Posted on 05/12/2005 10:47:27 PM PDT by neverdem
The Army's top recruiter, already struggling to meet his quotas this year, said yesterday that 2006 would be even harder, and perhaps the toughest year for recruiting since the all-volunteer force began in 1973.
Maj. Gen. Michael D. Rochelle, in a telephone interview, said the Army would most likely start its fiscal year this October with the smallest pool of recruits ready for boot camp in at least a decade. He said that by then, only 9.9 percent of the roughly 80,000 new active-duty soldiers the Army needs next year to replenish the ranks in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere were expected to be in the pipeline.
Normally, as the Army begins its recruiting year, it has a goal of having already-signed contracts with one in every three of the year's expected arrivals - a cushion that helps recruiters through the slow winter months. But this year, the Army started with one in five, and if General Rochelle's prediction is correct, next year will begin with only one in 10.
The general said that prospect was "not a bright picture" and blamed a variety of factors, from the war in Iraq, to an improving economy, to family members and friends of applicants who he said often dissuade recruits from joining.
"The challenges we're now facing truly are America's challenge to address," he said.
General Rochelle said he was still "cautiously optimistic" about meeting the current year's goal of 80,000 active-duty soldiers, even though the Army had recruited only 35,926 soldiers as of April 25, more than halfway through the fiscal year.
Most recruits, he said, typically enlist during the summer as new high school graduates make future plans. But some former Army recruiting officials and outside military analysts said the Army appeared to be entering what some of them call a "death spiral," a cycle of shortfalls that can take years to overcome.
Beth J. Asch, a senior economist specializing in military personnel at the RAND Corporation, a military-financed research organization, described the general's prediction as "near disastrous."
She said the reduced pool of enlistees would force the Army's 7,500 recruiters, already struggling under intense pressure, to find applicants, verify that they are qualified and send them to boot camp in 30 days or fewer. In 2004, recruits typically waited 110 days to report to boot camp after signing up; as of March, that had dwindled to 50 days.
"It's comparable to having no savings account," Ms. Asch said. "They'll be living month to month."
In interviews over the past five months, recruiters have said they already feel rushed to push recruits to boot camp as quickly as possible. They said the accelerated pace often leads recruiters to overlook or illegally conceal psychological problems and police records that might make a recruit ineligible.
Various forms of cheating, or breaking Army rules to enlist unqualified applicants, have been on the rise. Army statistics showed 325 closed cases of substantiated improprieties in 2004, up from 199 in 1999, the last year the annual active-duty recruitment goal was missed.
The expected decline in the number of ready recruits at the beginning of next year could also waste military resources and limit combat strength, said some former recruiting officials.
"This has ramifications and ripple effects throughout the entire Army," said Col. Greg Parlier, who oversaw the Army's internal recruiting strategy and research unit from 1998 to 2002 before retiring in 2003.
"It means the training base becomes very inefficient because you have underused capacity - a bunch of drill sergeants sitting around."
The last major recruiting shortfall, in the late 1990's, he said, forced 2 of the Army's 10 active divisions to be listed at the military's lowest level of combat readiness. He predicted that similar problems would occur if the recruiting lag continued.
"It means positions in combat units cannot be filled in a timely manner," he said.
In yesterday's interview, General Rochelle said that in addition to increased enlistment bonuses and a retooled advertising campaign, another incentive was introduced nationally on May 9.
That new incentive allows recruits to sign up for an eight-year program, earning a student loan repayment of up to $18,000 in return for 15 months of active duty and 24 months in the Reserve or National Guard. The remainder of the time could be spent in AmeriCorps or the Peace Corps.
General Rochelle, who has overseen recruiting since 2002, also went into greater detail about the Army's plans for a one-day suspension of recruitment on May 20 so recruiters can be retrained in military ethics. He said that everyone in the Recruiting Command would view a video he produced that calls for strict adherence to the Army's core values, and the rules governing which tactics can and cannot be used to persuade someone to enlist. They will also have to join in discussions of ethical issues.
The Army occasionally suspends recruiting after accidents to give safety training. But this would be the first time in at least two decades when a hiatus was called for ethics training. The unorthodox move is necessary, General Rochelle said, because news reports have highlighted violations at the lower levels of the command.
Allegations of abuses, including the recruitment of a mentally ill young man in Ohio and a recruiter in Houston who threatened to arrest an applicant if he failed to join, General Rochelle said, "were flying just below my radar."
I won't be surprised if this is eventually offered to the Marines and Navy Corpmen(sp?) as well, i.e. folks on the ground.
The Army and Marines, both active and reserve components, have not been making their quotas for the last three months, IIRC.
Check comment# 1.
Great incentives..but I KNOW what the Libs will say.."
"What good are incentives like that when you won't be ALIVE to use them??"
Anyone have a counter to that lilly-livered argument?
Well, I will just say that the dems and the MSM have a lot to do with this---
Why would young people want to join the military to go to an "illegal war" and "kill innocent people"? They are filled in with so much anti-America propaganda in high school and college nowdays that it would seem almost impossible to get a "patriotic" emotion from a lot of them these days....
I would think that if they could see the pride of what American troops have accomplished in Afghanistan and Iraq, it might help, but where would they see that---even Fox isn't showing it as much as they used to...
This is worrisome, but at least they're doing something. It's set up so that they can do one tour in Afghanistan or Iraq with an Active duty unit and another tour with an Army Reserve or National Guard unit.
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
IMHO it's a lot simpler than that. Most potential recruits know that there's a good chance they'll end up in Iraq within a year. We're going on our fourth year of active warfare, and it's tough sledding, recruitingwise. Even in WWII, a "popular" war, most people didn't volunteer, they waited to get drafted.
I think it will eventually come to a draft this time around, too, unless Iraq quiets down dramatically in the next six months or so. The numbers just aren't there. The trick will be in getting it through Congress, and in selling it to the public in a way that won't result in a major bloodletting at the polls. If Rove can pull that off, he'll deserve every nickel of his salary.
Right on about Fox. Lately I've been really turned off by FNC. I don't know but recently, to me, it seems like they are mainly concerned with more tabloid-like crap such as in depth coverage about what Michael Jackson had for breakfast rather than actual news. I mean come on, with everything going on in the world there is no reason why FNC needs to saturate us with coverage about Michael Jackson, the runaway bride, or whatever other garbage turns up. Nobody cares!
And if Korea or Iran blow up....all bets are off.
AR and ANG are geopraphically located. People aren't assigned or deployed the same way as Active Duty. They likely won't go unless their AR or ANG unit is sent and only a fraction of AR and ANG units are deployed at a time.
They are being sent as units and as individuals, depending on circumstances. The last that I heard and read, about 40 percent of the personel in Iraq are from the reserves, including almost all of the 42nd Infantry Division, New York Army National Guard.
And this time around it is time for women to step up to the plate and be required to register with the SS since they want equality.
Fem groups argued for years about women on ships and combat areas.
There is no reason for them to be exempt from national service or the draft.
A guy years ago was more to the point. He would go all out for women and equality WHEN he saw them join in mass protests for the right to be drafted.
The wusses in Congress after years of hand wringing finally allowed them to participate in current realities.
I posted comments earlier elsewhere about FNC's ratings running circles around the other news channels. They have been my news channel source for obvious reasons.
But, I pointed out they lately have regressed and seem to be using a National Enquirer mentality by sensationalizing lead-ins to upcoming segments..."See the shocking videos...blah, blah," "You won't believe what so and so said...blah, blah."
Yesterday, I emailed Greta's show, which is amounting to Son of Court TV about the above.
Where in the heck have you been? I've felt like the Lone Ranger around here for a long time.
Welcome to FreeRepublic.
A few months ago a thread like this would have already been loaded up with the, "What,-are-you-crazy? We-don't-need-no-stinking-draft!" crowd.
The authority to draft and the registration of women should have gone through congress and signed by the President before the end of September 2001. Now, it's going to be a wee bit tougher to "get 'r done."
Ten Million+ of what some refer to as "The Greatest Generation" were drafted.
The trick will be in getting it through Congress, and in selling it to the public in a way that won't result in a major bloodletting at the polls.
If the Bolton matter and the Filibuster issue were settled today, it would still take many months for Congress to even focus on the issue of manning the force.
Imo we need to pay the soldiers fighting on the ground much much more then they are making now. And get away from this promising of benefits crap.. make it real cash, aka increasing salary.
And we need to get away from the whole reserve idea of sending them overseas for a continuing mission.
After congress is done shelling out money to the unions, pork barrel contracts, and every other special interest.. I doubt there will be any money left over for troops.
I'm not sure more pay is the answer. Don't get me wrong, the troops can't be paid enough but big incentives are being offered right now.
I do believe, under conscription, we'd have be a little more creative than in the past. Of course, when the draft ended in 73, E1 thru E5 weren't highly paid anyway. So, it didn't much matter that a US (draftee) made the same as an RA (enlistee).
One way would be to create a two-tier pay scale for the grades effected (E1-E4 or 5). If a draftee chooses to stay longer at any point in the process, they would immediately jump to the higher scale. People forget that, even under the old draft, many draftees re-enlisted.
A few months ago a thread like this would have already been loaded up with the, "What,-are-you-crazy? We-don't-need-no-stinking-draft!" crowd.
If Iraq is not worthy of a Draft, then we shouldn't be there. I guess I agree with you. I also agree that it may take another major attack on US interests to make it happen. Make no mistake, something will have to change in the recruiting department before too long in any case, however.
"If Iraq is not worthy of a Draft, then we shouldn't be there."
Come on. You know very well what sort of event would be needed to get public support for a draft - something on the level of a nuclear attack on a U.S. city. To claim that anything short of that is not worthy of military commitment seems ridiculous and would give our adversaries free reign.
"Make no mistake, something will have to change in the recruiting department before too long in any case, however."
Agreed.
You seem to contradict yourself. You agree that we can't continue down this road with or without a major attack but earlier you say that is what it will take.
I said it would take a **major** attack to get enough support for a draft, but I also feel that changes will need to be made in the near term in terms of retainment, recruitment and deployment until the Iraqi army gets up to speed. If that doesn't happen in a reasonable timeframe in which we can maintain sufficient troop levels then we will have to look at other options, which include, among others, handing the keys to al Zarqawi and friends or stepping back and allowing a civil war to break out while aiding whatever group seems advantageous to U.S.
Thanks, I guess we are saying the same thing.
Even without a major attack on us, at the current deployment tempo and drop in recruiting, Iraq is going to take the Army and Marine Corps to the breaking point.
This is complete horse hockey! My nephew lives (lived?) in the peoples republic of MA. He tried for eight months to enlist in any branch of the service, without success.
He first started talking to the Army recruiter last Sep. The guy was all set to take him. All the initial background checks and aptitude tests were completed. He passed handily. The recruiter said that since his aptitude scores were so high, he would be wasting his talents in the infantry and that he should apply for some sort of advanced electronics MOS. My nephew did and was accepted. To absolutely clinch the deal, the recruiter told him that he would get some sort of enormous signing bonus (in the order of $20K) if he entered basic training before 31 Dec 04. My nephew said he would take it, he would take it all, and went home and quit his job (idiot). This was the mid-Oct. time frame. This is where we enter 'The Twilight Zone.'
Once per week he was to report to some sort of Army induction center in the Boston area. He would be there with a couple dozen other prospective recruits, orders in hand. A bus (or buses) would pull up and some army puke would get out and select 50 people at random, pack them on buses, head off to boot camp, and all remaining were told, "Sorry. Come again next week." This went on through out all Oct., Nov., and Dec. In the meantime, I am calling his recruiter and local recruiters to find out what the deal is. His recruiter said that it is the Army and just the way it works. Typical Army SNAFU. I asked with it being this messed up how did he ever make his quota. He stated that his whole monthly recruiting quota is satisfied within the first 4 or 5 days each month and he doesn't even have to leave the office. He said that he has no need to go to any high school or college campii, he just sits in the office and they come to him. He said the biggest hassle was preparing paperwork for recruits that may or may not be taken once per week. My local Army recruiter had pretty much the same story.
Here is the kicker - that enormous signing bonus was out the window since he had not been in boot camp by 31 Dec. 04. Being a Navy vet myself, I told my nephew to tell his recruiter that if he didn't get off his dead butt and get him in, that he would go across the street and talk to the Navy recruiter. He did. The Army recruiter said, "Well, goodbye then." So, now the nephew is forced to go across the street and see what the Navy had to offer. The Navy recruiter welcomed him with open arms. He got his file from the Army recruiter and said, "With your scores, you belong in the Nuclear power program!" Papers were signed, he entered some sort of advanced enlistment program where he was sworn in to the inactive reserves but would not stare boot camp for another several weeks. Finally the big day has arrived, he shows up at the induction center, they read about 50 names of a list and pack those off to boot camp. My nephew was not on the list. He went back to his recruiter who said there was some sort of paperwork SNAFU that he would look into and get straightened out. One month later, they are still trying to get his initial background screening signed off on - that was the problem.
Then one day, about 3 weeks ago, he gets a call from the Army recruiter who says that if his bunns are at the intake center the following day, he could absolutely guaranty that the Army would take him. The only problem was there would be no advanced schooling - all billets were filled for the foreseeable future - so he would be going in as an infantry recruit. He called his Navy recruiter to ask if he was "really" in the Navy and what would happen if he went into the Army. The Navy recruiter said "Go for it!" Now here it is 3 weeks later and he has been pretty happy at Army boot camp in GA.
The moral of this story is that the armed forces are having no problem making their recruiting quotas--at least in New England.
I wonder if they'd take a 55 year old fat guy with bad knees and back if he used to be a captain?
.
The United States Army defines lives:
RICK RESCORLA: Help honor 911 Lifesaving Hero
http://www.strategyzoneonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24361
.
Thanks for the link.
.
You're very welcome, neverdem.
http://www.lzxray.com
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.