Posted on Aug 8, 2016
I recently read a post about extending high year tenure (HYT). What would you think about having all SNCOs with a HYT of 30?
6.08K
11
13
0
0
0
Posted in these groups: 
Retirement
Retirement
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 6
3
3
0
I don't think it's a good idea, I made 30 but was living on motrin and finished my last year as a directorate SGM because I didn't want to be the old broke dick CSM keeping a younger guy from progressing( yes I said guy, because there were no females with eligibility in the field and my PC meter is pegged already today). I can't imagine being a 1SG , SFC or SSG at 30 years and being fit enough to keep up with the troopers they would be leading.
(3)
(0)
SFC Richard Giles
I hear ya CSM. I tried that same exact thing and once I hit 30 years I was done. Stretched it out for a couple more years to make up for lost time but I was on a permanent walking profile, my feet were flat, my knees were just barely keeping me up.
(1)
(0)
Capt (Join to see)
SGM thanks for the response. From my POV in the AF our SNCOs are highly administrative in nature so I don't think they'd have a problem keeping up with the demands of the job. In the career fields that require that type of vigor an extended HYT definitely wouldn't work.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Without a "pyramid" structure you end up with "homesteading" and limited promotion opportunities at the lower ranks.
As an example, when I was a young Cpl, there were 9x MGySgts in my field. The only way I could get promoted to Sgt was for 1 of them to get out. It created a domino effect through MSgt, GySgt, SSgt, and Sgt. By having HYT at 30, 26, 24, 20, and 12 resp. it prevented further backlog in promotions.
Although we want to retain people, we also want to retain people who are "viable" for future promotion. We can't do that if we keep specific paygrades too long.
As an example, when I was a young Cpl, there were 9x MGySgts in my field. The only way I could get promoted to Sgt was for 1 of them to get out. It created a domino effect through MSgt, GySgt, SSgt, and Sgt. By having HYT at 30, 26, 24, 20, and 12 resp. it prevented further backlog in promotions.
Although we want to retain people, we also want to retain people who are "viable" for future promotion. We can't do that if we keep specific paygrades too long.
(3)
(0)
Capt (Join to see)
Yeah I was thinking about this as well. I couldn't find the reference but only E-8 and E-9 are controlled by law. So the promotions to those grades would definitely slow but then people would have more opportunities (years) to make rank. Technically the services could keep the % to E-7 the same and we'd just end up with a few more E-7 than we do now. I think I looked at some statistics and E-7s retire almost as soon as eligible but E-8s and E-9 tend to stay around even after retirement eligibility. Ultimately I don't think many people would choose to stay until HYT (because most don't now) so I don't think we'd run into too much of an issue. Thanks for the response!
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Capt (Join to see) - It changes the number of players on the field however. Although you don't have hard limits on E1-E7, there are budget and T/O issues. More people staying in, especially at the E5-E6 ranks kills promotions for those in E4-E5. You have to get rid of the "not viable for promotion" (up or out), or this specific group WILL stay until retirement (Coercive Retirement System).
The changes to the Retirement System "may" alter this, but with the 20 year cliff (all or nothing), you will end up with E5-E6 doing everything in their power to stay from 12-20 because X% of pay for life is a huge incentive, even without added paygrades.
The changes to the Retirement System "may" alter this, but with the 20 year cliff (all or nothing), you will end up with E5-E6 doing everything in their power to stay from 12-20 because X% of pay for life is a huge incentive, even without added paygrades.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Another thought to consider, presuming the individual enlisted at 18 years of age and is now an SFC with 20 years TIS. You have a 38 year old PSG chasing a bunch of 18-19 old privates around. No matter how physically fit one is, age takes a toll. Now consider a 48 year old trying to the same. In the more physically demanding CMF's i.e., IN, EN, FA, etc. this could be an issue.
(2)
(0)
Capt (Join to see)
SFC John Hill You're right that it probably wouldn't work in the army. AF jobs are little less physically demanding (i.e. chair force) so it could work IMO. I had a 52 year old MSgt Superintendent in my last assignment and that guy move for an old timer! He just wrapped up 34 years of service (some time was in the reserves).
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google