Posted on Dec 18, 2014
Should TERA (aka 15 year retirements) be made permanent?
16.7K
59
14
3
3
0
Should Temporary Early Retirement Authorization (TERA) be made permanent as a cost saving measure for the DoD?
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 7
I see this as a good thing. But, as long as there is a decent balance between the benefits received for a 15yr retirement vs 20. If you make the deal to sweet for 15 you'll run into retention issues, creating a loss in knowledge and experience the rest can learn from.
(4)
(0)
LTC Joseph Gross
That is a very good point but I think it would work out simply because we always seem to have enough who want to serve forever. And I retire soon at 30....
(2)
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
LTC Joseph Gross, absolutely and those folks are balanced by the people that want to retire as soon as they are eligible.
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
This is true, normally the ones we want to stay are the ones that do. LTC Gross, I was stationed at Chievres from '05-'08 it was a great assignment. Hope you're enjoying it out there.
(1)
(0)
TERA is merely a tool to manage the force, balancing end strength and meet fiscal challenges. There are other management tools designed to retain a high quality, high performing leaner force. If you look across all the service branches, there is a focus on performance versus longevity. I'll be blunt, the days of getting a "20 year" retirement are long gone, in my opinion only.
(3)
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
SSG (Join to see), I agree, they keep pushing that agenda, and getting the subsequent push back. This is something they can do right now to reduce the budget long term as well and having a overall "younger" higher performing force.
(2)
(0)
Here is one selling point for service members: most Federal Law Enforcement jobs require a hire date prior to 37th birthday. With TERA, one could retire with 15 years, start drawing a pension based on that amount and start a new career! What a boon that would be to the Federal Law Enforcement community and what an awesome bonus to service members.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next