“When I’m done pulling a trigger, I’m done with the Corps. I don’t want a staff job, I want to lead grunts,” the Lieutenant said.

And I heard it from a lot of Lieutentants and Captains while I was in Iraq.

The New York Times, in its latest edition–sky is falling, leak in the damn, little boy crying wolf–reporting has this headline:

“Young Officers Leaving Army at a High Rate”

And then provides us with this chart.

Uh…I’m not quite getting the story.

According to chart, the year with the highest loss rate was 1999 and then it fell before 9/11.

The major up-tick occurred two years ago, but is still below the high of 1999–the era of Clinton, no war and perfect prosperity according to the NYT–and appears to have leveled off or may even be falling again.

According to an August 14, 2000, article in the NYT, the average turnover rate at U.S. companies is 17%. In companies with 5,000 or more employees, the turnover rate is 25%.

So, the Army is beating the corporate average. But you will never see this headline:

“Army Retains More Employees Than Fortune 500″

The NYT reporter, Thom Shanker, includes this nugget of incisive analysis:

“the ground forces are carrying the heaviest burden of deployments — and injuries and deaths — in the war.”

Before stumbling upon one of the main reasons junior infantry officers resign:

“With the rotation of one year overseas, then another year or so back at home, then another overseas rotation — it does take a toll on you,” said Mr. Kuo, who served a year in combat in northern Iraq. “Plus, I was not enjoying the staff jobs — desk jobs — I was looking at for the next 8 to 10 years.”

Once an infantry officer moves from Platoon Commander to Company Commander, he spends years in staff positions, schools and working as a bureacrat in fatigues before he would have the chance to command at the battalion level.

Many infantry officers I met would be content to spend their careers as Platoon or Company commanders, but in the military, you move on, up or out.

Wanting to stay a Company Commander and leading grunts on missions is a concept unfathomable to most reporters.

Rather than spend 10 years shuffling paper, many infantry officers hang up their armor and become cops, federal agents or decide to become civillians.

The NYT’s Shanker also spends a lot of ink on West Point graduates–which is something I have a little bit of experience with.

Years ago I was able to sit in on some interviews with applicants to West Point.

All the young students were incredibly bright, upstanding, over achievers. But very few were warriors. Many of them were destined for an upper tier colleges and thought of West Point as another Ivy League school.

When asked, in a very creative way by a retired infantry officer, if any of them wanted to be a Platoon commander and lead men into a firefight, and if that was their motivation for applying to West Point, none them answered in the affirmative.

In my experience, some of the best infantry officers do not come from Annapolis or West Point, but from Memphis State and other state colleges you have never heard of.

Why? Because like the young applicants I watched, many academy grads see a West Point or Annapolis education as a plum, not as a way to be an infantry officer.

Also, it does not seem to occur to the NYT’s Shanker that some officers join up knowing they are only going to do four years. They wanted to serve, they have served and now want to go in another direction.

But, that does not fit the NYT’s line so it is not pursued or even mentioned.

Of course, I am waiting for this headline from the NYT:

“Army Fails to Retain 100%, Some Generals and Sr. Staff NCOs forced to retire due to old age.”

This entry was posted on Sunday, April 9th, 2006 at 11:37 pm and is filed under MSM. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.