Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34

Thread: Sen McCain calls for USAF HQ Layoffs

  1. #21
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FLAPS, USAF (ret) View Post
    AF manpower documents show it that way? I'm looking at a UMD right now and it's not broken down that way at all. That's also weird how E4s are considered NCO.
    Pretty sure it's because the E4 is "assumed" to get promoted at their next base so they fill the E5 slot.

    Does the UMD showing rank or skill level?

  2. #22
    Senior Member efmbman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,042
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FLAPS, USAF (ret) View Post
    AF manpower documents show it that way? I'm looking at a UMD right now and it's not broken down that way at all. That's also weird how E4s are considered NCO.
    Good grief - does every conversation on this forum have to turn into a argument over something silly? Most of you guys on here simply argue for the sake of arguing. Just forget it.

  3. #23
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by efmbman View Post
    Looking at the strength of the USAF from MAR 2010 to MAR 2015, there have been some cuts, but the brunt of the cuts have come at the E1-E3 level:

    GRADE // 2010 // 2015 // %CHG
    GO 298 // 285 // -4%
    FGO 28,086 // 25,505 // -9%
    CGO 36,965 // 34,688 // -6%
    SNCO 34,058 // 31,128 // -9%
    NCO 162,814 // 160,541 // -1%
    ENL 69,265 // 55,231 // -20%
    I can't remember if you work USAF manpower or DoD. Do you have access to the same type of break outs for all the services?
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  4. #24
    Senior Member efmbman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,042
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    I can't remember if you work USAF manpower or DoD. Do you have access to the same type of break outs for all the services?
    When I was doing manpower, it was at a combined joint HQ. Sandsjames is right - at the joint and/or DoD level, E-4s are considered interchangeable with E-5s. That is, unless the USAF is the only service that does not adhere to the 2 up, one down rule.

    You can spend hours on this page:
    https://www.dmdc.osd.mil/appj/dwp/dwp_reports.jsp
    Lot's of great manpower data and some of the reports go back to the 1950s (when there were still O-11s on the rolls.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    851
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by efmbman View Post
    Good grief - does every conversation on this forum have to turn into a argument over something silly? Most of you guys on here simply argue for the sake of arguing. Just forget it.
    Good grief, I wasn't trying to call BS on you, but perhaps learn of a manning document that differs from the UMD. The UMD and UPMRs are all I am famaliar with.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    851
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    Pretty sure it's because the E4 is "assumed" to get promoted at their next base so they fill the E5 slot.

    Does the UMD showing rank or skill level?
    Yes, both.

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    'Merica
    Posts
    61
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Filterbing View Post
    headquarters reductions were meant to make Defense Department operations more efficient while saving money for American taxpayers

    Because that's how you get better, cutting people.

    Smith! Your workload went from 4 major end items and their respective projects to 6,now make them better than before.
    Well, sure! Why not? The rest of the Air Force has been forced (no pun intended) to do this, for years now, and also put up with being told, over and over and over again, that we were then more "efficient" for the cuts!

    Sorry, but the Air Force is top heavy, and needs to make cuts at the top end. Not saying that they necessarily need to cut positions, just cut some of the rank out. There's no reason for all the brass they have, and many jobs could easily be done by lower ranked individuals. They've cut back on the "indians" for years....now it's time to cut back the number of "chiefs".

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    851
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Salty Old Dog View Post
    Well, sure! Why not? The rest of the Air Force has been forced (no pun intended) to do this, for years now, and also put up with being told, over and over and over again, that we were then more "efficient" for the cuts!

    Sorry, but the Air Force is top heavy, and needs to make cuts at the top end. Not saying that they necessarily need to cut positions, just cut some of the rank out. There's no reason for all the brass they have, and many jobs could easily be done by lower ranked individuals. They've cut back on the "indians" for years....now it's time to cut back the number of "chiefs".
    Unless you consolidate organizations, then you still need leaders of those organizations, and deputies to those leaders.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    965
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FLAPS, USAF (ret) View Post
    AF manpower documents show it that way? I'm looking at a UMD right now and it's not broken down that way at all. That's also weird how E4s are considered NCO.
    E4s used to be NCOs. They still are in the other services. The AF is just a bit weird. that weirdness is why we don;t have WOs also.

    It makes it easier to pretend that shortages don't exist in the UMD if you continue to consider E-4s NCOs

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    248
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Before 1968 (I believe)a 3 striper (E4) in the AF was an A1C. The AF at that time converted the E4s to NCOs and called them Buck Sergeants. Not sure when they discontinued considering them NCOs and changed to term to Senior Airman.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •