The Air Force is severely undermanned. Is there a proposal on how to fix it?

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:30:09 -0500

So I've recently heard the AF finally admit that we have a huge undermanning problem. Setting aside it's what we've been trying to tell our leaders this whole time, they still haven't announced how they are going to fix it. Assuming they are. If there was an update please comment so I know, otherwise, please list some ideas or thoughts on how to fix it or what you plan to do with the way things are going.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Dec 19 at 2015 11:42 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:42:50 -0500

We need regime change to fix this problem, and that won't happen for another year.

Response by TSgt Kerry Hardy made Dec 19 at 2015 12:03 PM

TSgt Kerry Hardy — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 12:03:34 -0500

A1C Manz - Under manning is due to budget cuts and will only get worse. More with less is the new government motto. Gen Welsh did make a bad decision on cutting all 19000 airmen in one year when he had 5 to do it.

Response by TSgt Gwen Walcott made Dec 19 at 2015 12:23 PM

TSgt Gwen Walcott — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 12:23:25 -0500

Get rid of Obama

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2015 1:55 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 13:55:07 -0500

Purge a lot of our brass and rebuke them publicly and explain why they were fired so that the next generation of Generals and Chiefs will learn from their mistakes and know not to follow their path starting with Gen. Welsh. Explain to everyone how with over blown budgets and no sense of accountability and lack of quality analysis Government contracts have almost bankrupted our branch and we made our Airmen pay the price with cuts to benefits, pay and ultimately with their careers I'm sure Gen. Welsh realizes we didn't forget about the RTB that cost us 18'000 of my fellow including myself. This will not happen however until like everyone has said on here it will take a new military friendly President.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2015 1:59 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 13:59:57 -0500

By the way glad to see a young Airman taking interest and asking this kind of question I would love to see how SECAF would answer this I'm guessing she would be doing a lot of squirming while trying to answer it, keep asking the questions they don't want to answer that's what leaders do.

Response by SrA Matthew Knight made Dec 19 at 2015 2:13 PM

SrA Matthew Knight — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 14:13:42 -0500

My only assumption is that they will try to recruit more people.

They are also talking about increasing re-enlistment bonuses to try and entice people to stay in. They are also looking at the Reserves to see where they might be able to get people to come in Active Duty. I want to say I saw something on the Air Force Reddit where someone who had separated received an e-mail basically saying if you want to come back we'll take you.

They're really going to need to look at the way the branch is run if they want to have the incentives they need to retain people. It's hard to maximize your numbers when people don't want to stay in anymore. I know there was a lot of people who jumped at the opportunity for an early separation when that all came about and I think it says something when that many people want to get out. Even I plan on getting out after this enlistment simply because I have no incentive to stay in any longer. I'm stuck in a job that I hate that is also difficult to retrain out of and even if I could retrain there are no jobs on the retraining advisory that suit me either. So I'm going to take my G.I. Bill and split while I still can hopefully.

You can offer all the money you want but when people hate their jobs and commanders ideas of making things better is by forcing you to spend what should be free time at mandatory events then you aren't going to be keeping people in the service. They get tired and fed up and ultimately pack there bags and leave.

I'm not saying the AF is terrible but we have a long way to go before I would start to call us a great branch again.

But what does my opinion matter, I'm just a lowly Senior Airman.

Response by SrA David Steyer made Dec 19 at 2015 2:36 PM

SrA David Steyer — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 14:36:31 -0500

Let junior enlisted retrain earlier and/or expand the NCO retraining program in addition to letting prior service people come back if they don't get enough takers in undermanned fields. Those people coming back, their AFSC may have changed ten fold in the time they got out so someone brand new may be just as capable, maybe even more so depending on the person.

I know some AFSCs are NOT undermanned. A few months before I got out my AFSC was 150% overmanned from E1 to E4 and this wasn't even six months ago. Which is why I suggested letting people possibly retrain eariler, E5 was only 65% manned so retraining isn't really an option for those people.

Do some PCS'es to level out AFSCs if possible. I know my AFSC did last year. I am not really against homesteading but how about we spread the wealth and move people with crazy high time on station (TOS) espically when they are 200% overmanned at a certain rank and everyone at that rank has 4+ years ToS to bases who are authorized multiple SSgt's for example but only have one yet another base has six when they are authorized two? I have seen that happen but nope no one is getting moved.

Some people suggested "flightline pay" for those flightline workers, and something similar for security forces members but guess what... I don't see too many soldiers, or marines complaining they should get paid more than people who have desk jobs so no. Maybe I am missing something though.

Oh and make squadron superintendent a reporting identifier like group superintendent. I was a 4E - Public Health. I know of one base that is authorized a TSgt and a MSgt when it comes to NCO ranks, not even a SSgt is authorized! Not my base but a former coworker is good friend with the TSgt there. The MSgt is filling the squadron superintendent role currently and I found out that same MSgt authorized in that AFSC at that base is always the squadron superintendent. IMO, I am sure they are a great MSgt but you loose something when the same AFSC is the squadron superintendent in an AFSC made up of multiple AFSCs. So it's a misnomer to say they count against 4E manning when they aren't doing any duties for the 4E AFSC. Other special or additional duties within a squadron maybe they should be a 8-series special duty or a reporting identifier (9-series) and I know the AF is doing this with UDM but slowly.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2015 2:36 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 14:36:34 -0500

The Air Force is losing people because they WANT to lose people. I can only surmise that by conserving money in personnel administration, they can try to reprogram some of it for procurement.
Everyone talks about budget cuts, but in truth it is more like budget priorities. The Air Force really wants certain programs to fly (pun intended). In order to get a skeptical Congress to buy off, they are trying to find "efficiencies" elsewhere.
If you want to know why the USAF is shedding Airmen, look at the leaders at the very top.
Then look in the mirror and ask yourself whether you feel like you're part of the team or just marking time.
If you want to fix it, the Air Force needs to look at an incentivized reclassification process, a means to take good Airmen and get them into needed career fields where they can better grow professionally and contribute in a way the service needs more.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Dec 19 at 2015 5:12 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 17:12:14 -0500

Like any other Organization and or Company their is competition for Resources in this case People . With an Improving Economy the Air Force is going to have to improve their Game, Their Public Relations, Marketing for those same People.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2015 7:08 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 19:08:07 -0500

Throughout my 21 in the Air Force I have see manning like a roller coaster ride. It all depends on who is in office at the time. Typically I have seen if we had a Republican President, manning and funding went up. If we had a Democrat President, manning and funding was cut. I recall a time in 2007, manning in my section was at an all time low but HQ Air Force wanted us to deploy, deploy, deploy. Our manning levels were so low we finally had enough and said NO. Of course a ton of calls as to why. I told them they are just looking a paper and if they want to see for themselves they could come down and see. They did. Once I showed them in person, we got more manning and they cut back on our deployments.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2015 7:43 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 19:43:49 -0500

https://youtu.be/nQr34JBXQiY

Most recent discussion i could find about your question. I know this is not a good answer but its a good place to start.

As of now there is no real set in stone plan, a few meetings i have set in is retain-ability will be key. The Air Force forced out to many experienced leaders and workers, with that speed of work has slowed down and training has taken a hit. Maintainers have always relied on experienced workers to get the job done and keep jets flying. Now they are harder to find because they are burnt out from trying to do the "more with less" philosophy we have all heard. The Air Force can fix this but its going to take a lot of time and restructuring, but i don't know if upper leadership will understand the problem.

Secretary of the Air Force Open Door

Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James answers questions at Defense Media Activity, Fort Meade, MD on December 8, 2015.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Dec 19 at 2015 10:08 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 22:08:09 -0500

The proposal I believe is robust recruitment, but they are not reaching the recruiting goals.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 21 at 2015 8:32 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 08:32:48 -0500

Apparently our proposal is to re-hire 7,000 of the folks we tossed out in 2014.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 21 at 2015 10:28 AM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:28:00 -0500

Aside from what you read online what sources show you that we are "severely" undermanned as an Air Force? We have a handful of AFSCs that are undermanned but as a whole we are at or well above our sustainment level. Your AFS for example is 114% manned...might not feel that way but that can come down to personnel management within your particular AFS or duty location.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 21 at 2015 2:57 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 14:57:13 -0500

If they keep cutting people and we keep making the mission happen, why stop? As long as the unit Commander has an OPR, the mission will happen. As long as the Air Force needs new jets, the cuts will happen. Horrible cycle. It sucks because the little guys suffer and the big guys reap rewards for mission accomplishments. Get promoted!! It will get better because historical it always does but it is alarming when the majority of the force joined after 9/11 and we only know big budgets and a lot of personnel. Long story short if we fail to accomplish the mission....change will come. But don't fail!!

Response by SSgt Phil Sigman made Dec 21 at 2015 3:35 PM

SSgt Phil Sigman — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 15:35:03 -0500

They had a manning cut back in the early 90s where mid-career personnel were asked to voluntarily separate (with a bonus check), or be voluntold. This affected everyone from Major on down to Staff Sergeant, and maybe some Senior Airmen. I got out on this program in 1992, less than one month after Strategic Air Command was deactivated. Not sure how they can fix this problem now without a major Cold War style build up.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 21 at 2015 7:33 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 19:33:14 -0500

SrA Private RallyPoint Member easy question to answer. Take away more funding and slots so you require less until you hit 100%. That is how some think. Not correct answer, but a way.

Other thoughts I heard were to merge back into the Army and make it the Army Air Corps.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Dec 21 at 2015 11:39 PM

COL Charles Williams — Mon, 21 Dec 2015 23:39:09 -0500

Downsizing is a part of the fabric of the American way of war. We ebb and flow with what is going on in the world, and what we can afford.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Dec 22 at 2015 8:07 AM

Col Joseph Lenertz — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 08:07:49 -0500

While we may be undermanned overall, the AF has exacerbated the problem by chasing shiny new objects. The most recent sparkly thing has been cyber. Fully recognizing the growing importance of cyber, I am unconvinced we solve it by throwing large numbers of people with 6 weeks or 6 months of training at it. True cyber capabilities in the active defense and offensive areas take a special kind of genius and often years to develop. I'm not sure the military is the best place for it. There are agencies better suited to recruiting and paying to retain the best and brightest in cyber.

Response by MSgt Dan Hurley made Dec 22 at 2015 8:27 AM

MSgt Dan Hurley — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 08:27:25 -0500

As early as the mid 90's I could tell their was a shortage because the UTC's were going up and down on personnel and your time in the bucket for deployments never ran according to the way it came was always shorter just one old retiree's option

Response by SSgt Stuart Schultz made Dec 22 at 2015 9:00 AM

SSgt Stuart Schultz — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 09:00:57 -0500

I think the current administration is happy with the levels the way they are, it is a direct result of their policies and emphasis on budget; however, we do still have reserves. The AF always seems undermanned while a Democrat is Commander in Chief.

Response by MSgt Scott Gaston made Dec 22 at 2015 1:27 PM

MSgt Scott Gaston — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 13:27:59 -0500

Re-Elect Ronald Reagan! Of course I know that's impossible, but when you look at great presidents (regardless of Party) realized the importance of a strong, well Armed and trained Malitia. Someone decided that we needed a peace dividend after Vietnam and started slashing troop numbers and using that money for Pork Barrel Spending to help keep them in office. They seem blind to the fact that our would be adversarries are aware of the innovation curve and the fact that if we kept cutting, it would take years to build back up and trillions to modernize and train. Too bad the end result might be no office if we get cut so thin, we can't protect and repel "Bad Actors with ill Intent" on multiple fronts! But hey, they got elected because they were cool and had an agenda...

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2015 3:21 PM

Col Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:21:23 -0500

I have read the entire discussion and all comments and of course the undermanned problem is severe. Many solutions are good solutions but most will take a long time and others are not very realistic BUT not once did I see discussed or even mentioned a major problem that I have personally experienced and extensively researched and that is the fitness assessment test implemented several years ago and in this area is where I saw large number of airmen leave mainly because of the waist measurement. I have seen time and time again how many individuals can be very fit for combat readiness and yet this test tells them they are unfit.
After studying many research documents on how we have lost thousands nationwide and research on how this test is unrealistic to measure fitness for duty since it has many flaws according to conclusions from several university studies, our leadership insist in implementing this test destroying many military careers if anyone is unable to pass. I have read how genetics and low metabolism can negatively impact the plans for a military member struggling with staying fit and many become discouraged and leave.
Lets study all the ideas and solutions but lets not ignore the ones that can be implemented faster and help with a solution short term

Response by SrA Jonathan Carbonaro made Dec 22 at 2015 4:51 PM

SrA Jonathan Carbonaro — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 16:51:49 -0500

Manning I think needs to be looked at two categories people who are in and new recruits.
The Air Force is doing nothing to get people that are in to reenlist. Their are little to no bonus's, the Chief of Staff is saying we no longer have privacy when it comes to talking to friends. 1% Pay Raises for the past several years, and cutting TA. Changing Retirement, and retiring now comes down to a math equation. So the people who are going to stay in, were going to stay in regardless.
New People: While I'm not 100% what they are doing on that front, the economy is ok not great but their are options out there other than the military. Also if they could fix everything with recruiting you're still talking months or years of lead time before you see any noticeable difference in the Force. Theoritically it'd be a year to two year lead time before you could take a recruit and have them produce work that doesn't need to constantly be double checked.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2015 5:41 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:41:54 -0500

What the Air Force desperately needs are real leaders. People who get things done and encourage, motivate troops to always strive for better and accomplish more.
Problem is they are too focused on things like CBTs and EPR bullets to really focus on what's important. It's just not very effective.

Response by SSgt David Brunelle made Dec 22 at 2015 8:10 PM

SSgt David Brunelle — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 20:10:32 -0500

Recruiting way to many free thinking Sissy boys and girls!! I broke a nail! I need a time out!!! ! Leadership is to blame fully!! They take no responsibility they just look for some one or some other agency to blame! You senior nco's and officers don't have balls to lead! I point the finger at you infective leaders!! You hatched this qwaundry so fix it! Your leadership schools weren't for drinking beer and martinis!! Tuff shit boys! I was medically retired Years ago thank the Lord!! Oh ya 1 more thing!! Way too many Fatties in uniform on Waivers!! Enjoy

Response by MSgt Chad Bunch made Dec 22 at 2015 11:18 PM

MSgt Chad Bunch — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 23:18:18 -0500

Well, they keep doing the same thing and they expect different results!! Viatnam, Cold War then the Clinton eror, now the Obama eror!!!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2015 11:29 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 23:29:10 -0500

I think the USAF will increase their manpower in 2016, by 50%. I am transferring soon. Diablo 41 out

Response by SPC Rory J. Mattheisen made Dec 22 at 2015 11:38 PM

SPC Rory J. Mattheisen — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 23:38:11 -0500

I hear the Airmen complaining about their extended duty hours around here all the time, I think the focus should be shifted to how the existing personnel can perform more efficiently instead of trying to fix recruiting/retention issues. Most of the people that were thinking of joining are now hesitating, and many of those who are coming up on ets are likely leaving due to the prospect of Trump becoming CIC.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Dec 22 at 2015 11:38 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 23:38:49 -0500

The Corps rarely has problems meeting recruiting goals. Maybe there are some fundamental differences somewhere in there.

Response by SSgt Mike Hogan made Dec 22 at 2015 11:40 PM

SSgt Mike Hogan — Tue, 22 Dec 2015 23:40:18 -0500

Have the clowns in Washington pull their heads out of their rears

Response by SSgt Walter Lonsdale made Dec 23 at 2015 8:53 AM

SSgt Walter Lonsdale — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 08:53:14 -0500

Yes. Get rid of a CinC that hates America.

Response by SSgt Walter Lonsdale made Dec 23 at 2015 8:57 AM

SSgt Walter Lonsdale — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 08:57:27 -0500

We're fighting a phantom enemy. By that, I mean the enemy is everywhere. No one wants to serve 5 tours in Afghanistan with their hands tied. That's too much to ask.

Response by TSgt Nels Muler made Dec 23 at 2015 9:01 AM

TSgt Nels Muler — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 09:01:44 -0500

If the Executive branch asked for a larger end strength I believe the congress would go bigger as they have every year in the last four. But the cheapest easiest way is to increase recruiting as most will only do one term. The better way is to recall all of us who opted to get out during the last round of force reduction (with out penalties, I.E. repaying the buyout). However I do not know the percentage of us who are now because of medical issues either unaddressed or under addressed during our careers are unable to be recalled to active duty, I know I am one who falls into that category but would waive any increase in my disability by already addressed claims and reup in a heart beat to relieve the stress I know my career field is under after the time I spent with the excellent and motivated people in it I can only imagine the heart break the families are going through with multiple TDY's and deployments in what is supposed to be dwell time

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Dec 23 at 2015 9:29 AM

Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 09:29:55 -0500

The Air Force is undermanned and it is not a new issue. Unfortunately, it has gotten worse over the last several years. It all boils down to money. Congress mandates end strength and allocates funds accordingly through the POM (usually a five year projection and agreement). A Program Objective Memorandum (POM) is a recommendation from the Services and Defense Agencies to the Secretary of Defense concerning how they plan to allocate resources for a program(s) to meet the Service Program Guidance (SPG) and Defense Planning Guidance (DPG). The POM covers the 5-year Future Year Defense Program (FYDP) and presents the Services and Defense Agencies proposal on how they will balance their allocation of available resources. The POM includes an analysis of missions, objectives, alternative methods to accomplish objectives, and allocation of resources. The easiest and quickest way to get current year funds to continue operations is to cut personnel. Unfortunately again, cutting personnel is easy but when the oh crap factor kicks in that we cut too much, it takes years to recover. Last FY the SECAF and team cut personnel after ugly battles with congress and stated there wouldn't be any this FY. We are undermanned and I don't see it getting any better any time soon. Now the other side of official cutting is that we are wearing folks out and cutting retirement for the new folks coming in etc and people are leaving. Also when we cut people because we want to, they leave and don't want to come back...even if we want them to. I don't have the answers but our leadership really needs to continue to carry the torch and I believe Sec James is truly trying to fix this issue. Long road ahead of her.

Response by SMSgt Cary Baker made Dec 23 at 2015 10:54 AM

SMSgt Cary Baker — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:54:08 -0500

The Air Force and all services has been undermanned since post Gulf War back in 91. And manning has never fully recovered. Nor do I see it happening in the future. The only hope of increased manning will occur once a new President is sworn in. With the history of the Presidents since President Carter in the late 70s, only a Republican president will think about increasing manning in the military. And keep in mind, President George H.W. Bush was the first to cut manning post Gulf War. Then President's Clinton and Obama had really cut us all back. But, as with the professionalism, attitude, honor and loyalty of our service men and women, we will always get the job done with minimal support from our government. :)

Response by SrA Dennis Byrne made Dec 23 at 2015 11:10 AM

SrA Dennis Byrne — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:10:58 -0500

I may be 55, but I can still fit into my old flight suit and would LOVE to fly one of those drones out of Creech AFB. Put me in coach, I'm ready to play!

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2015 11:31 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:31:05 -0500

Outsource all support jobs in Garrison and let folks focus on the mission rather than "weeds-n-seeds, "dorm inspections," " housing inspections," and other foolishness.

Response by MSgt Marvin Kinderknecht made Dec 23 at 2015 12:00 PM

MSgt Marvin Kinderknecht — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 12:00:29 -0500

Activate the draft. if you are 18--you are in. No descrimination period. If you are not dead will will find you a job.

Response by SSgt Kristi Aldridge made Dec 23 at 2015 12:18 PM

SSgt Kristi Aldridge — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 12:18:51 -0500

This is not the first or the last time it will happen. You always have to do more with less, there will be no long time fix because the world and needs of Americas Military are always changing. It has never been a 40 hour a week job and never will be.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2015 1:05 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 13:05:48 -0500

They need to stop barring prior service members who are otherwise qualified from reenlisting and why is 38, an arbitrary age, a bar too?

Plenty of qualified 40+ who have rolled snake eyes in the new economy, willing to be Air Force again.

I am trying to get back in to the Air Force they keep coming up with issues that should not even be considered. I did not care much for the Army guard.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2015 1:40 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 13:40:23 -0500

This is a problem service wide. I am glad you are asking these questions, but as I am not in a related field, I cannot comment more concisely, other than all Maintenance MOSes in the USMC (and for that reason other branches), are overworked. It's not unusual for them to stay persistently late, or even come in on weekends (happened to our 3521's, or motor transport mechanics) every week, so they figured it out, started a rotation of sorts, or spent long weekdays, in order to have a weekend of sorts. It also wasn't uncommon for people from adjacent or similar MOSes (Heavy Equipment) to help them out if they had spare time, or not too much work (which restored my faith in humanity). Since I wasn't mechanically savvy, I couldn't directly help them, but would take spots for duty slated for them, and either myself of another non-Maintainer NCO sit in on them.

My only advice in the meanwhile would be, to come up creatively at your level with a way to balance the injustice that is upon you (I had to put it theatrically like that). Not sure how your immediate leadership is, what they're about or if they just don't care - just take charge of this post and all government property in view (little trivia for you, tell me what that is)! One of my SSgt's would always tell us, when faced with adversity (primarily garrison BS) - get out or get promoted.. but our Comm Chief at the time (very big, and strong GySgt, now MSgt, that slays bodies and radio frequencies) - "Own it, and show us what's going on tell us SNCO's to fuck off, go play golf!".. this is an actual quote, and I agree. Work harder, play harder...... you might as well embrace the suck.

Hopefully I'm not too off base here.

Response by MSgt Bill Milligan made Dec 23 at 2015 2:06 PM

MSgt Bill Milligan — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:06:16 -0500

Nothing has changed in the 15 years since I retired. I think what you will find as it always is aircraft maintenance is severely undermanned as the usual support groups like Security Forces.

Response by SMSgt David A Asbury made Dec 23 at 2015 2:13 PM

SMSgt David A Asbury — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:13:22 -0500

As a former USAF Recruiter in the early 80's, I went thru a time period when I had more qualified individuals wanting to enlist than the AF had jobs for. It was a highly selective process of taking the cream of the cream of the top. Anyone that went into the Air Force at this time period were waiting up to 9 months out to get in. It was difficult to keep these future airman wanting to join motivated. This relates to being under manned because the Air Force was drawing down from the once million plus active duty personnel. Cutting any where from 30 to 50 thousand personnel each year led to many slots to go unfilled. Part of the fix was each job and each position was looked at and determined if it could be eliminated or shared. Manpower studies even looked at the use of the word of the day "additional duties". The results of the cuts were an increase in the size of civilian personnel. This helped in some areas, and severely undermanned positions still faced shortages until we accepted them or paid big bonuses to those airman that would stay in.

Response by SMSgt Sheila Berg made Dec 23 at 2015 2:20 PM

SMSgt Sheila Berg — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:20:43 -0500

Here we go again! This was the same problem during the Gulf War where there was a reduction in the force in the middle of the Gulf War. There needs to be a clear mission statement of involvement in the current world situations. Also a change in culture where the Air Force is considered a business model and rid the decision makers who are "closeted anti- war sympathizers". Until then no clear decision on equipment and Airmen can be effectively decided. The Air Force is fighting a war on two fronts!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2015 2:43 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:43:37 -0500

With the AF not having a stop loss is one of the big problems and the fact in the FA here in the south we have a big problem with officers and NCO's being the most untrustworthy I have ever worked with and I have been in the Army,Army Reserves,National Guard,Air guard, and the Air Guard was the worst. No wonder so many have vacated the force. Almost all of the units I attended had a few problems and the biggest one is in the accounting payroll and manday's .When a Mday soldier goes active he is taking off the roster for required day served and ends up with a bad year for his retirement. I invested 21 years to only see 18 good years and got to old to chase the dream of a retirement check. Don't volunteer for war duty unless your young enough to put in 30 or more years to get your 20.

Response by PO1 Kenneth Cardwell made Dec 23 at 2015 3:57 PM

PO1 Kenneth Cardwell — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 15:57:27 -0500

If this is true, then the recruiters are lying. I have heard people tell me they join the Army because the AF waiting time was 1 year to 18 months!

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2015 4:50 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 16:50:50 -0500

Airman Manz, your care in asking this question says a lot; and your service is part of providing your own leadership now and in the future. Someday you will have to oversee your subordinates during tough times.

To directly answer your question, I do not have an answer; there are many: 1) recruit, 2) change the mission, 3) retention. I suggest you and I both watch and learn from what develops (...and don't stop asking these kinds of questions)!

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2015 8:57 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 20:57:27 -0500

Start by cutting generals and full birds who make up retarded rules like wearing a reflective belt in a combat zone

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Dec 23 at 2015 9:27 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 21:27:19 -0500

The AF has a long and proud history of mismanaging personnel. They have gone through many periods of either too many or too few pilots.

Back in 2001, after 9/11, Air Mobility Command (AMC) activated 350 Reserve and NG Security Forces members from all over the US and sent them all to Scott AFB (AMC HQ). The intention was to deploy the entire group as a Super Sqn down range. However, they jumped the gun and there was no place to go. So for over a year, 350 SF members just hung around Scott. The AF paid for 350 hotel rooms because regardless of rank, everyone got their own hotel room. At $75 an average per night, the AF was spending 26K a day just on billeting. It was a huge waste of manpower and money.

A few years later, even though the IMA Reserve program is very cost effective for the AF, they cut the IMA program by 90% (in the SF field).

As far as thoughts on how to increase manning. It's fairly basic, increase the budget for manpower and add incentives for undermanned AFSC's. Put more money in the Reserve side and increase the incentive to for AD folks to transition into the Reserves.

However, based on many years of past practice, I do not have high hopes that the AF will get the manning ratio correct in the future.

Response by MSgt Steven Wilken made Dec 24 at 2015 12:24 AM

MSgt Steven Wilken — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 00:24:54 -0500

The Air Force in recent times has taken to the ultimate Universal Solider mind set in determining who to keep and who to send packing. Leadership is completely ignoring members abilities, knowledge and experience leading to solely judge airmen by the fit-to-fight program. Under the zero tolerance mindset, far too many highly qualified members are being sent to the front gates because they failed by a single pushup or not having a 32" waist and weighing 120lbs. The Reserves are specially being hit hard due to having to adhere to Active Duty standards without the grace of being allowed on duty time to workout or participate in official fitness programs. Reservists are only there 2 days a month, but get tested on the same time frame as their active duty counterparts. Then they tack on the medical physical requirements that is solely used not to determine the medical fitness of a member and assist in improving overall health, but as a program to thin the ranks. A very minor condition I had ended my career (luckily I had over 20 years). I have arthritis. The medical squadron determined it was not the condition its self that was disqualifying, but the commonly prescribed medication to treat the condition that was used to disqualify.

Now comes into play the requirement for promotion ability. CSAF put into policy to be eligible for promotion above E-6, a member MUST have a CCAF degree. Never mind a member may have an advance degree of a B.S/B.A or Masters degree from highly respectable universities. That was determined to not be good enough. Leadership demands a lower Associates Degree instead. Having completed a B.S. degree, why should I return to school to complete a simply no name A.S degree. Ask how many civilian employers know what a CCAF degree is? Very few. I had attempted to transfer the credits I obtained for my Bachelors degree over, but was told my class work was too high level to be considered. They want 100 and 200 level classes, not 3 or 400 level. So on top of being disqualified for arthritis, I was dead ended from promotion to E-8 because I had a B.S. degree instead of an A.S.

Lastly, lets add all the ancillary and CBT training requirements. Again looking at traditional Reservists that only attend 2 days per month. A time limit is placed to obtain a 5-skill level. A large number of first term airmen are overwhelmed with all the ancillary training, F2F, medical, wing family days, CPR, SAPR training, etc, etc. Exactly when do they ever really get to see a real aircraft to train on? Never. I had airmen 5 years in and still had not obtained a 5-level, only to be put up on the Group Commanders weekly morning meetings slides showing no training progress and being asked WHY!! Its all about metrix numbers. Commanders don't want to hear of all the overwhelming ancillary requirements being an excuse.

Now the A.F. has come to where all the real experience and knowledge has left the building. Exactly how will young airmen get properly trained with all the mass exodus of Senior NCO's. When I left the Avionics shop where I was the highest rank Senior NCO, the next highest rank traditional reservist was a SSgt (E-5) still in 7-level upgrade training with only 7 years total service time compared to my 30.

If the A.F. truly wants to fix the revolving door, first take a closer look at their priorities of F2F and all the medical disqualifying conditions. When a person with a missing kidney is allowed to remain in service, but someone with arthritis at age 50 is not, something is wrong there.

Response by CPT Russell Pitre made Dec 24 at 2015 12:45 AM

CPT Russell Pitre — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 00:45:14 -0500

How is this possible. What are they undermanned in? It is just in some technical fields or everything.

Response by Capt Jeff S. made Dec 24 at 2015 4:01 AM

Capt Jeff S. — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 04:01:02 -0500

The Air Force as I remember it was very specialized. They used more people to do the same amount of work as routinely done by the Navy and Marine Corps, but they also did a better job covering themselves in paper and got more dollars to fund their efforts. The Navy / Marine Corps team covered our manpower shortages by cross training individuals so that an individual might do that which otherwise might take two people with different MOS's to do.

For example, I was an Avionics Tech, but I had also gone to Corrosion Control school and Mini-Comp (soldering). So not only could I diagnose the problem, but I had the means to fix it as well. And though my MOS was TACAN IMA Level Repair, I could also fix UHF, FM, HF, Radar Altimeter, etc. What that means is that you could send a detachment out and only need ONE IMA tech to support it since that person could troubleshoot AND repair most everything on that aircraft.

Am not saying that to brag on my skill set, but to illustrate the importance placed on training individuals... which is something the Air Force might want to consider if it hasn't yet already. I was just one of many in our shop that could work on multiple benches thanks to the wisdom of our SNCO's and Officers that prudently sought to take every opportunity to train those under them to be more well rounded and capable technicians. It's just how we operated.

Response by TSgt David Bariu made Dec 24 at 2015 10:49 AM

TSgt David Bariu — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:49:16 -0500

Well........for the veterans I see out here.....we will be glad to get back and serve diligently......we still are sharp.....well trained...and always ready to get the AF running as smoothly as possible.......sign me up uncle sam.....

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made Dec 24 at 2015 11:31 AM

MSgt Michael Smith — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 11:31:35 -0500

There is a very simple reason for this: The economy is doing much better now than it was a few years ago. The Air Force has pretty high minimum entrance exam scores. Most people who consider the Air Force are also considering college or trade school after HS. In a good economy these options offer quite a bit more freedom and pay than an entry-level enlisted position. Same thing goes for retainment: When the civilian world offers more than military service, people are going to get out.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2015 12:12 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 12:12:43 -0500

1st. Get rid of half the General Officers and staff. Obviously, they are no longer needed.
2nd. Look at the Metrics System and see if it is working or if the "Good Old Boy" system is still the way of promotion.
3rd. Look at the Physical Fitness Testing and find one that makes complete sense.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2015 1:21 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 13:21:09 -0500

Spending too much money on the F-22 and F-35 that are massively over budget to keep quality Airman. The money has to come from somewhere and it's not coming from big business who lobby's congress to push orders through and promises Generals a job when they retire, that's for damn sure.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Dec 24 at 2015 1:55 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 13:55:48 -0500

The AF will increase recruiting levels, invite back some who ETS'd , and some of those who were axed due to budget mandates.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Dec 24 at 2015 2:54 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 14:54:54 -0500

Define undermanned? USAF normally turns people away.

Response by Lt Col David George made Dec 24 at 2015 3:10 PM

Lt Col David George — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 15:10:14 -0500

The SAF has stated publicly that personnel numbers can't be permitted to go lower. Easy for her to say. She can't do a thing about it and her time is nearly up. There will not be a proposal to increase personnel until the political will and leadership exist to make it happen. I fix the blame at the top, which includes the President, the Pentagon and the Congress.

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Dec 24 at 2015 4:43 PM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 16:43:49 -0500

Money Michelle, money. Look at history. Whenever there is a cutback in funding, the first cuts are in manning. Need a squadron to deploy? Transfer qualified people in until you meet T/O and leave the other squadrons short and scrambling.
Why?
While it may take two years from civilian to basically qualified mechanic, the pipeline for equipment is more difficult to turn up after being shut down, so you've got to keep the material pipeline open and hope you have enough dedicated personnel to make it work (and they always do it because of their dedication and loyalty), then train the necessary people when the flag goes up again and priorities turn back to being able to win a war.
No need for a plan, the necessary action is a matter of record and been accomplished many times over..

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Dec 24 at 2015 7:37 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 19:37:34 -0500

I think not only the Air Force, its all the services that go through this cycle of downsizing for whatever reason they have and then in a few years they decided that they need more people again and hit hard on recruiting.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2015 11:05 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Dec 2015 23:05:08 -0500

I'm sure they could fix that by allowing some people to cross branch in to the AF.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 25 at 2015 5:33 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 25 Dec 2015 05:33:12 -0500

Beyond the scope of manning, there is a fundamental change sweeping the USAF. Something more sinister is occuring at an astronomical rate as 68,750 Vol'd to get out last year. We could HYBRID the PT program, we could offer assignemnts home, we could recognize their hard work with medals//decs, we could STEP more deserving people, we could not buy 100 Bombers and cut it to 40 freeing up much needed personnel funding to start a R.O.A.P. Retain our airman program. We could do nothing and witness a mass exodus out by 2017 @ $700K per airman lost--350k to train to 6 years and replacement cost of new AMN. In 23 years i havent seen it this bad and i strongly feel it will get worse. Maybe its a generation thing, its hard work and not everyone is willing or wanting to do it. The USAF cant fix upbringing or human factors such as decompression time with high deployment rate, school, volunteering etc....

Response by LTC Bink Romanick made Dec 26 at 2015 4:30 PM

LTC Bink Romanick — Sat, 26 Dec 2015 16:30:37 -0500

SrA Private RallyPoint Member I know that the personnel appropriations are creating some huge problems for the defense budget. Perhaps with $125K bonuses for drone pilots and expensive platforms like the F35C there is limited funding available for the personnel appropriations.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 27 at 2015 9:26 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 27 Dec 2015 21:26:20 -0500

A huge problem I am seeing is morale. People don't like the Air Force, so they want to get out. The Main reason I'm seeing for this is leadership. Individuals reach E-6 and suddenly stop caring about their troops. I will work and work for an NCO that cares about what happens to me as an airman, and I will do everything within my power to make them proud and help them accomplish the mission, but why would I want to stay in the military and work for people who don't care about me or the other junior enlisted in my unit? Fix leadership and morale, and that's a pretty big part of your manning issue.

Response by MSgt Jim Wolverton made Jan 2 at 2016 11:47 AM

MSgt Jim Wolverton — Sat, 02 Jan 2016 11:47:38 -0500

A1C if you find an answer to that, let us old guys know that wondered the same thing for 20+ years.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jan 3 at 2016 4:16 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 04:16:31 -0500

Elections.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 4:59 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:59:23 -0500

The Air Force doesn't have a manning problem. What they have is a structure problem. Their structure (and the Navy's as well) is beyond their ability to pay for. The Air Force receives a certain amount of money every year. It should build an Air Force which meets those fiscal constraints. It does not. You have the people that you can pay for. There isn't a huge loss at end state of the year. The problem is that you have too many squadrons. The Air Force needs to remove squadrons from its force structure to meet the man power they can pay for. Either that, or we end up with an under-staffed Air Force that cannot accomplish its missions. That's what we mean when we say "hollow-Air Force," or "hollow Army."

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2016 2:06 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 14:06:15 -0500

I know some unemployed Soldiers who would love to be in the Air Force. I wish the AF would open up to veterans of other services. I tried to enlist after four years in the Navy and the requirements for prior service were very strict. You had to be exactly at the rank of E4 with a career field they needed. I don't think it has changed. To me, a good prior service Soldier is natural for the US Air Force and I would be happy to release some of my best Soldiers to the Air Force if they need them.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jan 21 at 2016 2:36 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:36:30 -0500

I thought the USAF was going to all drones....... ;o)

Response by TSgt David Bariu made Jan 22 at 2016 1:58 AM

TSgt David Bariu — Fri, 22 Jan 2016 01:58:47 -0500

The AF might be undermanned but they perform more tasks, their skill sets and continuous education programs makes them hand more duties with less man power. But that doesn't mean they don't require man power. Recruit more AF personnel, re-enlisting for veterans who can add value to the AF.....mentoring from Veterans is imperative to see the AF grow gracefully.