Future of post 9/11GI Bill

JDean3204

Well-Known Member
#1
If you’re a vet looking to use your post 9/11 GI Bill you should read this article. If this goes through, pretty much any funding that is now available for public IHL’s goes down the chitter. Very sad to hear this, this bill was literally my dream come true. It allowed me to move back home to the NW and become a pilot. A job that I may complain about at times but absolutely love..

Not a good way to help address this “pilot shortage” as there is a good amount of 121 guys that are vets who used the GI Bill. Not sure numbers or percentage wise but I would say a significant amount has helped fill seats in the already desperate regionals. This will also hurt a lot of colleges as they pretty much always had a stacked VA program since 2010ish.

Report: Arrington Bill May Destroy High-Paying Veteran Jobs And The Airline Industry - The Daily Caller
 
Last edited:

///AMG

Well-Known Member
#2
Standard for DoD lately (or I guess VA as an extension of that). There will be no benefits left for service members in 20 years, as the feds nickel and dime us to death. Talk a big game about supporting vets all you want, but when I have a TDY related (actual work related) $80 expense that gets denied and have to pay out of pocket, while we spend billions on stupid stuff, one might also wonder less why the military has a retention problem.
 

Lawman

Well-Known Member
#3
Standard for DoD lately (or I guess VA as an extension of that). There will be no benefits left for service members in 20 years, as the feds nickel and dime us to death. Talk a big game about supporting vets all you want, but when I have a TDY related (actual work related) $80 expense that gets denied and have to pay out of pocket, while we spend billions on stupid stuff, one might also wonder less why the military has a retention problem.
This seems aimed specifically at trying to attack the civilian run programs that take advantage of the post 9/11 GI bill to fast track mil aviators into a civilian job. Typical high up mil decision.... people are leaving because the environment is toxic... steal their mode of leaving so maybe they’ll stay.

One has to wonder what retention will look like in our children’s military,

The 20 year brass ring was about the only thing that’s kept me in place the last few years.... that doesn’t exist anymore. Watching my dad’s medical and retirement get erroded more and more over the last 15 years I have to wonder what that will even be worth at this point.
 

NovemberEcho

Dergs favorite member
#4
One has to wonder what retention will look like in our children’s military,
At least on the AF side, I think they’re starting to see the consequences of the past decade+ of “whole Airman concept” and careerism. They’re now reverting back to 20yr HYT for E5 and a also couple other NCO ranks I think. Somebody finally recognized that not everyone is destined for Chief and there are some very good people who are quite satisfied stating at the middle ranks.
 

Lawman

Well-Known Member
#5
At least on the AF side, I think they’re starting to see the consequences of the past decade+ of “whole Airman concept” and careerism. They’re now reverting back to 20yr HYT for E5 and a also couple other NCO ranks I think. Somebody finally recognized that not everyone is destined for Chief and there are some very good people who are quite satisfied stating at the middle ranks.
I would give just about anything for the Army to bring back specialist ranks.

Not everybody wants to be an NCO, and more important than that not everybody should be. There was nothing wrong with having SPC6s running around taking orders from an E5 wearing chevrons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

MikeD

Administrator
Staff member
#6
I would give just about anything for the Army to bring back specialist ranks.

Not everybody wants to be an NCO, and more important than that not everybody should be. There was nothing wrong with having SPC6s running around taking orders from an E5 wearing chevrons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The big problem was the hard stripe wearers thinking the specialists of the same grade were living an easy life because they didnt have have the leadership responsibilties, and all the extra work that goes with that, of the hard stripe guys. Until that mindset can be squashed, the Sp4-7 will likely continue to cease to exist, in my opinion.
 

Lawman

Well-Known Member
#7
The big problem was the hard stripe wearers thinking the specialists of the same grade were living an easy life because they didnt have have the leadership responsibilties, and all the extra work that goes with that, of the hard stripe guys. Until that mindset can be squashed, the Sp4-7 will likely continue to cease to exist, in my opinion.
It’s the inane bitchwork we could get rid of too that sparks most of the problem. NCOs want to share the suck since they don’t get paid more... but hey neither did I for becoming an Air Mission Commander.

Staff Duty is a giant waste of time in the age of cellphones and that seems like the biggest reason celebrated when someone makes E5. Now we can pad the duty roster with that name. Let’s go instead look at what we have soldiers doing the same thing now that was being done in 1968 and realize we are wasting their time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Making it Count

Well-Known Member
#8
If people think there is a shortage now and this goes through, get ready for chaos. I just recently used my GI Bill to get my
Certs/ratings starting in 2015. I got most of my heli ratings and saw that the heli industry was in the crapper and switched over to fixed wing. Most of my students I instruct now are using the Post 9/11 GI Bill as well. I would really like to see the ratio of people coming into the civilian flight industry using VA benefits vs not. I feel this will dry up the low time pilot well that is ever small already.

That being said, what it will do is actually cause even more of an issue for regionals, and as we know will affect pay and bonuses in a positive way. Which in turn over time should open up more financial aid for flight training due to the potential earnings. It will hurt at first but could potentially be good overall for the industry and especially for those already in it.

Of course it all comes down to money. Airlines want pilots, time to start paying up and not just in bonuses. Time for pay to get where it’s needs to be, which isn’t even close now even with bonuses.
 

Lawman

Well-Known Member
#9
If people think there is a shortage now and this goes through, get ready for chaos. I just recently used my GI Bill to get my
Certs/ratings starting in 2015. I got most of my heli ratings and saw that the heli industry was in the crapper and switched over to fixed wing. Most of my students I instruct now are using the Post 9/11 GI Bill as well. I would really like to see the ratio of people coming into the civilian flight industry using VA benefits vs not. I feel this will dry up the low time pilot well that is ever small already.

That being said, what it will do is actually cause even more of an issue for regionals, and as we know will affect pay and bonuses in a positive way. Which in turn over time should open up more financial aid for flight training due to the potential earnings. It will hurt at first but could potentially be good overall for the industry and especially for those already in it.

Of course it all comes down to money. Airlines want pilots, time to start paying up. It’s going to have to happen.
The funny part of this is they are arguing that people are using too much cash because the 141 bachelors program schools see it as a blank check...

Let’s not forget there was not originally a requirement to go to a degree program to get these certificates. They created that requirement in order to use the benefits in an effort to make it harder for people to get this training and leave.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

tbflyer

Well-Known Member
#11
I don’t see what the problem with this bill is, it doesn’t eliminate spending on flight training, it just reals it in. There is no reason an In state school can charge the VA $250 an hour for a 172 with instructor while the neighboring 141 charges $175. Or why that same university will grant credit to someone who took an outside private pilot ground school 9+ credits and paid $200 yet will charge over $2k for the same result.
 

Lawman

Well-Known Member
#12
$5 on memory wipe tech
Honestly the more and more they (both parties) erode away at the incentives to join, I can honestly see a tipping point where selective service comes back on the table.

If we have another major conflict with high casualties that some are predicting in the next 20-30 years I definitely see selective service coming back in order to reconstitute a depleted military and reestablish/maintain the tenuous post conflict status quo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Lawman

Well-Known Member
#13
I don’t see what the problem with this bill is, it doesn’t eliminate spending on flight training, it just reals it in. There is no reason an In state school can charge the VA $250 an hour for a 172 with instructor while the neighboring 141 charges $175. Or why that same university will grant credit to someone who took an outside private pilot ground school 9+ credits and paid $200 yet will charge over $2k for the same result.
The question isn’t that government funding in education is screwed up, that’s pretty evident across the board.

It’s more to those of us currently here seeing the problem with manpower this represents not a fix to government spending but a trick thrown in to again make it harder for our pilots to transfer their skills into the outside world. The Rotary wing community specifically with the RTP programs being run right now is a huge problem that Human Resources Command totally knows is there but refuses to acknowledge in public. Meanwhile in private little games like this are being played along with other ideas like increased service commitments for pilots to attempt to reign in a problem that the DOD its self created. The force is tired, the force was downsized, and now those of us left are being asked to do a lot more and treated with a “what have you done for me lately” attitude. That’s a toxic environment when it’s not longer 2007 and airlines are hiring big. The old threats of “If you leave you’ll be homeless” aren’t working anymore and friends that have gone are networking with their buddies still in to evacuate and move to greener pastures. I almost dropped my UQR packet last year to go to Piedmont after some severe lobbying by a friend. Having my second child and selecting an assignment I genuinely wanted are the only reasons I’m still in uniform. I’ve got plenty of buddies who no longer are, and I don’t begrudge them for a second.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

JDean3204

Well-Known Member
#14
this problem obviously started with a select few and mostly one flight school taking advantage of the way the bill was funding flight training. IIRC, one school was throwing vets straight into a bell turbine helicopter for their PPL. This lead to over half a million dollars racked up for all the ratings. That is not what the majority of schools do, as far as the cap on public IHL’s currently you can get most of the funds covered. The funds stretch commercial funds pretty thin, but if a VA student has to find 3-5k out of pocket that’s not a big deal. However, the proposal will put a cap on public as they do on private. The only saving point will be if the public IHL’s extend the yellow ribbon to help with the slashed funding. Even then, a program like UND or ASU will not be covered entirely, most likely causing vets to fund a significant amount themselves.

The program I went through, Portland Community College hasn’t been able to accept veteran applicants wanting to use the bill in almost a year. The ones that were accepted previously had to fund their PPL out of pocket, it just seems to be a dying benefit that I believe was a great thing for the industry. All because a few geeedy schools took advantage a few years back..
 

Lawman

Well-Known Member
#16
I didn’t think you could use GI Bill for PPL anyway? Or is it you can’t use it for JUST a ppl?
If it’s part of a full 141 school curriculum (like an aero sci degree from riddle) it’s possible.

That’s the weird thing, GI bill and vocational trades have always been a little of a weird relationship, but with flight training it was wide open and seen as too easy to use, so they tagged the 141 requirements. Now they are complaining it costs to much when no sane person would look at ERAUs flight training program and call it a cost effective way to become a commercial aviator.
 

jynxyjoe

The Kickin' Chicken!
#17
If you’re a vet looking to use your post 9/11 GI Bill you should read this article. If this goes through, pretty much any funding that is now available for public IHL’s goes down the chitter. Very sad to hear this, this bill was literally my dream come true. It allowed me to move back home to the NW and become a pilot. A job that I may complain about at times but absolutely love..

Not a good way to help address this “pilot shortage” as there is a good amount of 121 guys that are vets who used the GI Bill. Not sure numbers or percentage wise but I would say a significant amount has helped fill seats in the already desperate regionals. This will also hurt a lot of colleges as they pretty much always had a stacked VA program since 2010ish.

Report: Arrington Bill May Destroy High-Paying Veteran Jobs And The Airline Industry - The Daily Caller
Yeah this already tagged my cousin sitting sideways getting out soon.

Gibill needs more money not less.
 

///AMG

Well-Known Member
#18
Out of curiosity, assuming I already have a VA GI Bill authorization to use for a certain ATP/CTP course this fall, I shouldn't be concerned with not getting re-imbursed, correct? It's not that big of an issue, as I already paid for it, but the extra $5000 would sure be useful during my transition out of the military next year.
 

JDean3204

Well-Known Member
#19
Out of curiosity, assuming I already have a VA GI Bill authorization to use for a certain ATP/CTP course this fall, I shouldn't be concerned with not getting re-imbursed, correct? It's not that big of an issue, as I already paid for it, but the extra $5000 would sure be useful during my transition out of the military next year.
That is a great question that I don’t know the answer to. Are you utilizing ch.33 benefits on the program?
 
Top