Thought I might start a group so we could talk about career choices that our sialors have to make. After boot camp and transition to the fleet, out sailors have to make some career choices....do I stay until my enlistments is up or do I consider trying to re-enlist and possibly making a career in the Navy.

The follwoing is from NavyTimes and details a little about the re-enlistment ptential in 2010 by rate...times are a-changing and we need to be informed about opportunities there are in the Navy:

Your ticket to staying Navy

Critical NECs soon will give sailors re-up edge


By Mark D. Faram

mfaram@militarytimes.com

It’s getting tougher to stay in the Navy, but personnel officials are reworking the service’s re-up approval system to give some sailors an edge.

While sailors with up to 14 years of service must still seek re-enlist­ment approval through the Per­form to Serve system, officials have reworked the approval process. Now it not only includes a sailor’s rating and evaluations, but also Navy enlisted classifications.

More and more, leaders say, get­ting these critical job codes will become the ticket to staying in.

“The reality of today’s Navy is that in Perform to Serve, you have to compete to stay,” said Rear Adm. Dan Holloway, who directs manpower plans and policy for the chief of naval personnel. “We want to retain our best and brightest sailors, and now we have the per­sonnel and tools in place to man­age that process correctly.” But officials are always looking to improve the system, he said.

“We are now including critical NECs in the PTS algorithm,” Hol­ loway said. “This is most impor­tant in Zones C and B and will ensure we can retain these crucial skills in our Navy. We have agreed with Fleet Forces Command on what our most critical NECs are, and will include those in the sys­tem from now on.” For those in Zone A — up to six years of service — having the higher paygrade often determines whether a sailor stays in his rating and, sometimes, in the Navy. Holloway said having criti­cal NECs will probably have the greatest effect on re-enlistment Zones B and C — those with six to 14 years of service.

“An example is, a hospital corps­man with the Force Recon Inde­ pendent Duty NEC will rank high­er than a corpsman without it,” Holloway said.

“Getting critical NECs some­times can mean strict require­ments and take long and intense schooling to achieve,” he said. “We want to reward sailors who take on difficult and critical training and assignments.” The community managers at Navy Personnel Command provid­ed Navy Times an exclusive look at their projected retention for the rest of this fiscal year, through Sept. 30. The list is by rating for re-enlistment Zones A, B and C, but officials warn sailors these numbers aren’t guaranteed. As the year goes on, spots fill up and the needs of the Navy change, and community managers track these issues on a near-daily basis. They are also tracking sailors by “year group,” much in the way officers have traditionally been managed.

“These needs are very dynamic,” Holloway said. “At times, these numbers can change daily in response to sailor decision-mak­ing or in response to the needs of the fleet.” A sneak peek into sailors’ chances at re-enlisting should be “a great introduction for our sailors to begin to see what’s out there and available to them,” he said. “They should use it as an opening conversation for discus­sions with their career counselor and their chain of command, but also their mentors and families.” But as re-enlisting gets tougher and sailors increasingly examine critical skills at re-enlistment time, Holloway stressed that com­mands have a crucial role to play.

“We can’t stress enough the command’s role in helping a sailor prepare for and make critical career decisions,” he said. “It puts an increasing focus on the role of the career counselor and chain of command to ensure these sailors get the career development boards and daily guidance and mentorship to make informed decisions.” Still, he said, it’s up to sailors to manage their careers. Holloway encouraged them to research their own rating, know what the critical skills are and be aware of manning and advancement opportunities. □

RIPE FOR CONVERSION — AND PROMOTION


Ratings identified by the Navy’s community managers as the hottest in the fleet, with current manning, minimum Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery scores and who the Navy is looking for:

Cryptologic technician, collection (CTR)

Manning: 83 percent.

ASVAB: VE+AR=109 E-5 and below, three to seven years of service.

Explosive ordnance disposal technician (EOD)

Manning: 95 percent.

ASVAB: AR+VE=109 and MC=51 E-5 and below with three to six years of service.

Cryptologic technician, interpretive (CTI)

Manning: 89 percent (Arabic); 70 percent (Persian).

ASVAB: VE+MK+GS=162 E-5 and below with three to five years of service.

Electronics technician, submarine navigation (ETSNV)

Manning: 85 percent.

ASVAB: AR+MK+EI+GS=222 Zone A E-3 through E-5. Surface sailors must be eligible for a security clearance and volunteer for sub duty.

Cryptologic technician, maintenance (CTM)

Manning: 91 percent.

ASVAB: AR+MK+EI+GS=223 E-4 and below with three years of service.

Cryptologic technician, networks (CTN)

Electronics technician, submarine radio (ETSR)

Manning: 80 percent.

ASVAB: AR+MK+EI+GS=222 Zone A E-3 through E-5. Surface sailors must be eligible for a security clearance and volunteer for sub duty.

Manning: 84 percent.

ASVAB: AR+2MK+GS=222 E-5s and below, three to seven years of service.

Cryptologic technician, technical (CTT)

Electronics technician (ETSW)

Manning: 89 percent.

ASVAB: AR+MK+EI+GS=222 All qualified E-5s in Zones A and B.

Manning: 91 percent.

ASVAB: VE+MK+GS=162 E-5 and below with four to six years of service.

Fire controlman (FC)

Manning: 97 percent.

ASVAB: AR+MK+EI+GS=223 All qualified Zone A candidates will be considered.

Those interested in ballistic-missile warfare can move into the FC Aegis rating.

Fire control technician (FT)

Manning: 87 percent.

ASVAB: AR+MK+EI+GS=223 Zone A E-3 through E-5. Surface sailors must be eligible for a security clearance and volunteer for sub duty.

Intelligence specialist (IS)

Manning: 97 percent.

ASVAB: VE+AR=107 Zone A and B, primarily E-4 through E-6 with five to seven years of service.

Information systems technician (IT)

Manning: 97 percent.

ASVAB: AR+2MK+GS=222 Zone A and B E-4 and E-5 only, specifically those in their fourth, fifth, seventh or eighth years of service.

Legalman (LN)

Manning: 89 percent.

ASVAB: VE+MK=102 Zone A and B E-4 and E-5. See Judge Advocate General Instruction 1440.1D for rating details.

Navy diver (ND)

Manning: 99 percent.

ASVAB: AR+VE=103 and MC=51 E-5 and below with five to six years of service.

Special warfare boat operator (SB)

Manning: 96 percent.

ASVAB: AR+VE=103 and MC=51 E-5 and below with three to six years of service.

Special warfare operator (SO)

Manning: 94 percent.

ASVAB: GS+MC+EI=165 E-5 and below with three to six years of service.

Sonar technician, submarine (STS)

Manning: 87 percent.

ASVAB: AR+MK+EI+GS=222 Zone A E-3 through E-5. Surface sailors must be eligible for a security clearance and volunteer for sub duty.

here are the zone explanations for the charts:

RE-UP REALITY CHECK


These statistics are a snapshot of manning as of Jan. 8 by re-enlistment zone; Zone A is sailors with up to six years in uniform, Zone B is those with six to 10 years, and Zone C is sailors with 10 to 14 years. Community managers say these statistics can change daily as sailors re-enlist or leave the Navy. Sailors considering converting into or out of a rating should seek the advice of a command career counselor, who can determine ratings best suited to sailors’ interests, abilities and test scores, as well as the current needs of the Navy.

NavyTimes:

What this year looks like (prior to Haiti...):

2010 on the horizon

From pay to uniforms to quals: Here’s what the coming year has in store



Times staff

Expect big changes in pay, uniforms, hardware and personnel policy in the coming year. A rundown of the top issues for sailors to watch:

1. PAY RAISES

For 11 straight years, service members have received a Jan. 1 increase in basic pay that is slight­ly larger than average private-sec­tor raises. But that could end when Congress takes up the 2011 budget.

Bigger raises have been part of a congressional effort, largely opposed by the Pentagon, to close a perceived gap in pay that grew in the 1980s when military raises were capped. After the 3.4 percent Jan. 1, 2010, increase, the pay gap, which peaked at 13.5 percent in 1999, will be reduced to 2.4 percent. Whether there will be a 12th consecutive year of gap-reducing raises will depend on the state of the economy and whether elec­tion-year politics make lawmakers more interested in cutting federal spending than in continuing to close the pay gap.

Military advocates are urging Congress to keep chipping away at the pay gap by providing raises through 2013 that are half a per­centage point greater than pri­vate-sector raises.

The Military Coalition, a group of more than 30 military-related organizations, does not want to leave military raises to the annual whims of Congress. It would like lawmakers to set into law a fixed formula for raises to be half a per­centage point greater than the annual increase in the Employ­ment Cost Index, a Labor Depart­ment measurement of private-sec­tor wages.

Such a law was used in the early years of this decade, but Congress allowed it to lapse. If it were re­enacted, it would fence off military pay from any debate about cutting federal spending.

2. PAY & BONUS REVIEW

The review of all Navy officer and enlisted special pays and bonuses will continue into the coming year. In 2009, personnel officials reworked the selective re-enlistment bonus program, which now offers money to signif­icantly fewer sailors. Also reviewed was special duty assign­ment pay, which offers sailors extra cash to fill crucial billets. That special pay also saw significant reductions.

Officials are now reviewing the assignment incentive pay program and expect to announce those results early in the new year. The review of the remaining special and continuation pays will wrap up sometime in 2010.

3. NEW UNIFORMS

This coming year will see the final sets of blue camouflage Navy Working Uniforms and the black­and-khaki service uniforms rolled out to the different Navy regions.

Sailors E-6 and below must own the service uniform by July 31. Starting in August, the summer white and working blue uniforms will no longer be authorized.

As for the NWU, all sailors must own the uniform — which replaces wash khakis for chiefs and officers and utilities for sailors — by Dec. 31.

Other uniform highlights:

■ New desert and woodland cam­mies. Details on testing and field­ing of the Type 2 and 3 versions of the NWU are expected to come early in the year.

■ Improved crackerjacks. The uni­form board will receive results of wear tests for the new uniforms this coming year. A lighter­weight version of the dress blues is being tested, along with a ver­sion of the whites with side zip­pers, more pockets and a faux 13­button flap.

■ Service dress khaki. Officials have wrapped up their wear tests of the throwback khakis for chiefs and officers. They tested both a traditional and a contemporary design. Expect an announcement on the way ahead in the early months of the year.

■ New running suit. After ditching the first two warm-up suit designs in 2008, Navy uniform officials began wear-testing two new designs this fall in Norfolk, Va.; Great Lakes, Ill.; and Washington, D.C. About 100 sailors are wear­ing the two similar designs. Test­ing is expected to be completed in 2010, and officials could make a decision on fielding the suit by the end of the year.

4. MANDATORY WARFARE QUALS

Sailors E-1 through E-4 will soon be required to earn a warfare pin within 30 months of checking onboard their first sea-duty com­mand, officials recently announced.

Sailors E-5 and above who are going to sea for the first time will still be required to complete their quals in 18 months or less.

Type commanders are expected to submit drafts of their instructions in January for review by the master chief petty officer of the Navy. Final approval is expected in the first few months of the year.

5. MORE HIGH-LEVEL FIRINGS

With 15 firings by Dec. 20, more commanding officers were relieved in 2009 than in any of the past five years. You may see that crackdown continue, as senior officials appear to be stepping up enforcement of the fraternization rules that bring down skippers more often than many other reasons. In addition, senior enlisted leaders will be get­ting more scrutiny by Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy (SS/SW) Rick West, who said he wants to be briefed whenever a chief has a major disciplinary problem.

6. MORE CHIEFS GOING HOME

In September, a continuation board met to decide whether near­ly 8,000 retirement-eligible chiefs and above should stay in the Navy. The board sent home 158, who must retire by the end of June.

Another board will be held in 2010, but senior enlisted leaders are lean­ ing toward recommending that chiefs with 19 years in also go before the board, and that no one be exempt.

7. CARRIERS & STRIKE GROUPS

■ The Dwight D. Eisenhower is scheduled to deploy in January.

■ The Harry S. Truman will fol­low a couple of months later, marking its second eight-month deployment in as many years.

■ Enterprise, late coming out of the yard, will be back in action to prepare for its final deployment next year.

■ Carl Vinson will move to San Diego in the early part of the year.

■ Nimitz is scheduled to return to San Diego in March after an eight-month deployment.

■ Abraham Lincoln is a likely candidate to replace Nimitz, but Navy officials will not comment on future deployments. While Lincoln and John C. Stennis are in Bre­merton, Wash., for maintenance and workups, Stennis has been out twice since 2007, including a 2009 deployment. Lincoln hasn’t gone since 2008. And don’t add the Ronald Reagan into that equation

— the carrier is at Naval Air Sta­tion North Island, Calif., for main­tenance following four deploy­ments in as many years.

■ The George Washington is for­ward-deployed at Yokosuka, Japan.

■ The George H.W. Bush is beginning its operational life, and will spend the year completing quals and evals.

■ The Theodore Roosevelt entered the yard in mid-2009 for its major refueling and overhaul, which should take roughly three years.

In addition, the decision as to which carrier will move to May­port, Fla., is expected to be part of the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review.

8. QDR DECISIONS

For months, decision-makers in the Pentagon and Congress have put off answering questions on programs because of the Defense Department’s Quadrennial Defense Review, the planning doc­ument that is supposed to set down DoD’s latest strategic and budgetary priorities.

Beltway scuttlebutt has it that this year’s report could deliver a body blow to the Navy, recom­mending that it strike one or even two aircraft carriers, cancel the Marine Corps’ Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, and delay field­ing the F-35 Lightning II. Or not. Whatever its findings, the release of the QDR with the fiscal 2011 budget in February will at least create a new normal for Pentagon programs, one that Congress and DoD could use to make their next decisions .

9. OP TEMPO

Carrier strike groups saw eight­month tours in 2009. Attack subs were out eight to 13 months.

And with sailors being a key part of the Afghanistan push, overall op tempo doesn’t look to let up in 2010.

The Dwight D. Eisenhower and Harry S. Truman carrier strike groups will pull eight-month tours in 2010. The extensions were caused by problems with the 48­year-old Enterprise, which was four months late in getting out of its 16-month overhaul.

But whether longer deployments are the exception, or the new nor­mal, remains to be seen.

As for the ground force in Afghanistan, there are already 3,700 sailors on the ground, mostly explosive ordnance dispos­al, Seabees and medical person­nel. Another 208 are building schools and roads. In January, another force of 1,100 Seabees will begin rotating into the war zone.

10. SHIP NAMES

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus will likely name seven ships in 2010, said his spokeswoman, Capt. Beci Brenton: ■ The Zumwalt-class destroyer DDG 1002.

■ Three littoral combat ships: LCS 5, LCS 6, LCS 7

■ One Lewis and Clark-class dry cargo and ammunition ship: T­AKE 14

■ One Virginia-class attack sub­marine: SSN 786

■ One joint high-speed vessel: JHSV 4

11. SHIP COMMISSIONINGS

■ Jan. 16: Littoral combat ship Independence, Mobile, Ala.

■ March 6: Destroyer Dewey,

Seal Beach, Calif.

■ June: Missile range instru­mentation ship Howard O. Loren­zen, Pascagoula, Miss.

■ July 24: Submarine Missouri, Groton, Conn.

■ July: Destroyer Jason Dun­ham, Bath, Maine.

■ September: Destroyer Grave­ly, Pascagoula, Miss.

■ To be determined: Submarine New Mexico, Newport News, Va.

12. LCS FUTURE

The Navy is expected to decide in the first half of the year which of its two littoral combat ship designs will go into full produc­tion. It doesn’t get much bigger: Billions of dollars and 51 ships —

a major portion of tomorrow’s planned surface fleet — are at stake. The Navy will choose either a conventional steel and alu­minum ship built by a contractor group led by Lockheed Martin, or an all-aluminum trimaran built by a General Dynamics contractor group.

13. THE FIGHTER GAP

Congress added nine F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets into the annu­al budget last year for a total of 18, but that won’t resolve con­cerns about the looming shortage of tactical aircraft. The F-35 Lightning II is on its way, but Hornets are wearing out faster than planners predicted. The Navy expects the shortfall to be 200 to 300 aircraft, peaking about 2015. And now that Washington has resolved other key aviation issues — ending the Air Force’s F­22 program and the overpriced presidential helicopter program

— the Navy’s fighter gap may draw more attention from law­makers and lobbyists.

14. THE FUTURE OF AIR

Key advancements coming for naval avi­ation: ■ The X-47B Unmanned Combat Air System demonstrator will have its first test flight during the first quarter of 2010.

■ The F-35C, which is the carrier variant of the Lightning II, will continue testing at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., with a target ready date of 2015.

■ The first EA-18G Growler squadron, Electronic Attack Squadron 132, known as the Scorpions, will deploy for the first time in 2010.

15. BMD PLANNING

The Navy has one year left to come up with the ships, sailors and plans to guard Europe from Middle Eastern ballistic mis­siles, a mission the service was given with apparently little internal notice.

The Navy and the Missile Defense Agency will spend 2010 figuring out how to coordinate ships, deployments, numbers of missile interceptors and the other essential elements of providing a BMD cover for Europe by 2011, when the U.S. has com­mitted itself to defending the continent from the sea.

With an operational tempo that fleet offi­cials say is already high, the Navy will have to apportion additional ships for the Euro-BMD mission.

16. HOUSING CRUNCH

The Navy will try to get more sailors into shore-based housing, but the crunch will likely continue as major bases will be at least 3,000 beds short of the Homeport Ashore program’s stated goal of giving every sailor a place to live (other than the ship) by 2016. Meanwhile, budget cuts may begin to make it “difficult for regions to manage and operate bachelor housing,” according to a 2009 report from the Naval Inspector General.

17. WOMEN & SUBS

It will be roughly two years before women will be underway as part of a sub’s crew, but their training and selection begins in 2010.

Plans call for four integrated crews: the blue and gold crews of a ballistic-missile sub on one coast and the blue and gold crews of a Tomahawk shooter on the other. The female element of each will come from the Naval Academy’s Class of 2010, where half of the 32 ensigns planning to head to nuclear propulsion school were women.

Integration will occur only in Ohio-class submarines. Attack boats are tightly packed, and modifications to accommodate women would be exceedingly expensive.

Because female cadres need to have one senior member to act as mentor, female supply officers or surface warfare officers who have served on a mixed-gender crew may also be selected for sub duty to assist in the transition.

18. ‘DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL’

President Barack Obama’s promise to repeal the law barring service by openly gay people was moved to the back burner in 2009, overwhelmed by concern about the sagging economy and the war effort in Afghanistan.

That will change in 2010. And although the outcome is far from clear, Congress in the coming months will face the long­delayed review of the law and policy that bans open service by gays.

Extensive hearings are planned in the House and Senate, with testimony from current and former troops, as well as from military leaders.

In June, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he and Obama had discussed the issue, with a focus on whether “there’s at least a more humane way to apply the law until the law gets changed,” as Gates put it.

Most Americans — more than two-thirds

— favor allowing gays to serve openly in the military, while about one-third are opposed, according to a May Gallup poll.

According to the latest figures available

— through 2008 — 10,507 troops had been discharged under “don’t ask, don’t tell” since the Pentagon began tracking such discharges in 1997, according to spokes­woman Cynthia Smith.

The fight over changing policy will come to a head when lawmakers try to pass the 2011 defense authorization bill, which like­ly will happen in early spring in the House of Representatives. Those who want to repeal the ban will try, and probably suc­ceed, in getting an amendment attached to the bill that would allow gays to openly serve. It appears they will have enough votes to get the measure approved by the full House, especially if Obama gets direct­ly involved in selling reluctant members on the idea.

But House passage may be as far as the effort goes because advocates for repeal have not come up with a strategy to over­come the 60-vote majority that would be needed for approval in the Senate if oppo­nents in that chamber try to filibuster over the issue.

With midterm elections coming in the fall, and with Obama sagging in public opinion polls, it will be difficult for conserv­ative Democrats concerned about re-elec­tion to vote in favor of allowing gays to openly serve in uniform. □

The carrier move has been suggested but there is a lot of opposition. I posted an article about that in the Carrier Families group very recently.

As far as your electroic attack squadron questin--- I cannot say...you would have to talk to a Navy man for that...search the Members tab for Chief West...he may be better able to answer.
NavyTimes is written for Navy personnel so don't expect glitter...it is to the point and has a lot of news...and a decent crossword.......

NavyTimes Early brief:

Draft report recommends another port for carrier
Posted to: Military News

By Bill Bartel
The Virginian-Pilot
© January 28, 2010
A draft of the military's four-year review of defense strategy recommends an East Coast "alternative port" to Norfolk for nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. But it doesn't specifically mention a new homeport in Mayport, Fla.

The draft of the Quadrennial Defense Review said another port is needed for "strategic dispersal," an argument Navy leaders have used in pushing for another carrier based in Florida. All carriers on the East Coast are currently based in Norfolk.

The military in North America must "maintain the defense posture required for mission assurance, consequence management, defense support of civil authorities, strategic dispersal and homeland defense," according to the draft.

To achieve that objective, the military will "provide an alternative port to dock East Coast aircraft carriers to mitigate the risk of a man-made or natural disaster," the draft states.

When Navy leaders endorsed plans last year to make Mayport Naval Station the home of a nuclear carrier, they said the determining factor was that dispersing Norfolk-based carriers would reduce the risk of an attack or natural disaster that crippled the fleet.

After being pressured by Virginia's congressional delegation, Defense Secretary Robert Gates agreed to postpone a decision on Mayport until completion of the Quadrennial Defense Review, a document prepared by senior Pentagon officials.

The Dec. 3 draft could undergo changes before its release early next week. However, senior defense officials told a Hampton Roads group during a Dec. 4 meeting at the Pentagon that the report was essentially complete.

Losing a carrier, according to the Hampton Roads Chamber of Commerce, would cost the region 11,000 jobs and $650 million.

Officials in Hampton Roads and Florida who are familiar with the draft said Wednesday it can be interpreted different ways.

Frank Roberts, director of the Hampton Roads Military and Federal Facilities Alliance, said the report's failure to specifically mention a new homeport means the Navy could build a less-expensive second base for limited use. Given the budget pressures on the military, the review would allow the Navy to "bow out gracefully" from its desire to build a new full-service nuclear base, Robert said.

The review does make clear whether dispersal of the carriers is a concern for the Navy, he said.

A spokesman for Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., a proponent of the Mayport base, said the draft has a "good amount of ambiguity" that leaves the issue unresolved.

"It certainly delays the process," Dan McLaughlin said.

Bill Bartel, (757) 446-2398, bill.bartel@pilotonline.com

Re-enlistment is a funny thing. When I got off active duty in 1980, I was offered $10,000 to re-up for 4 years. I was an OS with a special NEC. They couldn't get me the orders I wanted to so I got out and joined the reserves. So many took them up on the bonus that the rate got top-heavy (too many senior petty officers). I spent 7 years as an E5 in the reserves because there was no more room for an E6. That is why I got out.

Thank you for this group so much.

NavyTimes article:

House panel backs bigger pay raise

DoD, Senate question extra $340M needed for ’11 boost
By Rick Maze

rmaze@militarytimes.com

Despite widespread concerns about holding down federal spend­ing, the House Armed Services Com­mittee is making a pitch for a bigger military pay raise and for money to pay for improvements in retired pay and survivor benefits next year.

The committee is seeking a 1.9 percent increase in basic pay and drill pay effective Jan. 1, which would be half of a percentage point more than President Obama has requested and more than the Pen­tagon believes is necessary.

In a bipartisan letter outlining its views about the 2011 defense budget, the House committee is still committed to an initiative launched in 1999 to restore pay comparability in military salaries and completely erase a “pay gap” between average military and private-sector pay that peaked at 13.5 percent in the late 1990s.

“Even after providing enhanced pay raises for over a decade, mili­tary pay levels still trail private­sector pay raises by 2.4 percent,” states the committee letter, signed by Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., com­mittee chairman, and Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon of Califor­nia, ranking Republican.

“We … are committed to fulfill­ing the long-term plan to remove uncertainty as to whether military pay raises have fallen behind pri­vate-sector trends.” The slightly bigger raise would cost about $340 million more than the 1.4 percent boost sought by the Obama administration.

The Pentagon opposes a bigger raise, and the Senate Armed Ser­vices Committee has not endorsed anything more than the 1.4 percent. At a March 10 hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee’s personnel panel, said a bigger raise isn’t practical. “We all wish we could do more, but we have budget prob­lems,” he said.

Clifford Stanley, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readi­ness, said the 1.4 percent raise is enough for the troops, given that military pay increased by 42 per­cent since January 2002 while pri­vate-sector pay rose 32 percent.

“We are at the point where ris­ing personnel costs could affect the readiness of our forces,” he told the Senate subcommittee.

In addition to the bigger pay raise, the House Armed Services Committee also is asking for the 2011 budget to include money to: ■ Fund concurrent receipt of mili­tary retired pay and veterans’ dis­ability benefits for people not yet eli­gible to get both payments in full.

■ Allow people eligible for mili­tary and veterans’ survivor bene­fits to receive both without offsets.

■ Provide retroactive credit toward earlier retirement for National Guard and reserve mem­bers mobilized since the 2001 ter­rorist attacks. □

a great way to retain your top talent:

again from NavyTimes:

Retention bonus drops for senior SWOs, steady for younger officers
By Lance M. Bacon

lbacon@militarytimes.com

Strong retention is taking a bite out of retention bonuses for senior surface warfare officers, but bonus levels are expected to remain for junior and midgrade SWOs.

Captains are hardest hit, with their annual bonus level dropping from $20,000 to $10,000. Bonuses for commanders are dipping from $15,000 to $12,000.

However, bonus levels for younger SWOs are staying where they are because year-groups are smaller. Personnel officials believe they have retained enough SWOs to fill department head billets, but officials say when the pool is small, it’s important to keep reten­tion high.

“We are still very committed to [the critical skills retention bonus program] and the junior SWO bonus,” said Rear Adm. Daniel Holloway, director of manpower, personnel, training and education. “Beyond near-term, this will be a CSRB that will be used effectively, though we may dial it up and down over time to address small year-groups or changing continua­tion rates.” The junior SWO bonus is offered to lieutenants at the seven-year mark.

As of Feb. 10, SWO manning levels were 121 percent for lieu­tenants, 89 percent for lieutenant commanders, 79 percent for com­manders and 86 percent for cap­tains, according to personnel offi­cials. While it would seem junior officers are overmanned and senior officers are undermanned, the opposite is true.

For starters, all discrete require­ments for senior surface officers are adequately met. And though it would seem there are too many lieutenants, most are at four to six years of commissioned service, said Mike McLellan, spokesman for Navy Personnel Command.

“Many are at a career decision point, but historically only retain at approximately a 35 percent rate to the SWO department head mile­stone,” he said. “This milestone is the focus of the junior officer bonus program.” The size of that junior bonus will vary as officials track year-group retention and match it against department head billets.

Still, bonus decisions are not based solely on summaries and statistics. Officials also focus on the ever-changing intangibles, such as the effects of dwell time and operational tempo, the econo­my and spousal surveys.

Beyond simple retention, the application of CSRBs also is closely tied to the shifting SWO career pipepline, in which shore tours are being placed between two depart­ment head tours. Holloway, a for­mer detailer, said he likes that model because it enables a junior SWO to get a master’s degree and provides adequate time at home.

“That shore tour assignment is very valuable to the decision­making ... and is a very, very important time for us to engage these young men and women.” Such an attitude and approach is not exclusive to junior SWOs.

Holloway said the number of con­trol-grade SWOs — lieutenant com­mander to captain — is “slightly behind” the billet requirement. As such, the $46,000 bonus offered to lieutenant commanders for a three­year obligation remains, though the single-year bonus has been axed.

“We really weren’t getting a return on investment with the sin­gle-year CSRB,” he said.

The elimination of the single-year bonus and emphasis on the three­year commitment is part of an over­arching strategy to catch and carry “proven performers” through their promotion to commander and to keep them in the SWO community through their 15th year of commis­sioned service. □