https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/07/06/no-grunts-under-26-250k-bonuses-dods-most-radical-ideas-t***sform-infantry.html?ESRC=army_190709.nlI suppose this means they will be recruiting people who would normally be approached for Special Forces, and have a college education. I can see the need for a leaner meaner fighting force with greater training that can be deployed rapidly instead of the mechanized Military of WWII. Isn't that what the Marines already do. Lots to consider. What was wrong with my $78 per month pay in basic training. Eighteen-year-olds haven't fully matured cognitively and don't understand their own mortality so they are easier to lead into some very dangerous situations. We shouldn't be putting them in those situations, to begin with.
This country was built on the idea that a large standing army is not a good thing. But the world has changed so much and we tend to stick our nose in everyone's business. I just don't know about this and would need to learn a lot more about it.
No Grunts Under 26, $250K Bonuses: DoD's Most Radical Ideas to T***sform the Infantry
6 Jul 2019
Military.com | By Matthew Cox
What would it take to t***sform U.S. infantry into a higher-caliber force modeled after the elite 75th Ranger Regiment? For starters, find recruits in their mid-20s and offer them $250,000 bonuses and a $60,000-a-year salary.
That's part of a working concept officials from the Pentagon's Close Combat Lethality Task Force (CCLTF) have been turning over for the past year in efforts to take Army and Marine infantry to a higher level of lethality.
The task force is the legacy of former Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, a retired Marine Corps general and infantryman, who set out to place a new priority on a group that bears one of the heaviest burdens of warfare: the grunts.
Since its 2018 launch, the CCLTF has helped to find money in the Defense Department's budget to accelerate high-tech programs, such as smart augmented reality goggles for soldiers.
But despite its Defense Department backing, the organization faces a tough fight to convince the U.S. military's largest ground force to change the way it does business. Part of the task force's plan hinges on the Army's ability to revamp the antiquated methods it uses to recruit, select and train infantry and other select specialties with key roles in close combat.
"There is t***h in this fact that we have not paid great attention to this idea of specially selecting people and incentivizing infantrymen and giving them the right sk**ls," retired Army Lt. Gen. Thomas Spoehr, who serves as director of The Heritage Foundation's Center for National Defense, told Military.com. "I think we can do a lot better in the Army ... about getting the right people into these positions."
But Chris Dougherty, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, said that such an effort -- while laudable -- would be enormously expensive and unlikely to gain traction at a time when the Army is attempting to modernize its major combat systems and straining to meet recruiting goals.
"The question that I think the Army has got to grapple with is ... is this a cost-effective use of Army dollars," said Dougherty, who served in the 75th Ranger Regiment in the late 1990s.
"I don't think that we are headed into a period where ... you are likely to see heavy investment in light infantry."
U.S. Army First Sgt. Daniel Moss, assigned to the 25th Infantry Division Lightning Academy, performs cold-load training to Rangers from Bravo Company, 2nd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment, before the start of waterborne training at Bellows Air Force Station, Hawaii, Nov. 14, 2018. Lightning Academy waterborne operations off the coast of Hawaii offers a unique training environment and partnership opportunity for United States Army Special Operations Forces and the 25th Infantry Division. (U.S. Army photo by 1
U.S. Army First Sgt. Daniel Moss, assigned to the 25th Infantry Division Lightning Academy, performs cold-load training to Rangers from Bravo Company, 2nd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment, before the start of waterborne training at Bellows Air Force Station, Hawaii, Nov. 14, 2018. Lightning Academy waterborne operations off the coast of Hawaii offers a unique training environment and partnership opportunity for United States Army Special Operations Forces and the 25th Infantry Division. (U.S. Army photo by 1st Lt. Ryan DeBooy)
Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, a key adviser to the CCLTF, has some strong words for critics of the overhaul effort, however.
He called them "professional personnelists, those who practice the black arts of human-resource, personnel management."
"They approach it from the standpoint of efficiency and management," Scales said.
Soon after the task force was first created, it became clear that supporting new, high-tech weapons and equipment would not be enough to truly increase lethality and performance in infantry units, Scales said.
"Just a few months into it, all of us came to the realization that, you know, the toughest nut to crack is policy, and the culture of neglect that close combat forces have endured literally since the inception of the Army 244 years ago," Scales said. "The problem is, when you get into the Army's sausage-making machine, the frictions begin to arise, and everybody comes up with a whole series of what-abouts and what-ifs."
Scales praised the Army's decision to increase infantry one-station unit training (OSUT) from 14 weeks to 22 weeks, saying the change had "yielded enormous benefits."
"But we always slap back to that machine-age World War II era model," he said. "Our system of training most of the Army, except for infantry OSUT, is no different than it was when we built an eight-million-man Army in 1942 and 1943."
While the plan is still in its infancy, Scales said the task force is considering recommending that infantrymen should not be recruited until age 26, so they have more life experience.
Part of the criteria for infantry would "propensity to do well in infantry-specific sk**ls," as evaluated on a special test, Scales said.
"Then you say ... if you get through what, we are suggesting to you, we are going to pay you $60,000 a year and when you complete training, we are going to give you a $250,000 bonus," he added.
Currently, Army E-4s and E-5s make between $26,000 and $36,000, depending on how much experience they have.
The Army did just increase the maximum bonus to $40,000 for recruits who sign up for a six-year stretch in the infantry, but the incentive is only set to last until Sept. 30. Then, the maximum bonus for a six-year enlistment in the grunts will likely return to around $15,000.
Recruits would be brought in at the grade of E-4 or E-5 and could possibly be allowed to retire at half-pay after serving 13 years, "if you spent nine of those 13 years climbing up and down the mountains of Afghanistan," Scales said.
Recruiting Challenges
Military experts say that recruiting higher-quality soldiers, specifically for the infantry, will be extremely challenging "in an Army that is already having problems meeting its recruiting targets," Dougherty said.
The Army launched a bold new recruiting strategy last year after it missed its 2018 recruiting goal by 6,500 soldiers.
The scores on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery "are going to have to be higher; the physical fitness standards are going to have to be higher," Dougherty said. "If you want to raise all those thresholds ... it's going to put a real hurt on your recruiting."
Maj. Gen. Frank Muth, the commander of U.S. Army Recruiting Command, told Military.com it's all about the numbers.
"From my perspective as a recruiter, it depends on the numbers you are looking for, and that is why the Ranger Regiment does so well. Because they are not looking for large numbers," Muth said.
The task force is looking at effecting t***sformation for a much bigger population: 44,000 infantry and close-combat personnel in the active Army, Marine Corps and Special Operations Command, Scales said.
"We might want to say that those [military occupational specialties] that habitually accompany close-combat units might be included as well, and that would include [fire support] teams, medics and sappers," Scales said.
"By the way, we are talking about long service here, so you are not recruiting 44,000 a year, you are not recruiting 22,000 a year. You are recruiting about 9,000 a year," he added. "Are you telling me that in this country of about 325 million people, you can't find eight or nine thousand people a year who will take $60,000, plus a quarter-of-a-million-dollar bonus?"
Muth said such an undertaking "may be hard" because it could require the Army to alter the Occupational Physical Assessment Test (OPAT), a four-event test that helps recruiters predict whether recruits are suited for infantry and other physically challenging jobs.
The OPAT has three performance levels, with "black" being the highest for the most physically demanding jobs.
"They would be creating a separate OPAT beyond black, and make it black-plus," Muth said. And say 'look dude, you are going to be able to deadlift 400 pounds.' ... You automatically are going to start weeding people out ... that may be tough."
Spoehr said that for this infantry overhaul to work, the Army would have to use a different way of allocating people once they have decided to enter service. Recruits who meet the right criteria could be offered incentives to consider the infantry over other desired specialties, Spoehr said.
"I don't think this is going to create increased recruiting if they change the policies," Spoehr said. "It will be like, 'hey, infantry gets first dibs on this ... even though the person has always wanted to be an aircraft repairman. If the infantry wants him or her, then they are going to get that person."
Continued