Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DoD Announces Recruiting and Retention Numbers for August
DOD ^ | 9/8/06

Posted on 09/08/2006 2:54:36 PM PDT by bnelson44


IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. 882-06
September 08, 2006

DoD Announces Recruiting and Retention Numbers for August

The Department of Defense announced today its recruiting and retention statistics for the active and reserve components for the month of August.

• Active duty recruiting. All services met or exceeded their recruiting goals in August.

 
Accessions
Goal
Percent
Army
10,492
10,050
104
Navy
4,090
4,090
100
Marine Corps
4,320
4,053
107
Air Force
3,167
3,156
100


• Active duty recruiting from Oct. 1, 2005 to August 31, 2006.

 
Accessions
Goal
Percent
Army
72,997
70,200
104
Navy
28,499
28,499
100
Marine Corps
24,300
23,968
101
Air Force
28,256
28,124
100

• Active duty retention. All services are projected to meet their retention goals for the current fiscal year.

• Reserve forces recruiting. Four of the six reserve components met or exceeded their recruiting goals in July.

 
Accessions
Goal
Percent
Army National Guard
6,527
6,518
100
Army Reserve
2,433
3,954
62
Navy Reserve
1,087
1,027
106
Marine Corps Reserve
845
838
101
Air National Guard
1,010
792
128
Air Force Reserve
848
849
99


• Reserve forces recruiting from Oct. 1, 2005 to August 31, 2006.

 
Accessions
Goal
Percent
Army National Guard
63,025
63,240
99
Army Reserve
31,301
33,124
94
Navy Reserve
8,811
10,276
86
Marine Corps Reserve
7,886
7,799
101
Air National Guard
8,207
8,518
96
Air Force Reserve
6,803
6,606
103


• Reserve forces retention. For August, Army National Guard retention was above 119 percent of the cumulative goal of 31,599, and Air National Guard retention was 110 percent of its cumulative goal of 9,236. Both the Army and Air Guard are currently at 98 and 99 percent of their end strength, respectively. Losses in all reserve components for July are well within acceptable limits. The Navy Reserve presents a concern with its increasing attrition rates. Indications are that these trends will continue into August.

To view a fact sheet on who is volunteering for the military, click here.

Detailed information on specific recruiting data can be obtained by contacting the individual military recruiting commands at (502) 626-0164 for Army, (210) 565-4678 for Air Force, (703) 784-9455 for Marine Corps and (901) 874-9048 for Navy. The reserve components can be reached at the following numbers: National Guard Bureau (703) 607-2586; Army Reserve (404) 464-8490; Air Force Reserve (703) 697-1761; Navy Reserve (504) 678-1240; and Marine Corps Reserve (504) 678-6535.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: dod; recruitment; retention; reups; usmilitary

1 posted on 09/08/2006 2:54:36 PM PDT by bnelson44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

2 posted on 09/08/2006 2:56:32 PM PDT by bnelson44 (Proud parent of a tanker! (Charlie Mike, son))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44
It's a quagmire! It's all Bush's fault!

On a serious note, thanks for the post. This is very straight forward and highlights the misinformation which some are trying to propagate.
3 posted on 09/08/2006 2:57:35 PM PDT by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

Proud to say that #1 son is in this data set.


4 posted on 09/08/2006 3:04:38 PM PDT by bjc (Check the data!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

But but if this continues we won't need to have a draft.....we're doomed..../sarc


5 posted on 09/08/2006 3:12:28 PM PDT by showme_the_Glory (No more rhyming, and I mean it! ..Anybody want a peanut.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bjc

So is mine


6 posted on 09/08/2006 3:17:05 PM PDT by bnelson44 (Proud parent of a tanker! (Charlie Mike, son))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

Thanks for posting. It certainly disputes the despicable John Murtha's claims that our military is broken and can't meet their enlistment quotas. Of course he doesn't let the truth interfere with his agenda.


7 posted on 09/08/2006 3:29:14 PM PDT by jazusamo (DIANA IREY for Congress, PA 12th District: Retire murtha.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bjc
me too!
number two son at OSUT right now!
8 posted on 09/08/2006 3:51:03 PM PDT by frankenMonkey (new tagline under construction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

Forgive me for being a thread pirate but I have a question that Freepers may be able to help me with. An older man at work, knowing I had served in the AF, asked me a question about something disturbing he had heard. He has a nephew, as well as a friend's son, in the AF. He heard (from them?) that they could be forcibly transferred from the AF to another branch if that branch was not meeting recruiting goals.

I had never heard of such a thing, but I got out in the dark days of clinton. I spoke about AF Com. guys getting attached to an Army or Navy unit or Navy medics serving with Marines, but that I had never heard of forced transfers like he described. I did add the disclaimer that once you signed on the line, you were government property and every one signing knew that and should accept it.

Has anyone else heard of this or is this just anti-military propaganda?

Thanks for the help:
North Alabama Cajon Freeper- FarmerBob


9 posted on 09/08/2006 4:33:48 PM PDT by Farmerbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Farmerbob
well, i don't know (don't you just hate people who say that, and then post?) but it sounds like a large bunch of crap.
10 posted on 09/08/2006 4:59:13 PM PDT by frankenMonkey (new tagline under construction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Farmerbob
I know I had seen something to this effect over on Leatherneck .com's forums (or maybe it was the forums at military.com). They were saying that Navy and AF guys were going to be doing some road patrols and whatnot, but it was still gonna be the Marines and Army who were providing the majority of the boots on the ground.

Yeah...here's an article from back in January about the Naval Expeditionary Combat Command: http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=98139&ran=183893

Haven't seen anything that directly says the AF will be doing the same, though, just heard some chatter about it.

11 posted on 09/08/2006 5:13:43 PM PDT by anthropos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Farmerbob

There is a blue to green program that allows people with jobs that are being RFT'ed to join the Army without having to go through full blown basic. Instead they go to an abbreviated course. That's a voluntary deal though, not involuntary.


12 posted on 09/08/2006 5:18:57 PM PDT by Tailback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: frankenMonkey; anthropos; Tailback
Thanks for the input. Please keep me informed. I hate negative propaganda about the service. I recommend it for most peoples competent kids. It probably saved my life.
13 posted on 09/08/2006 5:31:12 PM PDT by Farmerbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Farmerbob

AF Security Police are being used to to secure Army ground convoys. But there are no forceful conversions from one branch to another. The Blue to Green program is voluntary only.


14 posted on 09/08/2006 5:48:49 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tailback; Farmerbob

That is my understanding as well. The AF is downsizing and some people may not have a choice if they want to stay in the service but to transfer to another service. However, they can always leave for civilian life.

I was wondering, now that the Army is converting to blue class A's if they will change the name of the program to the "blue to the other blue program". ;-)


15 posted on 09/08/2006 6:22:25 PM PDT by bnelson44 (Proud parent of a tanker! (Charlie Mike, son))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson