US Army leaders say "no crisis" in recruitment

[leftchick]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051003/us_nm/iraq_usa_recruiting_dc_1


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Army leaders on Monday said there was no crisis in recruitment despite figures showing a big shortfall in new soldiers in the latest fiscal year, partly caused by concerns over the war in Iraq.

Army Secretary Francis Harvey told reporters he was concerned about recruitment levels in the last 12 months, which saw the biggest numerical shortfall of the goal since 1979. But he added: "Is this a crisis? No, it's not a crisis."

Expressing optimism for the future, he laid out a series of measures the army was planning to tackle the problem, including big financial incentives and a larger force of recruiters.

In the fiscal year that ended on Friday, Harvey said the Army ended just under 7,000 recruits short of its annual goal of 80,000 recruits. It was one of the Army's poorest recruiting performances since the birth of the all-volunteer military in 1973 during the upheaval of the Vietnam War era.

The Army missed an annual recruiting goal for the first time since 1999. The part-time Army Reserve and Army National Guard also missed their 2005 recruiting goals.

[DIKB]

1. Sickening

"including big financial incentives and a larger force of recruiters"

More money offers, and a larger force to go into the ghettos and trailer parks. Why don't they just turn their slogan into "C'Mon Poor People, we need more Cannon Fodder!!!"

[Towelie]

9. What's sickening is people who like to generalize...

that recruiters prefer to "target" poor people, with no evidence or proof to back it up. I spent four years on active duty, the vast majority of the peoeple I met and worked with were from middle-class suburbia. My parents were just beneath the upper-class line when I signed up. Stop generalizing, you know nothing of what you speak about.

[Lochloosa]

11. Care to back that up with some facts and figures....

didn't think so.

Not questioning your service or integrity, just don't come here and spout something you cannot back up. If you can then I will apologize. But until then, show me the numbers.

Here, let me help you out....

http://silverchips.mbhs.edu/inside.php?sid=4287


An even more frightening disparity is evident in the ranks of the military: According to the Department of Defense, enlistees, who account for 86 percent of the active military service, come from consistently lower-income backgrounds than their officers. The recruits who take the most risk are inherently those with the least voice. Marines Sergeant Edwin Scott, a recruiter at Blair as well as the wealthier Bethesda-Chevy Chase (B-CC) and Whitman, says that he has come to expect that the recruits from B-CC and Whitman will consist almost entirely of commissioned officers. Still, recruiters continue to push commissioned officer programs at already privileged schools; across the county at Richard Montgomery, where students are slightly over half as likely to receive FARMs as Blazers, recruiters provide the Career Center with brochures almost exclusively advertising the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps and officer academies.


Oh, and there is this little tidbit:

Table 1. Proportion of Qualified and Available Males Required Annually for Military Service, Fiscal Years 1984-88
Thousands unless otherwise indicated

Item 1984-88 Total non-institutionalized 18-year-old males a 1,800 Minus: non-available college students (adjusted for dropouts) b 525 Minus: Unqualified males 526 Mental c 337 Physical or moral d 189 Equals: Qualified and available male pool 729 Total male recruit requirement 376 Active forces 278 Reserve forces 98 Percent of pool required 52

Sources: Total 18-year-old male population from Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, series P-25, no. 704, "Projections of the Population of the United States: 1977 to 2050" (GPO, 1977), pp. 4448, 51-55. Institutionalized population estimates based on preliminary data from the 1980 census provided by Bureau of the Census. First- and second-year dropouts based on estimates provided by National Center for Educational Statistics. Mentally unqualified derived from data contained in special tabulations provided by Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower, Reserve Affairs, and Logistics. Physically and morally unqualified derived from unpublished data provided by Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower, Reserve Affairs, and Logistics. Male recruitment requirements compiled from Department of Defense, Manpower Requirements Report, FY 1984, vol. 3: Force Readiness Report (DOD, 1983), pp. III-12, 111-20,111-21, IV-10, V-7, VI-6, VI-9, VI-10. Projections of Navy and Marine Corps reserve requirements based on fiscal 1983 recruitment data.

a. Assumes 1.5 percent of the male population aged 18 to 24 is institutionalized.

b. Estimates based on 1980 participation rates: in 1980, 74.4 percent of the youth cohort that had entered the ninth grade in 1972 completed high school and 46.3 percent of the initial group enrolled as full- or part-time students in programs creditable toward a bachelor's degree. Assumes that 25 percent of first-time enrollees leave during the first year and 12.5 percent during the second year.

c. Based on 1981 military aptitude requirements, 2 percent of males with one or more years of college would be expected to be unqualified, 10 percent of high school graduates without college experience would not meet minimum standards, and 60 percent of non-high school graduates would not qualify.

d. Assumes that 16.3 percent of the male youth population meeting minimum aptitude requirements would be disqualified on physical grounds and 3.9 percent would fail to meet moral standards.

http://www.npg.org/forum_series/manning_military.htm

It took me about a minute to come up with this...can you refute it?

[Towelie]

14. Where can I find this survey?

http://silverchips.mbhs.edu/inside.php?sid=4287

"According to a 2003 Department of Defense survey..." Where is it? How many surveys did they do in 2003? Exactly who did they survey? At which recruiting stations or basic training posts was this survey carried out? Was this only for new recruits? I can't tell you any of this because the writer's citation about where he derived his conclusions from is crap. So how am I supposed to make a correct statistical refutation when I can't locate his source? I wasn't aware that DoD did military-wide surveys of background demographics until I read that article, I don't recall ever participating in anything of that nature.

According to the Department of Defense, enlistees, who account for 86 percent of the active military service, come from consistently lower-income backgrounds than their officers.

There was nothing in my post about the differences between officer and enlisted demographics, this is a red herring. In our society, it is almost assured that those who come from higher-income backgrounds will seek out college degrees. A college degree is a prerequisite for being offered a commission in the US Military, so of course most officers will come from higher-income backgrounds. But using that premise to conclude that recruiters deliberately target poorer kids as enlistees is a logical fallacy.

About the "Proportion of Qualified and Available Males Required Annually for Military Service, Fiscal Years 1984-88"...I'm a bit confused, what are you trying to show me? It's 17 year-old data about the overall number of available 18 year-olds eligible for military service. I didn't see anything about income or any economical data unless I overlooked something. What's here that I should try to refute?

[tabasco]

12. I spent thirteen years on active duty.

And just got ordered back for two more.

It seems to me you're the one that doesn't know what you're talking about.

[Towelie]

15. How many people did you know who used to live in trailer parks

or ghettos compared to those who lived in better conditions? Are you referring to the economical situation now, or 13 years ago? In fact, how long has it been since you've been on active duty?

DoD AD orders are for 18 months max, how did you get so unlucky to be called up for 2 years?

[tabasco]

22. You really don't know what you're talking about.

545 days unless extended by proper authority. My assignment officer says expect two years. Do you think everyone gets out on their ETS date too? Ever heard of stop loss? You really are showing your ignorance.

[tabasco]

24. Since you're such a gung-ho kind of guy...

why don't you re-up?!? Do you know they take prior service up to 47 years old now? Why aren't more of your gung-ho republican friends signing up? Don't you know our FREEDOM is at stake? You don't sound very patriotic to me.

Re-up and maybe you'll end up in my unit. I sure hope so. Well, actually not. Just another Chapter case, I imagine. Too much paperwork. Plus, you're probably not a grunt.

Why don't you provide some links or citations to support your claims rather than just spouting off about your personal observations? Your observations in the military are not valid when generalizing about the military as a whole. You only saw a very, very, small fraction of the military.

I was in the infantry and very few of the enlisted men came from other than lower income backgrounds. Most were from inner cities rather than suburbia as you claim. They were outstanding troops.

[trogdor]

23. 15 years active, 7 reserve.

Towelie is smoking crack.

I might have run into two, three people at the most who had any reasonable form of education behind them. Most of the people I used to work with (or had the misfortune to work for) were barely literate yokels whose idea of high culture was Penthouse Forum - that is, the ones who haven't given their lives to Jayzuz, and most of those people had a few skeletons in the closet, as well as a wider variety of annoying character flaws than the general population.

I won't even talk about my various kooky neighbors when I lived in on-post housing. Suffice to say one could write a Fox sitcom based on them.

[alarimer]

16. What a load of BS

n/t

[rocktivity]

17. Middle class suburbia can be a poverty pocket, too.

Don't let the neat rows of houses fool you. More and more families are having to choose between payig their mortages and saving for their children's college tutition.

:headbang:
rocknation

[SKKY]

18. It depends on where you worked and what your rate/mos was...

...Come on Towlie, you know that the Military targets certain groups for certain things. A good example I can think of just off the top of my head would be "supply" ratings in the Navy (i.e. DK, SK, CS, SH, etc). which have an inordinate amount of minorities among them. I don't have proof that recruiters target poorer areas, but I do know that certain ethnic groups are more more abundant in certain rates. Why wouldn't I think that poorer kids wouldn't be targeted as well? And, I'd like to welcome you to DU- one vet to another.

[bee]

29. Im just curious as to how you chose your login ID... seriously.

[Earth_First]

31. Towelie, where'd you go!?

[0007]

2. The pig photo sez it all, LOL!! I love it -

[leftchick]

3. someone had to post it!

:hi:

[tanyev]

7. It's the new White House energy hog!

:rofl:

[marmar]

4. There's that reality-based community again...

trying to rain on Bush Fantasyworld's parade.

[rocktivity]

5. Tell it to the Marine!

Ryan is a Marine serving in Iraq...September 23, 2005, Ryan was scheduled to return home...

...As Ryan sat on the plane and waited to take off, an officer suddenly came on board. He called out three names. Ryan's was one of them.

Ryan was told that he would have to stay in Iraq longer because there were not enough people to release him...

More

"No crisis," my :kick:.
rocknation

[Roland99]

6. That's why they're using Craigslist to recruit and offering free iTunes?

http://wcbs880.com/topstories/local_story_276105304.html

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/29.html#a5161

[barb162]

8. catastrophe is more like it

[NYC Liberal]

10. "I triple guarantee you, there are no American soldiers in Baghdad!"

"There is no recruitment crisis!"

and on and on

[SKKY]

26. It's almost as though we hired that guy, huh?

[UpInArms]

13. related: Army Misses Annual Recruiting Goal for First Time Since 1999

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a3wuhgqEjMu8&refer=us

excerpt:

This year's shortfall is one of the most severe since the Army abandoned the draft. In 1999, the Army fell 6,290 short of its goal of 74,500 recruits, and in 1979 it was 17,054 short of its goal of 159,200, according to U.S. Recruiting Command spokesman Douglas Smith. The Army's fiscal 2006 recruiting goal is also 80,000, Smith said.

<snip>

``Our challenge, because we are trying to grow the operational Army, is to do better than we have done,'' he said. ``It's like a sales forecast, you've got to do better than previous years.'' Harvey did not disclose whether the service reached its September goal of 8,365. Prior to September the service had reached its goal for three consecutive months.

Among the new recruit incentives Harvey disclosed today -- a $2,500 ``finder's fee'' for soldiers who identify recruits that get through basic and advanced infantry training and $25,000 in home mortgage assistance for recruits who stay in the service four years.

The new recruiting tools reflect ``the reality of the environment that we are dealing it,'' Harvey said.

...more at link...

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

19. soon there will be no jobs except for Military

Shrubya is getting rid of the economy and jobs so that there will be no where else for teenagers and adults up to the age of 42 to work.

Process of elimination -

You want to eat, join the military.

[Javaman]

20. All is going well in the war with Eurasia!!!

[SKKY]

27. It's Eastasia we're at war with!

Silly goose.

[Javaman]

28. My "1984" quotes aren't what they used to be. lol

[SKKY]

30. With the clowns we've had in office for the past 6 years...

...mine are on point!

[Demeter]

21. Yeah, Well, Army of One!

Pretty soon they can say with pride, Mission Accomplished!

[catmandu57]

25. Seems to me that the numbers were larger

I thought I read that they had fallen almost 30,000 short. Now, if our new gung ho member would like to reup then we could adjust the numbers down.
Either way, it smells like Author Anderson accounting.