US Army misses recruiting goals

Discussion in 'Multinational HQ' started by Ozgerbobble, Mar 4, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. ISN SECURITY WATCH (04/03/05) - For the first time in five years, the
    US Army last month missed its recruiting goals for active-duty,
    National Guard, and National Reserve forces, with deployment to Iraq
    being one of the primary concerns of potential new recruits.

    Pentagon spokesman Larry Di Rita told a press briefing on 3 March
    that the army was “a particularly stressed force” and officials were
    studying ways to increase recruiting.

    In February, the active army’s goal was 7’050 new recruits, and the
    service fell short by 1’936 recruits, or 27 per cent. All other
    services made their recruiting goals.

    Di Rita cited a number of reasons for the shortfall, including fear
    of being sent to Iraq, and an improving economy that makes it harder
    to compete with the civilian sector. Di Rita went on to say that the
    army hoped to fill the gap by increasing incentives such as
    enlistment bonuses from US$8’000 to US$10’000. In some hard-to-fill
    military occupational specialties, he said, the service had raised
    enlistment bonuses to US$15’000. In addition, the army has increased
    the number of recruiters on the street by 20 per cent, adding 950
    recruiters to the total recruiting force.

    Di Rita also said the military was working to get parents - or
    other “influencers” - to encourage eligible young men and women to

    On the plus side, Di Rita noted that retention rates were better than
    expected. In units that had deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq, the re-
    enlistment rate actually was higher than in units that had not

    In other news, the Washington Post reported on Friday that the Bush
    administration was seeking guarantees from Europe that it would back
    punitive measures against Iran if negotiations failed to produce an
    agreement with Tehran to permanently abandon any ambitions to develop
    nuclear weapons.

    The White House aims to impose a tight timeline on any potential
    incentives package, and is seeking agreement that the case will be
    referred to the UN Security Council if diplomatic efforts do not
    produce results within that time. US Vice-President Dick Cheney and
    the Defense Department are reportedly the main skeptics of any plan
    to offer incentives to Tehran, as they worry that Europeans may not
    follow through with tough measures if talks should fail.

    European officials, on the other hand, have expressed concerns that
    the US could derail the diplomatic effort by not offering enough
    incentives and brandishing the Security Council threat too


    What a surprise :roll:
  2. Do the Yanks actually realise how small most European armies are these days? I think we have confused them by having a 1st British Corps, kind of implies there might be more than one? I bet Bliar is having kittens about this imagine him trying to convince parliament to back another war.

    Not surprised about the recruiting though, they'll probably drop the standards required like most countries do if they need more troops.
  3. I suspect that MEPS[Military Entrance Processing] will get less picky. Here are some problems that might be disqualifying.

    Almost any surgery other than an uncomplicated appendectomy or hernia repair, or ligation of tubes, male or female. Absolutely any surgery of the brain, back, spinal cord, chest, upper abdomen, pelvis, and joints. A tissue report is required in the case of most biopsies (skin, breast, etc.) of tumors and lumps.

    Any history of hospitalization other than the exceptions listed directly above, even if it was only 1 or 2 days for tests.

    Any History of Asthma after 13th birthday.

    History of counseling (family, marriage, etc.).

    Skin diseases other than mild acne and athletes foot.

    Allergies if more than mild.

    Back sprains.


    Severe joint sprains.

    Heart conditions.

    Hepatitis, mononucleosis.
  4. I love the idea of a $15000 'enlistment bonus', it kind of puts our TA bounty to shame. Quite tempted myself.
  5. Yes, we do. :wink:

    With regards to lowering standards, it will be tempting, but I think this time around it (hopefully) won't happen. Right now, the average time between graduating from initial training and deployment to Afghanistan or Iraq is 27 days. With that type of operational tempo, having 'switched on' troops is vital.
  6. Tracy..... with all the wavers we have now, I don't think we can really lower the standards any more. :lol:
  7. In fact we dont even have that, haven't since 1992, although we are Framework Nation for the Allied Rapid Reaction Corps.
  8. Well, I draw the line at "Pulse and Respiration".
  9. ie We do the catering...

    The "thin red line of 'eroes" is pretty thin
  10. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator


    Somewhere, in Alaska, there might be a unit that's just re-rolled to collecting bear shit from inside bear caves that's lost more people but the idea that troops retention is per see higher with deployed than undeployed units is dripping in brown stuff.
  11. Actually its true Happy. One problem the Army faces is that the US economy is doing quite well and there are alot of opportunities in the private sector.
  12. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator

    Toss Tomahawk (and I respect all your posts) - are you seriously telling me that the average US unit returning from deployment has a better retention rate than the average unit never deployed?
  13. It was true after the first rotation. Most of the Army's combat units have done a rototation in either Astan or Iraq [some have done a tour in both].
    Retention is not a problem- at least right now. The USAF and USN are downsizing and the Army has a program called Blue to Green where these folks can transition to the Army. More recruiters have been put onto the street to bolster recruiting. The Army needs 80,000 recruits a year so thats a sizeable challenge year in year out.

    Here is a link to USAEUR's retention stats.
  14. Hrm, 950 nore recruiters = 20% increase

    5,000 recruiters? **** me!
  15. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator

    80,000 target, 5000 recruiters, my little eagle brain says that each recruiter needs to get 16 blokes per annum, or one every 3 weeks.... That's gotta be an easy job.

    Just hang around schools offering free cigarettes to anyone that wants a free $15000 for a signature.... BINGO!