Air Force Track System to Increase Retention, Lethality, and Quality Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Air Force Track System to Increase Retention, Lethality, and Quality of Life 20 February 2018 Authors: Capt Anthony T. Alt Capt Nathaniel D. Beene Capt Kathleen B. Deiters Capt Patrick C. Ernst Capt Katherine J. Hewlett Capt Anita L. Labenski Capt David J. Miller Capt Irene M. Mitchell Capt Nathan F. Schuler Capt Chance A. Smith Capt McKay D. Williams Capt Christopher T. Wright 1 Executive Summary One of the most pressing issues facing the United States Air Force is the ever growing pilot shortage, reaching a deficit of nearly 2,000 pilots and expected to increase (Pawlyk, 2017). A number of factors led to this shortage, including the high operational tempo, the availability of higher paying jobs in the private sector, the additional duties detracting from primary jobs, and the lack of ability to continue as a technically trained line-flier versus transitioning to leadership roles requiring drastically reduced flight time as a more senior service member. However, these issues are not limited to only rated career fields. The Air Force could potentially see critical shortages in all AFSCs. The Squadron Officer School Class 18C Think Tank collective was asked to address this growing retention crisis and its impact on lethality. The authors of this article recommend establishing a track system in both the officer and enlisted ranks to retain experience and maximize lethality in highly technical career fields, called the Air Force Track System (AFTS). This system codifies the existing command track and creates an equally valid technical track. The AFTS delineates the separate tracks with highly skilled, technically minded experts in the technical track with a depth of highly technical experience and in the command track, passionate leaders who are intentionally and deliberately developed for command. Complementing General Goldfein’s Revitalizing the Squadron and Additional Duty Reduction initiatives, the AFTS addresses the reasons driving airmen out of the force, thereby increasing the overall warfighting skill set by retaining expertise, and ultimately increasing Air Force lethality. The AFTS demonstrates commitment to airmen through an empowered voice in their career path which will allow airmen to focus their career on their talents and passions either in command and leadership or as a technical expert, resulting in increased retention. 2 Background Since the end of the Cold War, the Air Force has experienced a number of significant reductions in force, contributing to the overall decrease in manning by 38% (Grosso, 2017). Examples of these congressionally mandated reductions include the 2005 Program Budget Directive (PBD) 720, which reduced the total active force from approximately 377,000 to approximately 335,000 (a reduction of over 10%) (O’Neill, 2012), and the Air Force’s 2014 Reduction in Force (RIF), which further reduced the active force from approximately 327,000 to approximately 310,900 (a reduction of 5%) (Losey, Aug 2017). These regulations, combined with inadequate retention, culminated in a shortage of Air Force pilots in 2016, totaling 1,555 pilots across active duty, the Reserves, and the Air National Guard. The gravest of these shortages exists in the active duty fighter pilot community, which was 873 pilots short in 2016 and was projected to grow to over 1,000 pilots short by the end of fiscal year (FY) 2017 (Grosso, 2017). The decline in pilots and Airmen in other AFSCs has caught the attention of Air Force Senior leaders. Chief among them are General David Goldfein, Air Force Chief of Staff, who commented that today’s Air Force “[is] the smallest we’ve ever been,” (Moon, 2017) and the Honorable Heather Wilson, Secretary of the Air Force, stated, “with 2,000 pilots short, it will break the force” (Losey, Nov 2017). Unfortunately, this drawdown in the service’s manning has coincided with an increase in operational requirements, thus creating additional strain on Air Force personnel and decreasing the force’s full-spectrum readiness for future conflicts. There are at least two foreseeable methods to address the dwindling force. The first would be to bring an increased number of accessions into the service. However, one of the major issues with this idea is that it provides a quantity, not necessarily quality, approach to Air Force 3 human capital. Accessions do not necessarily enter with the requisite skill sets to be lethal on day one of service, thus requiring training. In the current environment however, training is not a priority and the time to do such training is minimal (Grosso, 2017). The second approach, which is the focus of this paper, is to increase the retention of existing personnel. The successful execution of a retention-focused approach will allow the Air Force to retain the skills that existing personnel possess, which provides a greater return on investment from training members, ultimately ensuring that the lethality of the force is maintained. The officer retention and lethality issue also extends to the Air Force Medical Service (AFMS). The retention of medical personnel has been discussed in depth within the AFMS since at least the 1990s (Rodgers, 1990). AFMS officers, Biomedical Service Corps (BSC), Dental Corps (DC), Medical Corps (MC), Medical Service Corps, and Nurse Corps are an integral part of the Air Force’s readiness and their mission is intimately tied to Joint and Air Force Doctrine. In the 1990s, the Air Force conducted a study which showed that the number one reason for MC officer separation was pay; however, it also found that pay alone was not going to solve the retention problem (Rodgers, 1990). The study also found that MC officers would be more willing to remain in the service if administrative/ancillary responsibilities were minimized in order to maximize the provider’s time with patients. In addition, it was found in 2013 that O-6 DC officers, who spent the majority of their time practicing their craft, had a higher retention rate than MC officers, who are mostly forced into command at the same rank (Osgood, 2013). Table 1 is an extract from Lieutenant General Gina Grosso’s presentation to the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Armed Services, in regards to the pilot shortage (Grosso, 2017). While there are some areas that are outside the Air Force’s control (e.g., “Availability of Civilian Jobs”) and others that are needed for Air Force lethality (e.g., “The 4 Potential to Leave Your Family for a Deployment”), there are areas where increasing retention can potentially alleviate the pressure. By retaining personnel above the current rate, the additional duties are spread across more members, reducing the number of additional duties per member. This would facilitate a better work/life balance and, potentially, a more manageable home station temp. In an ideal case, this cycle continues and the next iteration will further balance the factors of work/life balance, tempo, and additional duties until, at length, the Air Force is able to fully man its requirements. The first step is to increase retention. Table 1: 2015 Rated Exit Survey Results on the “Top 5 Influencers to Leave,” excerpt from Lieutenant General Gina M. Grosso’s testimony before congress (Grosso, 2017). Air Force Track System Overview The Air Force can retain both traditional, command-focused officers and technically adept officers through the codification of the existing command track and the creation of a technical track in select, highly technical AFSCs. The AFTS would allow officers to concentrate their efforts towards becoming a commander or towards developing, honing, and applying their technical knowledge. The implementation of the AFTS provides opportunities to strengthen the force, enhance lethality, and retain technically proficient Airmen to whom the traditional command career progression may not appeal. 5 As shown on Figure 1 below, Command Duty Officers (CDOs) will follow the traditional command track and promote through the current officer grades. The CDO career will be focused on command and leadership development, following the existing officer career progression through advanced Professional Military Education (PME), staff experience, and key leadership positions. The technical track officers will be called Line Duty Officers (LDO) for a joint- translatable term, utilizing the Navy acronym for their technical officers. Borrowing from the flying community’s term “flying the line,” Line Duty Officer will focus their career towards technical development and expertise. LDOs will promote from the grades of O-3T through O-6T, with on-ramps at the O-3, O-4, and O-5 levels. The letter “T” is added to the grades to distinguish LDOs from their CDO equivalents. Along the technical track, the highest attainable grade would be O-6T. Capping LDO career progression at O-6T has precedent within the Department of Defense as it is consistent with the U.S. Navy’s Limited Duty Officer program, which has been authorized to promote its technical track officers no higher than the grade of O-6 since 1985 (Bureau of Naval Personnel, 2011). The LDO career will be focused on the development of technical expertise in the assigned AFSC while maintaining leadership proficiency. Officers would have the initial opportunity to apply to become an LDO upon becoming a senior captain with a minimum of seven years of commissioned service within one career field. LDO selection boards will be held on an annual basis, and applications will be accepted for O- 3T, O-4T and O-5T. If a member is not selected, he or she will remain on the command track. Officers on the command track in the grade of O-6 and above would not be considered for transition to the technical track; they must remain on the command track. This restriction will safeguard O-6 technical track opportunities for LDOs. 6 Though the emphasis of this paper is the implementation of the AFTS for officers, the same principles can be applied to developing and implementing an AFTS for enlisted airmen.