Should Military Implement 'Voluntary' Separation?

2013-11-26T22:51:04-05:00

During this time of accelerated drawdown (down-sizing, right-sizing, etc.), should the military implement VOLUNTARY separations across the board?<br><br>Why or why not?<br><br>What else should the military consider to separate its service members.

Response by SFC James Baber made Dec 12 at 2013 10:41 PM

2013-12-12T22:41:07-05:00

I thought that they were still in the system from a few years back, if not I think it would be a valuable opportunity to save on many of these boards for the possibility of losing quality leaders due to being cut from the boards.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 2:23 PM

2013-12-13T14:23:04-05:00

I agree with SFC Baber's comment that it would save time and effort for boards that attempt to cut numbers by sorting out who is best qualified to go to Fort Couch. But what sparks my curiosity is how would they determine who can voluntarily leave? Would it be based on TIS? (min or max) How would the process work? If Soldiers were able to come to work and out of the blue one day just say "screw it, I'm done" I think we would lose massive number of junior Soldiers who don't understand the reason why we do some of the things we do. Toxic leadership may drive otherwise excellent Soldiers with vast potential for a successful career from the Army. Otherwise....I'm all for it. I wouldn't make it easy. If they don't finish their contracts, I would make them pay back any bonuses they may have gotten. Even enact an "early termination fee" almost like a cellphone contract. There would need to be a control measure of some sort. After all, they did sign a contract with the government. There should be some type of penalty for essentially defaulting on the deal. Just a thought.

Response by 1SG Steven Stankovich made Dec 13 at 2013 4:33 PM

2013-12-13T16:33:55-05:00

Voluntary Separation Boards? Very interesting. I remember, as I am sure you do also MSG(P) Quick, back in the early to mid-90s when the Army basically opened up the flood gates to get people out. Early retirements, early outs, etc. If you wanted out, you could basically get out. The "powers that be" did not take into consideration rank, MOS, recruitment trends, STAR MOSs, etc. We lost a lot as an overall force at that time.

Fast forward to now. I think that the lesson was learned and this time, to me, seems to be a more phased and planned "drawdown" or "reduction in force." Big Army is tossing out an execution of a means of separation, looking at the amount that is cut, and is then tossing out the next execution. I believe that it is very phased and deliberate.

I am interested in how a Voluntary Separation Board would fit into Big Army's equation. While I think that it is a great idea to send home those who do not want to be here, it is important to maintain strength levels across the board with regards to MOS and ranks.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 5:35 PM

2013-12-13T17:35:58-05:00

I think I posted this somewhere else, but If a Service Member wants out, and there are outcalls at their level.... then let them GO!!! If someone files the paperwork saying they will never reenlist, then start them on ACAP, and get them out ASAP!

Response by CSM Mike Maynard made Dec 14 at 2013 7:52 PM

2013-12-14T19:52:11-05:00

Absolutely not.

Voluntary boards usually fail to draw down the right folks or in the right specialties.

Just considering the numbers, voluntary separations would seem to allow us to forego separation boards, but realistically, we would still require the separation boards, because we would still be overstrengthed in certain fields that didn't draw themselves down voluntarily.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2013 12:19 AM

2013-12-15T00:19:13-05:00

No, we want to keep the people who can cut it on the outside and cut the people who can't get the job done in a green or a pinstripe suit.

The only voluntary outs the Army is taking right now is people who are identified as being in the zone of consideration for QSP (up-or-out) separation for longevity without recent rank progression. This does save some money on boards and appeals. It cuts people who want to get out and who are considered for elimination already.
However, it keeps in everyone whom we plan to use. Low density MOS, mid-career leaders who will be the senior/strategic leaders of the next war, and everyone whom we paid good money to reenlist.
When you give people the option to get out at reduced benefits, you lose all the experienced people who can make money on the outside. All you're left with is people who either love it too much to quit or are just smart enough to realize that they need the Army more than the Army needs them.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2013 8:10 AM

2013-12-15T08:10:33-05:00

Although currently suspended, the Navy has used two programs in past years such as the Early Career Transition Program and the Early Enlisted Transition Program which allowed members with up to 24 months left on their enlistment to apply (and be reviewed by board) to either separate early or transition into a reserve unit for the remainder of their contract. The programs were so successful in helping the Navy wean down their numbers that they have since been suspended.

http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=72713

http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=70883

Navy Suspends Enlisted Early Transition Program

The Navy announced plans to suspend the Enlisted Early Transition Program (EETP) as leaders focus on maintaining current

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2013 10:13 AM

2013-12-15T10:13:32-05:00

If they don't want to be in then let them go. Those who are motivated and in OS MOS can reclass to US MOS. I would rather have 5 Soldiers working with me who want to serve opposed to 10 where five just want to get out.

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Dec 15 at 2013 11:19 AM

2013-12-15T11:19:59-05:00

We experienced this same sort of thinning of the ranks after DS/DS..they opened up a Voluntary Separation/Early Retirement period and we lost a lot of mid-level leadership that ended up "hurting" our Army for almost a decade. If we are "serious" about the drawdown, then use the tools we have: QMP, etc to get rid of those that shouldn't be serving.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 16 at 2013 12:26 PM

2013-12-16T12:26:14-05:00

SFC Gates,

I can definitely see how that could happen, but one might argue that they're going to pay for it, regardless of how it's done.

There will be another conflict. It's not a matter of whether or not, just a matter of when and where. When it breaks out, we're going to be stuck hurriedly trying to bolster our numbers and prepare for war again.

In my (however limited) estimation, the US has been managing the strength of its forces like a drunk driver stays on the road - over-correcting back and forth - for decades. Would it be that difficult to find a level where we can meet mission requirements in war OR peace and maintain it?

Response by SPC Christopher Smith made Feb 26 at 2014 6:46 PM

2014-02-26T18:46:53-05:00

AR 635-200 Chapter 19, Section 4, Page 111-Voluntary Seperation

http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r635_200.pdf

I found this in Korea when I had a soldier who wanted out, almost by any means. Good kid, and I didn't want him to burn bridges that would burn for life. I did the leg work, but the C.o.C did not want to recognize his ability to use this chapter.

Latest ALARACT on the subject is ALARACT 340/2013

http://www.ncosupport.com/files/Early_Separation_Program.pdf

Gives a decent outline on who can absolutely be let out, but AR 635-200 is pretty clear about your options as well.

You have to love straight out the book regulations.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 26 at 2014 8:31 PM

2014-02-26T20:31:47-05:00

I know this post is over three months old but if anyone didn't know, since then they have posted messages in regards to Voluntary separation. However it is only for the purpose of excepting employment and if you were denied retention by HQDA.

Below are the links for the Milper and the Alaract messages that apply.

http://www.armyreenlistment.com/Messages/MILPER/Enlisted_Voluntary_Early_Separation_Program_14_002_20140102.pdf

http://www.ncosupport.com/files/Early_Separation_Program.pdf

w>/*¨³vÕ}[¥o³vð¯váûaoÊþ0ãÏÊØèoå>""6¼Pâúùqíºé«Ø·×æØÚ!àÂÉ³Ù9&´ú(ÒL0á¦8Å§p@sÀA¿ê0ÊDó(0¬48nlxÄ¸ö,ÿmxNFïR Þ72¬¢
RÀFeHbÞÒ X´`R¬ãåµ
9°ÍLÖAòÛjwv
¥ÿ¤È¡H¿"ÜQôG XÝ6
endstream
endobj
...

K@M$µypÉ+'lnºöZamMà=x°ö \%ÿ10ÔFîÑæ½&°y\#8qmÌ°öH"kPÌw?ô/¿ÞTsõ/ýþã:²ÎÌÿê½{U°
ü½_í» ²~N
pPïÕ"¼"Ï2þßõøÎO_µ}ÿuËêðþ)ó²8hÏ~©¶iû±G-¬ZýØ
ücë¾\¾¹|àQ¨åû¯ÁZ¤ø
unì/hMº8õñ¹u7ëÞ][«5...

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 26 at 2014 9:08 PM

2014-02-26T21:08:49-05:00

Absolutely ! If they want to leave voluntarily I say let them. This way the experienced people that truly want to stay in are not forced out merely to shrink numbers.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 27 at 2014 5:02 PM

2014-02-27T17:02:22-05:00

I would be a bad idea. If anyone who wanted to separate could then the Army as a whole would suffer drastically.

MOS's would become under-strength at an alarming rate and the Army would lose valuable leaders and other technically proficient soldiers.

Cut off scores would plummet and EVERYBODY pick up. Now I'm sure a lot of these soldiers would truly deserve the promotion and excel as leaders. But not everyone would be truly ready to hit the ground running.

Let alone all the soldiers who will be selected for OCS, WOCS, Drill Sergeant etc.

It would be utter chaos. Think of the trees!!!!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 27 at 2014 6:04 PM

2014-02-27T18:04:44-05:00

I think there are a lot of concerns that arise with voluntary separations. One of the first things that comes to mind is whether we should allow Soldiers who received enlistment/reenlistment bonuses to terminate early. Do we allow them to keep their bonus money, or make them pay it back. Perhaps pay back a pro-rated amount.

My next concern is controlling the separations to avoid losing too many good Soldiers. Would we base it on MOS, rank, both, etc.? We could allow Soldiers in over-strength MOSs to reclass as we already do, or we could allow them to separate.

I have heard an idea for how we could facilitate the downsizing of the Army. I don't know that I actually support this idea, but it is something that a colleague recently debated with me. We want the best and brightest, right? Well, one thing we could do is to stop having mandatory PT; allow Soldiers to conduct their own PT. Motivated Soldiers will continue to work out, while the others will not. Over time, the lazy Soldiers will weed themselves out as they start to fail APFTs and/ or start failing to meet the standards of AR 600-9.

I guess I could see the value of having voluntary separations, but perhaps it should be an application style mechanism. Just as Soldiers apply for separation for programs like Green-to-Gold, we could have a system in place where they not only need to apply, but they also need to provide justification and have command approval. We could take it a step further and make the approval authority the first General/Flag officer in their chain of command.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 2 at 2015 4:54 PM

2015-03-02T16:54:48-05:00

What about mandatory retirement? Sound like a good tool in my opinion.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 4 at 2015 10:17 AM

2015-09-04T10:17:42-04:00

SGM,
With all the turmoil going on around the world and all the troops that we have abroad presently, taking away people in leadership positions can and will not bring about the desired result. If the QMP board were geared at SHARP, GOMAR, DWI and other serious offenses then it would be understandable but most of the people that I have spoken to are having their careers put on hold for going on 6 months for minor offenses that could have been resolved in house. Let the Soldiers that want to get out get out and let those that who live to serve continue to do so.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 4 at 2015 10:28 AM

2015-09-04T10:28:31-04:00

SGM,
Yes, we should initiate voluntary separation. I have spoken to many Soldiers, asked them about their expected futures in the Army and most of them just want to do their initial term. Some if not all when the find out what they are really doing would entertain the prospect of voluntary separation. At this time of budgetary constraint holding QMP/QSP boards for senior Soldiers is counter productive. If the goal is to drawdown the force to save money. The draw down should be geared towards first term to mid career Soldiers. The Army would benefit from weeding out Soldiers that they hadn't invested so much time and money in, we would be better prepared for the next war and not have to dish out all those bonuses to attract new Soldiers when or if we lost to many.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2016 4:05 AM

2016-08-20T04:05:01-04:00

I think that their should be a voluntary separation board. There have been many Soldiers in my current and past units that hate the Army and want to get out. I've tried to convince them all otherwise on how this is the only career that offers so many great benefits and decent pay. But I can only beat a dead horse for so long. Like many have expressed on this thread, I'd rather have 2-3 highly motivated Paratroopers than 20 unwilling and whiny Soldiers.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2019 10:15 AM

2019-01-24T10:15:53-05:00

Depends on how often they do them. When I was active duty USAF ( 2008-2015) we had TONS of voluntary separations before the reductions in force started coming. They got rid of a few people that would have been cut, but a lot of GOOD captains looked around and after the second, punched. Why stay in when your risk getting cut without warming or you can take the voluntary separation have 6 months to plan your life and get a bonus to leave. We had voluntary, reduction, voluntary, reduction by the second voluntary anyone who had the desire to go back to school, had a job offer or useful degree seemed to bounce. Not going to lie after the third RIF is when I decided to go to law school.