A Marine giving advice to "join the Air Force".

Sorry, I just had to laugh.

Now I have to go out and tell some college students to be English majors.

:)

---

I'll take a stab at this. I don't have the figures but the Marine Personnel folks would. So would the recruiters. After all, this is their job. Here are my thoughts. The Marine Corps has a structure that requires X% Officers and Y% Enlisted. Each other service has their own ratio. Last I saw, Marines had a higher number of Enlisted to Officer (~8:1 ), then Navy & Army about the same (5.5:1), then Air Force where it is near 4:1. For each paygrade within the service, there is a target number of personnel they desire.

Why bring this up? Because the percentage of folks staying in or getting out is not based solely on the individual. If you don't promote, you may be forced out due to high year tenure. Put simply, either your career field is too overmanned or you suck enough that we don't need you anymore. Move along so we can let the next generation move up. It is referred to as "move up or move out." You may want to give your life to the Corps, but if you meet the criteria above, they'll say thank you for playing and away you go.

So what percentage will re-enlist for 2 or more terms. There is a given historical percentage that generally remains true. They use it to plan their future manning and decide where shortages are or will be. However, such things as recessions/economic downturns/high unemployment will cause retention numbers to rise as folks weigh the pros/cons of getting out vs. staying in. If unemployment was at an all time low and salaries were exponentially higher in the civilian world, one would expect the military to institute paying of higher reenlistment bonuses, etc to entice their experienced people to remain in. Either way, they need fewer people at higher paygrades so they DESIRE people to get out.

What I think your gut is telling you, though, is that the Marines have done a good job of promoting their institutional culture. That appeal is also then used as a retention tool. If you instill a value that you are part of a special elite (the few, the proud) and a family (once a Marine, always...), then that individual may choose to remain in for other than pecuniary rewards. This was the target of your first point, I believe. The appeal attracts a certain type of individual. Those that are swayed by it will continue to be. Those that aren't, may choose to serve their country in other ways.

Finally, I will say this about your point #2. Doesn't matter what service you choose or for how long you do it. Anyone who HAS served earns my respect provided they served honorably. Whether one chooses to remain for a career or gets out after their first commitment, they still did something that a majority of Americans have NOT done (military only 9% of the Gen Pop.) It's the service that counts, not the time served.

We need good people in the Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard just as well. The job they all do is just as important. It all defends our freedoms and our country.

P.S. Are you aware that the Marine Corps organizationally belongs to the Department of the Navy as a subordinate unit? 😉 Navy Org Chart 

---

I didn't mean to disparage those who served shorter terms. Not at all. Even if such a thing were valid, which I don't consider it, it wouldn't be valid coming from me, who has never served.

That's why I haven't attempted to give the OP any advice. That's not my place or my competence.

I really was just responding to the "recruiters lie" subthread.

My only point is really that if you're going to sell/recruit people a "career in X" you're going to recruit differently than if you're going to sell/recruit people seeking "a stepping stone for the future career". And that my impression (again, as a pure ousider) is that the marines both seek and attract those seeking the former more; and army/navy/etc, the latter more.

I wouldn't even argue that either approach is "wrong". While I personally admire Marines a bit more, because I consider them more likely to be "warriors" first, I'm convinced that modelling the entire US military (or its recruitment on the Marine Corp model) would be a disaster. (Sorry, Foster.)

A modern nation that asks its military to serve as wide a range of political/economics/culture needs more than warriors in it. And it needs more than Marines.

I just think that you can't lump all military recruiters/recruitment strategies and tactics together. Depending on the objectives being served by the recruiter (or sought by the potential recruit), lying might be a preferred approach sometimes.

But not always.


Hehe...and, yes, I know the Marines are part of the D of Navy. But my impression has always been that they recruit separately and target different recruits.

This is probably why they both wear silly pants.

---

Wade,

Didn't think your intention was to disparage those who served shorter terms just as I didn't intend to disparage those who haven't served. I was just lumping in my own opinions in the same post as I replied to one of your comments.

Since I sort of started the "recruiters lie" theme, though, I will still stand by that. It is an old saw. Sure, not all recruiters are devious just like all cops in the US aren't assholes (a previous post). However, there is a kernel of truth to each and it comes from the collective experiences of many people being burned.

Let us not forget that the job of a recruiter is to recruit. His performance is evaluated based on how well he meets monthly quotas (or, to be P.C., "goals"). We recognize that asking police officers to write X number of tickets per month doesn't equate to good governance and doesn't help them do their mission. They feel pressured to write tickets in B.S. situations to keep their job/performance if it has been a slow month. Same thing applies here, I imagine. Slow month....get a kid who is interested, sell him some half-truths and get him to sign.

I think what NSD and I were trying to say is this:
Understand EXACTLY what it is you are undertaking and what you are giving up to do so. Ensure that your reasons/needs/desires for entering into this contract are met before you sign because you aren't getting anything after the deal. Unlike the NFLPA, there is no contract re-negotiation for performance and there are no union strikes in the military...unless you are European 😉

---