DOD panel mulls 10-year retirement plan

[Ernesto]

.....Getting a little desperate for cannon fodder?.......

Today’s military members serve under the traditional 20-years-or-bust retirement plan, which has been prized by generations of retirees.
That plan isn’t going away for the current force. But a new plan might be offered as a voluntary option for those in now, promising at least some retirement benefits to many members who don’t expect to serve 20 years.

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?article=35448§ion=104

[cdsilv]

1. I know some enlisteds who aren't going to re-up after 6 or 8 years....n/t

[MADem]

2. There is a MAGIC WINDOW in most military careers

And that magic window opens between eight and twelve years' service.

You really mull over where you are at, where you want to go, what your options are...and you either make the decision to bail, then and there, or you slog on to at least twenty, or more if you can bear it.

The war is encouraging more people to bail, there's far less "weighing those pros and cons" going on.

The trick they are doing here is getting a bunch of folks unwilling to push on to twenty, willing to consider the idea of pushing on to ten with a nice little payback...and then, when they hit ten, well, you're halfway there.....it's like following the Reese's pieces....

[atreides1]

3. I Bailed

At 13 years, just wasn't having any more fun.

[Coastie for Truth]

5. Ten year "retirement" + grad school might attract some junior officers

Going to grad chool - with full pay and allowances and benefits -- and having the grad school years count for retirement. That would be a draw.

[MADem]

6. That would require a change in existing regs (but since it isn't a

statuatory reg, it could be done) unless they front loaded the grad school, or nestled it smack dab in the middle of the service obligation. The payback for advanced education in terms of obligated service is three for one for the first year, and one for one thereafter. This includes both military postgraduate schools, war colleges and civilian instruction (ya have to get into the civilian university, first, though!).

Nowadays, some sort of advanced education, to include JME (joint military education) is absolutely mandatory if you want to make it past 0-4. And unless you have a few joint tours under your belt at the appropriate career stages, you don't have a prayer of competing for senior officer/flag/general rank. Without the joint duty, they don't even consider otherwise stellar people for promotion. It's the ultimate "force shaping tool."

[Coastie for Truth]

7. Was one year for one year

with no "payback" required if it was night school - plus the ROTC instructors who "took clsses on the side" didn't have a pay back.

A couple of my friends had joint tours on the GPSS and the National Data Bouy and Weather Satellite projects. (These guys were real geeks - in college they were definitely the crew cut, horn rimmed glasses, plastic pocket protector, slide rule holster, ripple sole shoes, computer punch cards for book marks and note paper types --- carries through even when they are O-3's and O-4's)).

[MADem]

8. No, I am referring to full time education, not night school

I know, because I benefitted from the program. You basically check out for the entire time you are a student, you have to go to the odd muster, but essentially, you are a civilian until you get that grad degree. It's a great program...especially if you can get in, and time it between brutal tours.

[Coastie for Truth]

4. Atypical military career (Coast Guard - Port Security/Engineering)

and a Dem. But my contract ended just as the country was rolling into a recession and I was on the cutting edge of Liquid Natural Gas tankers.

See this paper by Steven Flynn's research assistant, Eben Kaplan, on Liquid Natural gas tankers and terminals as a terrorist target,

Then I had a new Commanding Officer who was a racist, alcoholic, repug. But, at that point in time I would not have cavalierly dismissed the idea. - Dismissed, but not cavalierly so. ;)

But I can see some "marketing" and "cost savings" points---

The plan also would offer full vesting in a retirement benefit after just 10 years of service. The current annuity formula, of 2.5 percent of basic pay for each year served, would apply. So a 10-year retiree would get 25 percent of retired pay. The catch — and it’s a big one — is that retired pay, for everyone, wouldn’t start until age 60.

1. Ten years is the ERISA "defined benefits plan" vesting period.
2. Postponing retired pay until age 60 - or later - is a normal private sector ERISA "defined benefits plan" feature. Besides, a "young" retire probably has 'second career" opportunities.

Careers as long as 40 years would be allowed, and a 40-year retiree would draw 100 percent of basic pay. But ending for future generations of servicemembers would be immediate annuities after 20 or more years — that is, starting when the servicemember retires. To entice enough members to serve 20, 30 or 40 years, the plan calls for special “gate pays,” extra income at strategic points along a member’s career path.

Careers longer then 30 years -- This has always been available for doctors, linguists, and other "special communities."

...But ending for future generations of servicemembers would be immediate annuities after 20 or more years — that is, starting when the servicemember retires....

This is the "green weenie" - especially since DOD Health Care does not kick in until you actually begin drawing a pension. This is the system for Guard and Reserve -- so the new retiree - with a vested annuity some years in the future - is out of pocket for health insurance.

Interesting side note - If the military pays for your Medical, Dental, Nursing School, or for college (Regular ROTC, Academy) + Flight School - you are serving 10-12 years anyway.