“The military is about war. “
Well the author undestands this. Maybe we should let the recruits know this as well (it is a closely guarded secret?).
“I was about $60,000 in debt from student loans. ... and had completed three years of college “
Given such irresponsible spending habits, i would recommend that the (fictitious) person do something drastic. Joining up might be a good solution. Both to obtain money and to - hopefully - learn fiscal responsibility.
“When I met with the recruiters in their downtown Manhattan office, they kept holding out their golden ring: money. “
Employers should not be allowed to entice potential employees with cash. It is, after all, rather crass. (I wonder, do other employers use this despicable strategy?)
“Would recruiters really need to lie, harass and push their way into public schools “
They should not. They should merely be invited in.
“These recruiters offer what society doesn
Posted by wolf on Apr 19, 2006 at 7:51 AM
Wolf
We seem to take opposite sides on almost every debate. ;)
Employers should not be allowed to entice potential employees with cash. It is, after all, rather crass. (I wonder, do other employers use this despicable strategy?)
There is a major difference between the Military and say, Acme Inc. offering a given compensation package. If you were to sign on with Acme, Inc. for position X and they paid you less than was promised, you could simply quit. The Military, on the other hand, cannot be ditched so easily. Once they’ve got your signature on your enlistment agreement…
The focus of the article is that recruitment officers promise compensation packages that often do not ever materialize once the recruit has signed on. They’re quick to rifle off the top-tier benefits at a potential recruit, often failing to mention any of the stipulations, with full knowledge that many candidates will not qualify for most of them. Many low-income kids, desperate to succeed somehow, are eager to believe that a military officer would represent the offers honestly. Many are wrong.
When I was nearing High-School graduation, I looked into enlisting as a possible option. Wanting to compare the various branches, not only to get multiple offers, but to fact check the various recruiting officers against each other, I visited two Army stations, one Air-Force, and one National Guard. Each one gave me a similar speech, though the Air-Force was lower pressure (I’d imagine theat the Air-Force’s quotas are smaller,) and, after listening to the promises and speeches of each recruiter I agreed to enlist with one condition:
The promises of college money, compensation package, and job would need to be added to an amendment of my enlistment agreement, and that the amendment would need to include a recourse from changes to the amended sections.
Both Army recruiters flatly refused, acting very offended that I would even suggest their word wasn’t gold. The Air-Force officer told me plainly that he didn’t have the authority to do so, but would see if it could be done. The National Guardsman said he would have it amended, and call me when the updated document was ready for my signature. He never called. The Air-Force recruiter called me a week later, saying that his superiors had refused to give me an amended enlistment agreement.
Quick to promise the world, but never in writing.
“I was about $60,000 in debt from student loans…”
“Given such irresponsible spending habits, i would recommend that the (fictitious) person do something drastic. Joining up might be a good solution. Both to obtain money and to - hopefully - learn fiscal responsibility.
Really, $60,000 in student loans is not an abnormally high amount. The school my sister currently attends is around $20,000 a year, and even with a partial scholarship she’ll still have almost $50,000 in school-loan debt by the time she graduates. If a low-income student wants to attend the best schools in the country, their debt could easily reach six-digit figures. Harvard, for example, is somewhere in the realm of $38,000 a year, over $150,000 for a four year degree.
—————————————
I’ve got no problem with military recruiters visiting schools, running recruiting drives, and the like, but they should not be allowed to promise so much, and deliver so little, to people who are quick to be taken in by promises of a better life.
Posted by Harrower on Apr 23, 2006 at 7:36 AM
Harrower - Given your experience, i wonder if there is a way to see if the military is giving significant amounts of false information to its potential recruits (either intentially or not). If so, i would suggest that rather than attempting to ban recruiters to campuses, the schools should offer a workshop on what to ask them. That is, to help those who do not have the wisdom you had at the end of high school.
The author represented herself as only 3 years into a degree, yet with $60K debt. This seems very very high to me. I would strongly discourage my children from such a large financial commitment, unless they thought that they might be making big bucks when they got out of school (much more than the military would offer). (While Havard is much more expensive than a state school, i doubt it is worth the differential for most people.)
The military clearly should be held accountable for their promises. Especially given that, as you say, once you sign the contract, you are in for the long haul (and even possibly longer).
Posted by wolf on Apr 24, 2006 at 7:50 AM
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
“The military is about war. “
Well the author undestands this. Maybe we should let the recruits know this as well (it is a closely guarded secret?).
“I was about $60,000 in debt from student loans. ... and had completed three years of college “
Given such irresponsible spending habits, i would recommend that the (fictitious) person do something drastic. Joining up might be a good solution. Both to obtain money and to - hopefully - learn fiscal responsibility.
“When I met with the recruiters in their downtown Manhattan office, they kept holding out their golden ring: money. “
Employers should not be allowed to entice potential employees with cash. It is, after all, rather crass. (I wonder, do other employers use this despicable strategy?)
“Would recruiters really need to lie, harass and push their way into public schools “
They should not. They should merely be invited in.
“These recruiters offer what society doesn
i belive that war is a way to settle a problem. even though it is violent it is better it fight than to quarl
im a stupid 18 yr old so i probably dont make scence, but im gonna join in a couple of days so im goin with sam
Wolf
We seem to take opposite sides on almost every debate. ;)
Employers should not be allowed to entice potential employees with cash. It is, after all, rather crass. (I wonder, do other employers use this despicable strategy?)
There is a major difference between the Military and say, Acme Inc. offering a given compensation package. If you were to sign on with Acme, Inc. for position X and they paid you less than was promised, you could simply quit. The Military, on the other hand, cannot be ditched so easily. Once they’ve got your signature on your enlistment agreement…
The focus of the article is that recruitment officers promise compensation packages that often do not ever materialize once the recruit has signed on. They’re quick to rifle off the top-tier benefits at a potential recruit, often failing to mention any of the stipulations, with full knowledge that many candidates will not qualify for most of them. Many low-income kids, desperate to succeed somehow, are eager to believe that a military officer would represent the offers honestly. Many are wrong.
When I was nearing High-School graduation, I looked into enlisting as a possible option. Wanting to compare the various branches, not only to get multiple offers, but to fact check the various recruiting officers against each other, I visited two Army stations, one Air-Force, and one National Guard. Each one gave me a similar speech, though the Air-Force was lower pressure (I’d imagine theat the Air-Force’s quotas are smaller,) and, after listening to the promises and speeches of each recruiter I agreed to enlist with one condition:
The promises of college money, compensation package, and job would need to be added to an amendment of my enlistment agreement, and that the amendment would need to include a recourse from changes to the amended sections.
Both Army recruiters flatly refused, acting very offended that I would even suggest their word wasn’t gold. The Air-Force officer told me plainly that he didn’t have the authority to do so, but would see if it could be done. The National Guardsman said he would have it amended, and call me when the updated document was ready for my signature. He never called. The Air-Force recruiter called me a week later, saying that his superiors had refused to give me an amended enlistment agreement.
Quick to promise the world, but never in writing.
“I was about $60,000 in debt from student loans…”
“Given such irresponsible spending habits, i would recommend that the (fictitious) person do something drastic. Joining up might be a good solution. Both to obtain money and to - hopefully - learn fiscal responsibility.
Really, $60,000 in student loans is not an abnormally high amount. The school my sister currently attends is around $20,000 a year, and even with a partial scholarship she’ll still have almost $50,000 in school-loan debt by the time she graduates. If a low-income student wants to attend the best schools in the country, their debt could easily reach six-digit figures. Harvard, for example, is somewhere in the realm of $38,000 a year, over $150,000 for a four year degree.
—————————————
I’ve got no problem with military recruiters visiting schools, running recruiting drives, and the like, but they should not be allowed to promise so much, and deliver so little, to people who are quick to be taken in by promises of a better life.
Harrower - Given your experience, i wonder if there is a way to see if the military is giving significant amounts of false information to its potential recruits (either intentially or not). If so, i would suggest that rather than attempting to ban recruiters to campuses, the schools should offer a workshop on what to ask them. That is, to help those who do not have the wisdom you had at the end of high school.
The author represented herself as only 3 years into a degree, yet with $60K debt. This seems very very high to me. I would strongly discourage my children from such a large financial commitment, unless they thought that they might be making big bucks when they got out of school (much more than the military would offer). (While Havard is much more expensive than a state school, i doubt it is worth the differential for most people.)
The military clearly should be held accountable for their promises. Especially given that, as you say, once you sign the contract, you are in for the long haul (and even possibly longer).
register a new account »Posting Security