shrinking military=screwed dh

pixiem38 · September 2012

My dh is in the national guard (has been for 17+years now), but despite being deployed twice already, i am not super familiar with how it actually works (so forgive my ignorance). Last week he told.me that basically because.of.the cutbacks in military personnel, he will.probably be done with his army career even though it is not his choice. I guess if you have 18 years in, they will.find a position so you can stay and get the 20 years needed to get retirement, but his.board.meets in January and he will be literally 2 months shy.of the 18 years, so he will.be screwed. He is.trying to.see what can be done, but the board is national.and.not.the state, so.it doesn't look.good.for.him.at all. All.of his.performance things have been good, but he said.it.is just a.matter of the numbers....(only so.many Lt. Col spots available. It seems wrong wrong wrong.wrong. he.spent three years overseas ). I don't know.what there pptions there.are.to.try and.fight this, but he makesnit.seem.rather bleak. I thinm.writing congresspeople letters...but that is all i can think.of. this.sucks so much! Does anyone have.any thoughts on thia? Like.i said, i.don't know.how these thkngs even.work...so.i.am basically.clueless. thanks

hansonam446 · September 2012

Whoa. Are you typing this from a phone because some parts were hard to read. And there were periods between each word there for awhile. Anyway, I don't know specifics about the National Guard but the downsizing is going around. My husband's unit is chaptering people out left and right for stupid sh*t such as missed appointments.

Ktbug613 · September 2012

Im sorry to hear this is happening to you, especially with so many years in! Unfortunately I don't know that there is much you can do. This is happening left and right to all ranks, and in all branches. Ive seen people refused reenlistment for no reason. Its just a very unfortunate part of the current down sizing

smwiggle · September 2012

Unfortunately there isn't much he can do. Everyone is being screwed over in some way due to forced retirements, chaptering out, or missed promotions. This is what happens when you downsize. As National Guard, he should have another job also, so at least he has something to fall back on.

And I agree with PP, your post was hard to read with all the punctuation. Is it your phone?

Temp76535187505890 · September 2012

One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

iluvmytxrgr · September 2012

He needs to look into all sorts of options. Transferring may be one. Also, AD is allowing people with a minimum of 15 years to retire with 30%. Maybe he can look around and see if that may be an option for him.

12bailey18 · September 2012

Yep, DH is (kind of) in the same boat. He's been in 10 years and basically there are too many officers in the Marine Corps so when he is up for promotion to Captain he either gets it or he's told, "Good-bye, thanks for your service." It's really a sad situation for these guys and a lot of them are really stressed about it. He's trying to hard to make sure his record is clean and going above and beyond to "shine" when he's up for the board. That's really all they can do. But like your DH said, it all comes down to numbers. No advice but I get where you're coming from.

pixiem38 · September 2012

2bailey18--that sucks...i'm sorry

it seems soooooo unfair. It seems worse than if it were a comparable civilian job somehow. Your situation sounds about the same, other than the.time in. (Yes, i am on the phone, so i apologize for crappy.formatting and weirdo.punctuation). What is.AD? Unfortunately DHs civilian job is running our farm, and that (again unfortunately) doesn't pay all the bills (but we DO eat well). The thing that freaks me out the most is the insurance aspect of it all. We are coming off TAMP from hjs.last deployment and switching to tricare reserve select. With two existing children and two on the way, we need insurance (our state is a bad one for self employed people. Back before we had kids and TRS didn't exist, the cheapest insurance around was $700-$800 a month with a $10000 deductible or something INSANE like that). That is my big big concern, although the whole thing just bites (and yes, we vote...even.without this new development, we would be voting. But, dh says that even if the downsizing is stopped, the army is s-l-o-w to.implement any change, and by then.it would be too late).

Rosebud2587 · September 2012

DH is stressed about all the downsizing too. He always planned to be a career soldier but those plans might have to change. DH's MOS is engineer. He has no engineering background/degree. He was told that they are going to cut all the officers who don't have, at the very least, a master's in engineering.

SheilaE · September 2012

12bailey18:
Yep, DH is (kind of) in the same boat. He's been in 10 years and basically there are too many officers in the Marine Corps so when he is up for promotion to Captain he either gets it or he's told, "Good-bye, thanks for your service." It's really a sad situation for these guys and a lot of them are really stressed about it. He's trying to hard to make sure his record is clean and going above and beyond to "shine" when he's up for the board. That's really all they can do. But like your DH said, it all comes down to numbers. No advice but I get where you're coming from.

While the USMC is downsizing in all areas, I want to clarify something. Getting Captain is the easy part in the USMC. It's the career designation that is hard. It has many factors and that is where the Captain selects are stressing. If they don't get designation (some get one look, some a couple looks, some more depending on their EAS) then they are bascially forced out if not desingated. I have many friends whose Dhs that are dealing with this, and many of Dh's Marines have dealt with this. Let's just say the stress of getting selected for Captain was nothing compared to the designation. Dh's Lt's were stressed for weeks with the last designation board.

Sammy0709 · September 2012

SheilaE:
12bailey18:
Yep, DH is (kind of) in the same boat. He's been in 10 years and basically there are too many officers in the Marine Corps so when he is up for promotion to Captain he either gets it or he's told, "Good-bye, thanks for your service." It's really a sad situation for these guys and a lot of them are really stressed about it. He's trying to hard to make sure his record is clean and going above and beyond to "shine" when he's up for the board. That's really all they can do. But like your DH said, it all comes down to numbers. No advice but I get where you're coming from. 

While the USMC is downsizing in all areas, I want to clarify something.  Getting Captain is the easy part in the USMC.  It's the career designation that is hard.  It has many factors and that is where the Captain selects are stressing.  If they don't get designation (some get one look, some a couple looks, some more depending on their EAS) then they are bascially forced out if not desingated.  I have many friends whose Dhs that are dealing with this, and many of Dh's Marines have dealt with this.  Let's just say the stress of getting selected for Captain was nothing compared to the designation.  Dh's Lt's were stressed for weeks with the last designation board. 

I also thought that up until that rank you could be HYT'd? Wouldn't that be a cause of some of this as well maybe in some of the other branches...I know career designation is huge in the MC.

hansonam446 · September 2012

ArmyQM:
One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

I think this has more to do with the influx of people coming into the military and them now having the pick of the crop rather than the government...but you should still vote.

darjeeling · September 2012

hansonam446:
ArmyQM:
One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

I think this has more to do with the influx of people coming into the military and them now having the pick of the crop rather than the government...

The Pentagon is directly involved with force reduction and the setting of recruitment goals and standards.

hansonam446 · September 2012

darjeeling:
hansonam446:
ArmyQM:
One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

I think this has more to do with the influx of people coming into the military and them now having the pick of the crop rather than the government...

The Pentagon is directly involved with force reduction and the setting of recruitment goals and standards.

Even so, voting in November for the president next year isn't going to help her husband now = my point.

darjeeling · September 2012

hansonam446:
darjeeling:
hansonam446:
ArmyQM:
One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

I think this has more to do with the influx of people coming into the military and them now having the pick of the crop rather than the government...

The Pentagon is directly involved with force reduction and the setting of recruitment goals and standards.

Even so, voting in November for the president next year isn't going to help her husband now = my point.

No, your point was that the government had nothing to do with draw down. But you're allowed to change your mind.

Voting in November could very well change the outcome for OP's DH, since his boards aren't until January.

OP, has your DH looked into employment resources for veterans? I'm sorry you are going through this and I hope things work out better than you expect. Keep us posted.

NSL · September 2012

darjeeling:
hansonam446:
darjeeling:
hansonam446:
ArmyQM:
One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

I think this has more to do with the influx of people coming into the military and them now having the pick of the crop rather than the government...

The Pentagon is directly involved with force reduction and the setting of recruitment goals and standards.

Even so, voting in November for the president next year isn't going to help her husband now = my point.
No, your point was that the government had nothing to do with draw down. But you're allowed to change your mind.
Voting in November could very well change the outcome for OP's DH, since his boards aren't until January.

Not likely, since newly elected officials (including a new President, if we have one) won't be sworn in until January. Also, force reduction is a natural thing as we wind down two wars. No matter who's in office, troop numbers aren't going to be increased or even stabilized at current levels unless we go back into an armed conflictg sometime soon.

FWIW, OP, I do understand. My H was turned down for what we thought was going to be a routine O3 to O4 promotion last year. He missed the mark on one PT test (in sixteen years AD, enlisted and officer, with no other blemeishes on his record) and the board passed him over. Thankfully he picked up the rank this year, but if that hadn't happened we would have been SOL. This is a tough climate, and a lot of people are feeling your pain.

hansonam446 · September 2012

NSL:
darjeeling:
hansonam446:
darjeeling:
hansonam446:
ArmyQM:
One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

I think this has more to do with the influx of people coming into the military and them now having the pick of the crop rather than the government...

The Pentagon is directly involved with force reduction and the setting of recruitment goals and standards.

Even so, voting in November for the president next year isn't going to help her husband now = my point.
No, your point was that the government had nothing to do with draw down. But you're allowed to change your mind.
Voting in November could very well change the outcome for OP's DH, since his boards aren't until January.
Not likely, since newly elected officials (including a new President, if we have one) won't be sworn in until January. Also, force reduction is a natural thing as we wind down two wars. No matter who's in office, troop numbers aren't going to be increased or even stabilized at current levels unless we go back into an armed conflictg sometime soon.
FWIW, OP, I do understand. My H was turned down for what we thought was going to be a routine O3 to O4 promotion last year. He missed the mark on one PT test (in sixteen years AD, enlisted and officer, with no other blemeishes on his record) and the board passed him over. Thankfully he picked up the rank this year, but if that hadn't happened we would have been SOL. This is a tough climate, and a lot of people are feeling your pain.

All this.

darjeeling · September 2012

hansonam446:
NSL:
darjeeling:
hansonam446:
darjeeling:
hansonam446:
ArmyQM:
One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

I think this has more to do with the influx of people coming into the military and them now having the pick of the crop rather than the government...

The Pentagon is directly involved with force reduction and the setting of recruitment goals and standards.
Even so, voting in November for the president next year isn't going to help her husband now = my point.
No, your point was that the government had nothing to do with draw down. But you're allowed to change your mind.
Voting in November could very well change the outcome for OP's DH, since his boards aren't until January.
Not likely, since newly elected officials (including a new President, if we have one) won't be sworn in until January. Also, force reduction is a natural thing as we wind down two wars. No matter who's in office, troop numbers aren't going to be increased or even stabilized at current levels unless we go back into an armed conflictg sometime soon.
All this.

Sure, it's not likely legislation will change in time for OP, although it is certainly not unheard of. However, the fact remains that a change in administration could help other service members, and that is ArmyQM's point.

And yes, downsizing after a war is inevitable, but I do not agree that the situation is that simplistic.

OP's quandary is not purely the result of force reduction.

The fact is that military benefits are being whittled away, and this does not go hand in glove with reducing troop numbers. These cuts are the result of the priorities and budget decisions of the administration.

As the administration is comprised of elected officials, our votes do matter. It is inaccurate to claim that any and every administration would choose to cut raises, Tricare, and retirement.

Elected officials have created and condoned an environment where DOD has no other choice but to squeeze out a service member months shy of a benefit he has been working towards for 17 years.

Yes, America is in an economic downturn. But does that mean we no longer take care of those that have given years of service, lost family time and suffered personal injury?

One of the ways we can speak is with our vote. Although a change in administration may not come in time for OP, it could certainly help insure that future veterans are given the respect and benefits they have earned and deserve.

NSL · September 2012

darjeeling:
hansonam446:
NSL:
darjeeling:
hansonam446:
darjeeling:
hansonam446:
ArmyQM:
One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

I think this has more to do with the influx of people coming into the military and them now having the pick of the crop rather than the government...

The Pentagon is directly involved with force reduction and the setting of recruitment goals and standards.
Even so, voting in November for the president next year isn't going to help her husband now = my point.
No, your point was that the government had nothing to do with draw down. But you're allowed to change your mind.
Voting in November could very well change the outcome for OP's DH, since his boards aren't until January.
Not likely, since newly elected officials (including a new President, if we have one) won't be sworn in until January. Also, force reduction is a natural thing as we wind down two wars. No matter who's in office, troop numbers aren't going to be increased or even stabilized at current levels unless we go back into an armed conflictg sometime soon.
All this.
Sure, it's not likely legislation will change in time for OP, although it is certainly not unheard of. However, the fact remains that a change in administration could help other service members, and that is ArmyQM's point.
And yes, downsizing after a war is inevitable, but I do not agree that the situation is that simplistic.
OP's quandary is not purely the result of force reduction.
The fact is that military benefits are being whittled away, and this does not go hand in glove with reducing troop numbers. These cuts are the result of the priorities and budget decisions of the administration.
As the administration is comprised of elected officials, our votes do matter. It is inaccurate to claim that any and every administration would choose to cut raises, Tricare, and retirement.
Elected officials have created and condoned an environment where DOD has no other choice but to squeeze out a service member months shy of a benefit he has been working towards for 17 years.
Yes, America is in an economic downturn. But does that mean we no longer take care of those that have given years of service, lost family time and suffered personal injury?
One of the ways we can speak is with our vote. Although a change in administration may not come in time for OP, it could certainly help insure that future veterans are given the respect and benefits they have earned and deserve.

Does either presidential candidate actually have any of this in their platform? Because if so, that's news to me, and I follow these things pretty closely.

Ktbug613 · September 2012

darjeeling:
hansonam446:

ArmyQM:
One word comes to mind.....VOTE.

I think this has more to do with the influx of people coming into the military and them now having the pick of the crop rather than the government...

The Pentagon is directly involved with force reduction and the setting of recruitment goals and standards.

yes they are, but regardless of who is voted president, this is not going to change. They, for once, aren't doing this to be jerks. We beefed up by a HUGE amount because we were full force in two wars. Now we aren't, so things have to start getting back down to original numbers it sucks but its just a part of the deal.

cmgedney · September 2012

I haven't read all the PP yet, but it first seems that your husband is an officer, correct? Is he M-Day, on ADOS orders, or a full timer on Title 10? From what I gathered from your post it seems that he is a LTC and has been for some time. I am not an officer, so I do not fully understand the promotion process for officers at this time, but I do believe that they have a time frame in which they have to get promoted otherwise they are put out. Depending on what his branch is, there may not be many COL positions in the state so that is where the problem lies. Take the officers in my branch for example, up until a year ago there was only ONE COL slot in the entire state, now there is TWO. My previous OIC decided to retire earlier than he wanted two because the COL slot wasn't going to open up for a couple years and wanted his officers below him to be able to promoted so he left to give my current OIC the ability to get promoted to LTC and just recently got promoted to COL due to the change in the UMR. But I do know for sure that officers have a certain time frame given to get promoted to the next rank and if they do not get the schooling requirements or promotion in time, it's early retirement for them. When I went through my WOC board, one of the officers I know on the board from a previous deployment back in 2006 is still a MAJ and is facing the same situation that it sounds like your husband is facing. He can't get promoted (I believe it is bc he has a GOMAR filed in his file) so he is looked at other options and he is AGR(Title 10).

**After rereading your post it seems your husband is MAJ trying to get promoted to LTC, same concept that I wrote above.

pixiem38 · September 2012

cmgedney:
I haven't read all the PP yet, but it first seems that your husband is an officer, correct? Is he M-Day, on ADOS orders, or a full timer on Title 10? From what I gathered from your post it seems that he is a LTC and has been for some time. I am not an officer, so I do not fully understand the promotion process for officers at this time, but I do believe that they have a time frame in which they have to get promoted otherwise they are put out. Depending on what his branch is, there may not be many COL positions in the state so that is where the problem lies. Take the officers in my branch for example, up until a year ago there was only ONE COL slot in the entire state, now there is TWO. My previous OIC decided to retire earlier than he wanted two because the COL slot wasn't going to open up for a couple years and wanted his officers below him to be able to promoted so he left to give my current OIC the ability to get promoted to LTC and just recently got promoted to COL due to the change in the UMR. But I do know for sure that officers have a certain time frame given to get promoted to the next rank and if they do not get the schooling requirements or promotion in time, it's early retirement for them. When I went through my WOC board, one of the officers I know on the board from a previous deployment back in 2006 is still a MAJ and is facing the same situation that it sounds like your husband is facing. He can't get promoted (I believe it is bc he has a GOMAR filed in his file) so he is looked at other options and he is AGR(Title 10).
**After rereading your post it seems your husband is MAJ trying to get promoted to LTC, same concept that I wrote above.

A lot of what you ssid i gobbledygook to me (sorry... i don't understand a lot of the acronyms ), but it seems like what you said.is the gist of.the situation. He is up for LTC, but not enough LTC spaces available, or something like that. He has already been up.once i guess, so.one more time (in January) and then that is it. It would probably be fine enliaere actual.early retirement, but he doesn't have enough time in yet to qualify for retirement, so.its bye bye see ya later.thanks so much...etc. He is thinking that maybe he will join the air force or enlist (?) in the army again. He has been talking to people, but really just starting since he was away at a class, and so i don't know if he.lnows how realistic those options would be. I.suppose there is always a.chance he will get it, after all, but it seems.pretty crony-ish/political and he is not on the favorable side.of.either.

Want a personalized experience?

shrinking military=screwed dh

Re: shrinking military=screwed dh

Choose Another Board

Search Boards