AMEDD Captains Career Course

[chemist157]

Does anyone know if they are still offering the truncated version for medical corps? Looking at the schedule online I only see last years 2 week courses. Does anyone ever get this out of the way in fellowship or should you wait until you are in a staff position?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BlackFrancis33]

I faced the same question. 1st, will you be in long enough to make 0-5? If yes, then you need to take it. As you are in fellowship, the answer is probably yes. You won't have priority unless you are within 3 years (I think it is 3 and not 2?) of LTC. You will likely still have a chance to get into the 2 week course if you are greater than 3 years from 0-5. I heard it was scheduled through 2014 or 15, so I frickn hope it hasn't all of a sudden gone away. I considered doing it during fellowship, but I decided that missing 2 weeks of fellowship was detrimental. I didn't want to miss all of those cases to go spend 2 weeks checking a box I can check later. If the 2 week course is now gone, and I have to take the 9 week course, I will eat those words.

 

[colbgw02]

2-week course isn't dead yet. I think they've got one coming up late this year...December maybe? Not sure how to sign up, but your branch manager probably knows.

 

[turkish]

Any idea what it's like in terms of daily schedule? Weekends off?

I've heard you have to take another PT test while you're there, regardless of whether you passed your October APFT.

 

[DoctorDoom]

1- No more 2 week courses; 9-week courses for all.
2- Passing the APFT at CCC is required for passing CCC, change from last FY.

 

[Homunculus]

1- No more 2 week courses; 9-week courses for all.

really? i heard rumblings about this-- mainly from the schmucks that do the 9 week course being pissed that docs get away with a 2 week version-- but haven't heard for sure when it ends.

now all these poor skeleton crew MTF's are going to be losing docs for a couple of months at a time. i don't think the AMEDD bigwigs understand they'll just be hurting themselves and their mission readiness. try talking cost containment to the MTF commaders with no docs to see patients, lol. the mere fact you can condense 9 weeks to 2 makes me think the course is probably not exactly a rigorous one to begin with-- why not just make 2 weeks the standard?

--your friendly neighborhood i'll take the 9 week TDY no call vacation please caveman

 

[BlackFrancis33]

S$#(! if that is true that sucks beyond belief. 9 more weeks for all away from their medical practice, that is a great use of gov't time and money. The medical corps leadership are a bunch of spineless wimps to let this go through.

 

[colbgw02]

The trick is to accept that they don't actually want you to practice medicine. Or, at least, its practice is totally incidental to your 'career'.

 

[jabreal00]

Anyone with a three of four year obligation has to be completely deluded to stay in or even consider CCC. The writing is on the wall fellas. My specialty consultant just relayed that my specialty is tasked with filling two brigade surgeon slots. Last year two people were tasked for this. So four people in two years are taken out of their specialty to basically push paper for two years. HRC doesn't give a darn that procedural skills will erode. Mil med ship is sinking fast. For those in too deep, well good luck. For those who have short obligations, this is the best time to get out while you can. Just my personal opinion.

 

[chemist157]

Does doing CCC put a target on your back for being tasked for brigade surgeon spots? Does this make you more likely to be tasked since they don't have to send you to C3 first?

 

[DoctorDoom]

really? i heard rumblings about this-- mainly from the schmucks that do the 9 week course being pissed that docs get away with a 2 week version-- but haven't heard for sure when it ends.

now all these poor skeleton crew MTF's are going to be losing docs for a couple of months at a time. i don't think the AMEDD bigwigs understand they'll just be hurting themselves and their mission readiness. try talking cost containment to the MTF commaders with no docs to see patients, lol. the mere fact you can condense 9 weeks to 2 makes me think the course is probably not exactly a rigorous one to begin with-- why not just make 2 weeks the standard?

--your friendly neighborhood i'll take the 9 week TDY no call vacation please caveman

Yes, this is for sure. Straight from HRC/Corps Chief; end of 2012 was the last iteration. The 2-week CCC was only there as a make-up for the 2400+ MC officers who should have gone to CCC and never did; now that the backlog has been made good, and there's a new MC emphasis (straight from Corps Chief MG Thomas' mouth) on military education as well as operational assignments, the 2-week CCC is not coming back. The idea is ostensibly that this will make sure that we can better avoid having another non-MC officer become Army Surgeon General in the future, but now that the genie is out of the bottle I doubt it can be changed.

And the 2-week version was not useful at all, so I wouldn't say that the 9-week version can be successfully condensed so as to make the 2-week course the standard. It was as "check the box" of a course as you can get, totally worthless, and designed purely as an administrative workaround so we can get the "AMEDD OFF ADV COURSE" show up on our OERs. Whether the 9-week version is useful is another question all together, but that's more a problem with AMEDD curricula being completely divorced from reality.

Regardless, the 2-week version is off the table. ATRSS also no longer lists it as a course either. One of my General Surgeons (previous Section Chief, FS, FST Commander, West Pointer) is being told he has to go or risk being non-select for LTC. Meanwhile, his new DCCS won't let he be gone for 9 weeks, which was the original reason why so many MC officers including some O-6's never went in the past. So we are back to square one. One guess as to whether this lifer is going to ETS as soon as he gets the chance...

 

[DoctorDoom]

Does doing CCC put a target on your back for being tasked for brigade surgeon spots? Does this make you more likely to be tasked since they don't have to send you to C3 first?

Not as far as I know. CCC is irrelevant from what I was told by Branch, the only requirement for Brigade Surgeon assignments is the Brigade Surgeon Course (NLT 90 days prior to arrival on station, not a pre-requisite for assignment). The selection of Brigade Surgeons is based on which specialties and sub-specialties are "overstrength" and not so much on previous military education. So avoiding CCC won't protect you from an operational assignment, just prevent your promotion to LTC. Of course, "overstrength" is a relative term; Rads is now required to submit 8 officers of O-4 or above to Brigade Surgeon slots, mainly because for years no one in Rads updated their manning requirements, so that nuc med is considered to be part of their regular diagnostic personnel strength. Another example of our senior leadership's failure.

Incidentally, I was one of the ones that raised a stink about getting the Brigade Surgeon Course's later iteration changed from September to July, so that new Brigade Surgeons actually went to the course before they got to their new duty stations instead of 2 months after (like I did). I also pushed for the new Brigade Surgeons not coming directly out of Residency to be allowed to go to the January iteration. I had to get 4 O-6's involved just to make sure my replacement and I had overlap, instead of him being dropped with no training into a Brigade that has no Brigade PA and no MEDO. Then I also tried to get the curriculum of the Brigade Surgeon Course revised so that you actually get taught what you need to know, like how to use MEDPROS (which changes every couple of months), instead of getting briefs on how the server networks interface in MEDPROS, which unless you are IT is totally irrelevant. Heck, for some of the specialties, being taught how to properly write profiles would be critical. But nope, no one wanted to hear that. So now I have been downgraded from Brigade to Battalion level, and sent as a GMO to a TMC, with no surgical capability so that my surgical skills wither. The work I put in to get ACOM OERs from Combat Arms Brigade Commanders now seems to me to be a waste of time. Let's not even discuss surgery residency...

 

[DoctorDoom]

The medical corps leadership are a bunch of spineless wimps to let this go through.

Medical Corps leadership didn't allow this to go through, they pushed for this; can't blame this on anyone except our own Corps leadership.

The new rules with CCC and Operational Assignments are part of an effort to try and correct the fact that so few of us had the qualifications to be Surgeon General that they gave it to a nurse. It also is trying to address the lack of clinical experience in positions of direct advice to line-unit Commanders and staff work. While on the one hand I can understand the motivation, the execution has been less than ideal, to say the least. Especially given that there were mechanisms in place previously to adress these issues and avoid these problems. But if no one uses the mechanisms in place (and thus allowing issues such as COL's who never take any leadership role even in MTF's, many MC officers who do everything possible to avoid ever actually doing anything remotely Army, tying FP and primary care incentives to the civilian sector instead of Army needs, training sub-specialists who then get considered excess because the MEDCENS can't support their practice, etc. to fester), then the solution later on will be necessarily onerous. I get the sense the solution that is now in place came about in a panic, and is likely going to create new, much worse problems. Especially when everyone ETS as soon as possible.

 

[colbgw02]

The new rules with CCC and Operational Assignments are part of an effort to try and correct the fact that so few of us had the qualifications to be Surgeon General that they gave it to a nurse.

If this is true, then it's such backward logic that only the Army could have dreamed it up.

Let's see, shooting for general out of the medical corps is such a crappy deal that no one wants to do it, even though the avenue is wide open to them. I know what'll show 'em! Let's make everyone at least do part of the same crappy deal. That way, after the max exodus of disgruntled O4s and O5s, there will bound to be a few future general officers left over! Problem solved!

Some of us were doing a head count in my department last week. Of about 20 Army active duty staff in my department, only three are staying until retirement. All of them have pre-MC time, and two of them will drop their papers at the first chance. The rest of us are all ETSing at first chance, which includes several people who signed MSP contracts after their initial ADSO, but will now separate in the 12-14 year range. A couple are academy grads. One guy will ETS after 17 years; that's how bad it's gotten.

 

[Perrotfish]

One guy will ETS after 17 years; that's how bad it's gotten.

I hope he doesn't. This seems like a classic example of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[idq1i]

they are giving the 2 week course this December. Email just went out. For all you lifers and potential lifers...

 

[BlackFrancis33]

Geez, of course there is going to be one more 2 week course while I am stuck in a galaxy far, far away. Doctor Doom, you definitely killed my buzz (fake buzz, NA beer only right now), but I know you are just passing along the s#*)7y news. The small percent of those geniuses in charge are worried about the very, very small percentage of us who will someday try and make general. I've already planned on possibly avoiding ILE altogether and spending my last 2-3 years at 0-5 to avoid ever leaving clinical medicine. Well, I'm a lifer so I guess I should start planning when it will be convenient to spend 9 more weeks away from my family and subspecialty. I'll likely see some of you there. I'll get the first round at that cheesy British bar on the Riverwalk. We'll need to be drunk at least some of the time to make it through.

 

[colbgw02]

I hope he doesn't. This seems like a classic example of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I don't think you'd say that if you knew the guy, heard his reasoning, and knew of the jobs he's looking at. The financial benefits of staying are compelling, but you can't put a price on happiness.

 

[DoctorDoom]

they are giving the 2 week course this December. Email just went out. For all you lifers and potential lifers...

Must have come out while I was en route to my second utilization tour in a row, this one to join a deployed unit... except not, because the Brigade Surgeon slot is ALREADY OCCUPIED. I got 3 RFO's this PCS for positions that turned out to be already filled, and a total of 7 in as many weeks. HRC is awesome...

I assume this 2-week version is priority for those coming up on their IZ look for LTC who haven't had CCC yet?

It is pretty crappy all around. I already deferred ILE and will get out as soon as possible. I'm even toying with the idea of resigning my commission to try to get out of the last 2.5 years of my ADSO, which won't get approved, but maybe if I close my eyes and wish REAL hard...

 

[DoctorDoom]

I don't think you'd say that if you knew the guy, heard his reasoning, and knew of the jobs he's looking at. The financial benefits of staying are compelling, but you can't put a price on happiness.

It's definitely true that, for some, the 50% of our base pay is not worth 3 more years of crap. Good for him that he is in such a good position.

 

[Perrotfish]

I don't think you'd say that if you knew the guy, heard his reasoning, and knew of the jobs he's looking at. The financial benefits of staying are compelling, but you can't put a price on happiness.

I don't know. There are a lot of crappy boses and a lot of red tape in the civilian world. There's also a lot of uncertainty about our profession's future. That pension and healthcare package combined give you the freedom to walk away from work entirely if things get too rough. I know its different for a neirosurgeon vs a pediatrician, but its hard to save enough for that kind of security in the civilian world in any branch of the medical profession.

Also if you couldn't put a price on happieness no one would go to work in the morning.

 

[colbgw02]

Also if you couldn't put a price on happieness no one would go to work in the morning.

Not true. For some people, their work makes them happy. You may have forgotten that after working at an MTF.

 

[HomeSkool]

Some of us were doing a head count in my department last week. Of about 20 Army active duty staff in my department, only three are staying until retirement. All of them have pre-MC time, and two of them will drop their papers at the first chance. The rest of us are all ETSing at first chance, which includes several people who signed MSP contracts after their initial ADSO, but will now separate in the 12-14 year range. A couple are academy grads. One guy will ETS after 17 years; that's how bad it's gotten.

That's pretty bad, but it jives with what I've been hearing from friends around milmed. I've got a classmate from internship who will finish his current commitment next year with 18 years of service (prior enlisted) and he's getting out instead of retiring.

 

[HomeSkool]

I don't know. There are a lot of crappy boses and a lot of red tape in the civilian world.

I'm not sure how there could possibly be more red tape in the civilian world than in milmed.

I'd give a lot to never have to sit through another classroom-based training module that's completely unrelated to my job function...

 

[DoctorDoom]

There's definitely a lot of red tape on the civilian side, and depending on your employer it might even be worse than MEDCOM. For me, it's not the almost inescapable nickle and dime CBT junk that we deal with, it's how our senior leadership is completely divorced from the ground truth of our daily jobs, and how as more and more non-physicians exert their authority over us, it's going to get worse and worse. Everything else I can tolerate, lack of confidence in MEDCOM leadership is what is driving me out.

 

[pgg]

I'm not sure how there could possibly be more red tape in the civilian world than in milmed.

Believe it. At least CMS never visits federal hospitals. Those guys are worse than the JC bozos.

That's pretty bad, but it jives with what I've been hearing from friends around milmed. I've got a classmate from internship who will finish his current commitment next year with 18 years of service (prior enlisted) and he's getting out instead of retiring.

What specialty?

I don't care how toxic the work environment, quitting two years away from a pension that's conservatively worth a couple million inflation indexed dollars is probably not a well considered, rational decision. Unless there's some extraordinary, once-in-a-lifetime, time limited opportunity waiting for him ...

That's a lot of money. A lot of built-in freedom to just pick up and LEAVE any bad job or situation he finds himself in. It's the ultimate FU account.

 

[HomeSkool]

What specialty?

I don't care how toxic the work environment, quitting two years away from a pension that's conservatively worth a couple million inflation indexed dollars is probably not a well considered, rational decision. Unless there's some extraordinary, once-in-a-lifetime, time limited opportunity waiting for him ...

That's a lot of money. A lot of built-in freedom to just pick up and LEAVE any bad job or situation he finds himself in. It's the ultimate FU account.

He and I were transitional interns together in 2009-10. At that time, he was pretty set on being a lifer. Then we went to different MTFs for our residency training and I lost track of him for a couple years. When I ran into him again in July 2012, he'd changed his mind and told me he planned to get out ASAP. I didn't get all the details, but he essentially said there was too much crap in the Army and he was willing to forego the pension in order to be out.

 

[colbgw02]

He and I were transitional interns together in 2009-10. At that time, he was pretty set on being a lifer. Then we went to different MTFs for our residency training and I lost track of him for a couple years. When I ran into him again in July 2012, he'd changed his mind and told me he planned to get out ASAP. I didn't get all the details, but he essentially said there was too much crap in the Army and he was willing to forego the pension in order to be out.

This is representative of what I've seen. To wit, people who were content to be lifers as recently as 2-3 years ago are now ETSing at their first opportunity. I don't think there's a single factor, rather a series of recent changes that have made the Army a much less hospitable place for physicians.

 

[HomeSkool]

This is representative of what I've seen. To wit, people who were content to be lifers as recently as 2-3 years ago are now ETSing at their first opportunity. I don't think there's a single factor, rather a series of recent changes that have made the Army a much less hospitable place for physicians.

Exactly. He was fine with being a lifer when he was enlisted; it was after he became a physician-officer and got into the thick of residency that he changed his mind.

 

[pgg]

He and I were transitional interns together in 2009-10. At that time, he was pretty set on being a lifer. Then we went to different MTFs for our residency training and I lost track of him for a couple years. When I ran into him again in July 2012, he'd changed his mind and told me he planned to get out ASAP. I didn't get all the details, but he essentially said there was too much crap in the Army and he was willing to forego the pension in order to be out.

So he's also in anesthesia?

Doubly surprising then. Two years away from the pension, exiting to a soft job market. Spine surgeons might be able to walk into a 7-figure job but our kind can't. I'll be the first to agree that money isn't everything, but wow. He's taking a huge financial hit leaving that close to the finish line.

He doesn't have a terminal illness and expect to be dead in a couple years, does he?

I know the Army seems to have it worse than us Navy guys, but I'd put up with being in the Air Force for two years for a $2 million pension.

 

[HomeSkool]

So he's also in anesthesia?

No, he's in FP. I was surprised he'd pass on the pension when he was that close, but I didn't get his specific reasons.

 

[pgg]

No, he's in FP. I was surprised he'd pass on the pension when he was that close, but I didn't get his specific reasons.

FP? Mind blown, even worse. He must be miserable in the Army.

 

[DoctorDoom]

I know the Army seems to have it worse than us Navy guys, but I'd put up with being in the Air Force for two years for a $2 million pension.

A hearty laugh from me for poking fun at our Zoomie brethren.

$2MM? Seems like a high estimate, I thought it was closer to $1MM? Or are you including the cost/potential cost of the free health care?

 

[pgg]

A hearty laugh from me for poking fun at our Zoomie brethren.

It's one more perk to non-Air-Force service! You can always say, "well at least I'm not in the Air Force ..."

$2MM? Seems like a high estimate, I thought it was closer to $1MM? Or are you including the cost/potential cost of the free health care?

Not counting healthcare. It'll be worth something, but who knows what it'll be worth, or not worth, after the ACA dust settles.

Assume retirement at age 48, as an O5, after 20 years. Pay based on 24 years of service after getting the USUHS med school years back. Presently base pay for O5 >22* is $8,589.90 per month. Assuming no REDUX option, high-3 rate for 24 years is 60%, so the retirement benefit is $5154/month or $61,847/year. CDC says the average 48-year-old white male can expect to live another 31.1 years.

That's $1,923,450 ... (and remember that's in 2013 dollar buying power, because the pension will be roughly inflation indexed, assuming the zombies don't come and the Chinese don't sell all their Treasuries).

Of course, I plan to live to be at least 100, so it'll be worth lots more than $2 million to me.


Under the high-3 plan, an HPSP'er who doesn't get the 4-year kicker in retirement would get 50% pay of O5 >18*, which works out to about $1.5 million ($8118 * .5 * 12 * 31.1) for that 31.1 year life expectancy.

Hard chargering clipboard commandos who get to O6 will get more, assuming they're in for at least 3 years. But they're not likely to retire at 20, so I assumed O5 retirement rank.


So ... getting out at 17 years? If that civilian job pays $650,000 more than an MSP-augmented O5>16 salary, and you save all of that extra money, then you break even with the military pension. Actually, once the higher marginal tax rates in those years are considered, you probably need to outperform the military paycheck by about $700-750,000/year to break even.

It's possible for a spine surgeon to get out and walk into that kind of pay, perhaps. For an anesthesiologist, radiologist, internist? No.

Getting out at 12 years? If the civilian pay outperforms the military pay by $250,000/year you break even. Yeah, if you're an anesthesiologist getting out, walking into a sweet $500K job, you're "doubling" the $250K military paycheck you're walking away from. Except you're not, you're really just breaking even. (And then, only if you save 100% of the excess civilian pay for the next eight years and diligently invest it all, without the slightest bit of lifestyle inflation.)


There's more to life than money, of course. But once you've hit the ~12 years of creditable service mark, for the "I'm getting out for better pay" argument to hold any water:
1) You need to make a lot more as a civilian ... as in $250K/year more, minimum.
2) You need to actually save every bit of that extra money and not inflate your lifestyle at all.


FP, getting out at 17 years?


* High-3 retirement pay is based on average of previous 3 years of pay, so the O5 retiring at 20 doesn't get a percentage of O5>20 pay. It's more like a percentage of O5 >18 pay. Actually closer to 1/3 * O5>16 + 2/3 O5>18, assuming promotion to O5 was 3+ years prior to retirement.

 

[pgg]

Another way to compare pension value to a current cash value is to get a quote for a single premium immediate annuity that pays a benefit to you for life.

These quotes depend on the interest rate environment at the time of purchase. Some risk related to the health of the ins company you buy from. Right now a 48-year-old can get a SPIA paying $5K/month for life for about $1.2 million. However, unlike the military pension, that annuity has no cost of living / inflation adjustment, and it will pay $5K/month in 2013, and $5K/month in 2033 when $5K will probably buy half what it did in 2013.

An inflation-indexed SPIA would be a better direct comparison to a military pension; they exist but of course the single payment (cash value) to get one is far higher.

 

[DoctorDoom]

Good gouge, the calculations are very informative. The question I have is that I see you are assuming that the lost retirement pay will be made up in 3 years (for 20 years total work), whereas we know that the guy who gets out at 17 years will certainly be working a lot longer than that; not an unreasonable assumption since no one staying in the Army past 30 years, but do you have calculations for how much higher a civilian annual salary one would need to make up the lost retirement benefit, assuming you left at 17, would have stayed for 20, and work to 65 (so age 48-65 as civilian)? I'm curious and would be grateful if you did, since I'm awful at math.

On another note, if the guy getting out at 17 has any idea of what he's losing, and I suspect he has at least some clue, that's a pretty strong indictment of how bad things have gotten in MEDCOM. A friend who is a ring knocker and now an AD CT surgeon used to talk about how the benefits of being in a surgeon in the Army are great, he just wished they wouldn't give it to us by shoving it up our asses one nickle at a time. He said he's more used to it since he's been getting reamed since West Point, but I guess for some people it's worth a lot not to get violated any more. I know at 12 years when my ADSO ends, it certainly will be for me.

 

[DoctorDoom]

This is representative of what I've seen. To wit, people who were content to be lifers as recently as 2-3 years ago are now ETSing at their first opportunity. I don't think there's a single factor, rather a series of recent changes that have made the Army a much less hospitable place for physicians.

That's definitely what I'm seeing/hearing as well. It's not one thing or another but a host of factors, most of which I think are linked to leadership failures from the ROAD O-6's in MC being dominated by Army Nursing. People who were my junior residents are withdrawing from Army approved fellowships to ETS.

 

[pgg]

Good gouge, the calculations are very informative. The question I have is that I see you are assuming that the lost retirement pay will be made up in 3 years (for 20 years total work), whereas we know that the guy who gets out at 17 years will certainly be working a lot longer than that; not an unreasonable assumption since no one staying in the Army past 30 years, but do you have calculations for how much higher a civilian annual salary one would need to make up the lost retirement benefit, assuming you left at 17, would have stayed for 20, and work to 65 (so age 48-65 as civilian)? I'm curious and would be grateful if you did, since I'm awful at math.

Most military retirees get a civilian job the day they retire. Using the same example of retirement eligible at 48 years old, the right comparison is:

1) Retire at age 48, collect pension until death, make civilian $ until retiring from civilian practice at 65 (age 48-65)

or

2) Get out at age 45, make civilian money until retiring from civilian practice at 65 (age 45-65)

The guy who gets out with no pension, X years prior to retirement eligibility, has only X extra years of civilian practice compared to the guy who stays in the military for 20. It's during those X years that in order to break even, he needs to earn enough extra money to be able to buy an inflation-indexed single premium immedite annuity that pays out the same as the pension he didn't get.

Once the retiree gets out, he's making civilian pay too. Admittedly, there's another confounding factor here: the person who gets out of the military X years early also has X more civilian years to establish a private practice or become a partner in a group. His civilian pay may well be a lot more than his stay-til-retirement counterpart gets when he finally joins a civilian practice.

This is a specialty and practice dependent issue. It may be a huge one for a surgeon who uses those X years to build a practice somewhere and ramp up his referral network and surgical volume. For a hospitalist or EM doc who takes an employee position for Kaiser, an X year head start won't impact his effective hourly rate as much.

On another note, if the guy getting out at 17 has any idea of what he's losing, and I suspect he has at least some clue, that's a pretty strong indictment of how bad things have gotten in MEDCOM.

That's absolutely true. There's more to life than money.

Many good reasons to take a lower paying job. People do it all the time to live somewhere desirable, to work fewer hours, to be with people they like.

I just find that many people who cite money as a reason to get out haven't actually done the math, and don't realize exactly how much of a financial hit they're taking by leaving early to "double" their pay. Doctors as a group are lazy savers and poor investors though, so I guess that's par for the course.

A military pension is an amazing thing: an inflation-indexed payment for life, beginning the day you retire (not at age 65+!), with health benefits, with survivor benefits, backed by the full faith and credit of the US government. It may not be universally wrong to walk away from that a few years shy of the finish line, but wow, everyone ought to at least crunch the numbers.

 

[colbgw02]

Good stuff, pgg. Your numbers are close to - but I'm sure more accurate than - my amateur calculations from a few years ago. There's an extremely compelling case to be made for staying in when looking from a purely financial perspective.

 

[DoctorDoom]

I just find that many people who cite money as a reason to get out haven't actually done the math, and don't realize exactly how much of a financial hit they're taking by leaving early to "double" their pay. Doctors as a group are lazy savers and poor investors though, so I guess that's par for the course.

A military pension is an amazing thing: an inflation-indexed payment for life, beginning the day you retire (not at age 65+!), with health benefits, with survivor benefits, backed by the full faith and credit of the US government. It may not be universally wrong to walk away from that a few years shy of the finish line, but wow, everyone ought to at least crunch the numbers.

I think you are absolutely spot on. And I think that lure of the pension is what the military has counted on for a long time to keep people in the services. It's mind boggling to me that things have deteriorated to the point where people who clearly stand to benefit, and not just those like me who are on the cusp of clear gain from staying in, are voting with their feet.

By way of circling back to the original topic of the thread, I confirmed with Army HRC and on ATRSS that there is indeed one iteration of 2-week CCC of 150 slots, with preference given for O-3's with >3yrs TIG and O-4's, beginning 05 DEC 13. I put it out to several MC officers in that cohort, and found that several of them did not get the email. It's failures like that, and recalcitrance to change (having the MSC Branch manager tell me "if they can't manage their own careers then that's their fault." ) which typify the reasons for my dissatisfaction with MEDCOM. So Army people, do MC/HRC's job and get the word out to our fellow officers who may want to attend and stay in and/or get promoted.

 

[bricktamland]

Under the high-3 plan, an HPSP'er who doesn't get the 4-year kicker in retirement would get 50% pay of O5 >18*, which works out to about $1.5 million ($8118 * .5 * 12 * 31.1) for that 31.1 year life expectancy.

Getting out at 12 years? If the civilian pay outperforms the military pay by $250,000/year you break even. Yeah, if you're an anesthesiologist getting out, walking into a sweet $500K job, you're "doubling" the $250K military paycheck you're walking away from. Except you're not, you're really just breaking even. (And then, only if you save 100% of the excess civilian pay for the next eight years and diligently invest it all, without the slightest bit of lifestyle inflation.)


There's more to life than money, of course. But once you've hit the ~12 years of creditable service mark, for the "I'm getting out for better pay" argument to hold any water:
1) You need to make a lot more as a civilian ... as in $250K/year more, minimum.
2) You need to actually save every bit of that extra money and not inflate your lifestyle at all.


FP, getting out at 17 years?


* High-3 retirement pay is based on average of previous 3 years of pay, so the O5 retiring at 20 doesn't get a percentage of O5>20 pay. It's more like a percentage of O5 >18 pay. Actually closer to 1/3 * O5>16 + 2/3 O5>18, assuming promotion to O5 was 3+ years prior to retirement.

I've been following this thread with interest and there have been some great posts. I think the calculations above are very logical, but they don't account for the magic of compound interest, which can lend significant weight to the argument for leaving early. I'll use myself as an example.

I'm on the fence about the decision of whether to separate or stay in at the 12 year mark (age 39). If I go to 20 years of service, I would be retiring at age 47.

First, let's examine the option of staying in. Using the numbers quoted above for an O5 HPSP'er separating at year 20, I would be earning $4059 per month for the rest of my life starting at age 47. Let's assume I retire at age 65. If I earn a conservative 5% interest on my $4059/month and save all of it for those 18 years, that money will be worth $1.37 million. Let's say then, at age 65, I stop saving my monthly stipend and instead spend it each month until I die at the age of 79. That amount between age 65-79 is worth $682K ($4059 * 12mon * 14yr). At the time of my death, the total amount my Navy retirement earned me is $2.05 million ($1.37 million + $682K).

Now, let's look at the option of separating at the 12 year mark with the goal of having an equivalent $2.05 million for retirement. In order to have $2.05 million for retirement, I would need to have all that money accumulated by age 65, and I would need to do it with only 8 years of civilian employment (assuming that by either route, I would be earning the same amount at a civilian job starting at age 47). Applying the same conservative 5% interest rate, I would need to have $850K by age 47 ($850K compounding at 5% over 18 years will become $2.05 million at age 65). So how much do I need to save over 8 years to accumulate $850K? Earning a 5% return, I would need to earn $90K/yr over what I would earn in the Navy during those 8 years (probably around $250K/yr or so, on average).

Thus, I would need to earn $340K/yr at a civilian job in order to keep pace with the value of a military pension. This is quite reasonable for many specialties. Obviously, this is predicated on being disciplined and actually saving the difference and not upsizing my standard of living to match the higher income.

Furthermore, there are many other factors that can push the equation one way or the other. How long will I live? If I live to be 110, the military pension might be the better way to go. What rate of return will I actually achieve? If I can do better than 5%, then it's probably better to separate early (Earning a 7% rate of return means I would then only need to earn $70K more per year than my military job). How much of a factor are taxes? How much extra might I earn at a civilian job with an 8-yr head start?

This is a very complex issue and one that I am constantly grappling with as my separation date looms in the horizon. However, after analyzing the numbers, I feel more confident that separating at the 12 year mark has a low risk of harming me financially (at least in my specialty). In fact, there is a good chance I may come out ahead. Even if I were to take a lower paying job and come out a bit behind, the decision to get out will probably be worth a "happiness fee."

 

[denali]

I've 3 years left till my ADSO's up, then 3 years till retirement. I came back in with the intent to retire, well aware of the economics involved. Every time though, I envy my colleagues dropping their papers.

 

[Chonal Atresia]

When it comes down to it, you can't put a price on freedom. Military medicine will chew you up, spit you out and not blink an eye in the process. The medical corps is not just a sinking ship - it is a torpedoed disaster with a nurse captain. Get out while you can. To borrow a line from another post, grab your bag of popcorn, kick up your feet and watch the train wreck happen in real time from the comfort of the civilian world.

 

[Perrotfish]

When it comes down to it, you can't put a price on freedom. Military medicine will chew you up, spit you out and not blink an eye in the process. The medical corps is not just a sinking ship - it is a torpedoed disaster with a nurse captain. Get out while you can. To borrow a line from another post, grab your bag of popcorn, kick up your feet and watch the train wreck happen in real time from the comfort of the civilian world.

Whenever I hear someone say 'you can't put a price on...' What follows is almost always the prelude to, or justification for, a catastrophic financial decision.

 

[colbgw02]

Whenever I hear someone say 'you can't put a price on...' What follows is almost always the prelude to, or justification for, a catastrophic financial decision.

All these years and I had no idea this was a parody poster. Live and learn.

 

[Perrotfish]

All these years and I had no idea this was a parody poster. Live and learn.

To clarify: there are things you can't put a price on, and there are good reasons to do a lot of things that aren't financially advantageous. However I've noticed whenever I hear someone SAY 'you can't put a price on...' whatever what comes next is almost always very poor financial decision made for transient emotional reasons. It's the 'hey, hold my beer' of financial planning.

Examples of things people say they can't put a price on, and what they tend to mean:

Love
Translation: you agreed to pay 75K for your wedding

Memories
Translation: You're in a five star hotel on a two star budget. Alternatively you just bought a boat.

Dignity
Translation: You just told your boss to f- himself. You don't have another job lined up.

Peace of mind
Translation: You're over insured

Freedom
Translation: To avoid 2 more years of full time work at your crappy job with a non-physician nurse boss, you will instead work full time for 20 years at a slightly less crappy job with a non-physician MBA boss.

Just a personal opinion. And I'm in no way saying everyone who has been in for 4, 8, or 12 years should stay to 20. If the goal is to maximize happiness, and you hate your job in the military, then 8+ years of misery is a lot to trade for even 20+ years of part time work and/or an early retirement. I do, however, think the guy getting out at 18 years is out of his f-ing mind.

 

[DrMetal]

Another way to compare pension value to a.

Is there a Navy equivalent to this Captain's Career course bullsheeeeat? I hope not, I'm coming up for O-4. Honestly, for the Navy, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of necessary extra military training required in order to promote, am I right? [There's of course the NKO GMT courses, done best at home with a 6-pack, and the yearly dont-grope-your-neighbor (ie SAPR) training . . . but is there anything else?]

 

[pgg]

I've been following this thread with interest and there have been some great posts. I think the calculations above are very logical, but they don't account for the magic of compound interest, which can lend significant weight to the argument for leaving early.

Your example is well taken. It's a complicated subject. Money now IS worth more than money later. Compounding market gains, inflation, and taxes are hard to predict and account for.


The main problem I have with your math is that (I think) you're neglecting the effect of taxes during those first 8 civilian years. You can't save/invest $90K per year by earning an extra $90K/year. Because you're a high earner in that sweet civilian gig, much of that $90K is going to be have to be post-tax money going into a taxable brokerage account. Figure your federal marginal rate will be at least 33% plus another 5-10% state, say 40% as a conservative guess. In order to save that extra $90K, you need to be earning an extra $150K.

Which may still be possible depending on specialty. For my specialty, a senior .mil anesthsiologist under an MSP contract might make $250K or a bit more ... could I walk out and step into a position making $400K W-2? (Perhaps $475K if 1099?) Sure, those jobs are out there. Are they secure for the next 8 years (and beyond)? Magic 8-ball is fuzzy.


Also, 5% growth sounds reasonable, but what you really mean there is 5% real growth which probably means nominal growth closer to 8% to account for inflation. My personal bias is that I think 5% real returns are going to be very difficult to achieve over the next decade or two. (For one thing, fixed income options are horrendously bad right now.)

There's inflation risk in the military pension too, but it's a different kind of risk - it's an inflation indexed pension, so its inflation risk comes from the government's habit of understating real inflation with its official CPI figures. They said it was 1.7% for 2012, which I don't fully believe. Here's where political beliefs and prognostications cloud the issue further.


And much depends on when you retire for good. The pension path looks stronger with earlier retirement dates. When I crunched my numbers, I used a target of age 60 for retirement. Later retirement dates amplify the benefit of getting out and saving huge piles of money early.

There is value and security in diversification, and a government pension adds something there that can't be had in the financial markets, outside of annuities, which have their own cost premiums and risks.


Anther confounding factor is moonlighting. Some specialties, some commands, some times, some people can make an extra $50K, $100K or more on the side. How do you figure this into the math? I've got a nice side job now, but I'm PCS'ing in a year and maybe instead of a slow .mil job plus 4-6 civilian shifts per month, I'll be overworked at my .mil job and not moonlighting at all.


What we need is a good, unbiased retirement calculator that allows one to fiddle with all these factors. The stay-or-go calculators on the .mil web sites all suck and can't possibly be called unbiased. Maybe I'll make one next time I'm on call and stuck in the hospital waiting on someone's cervix.


I really do appreciate the comments and the time you put into responding.

 

[pgg]

Is there a Navy equivalent to this Captain's Career course bullsheeeeat? I hope not, I'm coming up for O-4. Honestly, for the Navy, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of necessary extra military training required in order to promote, am I right? [There's of course the NKO GMT courses, done best at home with a 6-pack, and the yearly dont-grope-your-neighbor (ie SAPR) training . . . but is there anything else?]

O4 is absolutely automatic, I wouldn't sweat it at all. Make sure your record has a current photo, no gaps, and nobody else's court martial misplaced in your file, and then don't give it another thought.


There's AMDOC. Two weeks, they hold it a bunch of times per year I think.

http://www.med.navy.mil/sites/navmedmpte/courses/Pages/AdvancedMedicalDepartmentOfficerCourse.aspx

I haven't done it. I suppose it couldn't hurt for the O5 board, but nobody I know who's made O5 has taken it.

 

[pgg]

To clarify: there are things you can't put a price on, and there are good reasons to do a lot of things that aren't financially advantageous. However I've noticed whenever I hear someone SAY 'you can't put a price on...' whatever what comes next is almost always very poor financial decision made for transient emotional reasons. It's the 'hey, hold my beer' of financial planning.

Examples of things people say they can't put a price on, and what they tend to mean:

Love
Translation: you agreed to pay 75K for your wedding

Memories
Translation: You're in a five star hotel on a two star budget. Alternatively you just bought a boat.

Dignity
Translation: You just told your boss to f- himself. You don't have another job lined up.

Peace of mind
Translation: You're over insured

Freedom
Translation: To avoid 2 more years of full time work at your crappy job with a non-physician nurse boss, you will instead work full time for 20 years at a slightly less crappy job with a non-physician MBA boss.

Just a personal opinion. And I'm in no way saying everyone who has been in for 4, 8, or 12 years should stay to 20. If the goal is to maximize happiness, and you hate your job in the military, then 8+ years of misery is a lot to trade for even 20+ years of part time work and/or an early retirement. I do, however, think the guy getting out at 18 years is out of his f-ing mind.

Well put, good examples.


It's human to believe what you want to believe. I did the math, signed the MSP contract, and am committed to a 20-year career now ... it takes real effort to be objective when I think and write about this. It's easy to look for reasons to reassure myself about my decision, and minimize the factors that might suggest it was the wrong one.