Djbred18 Posted January 18, 2018 Report Share Posted January 18, 2018 I applied for warrant officer and got denied my age plus afs waiver. Im pretty dissapointed to be honest. The Armys logic for not wanting someone with over 12 years of service is that they will not be able to retain them as long as a guy who has eight years in service. The part they are not addressing is the reason they are losing warrant officers so fast. The civilian job market quite simply treats their pilots better. Better pay, more flight time, doing the job they are supposed to do. So regardless of how much time a warrant officer has, they are simply leaving even before they hit their 20 years because they were sick of all the crap and BS they are made to put up with. Imagine telling a Colonel he cant pursue career advancement because he has been in longer than the other guy. It makes no sense to dismiss someone with more experience in the Army. The Army is making decisions based purely on hopes rather than logic. They are HOPING the guy the get will decide to do more than the six year obligation. There isnt anything stopping the guy with less AFS time from getting out after his six years. If guys with more years is an issue, make them sign a longer obligation. I would gladly do that. WLC distinguished honor gradPPL with 380 plus hoursBachelors with 3.6 GPAPlus the usual prerequisitesThe shortage must not be that bad. Its your loss Army Aviation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike0331 Posted January 18, 2018 Report Share Posted January 18, 2018 Any opportunity to keep fighting? Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honeybadger Posted January 18, 2018 Report Share Posted January 18, 2018 Im in the same boat. 13 years AFS waiver disapproved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedude Posted January 18, 2018 Report Share Posted January 18, 2018 If at the time of selection you are over 12 years you will hit 20 years prior to finishing your initial commitment after flight school. If the Army chooses to train you they’re gambling $1 million plus that you will stay in beyond your six year commitment and 20 year retirement date. A candidate with less TIS is more likely to provide a better return on investment by staying in beyond that initial commitment. The majority of warrants stay past their initial commitment, especially with the promotion (and ADSO) for W3 right around that same time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honeybadger Posted January 18, 2018 Report Share Posted January 18, 2018 I was told by someone in USAREC g3 special programs & boards that the study was done, I'm assuming the one referenced here http://www.armyaviationmagazine.com/index.php/archive/not-so-current/1445-the-why the reason why AFS waivers are being denied is because they are moving to a 8 year TIS cutoff before you need a AFS waiver. But going by that logic, also referenced in that study, wouldn't they just tag on an 8 year ADSO after flight school? I can't find anything in the regs stating they can DQ you for proposed policy that hasn't been implemented yet. Also I can’t find any policy stating you can’t incur an ADSO passed your 20 year retirement. If I get accepted to flight school I will stay in as long as I can. I'm here for the Soldiers on the ground not to get the training and fly for a civilian company as soon as I can leave the Army. Also if the 8 year AFS cutoff is the current trend why continue to process an impossible 12 year AFS waiver? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honeybadger Posted January 18, 2018 Report Share Posted January 18, 2018 If at the time of selection you are over 12 years you will hit 20 years prior to finishing your initial commitment after flight school. If the Army chooses to train you theyre gambling $1 million plus that you will stay in beyond your six year commitment and 20 year retirement date. A candidate with less TIS is more likely to provide a better return on investment by staying in beyond that initial commitment. The majority of warrants stay past their initial commitment, especially with the promotion (and ADSO) for W3 right around that same time. I would say the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Who would you rather invest $1million? Someone straight of the street or someone who has proven experience in the job field, multiple combat deployments, no law or medical issues, held a secret security clearance for 13 years, family that understands the lifestyle and training requirements and long hours away? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ByteFlighter Posted January 18, 2018 Report Share Posted January 18, 2018 I would say the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Who would you rather invest $1million? Someone straight of the street or someone who has proven experience in the job field, multiple combat deployments, no law or medical issues, held a secret security clearance for 13 years, family that understands the lifestyle and training requirements and long hours away? Thedude is absolutely correct. You were denied a waiver. Why are you trying to plead your case on here? Nothing on here is going to change Army policy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honeybadger Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 Thedude is absolutely correct. You were denied a waiver. Why are you trying to plead your case on here? Nothing on here is going to change Army policy.I'm trying to understand why my waiver was denied. The reason I was given was AR 135-100 paragraph 1-6 a. (2) The Army goal is to access WO's with 8 or less years of service. Warrant officer applicants with concurrent call to active duty must not have exceeded 12 years of active Federal service as of the date the DA form 61 is signed by the applicant. Key word in that being a goal. Sounds like a cop out to me. For comparison the Army also has a goal of 60% of all enlistments being in the 50 or higher AFQT. A congressionally mandated goal. If we were at 59% do you think they would stop someone from enlisting with an AFQT of 49 or lower? If they told me my waiver was denied for reasons of career progression and actually pointed to a regulation that made sense I would be ok with that and you wouldn't hear from me anymore. What policy are you referring to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike0331 Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 As I asked before, is this where it ends? Can you plead you case again, call a congressman, etc? Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ByteFlighter Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 I'm trying to understand why my waiver was denied. The reason I was given was AR 135-100 paragraph 1-6 a. (2) The Army goal is to access WO's with 8 or less years of service. Warrant officer applicants with concurrent call to active duty must not have exceeded 12 years of active Federal service as of the date the DA form 61 is signed by the applicant. Key word in that being a goal. Sounds like a cop out to me. For comparison the Army also has a goal of 60% of all enlistments being in the 50 or higher AFQT. A congressionally mandated goal. If we were at 59% do you think they would stop someone from enlisting with an AFQT of 49 or lower? If they told me my waiver was denied for reasons of career progression and actually pointed to a regulation that made sense I would be ok with that and you wouldn't hear from me anymore. What policy are you referring to? My point is this: Are you looking for a friend to argue with on here? Again, you were denied a waiver and asked the community why. One of our members gave you a pretty concise answer as to why.You didn't like that answer and continue to argue with someone that has no insight into your specific case and no ability to magically approve your waiver. I understand how frustrating it may be for you, but you should reach out to your Congressman if you want results as opposed to arguing with members on an internet forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honeybadger Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 My point is this: Are you looking for a friend to argue with on here? Again, you were denied a waiver and asked the community why. One of our members gave you a pretty concise answer as to why.You didn't like that answer and continue to argue with someone that has no insight into your specific case and no ability to magically approve your waiver. I understand how frustrating it may be for you, but you should reach out to your Congressman if you want results as opposed to arguing with members on this forum.I see what you did there. It is pretty frustrating I deal with these policy issues on almost a daily basis. My intent wasn't to argue with anyone here. If it came off that way I apologize. I am in contact with some people that may be able to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedude Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 I would say the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Who would you rather invest $1million? Someone straight of the street or someone who has proven experience in the job field, multiple combat deployments, no law or medical issues, held a secret security clearance for 13 years, family that understands the lifestyle and training requirements and long hours away?That may be true, but what about the guy who can say all the same stuff and has only been in six years? There’s a limited number of training slots available to fill and the Army apparently feels lower time guys are a better investment. You might not like it but the TIS limit has been at 12 years for quite some time. If you wanted a better chance at being a warrant officer you should’ve put in a packet prior to reaching the limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honeybadger Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 True. I shouldve put a packet in earlier but my point still stands. How does AR 135-100 paragraph 1-6 disqualify me? Its a goal not a standard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ByteFlighter Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 Regardless of regulation, the service proponent that rules on those waivers has a very very wide berth in decision making. In other words : The waiver-approving service proponent's rule is absolute. Trying to adjudicate their rule on something is quite harder than just shoving the same rule book in their faces that they used to deny you a waiver in the first place . Again, Congressman, Chain of Command, bum rushing SECDEF; just not on this forum. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedude Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 True. I shouldve put a packet in earlier but my point still stands. How does AR 135-100 paragraph 1-6 disqualify me? Its a goal not a standard.It says the goal is for applicants with less than 8 years and they will not accept applicants with over 12 years. Eight years is a goal, twelves years is a standard and regulatory. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kona4breakfast Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 When you get in bed with an 800 pound gorilla, sometimes you get f*cked 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudkow60 Posted January 19, 2018 Report Share Posted January 19, 2018 The reason is, they will have to pay for your retirement if you do 20, but you have only given them 8 years of service. Transferring into the Coast Guard was the same way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luofynerd Posted January 21, 2018 Report Share Posted January 21, 2018 What is your rank, if you dont mind me asking? You listed WLC, have you been to ALC, or SLC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRC Posted July 31, 2018 Report Share Posted July 31, 2018 Where you able to do anything in this matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.