Should military people be encouraged to "Homestead"?

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 16:46:21 -0400

Prior to WWII, "homesteading" was the norm for most enlisted soldiers unless soldiers sought a transfer. The idea was to enhance Regimental effectiveness and cohesion by training together for long periods of time, becoming familiar with an area and terrain, and of course, bonding to each other and to the Regiment. Entire units deployed in WWI; by WWII units were created and expanded and mobilized without long-term training. There are and were many pros and cons to the original Regimental systems for both Officers and NCOs...including cost savings...

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Nov 1 at 2014 4:56 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 16:56:11 -0400

SGM Private RallyPoint Member We probably will return to more tolerance for, maybe even promotion of homesteading. Nothing promotes efficiency like lean times in finance.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 1 at 2014 9:35 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 21:35:03 -0400

I have always been a supporter of a Regimental Affliation System, for the reasons SGM Private RallyPoint Member mentions above. I also believe that their should assignments to other units for a period of time and then return to the Regiment. This time away allows for a new look at operations and concepts that could be brought back and improve functions and systems in the Home Organization. No unit does everything well or totally right.

I have also seen NCOs who homesteaded in units (82nd ABN) for many years and then when reassigned to units in USAREUR. They had difficulty adapting from the 18hr N-hour sequense to wheels up as the Army's premire Rapid Deployment Force in the 82nd to 1-hour alert notification (larient Advance) and units rolling out the gate in Germany. In my opinion, this re-enforces the concept of periodic rotational assignments for Sr. NCOs and Officers.

A combination of both would benefit the Army and still be a true cost savings to the Army.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 1 at 2014 10:57 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Nov 2014 22:57:14 -0400

Sounds like a fine system, would allow for those who wish to stay in an area to stay there and not fret random orders. Would save money, and probably make a whole hell of a lot more people happy. Then those (like myself) who want to transfer can try to. I can see the benefits of the current system, expanding experiences and allowing a "big picture" sort of view, but a lot of folks I do work with WANT to stay where they are. So they should let them.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 16 at 2015 11:28 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 16 Jan 2015 11:28:14 -0500

Yes. If not for effectiveness, for cost savings. We keep proposing cuts to pay and benefits...how much do we spend every year on PCSing people?