If you were offered early retirement (15 years or more) with a reduced pension, 2% per year, would you do it, why?

2016-07-29T13:03:05-04:00

In the mid-90s our military faced a similar draw-down, minus QMP, QSP and TERA, however, they retired percentages by the AOC/MOS, the "Accessions Heavy Approach". This is the polar opposite of the "smart-sizing" approach of today. Bottom line: the 90's approach gave the option to the Soldier, the current approach gives the option to the DOD. Your call.
https://www.cnas.org/sites/default/files/publications-pdf/CNAS_RightSizingTheForce_Rostker_0.pdf

CNAS_RightSizingTheForce_Rostker_0.pdf

ûL&Y&9Ä%ÆuÇMÄsâsãã¿NpJP%ìMIJlN§|êªO=§%§mL»Ðu¡váx:HoL¿!ÈÉøC&13#s$ó/YÙÜìâì=ÙOsbsúrnåºçsOæ1óòvç=ËËïÏ\ä»hÙóÖê#ÂÂãoZTÔUt}`IÃsKV-ýY,+TB(É/ÙSò,]6*-W:#È7Ë*Êe¿ò^YDYÙ}UjêAyTù`ù#µD=þ¶"b{ÅÊôÊ+Ê:!kJ4Gµmötµ}uCõ%K7YVfFßYÕ.=bàá?SîÆÆºÈººçõyõØ Úkï5%4ým7lqlioZlG+ÔZÚzÍmzyâò]íÔöÊö?uøuôw|¿"ÅN»ÎåwW&ÜÛeÖïº*|ÕöÕèjõê5k¶yÝèþÇgç^yïkEkÖþlÝD_pß¶õÄõÚõ7DmØÕÏîoê¿»1mãál{àûMÅÎ nßLÝlÜ

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 29 at 2016 1:05 PM

2016-07-29T13:05:23-04:00

No I would not have. Over the course of a lifetime that 10% reduction could equal a few hundred thousand dollars! And honestly, at 15 years I knew I could (and did) squeak out another measly 5 years.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 29 at 2016 5:35 PM

2016-07-29T17:35:08-04:00

I think they should offer it a certain number per rank per MOS in over strength MOS's as determined by the Army. It would help clear out over strength MOS's however it should not be a blanket option like it was in the 90's due to the possibility of losing critical skills.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 29 at 2016 6:51 PM

2016-07-29T18:51:39-04:00

In a heartbeat without hesitation or second thought.
I am an E-7 at 14 years, made SFC at 10 years. The Army has changed drastically (mainly for the worst) and unless another major conflicts erupts soon the shenanigans will continue. I worry daily about the downsizing of the Army leaving me with nothing but a broken body (back, hips and other war injuries from Iraq) and worse-off mind (memory mainly)—not to mention no way to support my family. A retirement at 35%-40% is a better than nothing at all and daily anxiety.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 30 at 2016 7:23 AM

2016-07-30T07:23:15-04:00

Most personnel who I think would take up on this option are possibly fearing not making it to 20, offered very-very secure jobs, or have the means and capabilities to retire without being financially strapped. I hit 15 years in a few days and the Army has been a great experience for me (even though challenging at times) and would not take it.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Aug 1 at 2016 9:38 AM

2016-08-01T09:38:06-04:00

It depends on how shrewd you are and what your plans are after say 60. You know you must do something else to build up retirement, be it 401s, annuities, etc. Question is what you do with the early out pension? That's where the shrewd level comes in. If you work where you live within the means of that salary, having the pension grow can pay off big time.

If you always have a buck burning a hole in your pocket, it won't matter.....

Response by LTC Curtis Madsen made Mar 14 at 2017 6:59 PM

2017-03-14T18:59:32-04:00

At least these days, TERA isn't for those who are choosing to retire, they're being told to retire. For Soldiers like myself in the AGR system, you're just hoping to make it to 15 years and that TERA will be extended beyond 2018. It must be different for AC? Why would you turn down so,even pension vs no pension?