Posted on Jan 21, 2015
Should there be a "Transition" unit on each military installation?
1.66K
6
5
1
1
0
In the Army, we have WTB but what I mean is a unit that service members are transferred to once they are a year away from retiring and 6 months from regular separation.
My thoughts are that while in this transition unit, you are allowed to take care of anything related to your transition, from medical appointments to job interviews, just to name two. This way, you are not expected to hold a high level position that conflicts with you having successful transition.
Thoughts?
Note: I was just told that the Army used to assign junior Soldiers to the gym as they approached ETS and Seniors worked at a conference room or something like that...
My thoughts are that while in this transition unit, you are allowed to take care of anything related to your transition, from medical appointments to job interviews, just to name two. This way, you are not expected to hold a high level position that conflicts with you having successful transition.
Thoughts?
Note: I was just told that the Army used to assign junior Soldiers to the gym as they approached ETS and Seniors worked at a conference room or something like that...
Edited 10 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 1
1
1
0
SGT (Join to see), that's a bold proposal, but I'm not sure it's realistic. For retirees, setting aside the last year for transition issues is kind of the definition of R.O.A.D.
What I'm saying is that the military may not want to give servicemembers up for six months to a year of their tour or career, especially since they are supposed to be working during that time. I think that would be the biggest hurdle to implementing something like what you suggest.
What I'm saying is that the military may not want to give servicemembers up for six months to a year of their tour or career, especially since they are supposed to be working during that time. I think that would be the biggest hurdle to implementing something like what you suggest.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
CW5 (Join to see)
I agree it is a bold proposal, but I think there is some necessity in it, as well. Yes, personnel that are transitioning are still on active duty and are expected to work, and the respective service of a transitioning service member may not want to give them up. But I think the fact that unemployment among Veterans is so high, especially in the 9/11 era, is because they are not given the maximum amount of time to properly prepare themselves for life after the military.
Case in point, a soon-to-be retiree in my battalion (within the next 4 months) is still holding a high profile position in the S-3 and expected to contribute to operations in the battalion. This individual has said on numerous occasions that she feels she is not fully prepared for civilian life because she still has devotion to her position in the 3 shop. She admits to being conflicted because she is a hard charger, but knows she has not focused much energy on this big life transition.
I think sometimes unit leadership focuses so much on the mission that they forget some of us are about to be moving on. After all, what are they going to do when these individuals actually leave? Which is why I think a transition element is necessary.
I agree it is a bold proposal, but I think there is some necessity in it, as well. Yes, personnel that are transitioning are still on active duty and are expected to work, and the respective service of a transitioning service member may not want to give them up. But I think the fact that unemployment among Veterans is so high, especially in the 9/11 era, is because they are not given the maximum amount of time to properly prepare themselves for life after the military.
Case in point, a soon-to-be retiree in my battalion (within the next 4 months) is still holding a high profile position in the S-3 and expected to contribute to operations in the battalion. This individual has said on numerous occasions that she feels she is not fully prepared for civilian life because she still has devotion to her position in the 3 shop. She admits to being conflicted because she is a hard charger, but knows she has not focused much energy on this big life transition.
I think sometimes unit leadership focuses so much on the mission that they forget some of us are about to be moving on. After all, what are they going to do when these individuals actually leave? Which is why I think a transition element is necessary.
(0)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
SGT (Join to see) CW5 (Join to see)
That is a tough one. I can see that it would be beneficial to retiring members to have more time to properly prepare for civilian life, but I don't believe having a Transition Unit is the way to go. I think it is a responsibility of the unit commander to help ensure the retiring member has adequate time to prepare, but, ultimately, it is the responsibility of the individual. If a person waits until the last minute to prepare, whose fault is that? Not sure what going to a Transition Unit would accomplish. Allow more time to send out resumes, etc? Most retiring members do not stay in the area of their last assignment upon retirement, so being available for job interviews is not really the issue. I think most are able to attend Job Fairs, etc. and still perform their day-to-day functions.
Terminal leave is also designed to allow for transition. That frees up the service members 100% of his/her time to prepare, while drawing 100% of their pay. Maybe a possible enhancement that should be considered is to award an additional 15-30 days of paid terminal leave to all retiring members.
Many of the reasons I hear for establishing Transition Units also apply to folks who are preparing for PCS moves and deployments. While retirement/changing careers certainly is more involved for most people than PCSing and deployments, an argument could be made to relieving them from their duties for those activities, as well. I just don't think it is feasible.
That is a tough one. I can see that it would be beneficial to retiring members to have more time to properly prepare for civilian life, but I don't believe having a Transition Unit is the way to go. I think it is a responsibility of the unit commander to help ensure the retiring member has adequate time to prepare, but, ultimately, it is the responsibility of the individual. If a person waits until the last minute to prepare, whose fault is that? Not sure what going to a Transition Unit would accomplish. Allow more time to send out resumes, etc? Most retiring members do not stay in the area of their last assignment upon retirement, so being available for job interviews is not really the issue. I think most are able to attend Job Fairs, etc. and still perform their day-to-day functions.
Terminal leave is also designed to allow for transition. That frees up the service members 100% of his/her time to prepare, while drawing 100% of their pay. Maybe a possible enhancement that should be considered is to award an additional 15-30 days of paid terminal leave to all retiring members.
Many of the reasons I hear for establishing Transition Units also apply to folks who are preparing for PCS moves and deployments. While retirement/changing careers certainly is more involved for most people than PCSing and deployments, an argument could be made to relieving them from their duties for those activities, as well. I just don't think it is feasible.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
I absolutely agree that the individual shoulders the responsibility for their own transition, but I have witnessed firsthand several attempts by retiring/separating Soldiers be stymied because of their role within the unit. I even heard a CO commander say "The mission comes first. Handle your retiring stuff when you are retired." I know that this is not the thought process of every commander, but if one thinks this way, there are others.
The purpose of the transition unit would allow the service member the opportunity to go to medical appointments, TAP classes, job fairs, job interviews, etc.
I agree with you on PCS moves/deployments, though. The argument that they need a transition point is strong.
I absolutely agree that the individual shoulders the responsibility for their own transition, but I have witnessed firsthand several attempts by retiring/separating Soldiers be stymied because of their role within the unit. I even heard a CO commander say "The mission comes first. Handle your retiring stuff when you are retired." I know that this is not the thought process of every commander, but if one thinks this way, there are others.
The purpose of the transition unit would allow the service member the opportunity to go to medical appointments, TAP classes, job fairs, job interviews, etc.
I agree with you on PCS moves/deployments, though. The argument that they need a transition point is strong.
(1)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
Poor leaders fail to take care of their soldiers. I hope that most do not fit into that category, although I know there are some (too many).
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google