# Military Meets Most of its Recruiting Goals



## Boondocksaint375 (Nov 2, 2006)

Surprising if true

http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,117873,00.html?ESRC=dod-bz.nl 

The military has met most of its recruiting goals for the 2006 fiscal year, thanks in part to incentive programs and effective media campaigns. But a drop in the number of Sailors leaving active duty for the Navy Reserve has resulted in that command falling 1,500 people short of its goal of 11,180.
All the active services -- Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines -- met or exceeded their 2006 goals, as did the Marine Corps and Air Force reserves. The Army Guard achieved 99 percent, the Air Guard 97 percent and the Navy Reserve just 87 percent. Overall, the services brought in a combined total of more than 317,000 recruits.
"The Army is recruiting an all-volunteer force during a protracted war," says Army spokesperson Major Cheryl Phillips. Despite this, "in 2006, we achieved our highest Regular Army recruiting totals in nine years: 100.8 percent," or 80,635, Phillips adds, attributing this success to "the hard work of dedicated recruiters, increased incentives and bonuses."
Incentives for the active Army now include enlistment bonuses of up to $40,000 plus increased tuition assistance.
In recent months the Army has launched a media campaign built around its new recruiting slogan, "Army Strong," which replaces the controversial "Army of One." 
The Navy has rolled out a new media campaign too, this one targeting tech-savvy kids via email, according to Commander Glen Kammerer from Navy Recruiting Command. "Those emails [in reply] come back to our call center, where our cyberspace recruiters will do some blueprinting to make sure the applicant truly has interest and meets basic qualifications. Then they'll put them right in touch with a local recruiter. That seems to be working very well."
While both the active and reserve Navy have met their goals for new recruits, the Reserve, which traditionally receives large numbers of former active-duty Sailors, has failed to lure enough Sailors from the busy active force -- a problem that has also plagued the Army Reserve in recent years. "If they want to deploy, they're staying on active duty," Kammerer says. "They're not getting off active duty [to join the reserve]."
The Navy, too, has boosted bonuses to attract recruits, especially in career fields vital to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "Special warfare, special ops, special boats, explosive ordnance disposal, Navy divers ... those bonuses all went up considerably," Kammerer reports. "The SEALs went up the highest." To that list he also adds Seabees, corpsmen and intelligence and cryptography ratings.


----------



## goon175 (Sep 27, 2012)

You know why we have all these problems now? Because recruiters shoved a bunch of shit into the Army to meet mission during this time. USAREC didn't get the memo that quality over quantity works better. But oh wait, we have a suicide problem in the Army? Hmm... maybe it's because we shoved so many people into the service that didn't belong there in the first place. The fact that senior leaders in USAREC never leave USAREC, and since USAREC's lowest rank is E-5, they never have to deal with all the tirds they shove into the service to make themselves look better. Nevermind the fact it forces some young TL/SL who already has limited time with family in between deployments to stay after work typing up fucking counselings, and some PSG to sit there and work on a chapter packed instead of focusing on training his guys. But since some SFC/1sg in USAREC who came out on recruiting duty when he was a cpl to avoid deployment and then converted to a career recruiter, wants to push numbers instead of quality.....


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Sep 28, 2012)

I "liked" because nearly 6 years might be the oldest necro-thread I've seen on this site!  
Very good points all around Goon!


----------



## AWP (Sep 28, 2012)

Ordinarliy necroposting = bad posts, but for once that isn't the case.


----------



## reed11b (Sep 28, 2012)

goon175 said:


> You know why we have all these problems now? Because recruiters shoved a bunch of shit into the Army to meet mission during this time. USAREC didn't get the memo that quality over quantity works better. But oh wait, we have a suicide problem in the Army? Hmm... maybe it's because we shoved so many people into the service that didn't belong there in the first place. The fact that senior leaders in USAREC never leave USAREC, and since USAREC's lowest rank is E-5, they never have to deal with all the tirds they shove into the service to make themselves look better. Nevermind the fact it forces some young TL/SL who already has limited time with family in between deployments to stay after work typing up fucking counselings, and some PSG to sit there and work on a chapter packed instead of focusing on training his guys. But since some SFC/1sg in USAREC who came out on recruiting duty when he was a cpl to avoid deployment and then converted to a career recruiter, wants to push numbers instead of quality.....


 
The mind of USAREC:   "We need more numbers, but more and more of these recruited H.S. students are failing, perhaps we could recruit from a population with a very high pass rate (prior service w/ RE1) or we could lower the standards to have more of the current failing crop pass. Hmmmm. Lets lower standards!!!"
    Yes I know prior service are treated as retention and not recruitment, but I bet if someone wanted to make that change, they could. My personel pet peeve.
Reed


----------



## goon175 (Sep 28, 2012)

They only want prior service for the reserves. They need to quit focusing on h.s. seniors, wich is the main mission for active duty, and start focusing on those with atleast 2 or more years of college. Then we could really professionalize the force. Why I spend most of my time in High Schools instead of Colleges is beyond me.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 28, 2012)

I always laugh that the Army would bring a skinny gang-banger in (with waiver) but pass on a kid with weight problems or a prior service Soldier trying to get back in.


----------



## Z-man (Oct 4, 2012)

goon175 said:


> They only want prior service for the reserves. They need to quit focusing on h.s. seniors, wich is the main mission for active duty, and start focusing on those with atleast 2 or more years of college. Then we could really professionalize the force. Why I spend most of my time in High Schools instead of Colleges is beyond me.


in order for the command to have a "good year" they have to hit the wickets in their high school community college program. career talks, first seniors recruited from a priority high, its really a numbers game. plus an college kid has to see the Officer selection officer before going enlisted. so the really good kids get picked up by the OSO and the guys they cant work go to us. state and universities are also OSO territory. so recruiters are left with community colleges and i dont know about you guys but 75% of my community colleges are filled with mouth breathers anway. i find the best kids to be the street savy ones.


----------



## goon175 (Oct 4, 2012)

I know the USMC has specific officers that recruit for officers, but in the Army an officer goes through an enlisted recruiter either way (unless they do ROTC). So, it is completely up to a college kid if he wants to enlist or commission. The enlisted side definately does not get hand-me-downs - although just because someone was not selected at an OCS board does not mean they cannot still enlist, so that would be the only way I could see it being classified as such. As an example, as a regular army recruiter, I cover everything from local high schools, to community colleges, to institutions such as Cornell. Nothing is off limits. I have enlisted folks with masters degree's, as well as folks with just a high school diploma, and everything in between. My argument is that we should quit focusing on kids still in high school - who for the most part will back out of a contract at the mere thought of a girlfriend, and focus on kids in college or about to graduate college. I think this would make leaps and bounds in the professionalization of the force.


----------



## Z-man (Oct 4, 2012)

goon175 said:


> I know the USMC has specific officers that recruit for officers, but in the Army an officer goes through an enlisted recruiter either way (unless they do ROTC). So, it is completely up to a college kid if he wants to enlist or commission. The enlisted side definately does not get hand-me-downs - although just because someone was not selected at an OCS board does not mean they cannot still enlist, so that would be the only way I could see it being classified as such. As an example, as a regular army recruiter, I cover everything from local high schools, to community colleges, to institutions such as Cornell. Nothing is off limits. I have enlisted folks with masters degree's, as well as folks with just a high school diploma, and everything in between. My argument is that we should quit focusing on kids still in high school - who for the most part will back out of a contract at the mere thought of a girlfriend, and focus on kids in college or about to graduate college. I think this would make leaps and bounds in the professionalization of the force.


I completely agree, just this month i think a had 2 back out but rolling a 3 so it balances it self out. and believe me when i say that we dont hand me downs, 1.because Gunns will run my ass till i get the pucker effect if he ever misread m post and 2. because an OCS candidate can wait for two years and still not get selected. what Im saying is that even though a college student can be much more mature. some times to get a job done correctly you need a hard working PFC right out of high school because in his eyes SGT=word of god. and corporal=hand of god. and their professionalism is a direct reflection of you.

side note: thats pretty cool how you have open areas like that.


----------



## O'leery (Nov 13, 2012)

SOWT said:


> I always laugh that the Army would bring a skinny gang-banger in (with waiver) but pass on a kid with weight problems or a prior service Soldier trying to get back in.


 I recently left the Marine Corps and have been talking with Army recruiters and from my stand point as a potential prior-service enlistee I've experienced this situation myself (minus the weight problem) but i can't seem to find an open slot due to rank (E-5/Sgt)  and I think its completely wrong.


----------



## Marauder06 (Nov 14, 2012)

What is the reasoning for turning away prior service?  Guy's already trained for the most part, and has already demonstrated the potential to operate effectively in the service, right?  Plus he's probably older, maybe more mature and more stable.  Why is he not a better choice than a pot-luck enlistee straight out of high school?  Is it money?  Benefits?  Retirement?  What?


----------



## reed11b (Nov 14, 2012)

I would think that the increase in retirement payout, would be more then off set by the high cost of training multiple drop outs that each prior service would replace. When Law Enforcement acadamies have too high a drop out rate, they typicaly hold a big veteran recruiting drive, since the fail rate of veterans is miniscule compared to non vets.
Reed


----------



## goon175 (Nov 14, 2012)

The reason it's next to impossible to get guys A.D. right now, is because they want to expand the reserve force, so by shutting down the AD, they are forcing guys who want back in to go into the reserves, filling the leadership spots they need filled.


----------

