PDA

View Full Version : Twisting Arms For Re-enlistments



KB
09-25-2004, 11:13 AM
By Ralf W. Zimmermann

Was my old outfit – the 3rd Brigade Combat Team (BCT) of the 4th Infantry Division – up to new tricks in the Army re-enlistment game?

That was the question when local Colorado TV channels recently featured several young troopers muttering about threat methods to keep them involuntarily in their units. Stay with the brigade until 2007 or get shafted to some other Fort Carson outfit deploying to Iraq, they reportedly were told.

The reporters seemed surprised and shocked by these revelations. One anonymous young sergeant’s comments struck deep: “I don’t want to go back to Iraq. I went through a lot of things for the Army that weren’t necessary and were risky. Iraq has changed a lot of people.”

What is up?

Once again, one must step back and look at both sides of the equation, disregarding heated emotions, often exacerbated by reporters who don’t really know how our military works.

You’d be a fool to believe that military enlisting and re-enlisting is a clean process, characterized with mainly wonderful emotions. Just the opposite is true – it’s more like a brutal used car sale.

To recruit and retain soldiers, recruiters and their bosses usually apply a good dose of spin and deception. I always remember one young trooper coming into my commander’s office, complaining he never wanted to be a tank crewman. He insisted that he had signed up to work with computers and the recruiting sergeant had promised him just that. The young man complained about a breach of contract and demanded “the lying sack of recruiter crap” be fired.

Sadly enough, the recruiter had not lied at all. As a tank gunner, our troop actually worked with a very simplistic ballistic hand-crank computer.

Re-enlisting on duty also offers the possibility for deception. Most senior commanders judge subordinate units by the amount of reenlistments. Therefore, higher re-enlistments translate into the senior’s belief that a unit has to have great leaders and a nice working environment. Well, that’s actually true for a small percentage of units and leaders.

In general, however, re-enlisting is about statistics. When pressured, units won’t leave any stone unturned to buy soldiers’ loyalties. It’s the time when retention noncoms and commanders bring out the trinkets – logo bags, special pens, T-shirts and other goodies – to secure the troops’ signatures.

If a soldier refuses to sign his/her life away for the trinket, it’s on to the next level of coercion with the question: “What are you going to do on the outside? You know that there are no jobs out there!”

If that doesn’t do it, the command shifts to the "John Gotti" gear with threats of crap assignments and unwanted extensions.

Now, in defense of our Army, I must say that commanders are now more than ever forced to “go Gotti” early – it actually makes sense.

Despite a growing personnel crunch in reserve, Guard and active-duty troops, the Army must stabilize its outfits. That’s a good thing! Maintaining close leadership relationships and retaining experienced warriors produces higher combat efficiency. For the 3rd Brigade, it means having people sign-on until 2007, the end of the first stabilization cycle in Iraq.

Knowing the 3rd BCT in Fort Carson, I have to give them the benefit of the doubt. Many unit commanders will actually try to do what’s right and let those who want to leave move on to military jobs on post. But, there are only so many cushy jobs available there. Reality is that not every GI Joe or Jane can become a gym attendant, a permanent grass-cutter or tend to the “horsies” of Fort Carson’s mounted color guard. By necessity, many with outstanding volunteer time will have to go to other units – some deploying to not-so-nice places.

The key for the troops faced with arm-twisting is to lay out their individual case to their chain of command. Be truthful why you don’t want to stay in after your commitment is up and remain committed to the out-decision. Ignore the threats because there is only so much the chain of command can do.

For commanders and their chains of command, it seems high time to come forward about the real deal when it comes to recruiting and retention. Maybe they can make the point up the chain that a personnel crisis might be looming in the not so distant future, requiring new incentives and additional contingency plans.

Maybe some sort of draft isn’t as far off as many of our political leaders insist?

DefenseWatch Senior Military Correspondent Lt. Col. Ralf W. Zimmermann, USA (Ret.) is a decorated Desert Storm veteran and former tank battalion commander. His recent novel, “Brotherhood of Iron,” deals with the German soldier in World War II. It is directly available from www.iUniverse.com and through most major book dealers. Zimm can be reached at r6zimm@earthlink.net or via his website at www.home.earthlink.net/~r6zimm. © 2004 LandserUSA. Please send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.

ShakesFIST
09-25-2004, 11:39 AM
Im in 3 BCT right now and they are trying everything they can to A. Get people out of the army, B. Reenlist, C. Extend to 2007, or D. Goto 3 ACR which is going to Iraq. They are saying you have to pick one and there is a deadline!

DE_Six
09-25-2004, 11:45 AM
Im in 3 BCT right now and they are trying everything they can to A. Get people out of the army, B. Reenlist, C. Extend to 2007, or D. Goto 3 ACR which is going to Iraq. They are saying you have to pick one and there is a deadline!

Why do the try to get people out and others to stay at the same time?

dghost
09-26-2004, 12:43 AM
I'm in 3rd BCT also, and this stuff is pretty crazy.

the options laid down to us by the retention guys was 1) reenlist or extend to stay in 3rd BCT until Dec 2007 for the UA stuff, 2) sign a Declination of Continuted Service statement and get flagged, then wind up as needs of the army (note: this was changed in the last week, and they are no longer attempting to force soldiers to sign them), or 3) get reassigned as "Needs of the Army", which could include 3rd ACR (slotted for deployment in Iraq), 43rd Area Support Group (also slotted for deployment to Iraq), Korea, or pretty much any other unit getting ready to deploy to Iraq.

such phrases as "I'll come visit you when you are down at 3rd ACR wearing DCU's" and "you understand that there will be repercussions?" could be heard coming out of the meetings, along with the ever popular "you're going to get stop lossed and sent to Iraq anyways" line.

gotta love retention. funny thing is that the Army Times had this to say about it:



Spokespersons at the brigade's home post of Fort Carson, Colo., said one of the soldiers later told a local television station that he had misunderstood the policies and misinterpreted them as a threat.


I know what I heard, and the stuff we were being told was pretty much "reenlist to stay here for the next 4 years and get some cash out of it or go to Iraq". Not really sure how that could be interpretted as anything other than a threat...

ShakesFIST
09-26-2004, 12:53 AM
I still find it funny that they threaten if you dont go with the UA you will be going to Iraq. The UA (Unit Of Action) is gonna be going to Iraq anyways, just down the road further... I'm trying to stall with giving them an answer because things are changing too quickly that they could just come out and say "This is NOT working" and throw the plan away. Maybe...

dghost
09-26-2004, 01:09 AM
yup, 3rd BCT is going back to Iraq eventually, just not on this next rotation.

they are forcing our battalion (1-12) to give responses to all this stuff immediately, since we have to give a company up to another battalion and the rest of us are getting turned into a recon battalion.

so yeah, i keep getting asked to give a Final Answer - thursday marked the 4th or 5th time in the last two weeks i've been asked for an official answer.

gotta love it.

ShakesFIST
09-26-2004, 01:29 PM
I heard about that on friday and cant figure out why the BDE needs a recon BATTALION more than it needs an infantry battalion. I think 2 Infantry battalions are a much better idea than what they are planning.I'm down here at 3-29 FA and they are reorganizing us too. 1/68 Armor is going to be getting dismount FO's and RTO's which makes very little sense to me.

dghost
09-26-2004, 01:47 PM
well, 1-68 is going to get 2 infantry companies and is going to give up at least one of its armor companies (to 1-8?). my understanding is that all the personnel that would normally be attached to a battalion or company will be moved inside the battalion to make the unit more self-sufficent. as far as staffing, the unit looks a lot like how 1-12 and some of 1-68 were deployed in Iraq...

yeah, 1-12 becoming recon is kinda wierd. It looks to me like they are taking the brigade recon company and making it larger. As to why they need a full blown recon battalion, I am not really sure... and as to why they are converting an infantry battalion over to recon, I really don't know. Yes, we both use Bradleys and humvees, but all of them will have to be replaced as the humvees we have are not up to the task and our bradleys are the wrong model.

who knows...

ShakesFIST
09-26-2004, 09:36 PM
Well either Im not getting the full picture or the whole plan looks flawed...I keep saying it to everyone but I am saying it again anyways! :D