 22:49:56 -0400

I  would not look back in my 24 years, its worth every second, if you love what you do.

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Mar 9 at 2014 11:02 PM

Maj Chris Nelson — Sun, 09 Mar 2014 23:02:03 -0400

I feel that modifications will be made, but with that being said, I also feel that anyone currently in should not have their benefis package changed. I also feel that it is important for young troops to be well educated on the TSP... I never was (until the last 2-3 months....) I could be sitting so much better had I but known.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2014 12:53 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 00:53:08 -0400

I didn't join the military for the pay either, but I do rely on it to put food on the table and a roof over my family's head. I am really concerned with the potential loss in benefits, and I can only hope that if anything does change, that everyone who is currently serving gets grandfathered into the retirement system that we were all working towards and planning for. I get the need to change things because it is getting too costly, but if I would have known that my limited benefits could just go away, I might not have stayed in after my first enlistment...

Don't get me wrong, I didn't join the Army to get rich. I did join to serve my country and for family tradition, but I ended up staying because it really wasn't a bad deal with the steady paycheck, my education paid for, and unique opportunities to travel (even if some were deployments). All I have to do is show up where I need to be, on time, in the right uniform, and stay out of trouble! What worries me is that if they do change the retirement to a 401k system and mandate that it applies to everyone, I won't have much to retire with since I am just about 14 years TIS. If I had known to start planning for that 14 years ago, then it might be a different story. It is even worse for those who are getting ready to retire in the next few years. I almost feel that if the change is that drastic and applies to everyone, I would rather get out now and start working on my post-military career...

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2014 4:25 PM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:25:43 -0400

Chief, first I hope everyone that is concerned is an AFSA member (remember 4 lobbyist). Second, it has become clear that we can't maintain what we are currently doing for retired pay but there seems to be no clear alternative. Some would argue 401K much like the business world but no one in business asks you to get shot at, leave for family for months or years at a time. If we are going to keep asking members to do this, and it looks like we are, then how else do you keep them past one enlistment? Those that love it will stay but in an Air Force built on technical knowledge who do you have left to train the new recruits and how long will they do it? If the 20 year retirement goes away, then I would venture to say that the all-volunteer service would also go away shortly thereafter.

As for getting people to stay, most will stay if their first enlistment is easy and they have goals, mostly school but as soon as you ask them to do some of the above they will be gone (about 75% will be anyway).

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2014 4:36 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:36:30 -0400

I think the more they cut the more difficult a task it is to keep heroes motivated to serve. Many will find other avenues to fulfill whatever desires they have in life. I for one do not think the military lifestyle is a fit for everyone, and I do not see an issue with attrition due to lack of desire to continue service.

Those that ar meant to stay here will, and those that arent will hopefully serve honorably and move on to bigger and better things. My biggest issue at this time is that with the impending cuts etc our young NCOs and SNCOs need to actually lead. We need to stop worrying about the next promotion and start placing our focus on our people!

Active, visible, genuine leadership will retain those we need and remove those we do not...just my $.02

Response by SGT Richard Blue made Mar 10 at 2014 4:41 PM

SGT Richard Blue — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:41:09 -0400

Long answer short. The military will still be worth it for some but not for others.

Response by CCMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2014 4:41 PM

CCMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:41:23 -0400

I appreciate the perspectives and points that are being shared here. And also agree we do need to look at the whole retirement benefit package across the board. I'm liking what I'm hearing about the proposals of possibly affording those that are early on in their service to separate with some financial benefits (i.e. 401(k), TSP, etc). But also agree that those that were promised the original deal should be grandfathered. <div><br></div><div>We've got a lot of Wounded Warriors (past and present) that need a little extra taking care of and could use an extra look at their compensation as well... but I'll save that one for another thread. <br><div><br></div><div>Oh, I heard a great quote the other day by Senator Bernie Sanders:</div><div>"If you can't afford to take care of your Veterans, then don't got to war"</div><div><br></div><div>I think he pretty much summed it up!</div></div>

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2014 6:50 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:50:07 -0400

CMSgt I think you are right it is harder to talk to younger service members to stay in longer or even go for 20 (speaking as one of those younger leaders). Also as a recruiter with the amount of assaults that go on against the military it is hard for me to look at a young man or woman and tell them that the Army is such a great and wonderful opportunity. To kind of scale back, I am looking at doing 20+ years myself (I am at 10 now) and for the government to mess around with the benefits that I am looking forward to after my 20 years is down right disgusting taking into account their own "retirement" benefits. On the other side of the coin for those coming in, I don't agree what so ever with this 401k nonsense to reduce the military budget or however else they want to dress it up. I look at it this way what company does anyone know of that will invest right away into a retirement plan for you at 18 years old? I don't know any but I could be wrong. In my eyes the benefits for serving in the military is pretty straight forward if you don't retire, what other organization in the country offers 100% tuiton and fees payed for to your state run school of choice for only 3 years of work? But to a different point about the assault on military benifits, most of this is done under the guise of budget constraints and reductions correct? I for one will say that yes there is fraud, waste and abuse that goes on with military funds, but I challege anyone to say that there isn't something else that could be reformed before "employee" wages and benefits. We reduce our force, but say "oh look this new piece of technology is worth way more than X." To name a few things that millions upon millions were "wasted" on; the XM8 carbine project supposedly to replace the antiquated M16 series rifles until the scapped the project for being too much money and a hunk a junk to boot, or the project to replace the Kiowa helicopter that has been in service since the forever and every time they design something its another Apache and all we wanted was a scout helicopter, and the last one that really gets me is the Army uniform the one that we have dumped ungodly amount of money into outfitting every one and everything only to go back on the "ACU being the best thing since sliced bread" and issuing the multi-cam because its more effective.

I'll stop my novel now, I typed this out in a quick 15 minutes so I apologize if it all over the place.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2014 7:40 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:40:18 -0400

If our benifets are butchered the way that they're are wanting to to butcher them, then no It's not worth it any more. I love my job and I get great satisfaction doing it, but I have to retire at some point in time. If Im so broken that Im unable to work past the Military how am I going to make it without benifits?

Because of everything going on right now it makes it very difficult to stay in, and even harder to tell good soldiers they should reenlist.

Response by SSG Lisa Rendina made Mar 12 at 2014 8:02 PM

SSG Lisa Rendina — Wed, 12 Mar 2014 20:02:49 -0400

A member of Congress is eligible to receive a pension at age 62 after 5 years of service.<div><br></div><div>Currently, a SM must have served 20 years to receive retirement benefits.  Theoretically, that retiree could begin receiving that pension at age 38.  Upon an initial look, the 24-year difference in age seems huge; until one considers the much more difficult life the SM has had over that of the Congress member.  Military life is physically hard and studies have been done showing the faster-than-normal breakdown of a SM's body.  Military life is hard on the family (frequent moves, deployments, TDYs, field problems, etc).  I could go on.  In simple terms (and yes, I am simplifying this) those who have served in the military are not expected to live as long as average, thus the total number of years of pay-out may be less than what the retired Congress member can expect.</div><div><br></div><div>Of course, I also agree with those who advocate the introduction of a package similar to the private sector where the SM pays into it, invest in yourself as well.  But, placing my faith in the economy and the stock market future in exchange for 20 years of hard and difficult service is not ideal either.  I probably won't ever receive a dime of Social Security despite having paid into it.</div><div><br></div><div>I remember reading somewhere about a poll of SMs who by-and-large wanted larger monthly paychecks and fewer and less long-term benefits.  I couldn't help but think that whomever conducted that poll must have only polled 18-year old Privates and 22-23 year-old Lieutenants who had no intentions of serving beyond their initial terms and certainly not the MAJs and LTCs or SSG-SGMs who have families and time invested.  (Before somebody jumps down my throat, no disrespect to those ranks and ages mentioned, I know not everyone only thinks about the present, not everyone will think about the future, and everyone's circumstances are different).</div><div><br></div><div>http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL30631.pdf<br></div><div><br></div>

Response by CMSgt Mark Schubert made Apr 1 at 2014 12:43 PM

CMSgt Mark Schubert — Tue, 01 Apr 2014 12:43:56 -0400

Hi Chief!
I still think it's a "good deal" and would encourage you to stick to your plan to serve 30. I believe if you trust God, He will bless you with an opportunity when you retire from active duty. There are great jobs out there and many organizations are looking for solid leadership - something that is lacking in our culture in general and not easy to find. You could be an asset to any company. It may be true that you might not have a host of people beating your door down to come work for them, but if you make the appropriate time and due diligence, you will find opportunities.

Sites like this one (Rally Point) and others are great sources of information and more employers are looking at social media resources when recruiting new talent.

God bless you Chief for your 20 years of service and may he grant you more and more wisdom each day as you guide, direct and influence our great Air Force Airmen.

Response by SPC Charles Brown made Apr 1 at 2014 4:56 PM

SPC Charles Brown — Tue, 01 Apr 2014 16:56:12 -0400

Yes, I believe it is worth 20+ years. The greatest benefits are the intangible ones. I have many brothers and sisters that I would not have had if I had never entered the military I would never have had this opportunity. For me it wasn't just about rank and pay, for me it was pride in serving my country; something my father instilled in me unintentionally through his service. I am proud of what I have done in the military, but for a debilitating back injury I would still be in the Army, but life is what it is and we play the hands we are dealt. God bless those who still serve, and thank you for what you do.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 21 at 2014 10:06 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 21 May 2014 22:06:53 -0400

A fascinating question that enters my calculus daily it seems.

Everyone joins for different reasons, and I will not presume to speak for anyone but myself. I joined because of my Grandfather and his service in WWII. I admired what he did and respected that, regardless of what he did with the rest of his life, he served when his country needed him. He lived to see me enlist but died the day before I commissioned.

The man I most admired served 8 years. I have served 10. I have reached the point where I look at the prospect of another decade of defined mustache length and other duck-bite level annoyances and compare them with the pure privilege of having mind and body that allows me to continue to serve. But I also weigh what I have done vs. what I will continue to do. In the words of Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., I have shared the incommunicable experience of war. I was an Infantry Platoon Leader in combat. I was a God on the battlefield. I now face the prospect of a decade of powerpoint, MDMP and staff work the likes of which I can do in a private capacity without anyone questioning my moral turpitude for wanting to go unshaven on a Saturday.

All things being equal, there is no real reason I should remain in the military for personal gain other than my sheer love and respect for its history and my extraordinarily small part in it. I am presently serving as a Military Historian, which I honestly believe is the best possible job for me. I can see myself serving indefinitely in this capacity as every day I serve the history and honor of warriors who have gone before me. I would honestly do what I do for nothing right now if it didn't come with a legion of petty annoyances. I do not know what the future holds, or how I will balance the love of service with my perceptions. Regardless, I am, thanks to a rather spartan lifestyle, prepared to cut sling load if certain cuts are made, namely to tricare benefits. I am more pessimistic than optimistic in how current and future administrations will regard the military, and I will have no qualms in zealously pursuing the course of action that best directly benefits my family. I shall trust that the Army will be able to exist without me, and perhaps part of the 99% who presently do not serve will entertain possible service.

Response by MAJ Dennis Malone made May 28 at 2014 2:55 PM

MAJ Dennis Malone — Wed, 28 May 2014 14:55:01 -0400

I am 70% disabled, with some of the votes still out for VA to decide. I will tell you that the time to retire is when you don't enjoy what you do or can no longer fulfill the role honorably due to disabilities incurred in the line of service. I would still be in, have no doubt, if I could. I did not love every day of my career but I loved what I did each and every day. I have gone back to school at the age of 46 with the hope of enticing employers...know your enemy(or your potential friend in this case). You are the only one that ill make this decision and the only one that will have to live up to it...live up to it honorably.

Response by CWO4 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 16 at 2014 7:27 PM

CWO4 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:27:44 -0400

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jun 16 at 2014 7:31 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:31:33 -0400

It's still better than anything else you're going to find in the civilian world....

Response by TSgt Andrew Neal made Jun 17 at 2014 8:18 PM

TSgt Andrew Neal — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 20:18:34 -0400

If I would not have done my 22 and retired...we would be hurting so bad. I have tons of medical issues that prevent me from holding a full-time job and my wife is a RN. With my retirement and my 90% from VA (I get dual compensation checks; just over $1600 for retirement (taxable) and just over $1600 VA (non-taxable)). I am still making more than she does each month. What I make pays all the bills (including a house payment, 2 car payments, all utilities and about 75% of groceries) and her check is the primary savings we have. Of course, savings is not really a word we can use right now given we are putting two daughters through college at $1500 a semester each. But, without the retirement and VA checks we would be so far in the hole it would be unrecoverable!! I am forever grateful that my commanders fought for me like they did so I was able to stay through my 22 year mark when my medical boards started around my 17 or 18 year mark.

Response by TSgt Andrew Neal made Jun 17 at 2014 8:34 PM

TSgt Andrew Neal — Tue, 17 Jun 2014 20:34:35 -0400

Chief, my brother-in-law is a first sergeant there at Travis in one of the maintenance squadrons (MSgt William (Chris) Mitchell)!!

Drew