During the early and mid-1990s, when the military reduced personnel levels, retention was not a primary concern. However, DOD and Congress have long recognized that some servicemembers, particularly those in certain technical areas, can be difficult to retain. In 1998, DOD raised concerns about retention overall and about the quality and readiness of its forces. In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee in September 1998, the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified that retention rates had declined force-wide and within specific critical occupations. In response to these concerns, Congress increased military pay across-the-board and repealed legislation that lowered retirement benefits for some military personnel. In the last quarter of fiscal year 2000, the services reported they were generally successful in retaining more personnel at the aggregate level but were still concerned about readiness in selected critical skill areas. To determine which occupations were of greatest concern, we asked DOD and each of the services to identify and prioritize occupations they deemed retention-critical due to their impact on force readiness. In response, the services identified 64 service-specific occupations as retention-critical. To make comparisons between the different service occupations possible, we used DOD's occupational coding scheme to organize each of the service occupations into broader occupational groupings. For example, each of the services identified radio and radar repair personnel as a retention-critical occupation. Using DOD's occupational coding scheme, radio and radar repairers fall within the electronic equipment repair occupational area. All of our analyses were conducted at this occupational area level. By organizing the service occupations into their respective groups and ultimately into occupational areas, we were able to consolidate the services' list of 64 retention-critical occupations into 16 occupational groups and then further into three occupational areas (see table 1). In a November 2000 report to Congress, DOD acknowledged that the services had shortages in some critical skill areas. Although concerned, DOD indicated it was working with each service to prioritize the use of available personnel and planned to continue focusing on pockets of retention problems within critical skill areas. DOD officials attribute retention problems in certain occupations to factors such as the growth of civilian job opportunities, the negative impact of increasing military operations, and servicemembers' concerns over benefits and quality-of-life conditions. The expectations and experiences of personnel serving in retention- critical occupations were similar to those of other enlisted personnel (see fig. 1). We examined data from DOD's 1999 Active Duty Survey, which asked respondents to recall their expectations upon entry and how their experiences met these expectations. Most enlisted personnel did not intend to make the military a career when they joined. Nearly half (47 percent) were unsure of their career intentions when they first joined the military. About one-quarter (26 percent) indicated they had planned to leave at the end of their initial obligation. Another one-quarter (27 percent) planned to remain in the military until retirement. Those serving in retention-critical occupations reported similar career expectations when they first joined the military. Historically, the services have reported having a difficult time keeping personnel beyond their first term of enlistment. Although 27 percent reported wanting to stay for at least a 20 years, the DOD Actuary has found that only about 16 percent of the enlisted force actually do stay that long. In responding to survey questions about whether military life was better or worse than expected when they first joined, more than 70 percent of all enlisted personnel indicated military life was better than they expected or about what they expected when they first joined. Conversely, nearly 30 percent of all enlisted personnel, including those in retention-critical occupations, indicated that life in the military was worse than they expected when they first joined. Again, the responses of those in retention- critical occupations were similar to those of other enlisted personnel. To compare personnel in retention-critical occupations to other enlisted personnel, we developed profiles using survey questions from DOD's 1999 Survey of Active Duty Personnel. These profiles made it possible to compare the responses of retention-critical personnel in each occupational area against those of other enlisted personnel. By doing these comparisons, we could identify differences in the expectations and experiences between enlisted personnel serving in retention-critical occupations and other enlisted personnel. To measure expectations, we analyzed survey questions regarding what enlisted servicemembers' recalled their career intentions were when they first entered the military. We also analyzed their responses to survey questions about whether military life had met the expectations they had when they first entered military service. Figure 1 shows no significant differences between personnel serving in retention-critical occupations and other enlisted personnel regarding their career intent and their expectations for what military life would be like when they first entered the military. We defined a significant and meaningful difference to exist between the responses of retention-critical personnel and other enlisted personnel if their responses differed by ±7 percentage points. The experiences of retention-critical personnel varied somewhat by occupational area, but overall, they were generally similar to the experiences of other enlisted personnel. To measure enlisted servicemembers' experiences, we analyzed their responses to DOD survey questions about issues that reflect some of the top concerns that have been raised by servicemembers and service leadership in recent years. The survey asked (1) how many hours servicemembers reported working during their last full workweek, (2) how much they had been deployed during the previous 12-month period, (3) how well their units were staffed, and (4) how well their units were equipped. These issues were cited in a recent report to Congress as exacerbating retention problems within certain critical occupations. Our analysis of the survey data revealed that although some areas of concern exist within one retention-critical occupational area, these concerns are not as serious in the other two retention-critical occupational areas. For instance, more personnel serving in electrical and mechanical equipment repair occupations reported staffing and parts and equipment concerns compared to other enlisted personnel (see fig. 2), but the concerns of those in the other two retention- critical occupational areas were similar to those of other enlisted personnel. Enlisted personnel in retention-critical occupations reported working roughly the same number of hours as did other enlisted personnel. Concerns have been prevalent in recent years that servicemembers work longer hours because there are fewer staff and workloads have increased. Overall, most servicemembers reported working long hours; nearly half (47 percent) reported they worked 51 hours or more during their last full workweek, and nearly one quarter (23 percent) reported working 61 or more hours. Those serving in retention-critical occupations deployed at roughly the same rate as did other enlisted personnel. In recent years, DOD and others have raised concerns about the increasing number of deployments and the toll these deployments are taking on military personnel. About 19 percent of the entire enlisted force reported being away from home for 5 or more months during the 12 months prior to completing the survey. Excessive time away from home is believed to have a negative impact on servicemembers' overall satisfaction and thus retention intent. The survey data revealed that personnel away from home for more than 5 months during the previous 12 months were more likely to be dissatisfied than were those away for 1 month or less. Relative to other enlisted personnel, a higher percentage of electrical and mechanical equipment repair personnel (44 percent) reported their units were poorly staffed. Overall, more than one-third (37 percent) of all enlisted personnel reported staffing problems in their unit. Recent readiness reports show that staffing shortages adversely impacted unit readiness. In one readiness report to Congress, the Air Force reported that retention shortfalls created an experience imbalance in some key skill areas. The same report indicated that although mission-capable rates for aircraft stabilized, the Air Force was concerned that "low retention of experienced maintenance personnel could cause these rates to once again decline or remain at low levels." Parts and equipment shortfalls were of greater concern to personnel serving in retention-critical electrical and mechanical equipment repair occupations. Forty-five percent voiced concerns about parts and equipment problems compared to 34 percent of other enlisted personnel. To gauge the readiness impact of parts and equipment shortages, the survey asked respondents to rate their unit's preparedness regarding parts and equipment from well prepared to poorly prepared. While a significantly higher proportion of those personnel serving in electrical and mechanical equipment repair occupations raised concerns compared to other enlisted personnel, more than one-third of all enlisted personnel rated their units' preparedness as poor regarding parts and equipment. Overall, satisfaction with military life and intent to stay in the military among retention-critical personnel was similar to that expressed by other enlisted personnel. More enlisted personnel (46 percent) indicated that they were satisfied with the military way of life than were dissatisfied (30 percent). Personnel in retention-critical occupations were as likely as other enlisted personnel to plan for a full 20-year military career. Nearly half (49 percent), of all enlisted personnel indicated that they expected to serve for 20 years or more (see fig. 3). Nearly half (46 percent) of all enlisted personnel were satisfied with the military way of life, one-third (30 percent) were dissatisfied, and about a quarter (23 percent) were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. Close to 50 percent of all enlisted personnel, indicated that compensation was the primary reason for staying in and for leaving the military. In addition to a question about overall satisfaction with the military way of life, DOD's survey asked 37 questions concerning satisfaction with specific aspects of life in the military. These questions asked servicemembers to rate their satisfaction with issues such as basic pay, health care, leadership, and deployments, among others. In addition to expressing their level of satisfaction with each survey item, servicemembers identified their first and second reasons for staying/considering staying or leaving/considering leaving the military from the list of 37 aspects of military life. To simplify our analysis and gain a broader perspective for the areas of greatest concern to servicemembers, we used a statistical procedure called "factor analysis" to consolidate the 37 items into a number of overarching factors. We analyzed the top 10 factors including: compensation, military life, workload, personal health care, assignment stability, career progression, deployments, family friendliness, family health care, and co-location of military spouse. For all enlisted personnel, compensation was identified as both the top reason to stay and the top reason to leave the military. The compensation factor comprised several types of military pay, including: basic pay, special and incentive pay, bonus/continuation pay, retirement pay, housing allowance, subsistence allowance, and cost of living adjustments. Of the various types of compensation, basic pay was the top reason cited by enlisted personnel to either stay in or leave the military. Some of the other reasons to stay included assignment stability, military life, workload, and career progression. The top five reasons for staying in or for leaving the military can be found in table 2. The overall responses of retention-critical personnel to the individual items that comprise the broader categories shown in table 2 were also similar to those of other enlisted personnel. Of the 37 aspects of military life that comprise these broader categories, the top 5 reasons for staying in or leaving the military were generally similar for all enlisted personnel. Basic pay (included as an element of the broader compensation category) was cited as the top reason for both staying in and for leaving the military. Job security, retirement pay, job enjoyment, and medical care for family also appeared in the top five reasons for staying in the military for both retention-critical and other enlisted personnel. For all enlisted personnel the amount of family time, quality of leadership, amount of job enjoyment, and deployments, were cited as top reasons for leaving. More detailed information about the top reasons retention-critical personnel stay in and leave the military may be found in occupational appendices III through V. The intent of those in retention-critical occupations to remain in the military for a 20-year career was virtually the same as for other enlisted personnel. In response to one question asking how many total years of service they expected to have when they finally left the military, nearly 50 percent of all enlisted personnel indicated they planned to stay in the military for 20 years or more. Personnel in all three retention-critical occupational areas had similar career intentions. Unlike personnel in civilian occupations, military personnel are not vested in their retirement plan until they have served 20 years or more. This creates a disincentive for servicemembers to leave the military. As a servicemember moves closer to retirement, the lure of an attractive civilian job may not be enough to cause them to be willing to forfeit all retirement credit garnered to that point. In recent years, DOD and others have cited the strong U.S. economy as a main reason why military personnel, especially those in retention-critical occupations, leave the military. Overall, enlisted personnel tend to perceive that many aspects of civilian life are attractive (see fig. 4). Seventy percent of the enlisted force believed their quality of life would be better as a civilian than as a military member. Over 70 percent believed they could make an easy transition into a civilian occupation and nearly 60 percent thought that the civilian labor market offered many options. According to officials from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, this belief is difficult to quantify but probably accurate, since the training and documented work history of these personnel make them very attractive to civilian employers. These employers tend to be very positive toward former military personnel, and it is likely that these personnel have an advantage over their civilian counterparts. Personnel in some retention-critical occupation areas were more confident that they could do well in the civilian world compared to other enlisted personnel. Electronic equipment repairers were more optimistic about jobs in the civilian world compared to other enlisted personnel or to personnel in the other two retention-critical occupation areas. About three-quarters of the electronic equipment repairers believed the quality of civilian life would be better, their skills would transfer easily, and it would be easy for them to find a civilian job. Electrical and mechanical equipment repairers were about as optimistic as other enlisted personnel regarding jobs in the civilian world. The perceptions of personnel serving in retention-critical occupations were mixed. To the extent they have marketable skills, the perceptions of those in retention-critical occupations were equally or more positive than other enlisted personnel. Some felt that translating their skills directly into a civilian occupation would be difficult. For instance, those serving in communications and intelligence occupations were much less positive about their ease of transition and ability to find a civilian job than were other enlisted personnel. This may be because the occupational area is made up of several occupations that may not have direct civilian counterparts. Sonar and electronics warfare specialists, for example, may not have a direct translation of their skills into a civilian occupation. Unfortunately, it was not possible for us to fully examine the responses of personnel in these individual occupation groups to assess their specific perceptions of civilian life. Asked about more specific aspects of civilian life, most enlisted personnel believed that the amount of personal family time, total compensation, number of hours worked in a week, and general quality of life would be better in the civilian world. In addition, most enlisted personnel also believed promotion opportunities would be better in the civilian world. However, almost half of all enlisted personnel viewed vacation time, education opportunities, and health care as being better in the military. We provided a draft of this report to the Office of the Secretary of Defense for comment. The Department concurred with our report. In addition, the Department indicated it is important that the retention-critical occupations provided by the services be viewed as a "snapshot in time," and the occupations cited in our report represent those that were deemed retention-critical at the time of submission to GAO. According to DOD, these career fields, along with their priority order, periodically change as a result of many factors. The full text of the Department's comments appears in Appendix II. The Department also suggested some technical changes, which we incorporated as appropriate. Appendix I contains our objectives, scope, and methodology. Appendix II contains DOD's comments on this report. Appendixes III, IV, and V provide a detailed analysis of the survey responses for each occupational area. We are sending copies of this report to appropriate congressional committees; the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense; and David S. C. Chu, Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel and Readiness. Copies will also be made available to other interested parties upon request. If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at 202-512-5559. A list of additional contacts and staff acknowledgments is in appendix VI. Reliable assessments of military climate are essential for congressional policymakers as they consider the quality-of-life proposals offered by the Department of Defense (DOD). Our analysis of DOD's retention-critical occupations relied on such a survey. To obtain this data, we worked with the Department to design the 1999 Survey of Active Duty Personnel. It was mailed in the fall of 1999 to a stratified, random sample of over 66,000 military personnel. DOD provided the final survey data to us in late 2000. We performed our work between September 2000 and June 2001 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Technical details about the survey and our analysis of retention-critical occupations follow. Our objective in assessing retention-critical occupations was to determine if there were any significant differences between the responses of retention-critical enlisted personnel and other enlisted personnel. We defined a significant and meaningful difference as a ±7 percent difference between the responses of retention-critical personnel and other enlisted personnel. Our analysis focused on three areas: (1) what were the expectations and experiences of enlisted personnel, (2) how satisfied were they with military life and what were their career intentions, and (3) what were their perceptions of civilian work opportunities and quality of life. DOD's 1999 Survey of Active Duty Personnel helped us identify differences in these areas. This report refers to the enlisted population in three different ways: all enlisted personnel, retention-critical personnel, and other enlisted personnel. The first, all enlisted personnel, is comprised of the entire enlisted force and refers to the projected responses of the entire enlisted population. The second, "retention-critical" personnel, refers to only those personnel whose service identified their occupation as retention-critical. The third, "other enlisted personnel," refers to those enlisted personnel that were not a part of the specific retention-critical occupation area analyzed. For example, our analysis of electronic-equipment repairers compared the responses of personnel within this retention-critical occupation area to the responses of all "other enlisted personnel," which included the responses of personnel in the other two retention-critical occupation areas. The active duty survey is a recurring survey that DOD last administered in 1992. When the Department learned that the Subcommittee on Military Personnel had asked us to administer a separate survey to military personnel, the Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force Management Policy) offered to allow us to include questions on the survey DOD was already planning to conduct. We then worked with DOD staff to refine the survey instrument and address additional content areas. The survey was pretested and refined at Navy bases around Jacksonville, Florida; Pope Air Force Base, Fayetteville, North Carolina; and the U.S. Marine base at Quantico, Virginia. Time constraints prevented additional pretesting with Army and Coast Guard personnel beyond that already conducted by DOD on an earlier version of the survey. The sample of 66,040 military members was drawn from a May 1999 population of 1,419,269 active duty DOD and U.S. Coast Guard personnel who were below the rank of admiral or general and had at least 6 months of service. The sample was stratified on five variables: service; pay grade; gender; location; that is, inside or outside the continental United States; and marital status. DOD survey experts used response rates from prior surveys to adjust the sample for groups with differing expected rates of survey completion. Also, the sample was designed to provide varying levels of precision for numerous subgroups (e.g., + 3 percentage points for each service or pay grade group and + 5 percentage points for senior officers in the Army). As of January 2000, DOD had received 37,119 surveys between the start of the survey administration and the end of the fielding period. Some surveys were eliminated because they (1) had been returned blank, (2) were duplicates from the same individual, or (3) came from respondents who had left active duty before the fielding period ended. DOD computed a weighted response rate of 51 percent. The Department used a contractor to administer the survey. We did not test the contractor's procedures or validate the data provided to us. We did review DOD's and its contractor's quality control procedures for a similar large survey. Data were weighted to reflect the population of interest. The weights reflected (1) the probability of selection for that servicemember, (2) a nonresponse adjustment to minimize bias arising from differential response rates among demographic subgroups, and (3) a post- stratification factor for September 1999—the month in which the questionnaire was first distributed. DOD assumed that nonrespondents would have answered like respondents—an often-used assumption in survey methodologies. There is some risk of nonresponse bias, but it would take elaborate and time- consuming work to test for this bias. In recent years, both military and civilian surveys have experienced decreased response rates. Although weighting can adjust for the differing sampling rates and response rates within the sampling cells, it cannot adjust for possible differences between those who do and those who do not respond to a survey. However, the active duty survey is the only source of DOD-wide information for many issues, and it is far more reliable than anecdotal information or information generated by smaller, nonrepresentative samples. To obtain a list of retention-critical occupations, we asked each of the services to identify occupations they considered retention-critical because of their impact on readiness. The services identified a total of 64 occupations deemed retention-critical. Since each service uses a unique occupational coding scheme, we used DOD's Occupational Conversion Index to convert groups of service occupation codes into a common set of occupation codes that make it possible to compare similar occupations across all the services. Although the work performed within these occupations may differ from service to service, the skills they require are similar enough to make comparisons possible. For example, DOD's index makes it possible to group all personnel who do radio and radar repair work into a single occupation area. We organized all 64 occupations into their respective occupational groups, then further consolidated these 16 groups into 3 occupational areas. The DOD coding scheme is organized into three levels of detail: an aggregate level (one-digit) called an "occupational area," a middle level (two-digits) called an "occupational group," and a more detailed level (three-digits) called an "occupational subgroup." Since DOD's survey was not specifically designed to gather information about military occupations, our analysis focused predominantly on the occupational area because a more detailed analysis would have limited the precision of our results. Conducting our analysis at the occupational area level provided a large enough sample size to make our analysis more precise. The occupations identified by each of the services as retention-critical are shown in table 3. The Air Force identified 21 occupations (see table 4) considered retention- critical, however, it normally does not classify its occupations as retention- critical. Rather, efforts are made to retain all personnel regardless of specialty. To this end, the Air Force sets aggregate reenlistment goals based on years of service rather than occupation. For example, the Air Force currently wants to retain 55 percent of its first term, 75 percent of its second term, and 95 percent of its career enlisted personnel. According to Air Force officials, these reenlistment goals are used because they represent historically observed levels during "good" force sustainment periods. The Army identified 12 occupations it considered retention-critical (see table 5). They define retention-critical as an occupation with historic staffing shortfalls that are 10 percent below an Army average by grade and occupation. As shown in table 6, the Marine Corps identified 13 occupations it considered retention-critical. The Marine Corps defines retention-critical occupations based upon each occupation's strategic importance and the difficulty it has retaining personnel in the occupation. The Navy identified 18 occupations as retention-critical (see table 7). It defines retention-critical as any occupation filled significantly below authorized levels, traditionally hard to fill, difficult to train, strategic due to the skills required, and having the greatest number of opportunities in the private sector. We compared the survey responses of personnel serving in retention- critical occupations to those of other enlisted personnel. Significant and meaningful differences were judged to exist if percentages between the groups varied by at least ±7 percentage points. Each occupational profile was comprised of the same set of survey questions. To ensure that our analysis represented only the responses of retention-critical personnel, we limited our review to responses from personnel whose service identified their occupation as retention-critical. For example, although all the services have personnel who serve in missile guidance control and checkout occupations—as defined by DOD's Occupational Conversion Index— only the Navy identified personnel in this occupation as retention critical and only the responses of Navy personnel were analyzed. Since DOD's survey was not designed specifically for an occupational analysis, the amount of detail we could provide in many occupational groups was limited. By consolidating the responses of the occupational groups into three larger occupational areas, we were able to obtain a large enough sample size to ensure our results were representative of that area. As a result, we were able to obtain a precision level of ±5 percent for most survey items. Electronic equipment repairers' expectations and experiences were similar to those of other enlisted personnel, as were their levels of satisfaction and retention intentions. Significantly more of these personnel had positive perceptions of their civilian opportunities compared to other enlisted personnel. More of them believed that both their general quality of life and compensation would be better in the civilian world and that they could easily find jobs if they left the military. Most believed their military skills would easily transfer into a civilian occupation. This set of beliefs leads to the conclusion that these personnel are being pulled out of the military rather than pushed out, as some have thought. Within the, electronic equipment repairer occupational area, the services identified retention-critical occupations that fit within five DOD occupation groups. These occupational groups were radio and radar repair; fire control electronic systems (nonmissile); missile guidance, control and checkout; sonar equipment repair; and other electronic equipment repair occupations. Personnel in these occupational groups perform a variety of maintenance and repair services on electronic equipment, including radio, radar, navigation, weapons, and computers, among other things. Table 8 describes each occupation and provides details about the number of survey respondents, including the size of the enlisted population their responses were projected to represent. Some occupation groups are common across all the services, but not all the services identified the same occupation groups as being retention-critical. Our analysis included only the responses of personnel whose occupation groups were identified as retention-critical. Personnel that work within the same occupation group, but whose service did not identify that group as retention-critical were excluded from our analysis. The occupations described in table 8 are only those that each service identified as retention-critical. The survey asked servicemembers to recall what their career intentions were when the first entered the military. The career intentions of those serving in electronic equipment repair occupations, upon entering the military, were basically the same as other enlisted personnel (see fig. 5). As with other enlisted personnel, electronic equipment repairers were mostly unsure (50 percent) about their career intentions when they first joined the military. The remaining personnel were fairly evenly split between those who intended to remain until retirement and those who intended to serve their initial obligation and leave. Electronic equipment repairers perceptions about how the military had met their expectations when they entered were similar to those of other enlisted personnel (see fig. 6). When asked how military life met the expectations they had when they first joined the military, around 40 percent of both electronic equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel indicated that life in the military was better than expected. About 30 percent indicated military life was about what they expected. Roughly 30 percent indicated military life was worse than expected. The experiences of those working in electronic equipment repair occupations were about the same as those for other enlisted personnel. They worked about as many hours, were away from home about as much, and reported their units were about as prepared regarding staffing and parts and equipment as other enlisted personnel. Overall, electronic equipment repairers reported working about the same number of hours as did other enlisted personnel. Over 40 percent reported working 51 hours or more during their previous workweek. About one- quarter indicated they worked 61 hours or more during their last full workweek (see fig. 7). Concerns have been raised in recent years that military personnel are away from home excessively. Electronic equipment repair personnel were away from home for roughly the same amount of time as other enlisted personnel. Overall, about one-fifth of both electronic equipment repairers (22 percent) and other enlisted personnel (19 percent) reported being away from home a total of 5 months or more during the previous year. Nearly half of each group reported they had been away for 1 month or less during the previous 12 months (see fig. 8). Concerns about having enough personnel were about the same for electronic equipment repairers as for other enlisted personnel. Nearly 40 percent of both the electronic equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel reported their unit's preparation was poor regarding staffing preparedness (see fig. 9). Parts and equipment preparedness has also been a major concern during recent years. Overall, more than one-third of other enlisted personnel indicated that parts and equipment preparedness was poor in their unit. Electronic equipment repairers provided a similar assessment (see fig. 10). A higher percentage of electronic equipment repairers were optimistic about their job prospects in the civilian sector compared to other enlisted personnel (see fig. 11). Significantly more electronic equipment repairers indicated they had a good idea of they types of civilian jobs that would be available to them and what these jobs would pay. A higher percentage also thought it would be easy to find a civilian job and that their skills would easily transfer. According to the Bureau for Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, this occupational area is expected to grow between 10 and 20 percent during the next 7 years. Much of this growth is expected to occur because of the increasing demand for sophisticated telecommunications equipment. Although projections vary depending on the occupational specialty, overall job prospects for those in electronic equipment repair occupations appear to be good. Overall, other enlisted personnel were also optimistic about their ability to find and transition into a civilian job. Figure 12 shows those areas where enlisted personnel saw civilian life as being better than military life. However, there were two significant differences between electronic equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel. More electronic equipment repairers indicated that total compensation and general quality of life would be better in the civilian world than in the military. Figure 13 shows four categories where electronic equipment repairers indicated military life was better than civilian life. Vacation time, health care benefits, education and training opportunities, and a sense of accomplishment were all seen as better in the military than in the civilian world. The only significant difference between the perceptions of electronic equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel was in regard to the amount of vacation time. A significantly higher percentage of the electronic equipment repairers indicated that vacation time was better in the military. Overall, electronic equipment repair personnel were generally as satisfied with the military way of life as were other enlisted personnel (see fig. 14). While nearly 45 percent of both groups indicated they were satisfied with the military way of life, another one-third indicated they were dissatisfied. Forty-five percent of electronic equipment repairers indicated they expect to serve 20 years or more before leaving the military. Figure 15 shows the career intentions of servicemembers based upon how many years of service they believed they would have in when they leave or retire from military service. Electronic equipment repairers' reasons for remaining in the military were similar to those of other enlisted personnel. Basic pay, job security, retirement benefits, job enjoyment, and medical care for family were all cited as top reasons for staying in the military. As with other enlisted personnel, basic pay appeared as the top reason for both staying in and leaving the military. There were no significant differences between the responses of electronic equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel in the 5 categories measured (see fig. 16). Electronic equipment repairers' reasons for leaving the military were similar to those of other enlisted personnel. The top five reasons for leaving the military included basic pay, amount of personal and family time, deployments, quality of leadership, and job enjoyment (see fig. 17). There were no significant differences between the responses of electronic equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel. The expectations, experiences, satisfaction and retention intentions of personnel working in communications and intelligence occupations were generally similar to those of other enlisted personnel. However, proportionally fewer of the communications and intelligence specialists had positive perceptions about civilian work opportunities than did other enlisted personnel. This likely reflects the diverse nature of the occupational area. While air traffic controllers have a clear civilian counterpart, sonar equipment operators may not have any comparable civilian occupations. Because of this, the results for some occupations within this occupational area may be less positive than for others. Within the communications and intelligence occupational area, the retention-critical occupations identified by the services fit within six occupation groups. These occupation groups were radio and radio code, sonar, radar and air traffic control, signal intelligence/electronic warfare, intelligence, and combat operations control. Personnel in these occupation groups are responsible for operating and monitoring radio, radar, sonar and communications and intelligence consoles, among other types of duties. They also gather and interpret photographic, electronic and documentary intelligence. Table 9 describes each occupation and provides details regarding the number of survey respondents and the size of the population their responses are projected to represent. Some occupation groups are common across all the services, but not all the services identified the same occupation groups as being retention-critical. Our analysis was conducted using only the responses of personnel whose occupation groups were identified by their service as retention-critical. Personnel that work within the same occupation group, but whose service did not identify that group as retention-critical were excluded from our analysis. The occupations described in table 9 are only those that each service identified as retention-critical. The expectations of those serving in communications and intelligence occupations were similar to those of other enlisted personnel. The survey asked servicemembers to recall what their career intentions were when they first entered the military. The career intent of communications and intelligence personnel when they entered the military was virtually the same as for other enlisted personnel. Figure 18 shows that communications and intelligence personnel were mostly unsure (50 percent), as were other enlisted personnel, about their career intentions when they first joined the military. The remaining personnel were fairly evenly split between those who intended to remain until retirement and those who intended to serve their initial obligation and leave. The perceptions of communications and intelligence specialists about how military life compared to the expectations they had when they entered were similar to those of other enlisted personnel (see fig. 19). When asked how military life met the expectations they had when they first joined the military, around 40 percent of both communications and intelligence specialists and other enlisted personnel indicated that life in the military was better than what they expected. About 30 percent indicated military life was about what they expected. Nearly 30 percent indicated military life was worse than expected. The experiences of communications and intelligence specialists were about the same as other enlisted personnel. They reported working as many hours, being away from home as much, and that their units were as prepared with regard to staffing and parts and equipment as did other enlisted personnel. Overall, communications and intelligence specialists and other enlisted personnel reported working long hours. Roughly 45 percent reported working 51 hours or more during their previous workweek. About one- fifth of each group indicated they worked 61 or more during their last full workweek. Significantly fewer communications and intelligence specialists reported working 61 hours or more, compared to other enlisted personnel (see fig. 20). Concerns have been raised in recent years that military personnel are away from home excessively. Communications and intelligence specialists reported being away from home as much as other enlisted personnel. About one-quarter of the communications and intelligence specialists and one-fifth of all other enlisted personnel reported being away from home for a total of 5 months or more during the previous year. More than 40 percent of each group reported they had been away for 1 month or less (see fig 21). Concerns about having adequate numbers of personnel were about the same for communications and intelligence personnel as for other enlisted personnel. Forty percent of the communications and intelligence specialists and 36 percent of other enlisted personnel reported their unit's preparation was poor regarding staffing preparedness (see fig. 22). Parts and equipment preparedness have also been a major concern during recent years. About one-third (36 percent) of the communications and intelligence personnel and a similar percentage of the other enlisted personnel indicated their unit's parts and equipment preparedness was poor (see fig. 23). A significantly smaller percentage of communications and intelligence specialists were optimistic about their job prospects in the civilian sector compared to other enlisted personnel (see fig. 24). Fewer indicated they knew what civilian jobs would be available to them, and they were less positive than other enlisted personnel about how easy it would be to find a civilian job. Compared to other enlisted personnel, a smaller proportion thought their skills would transfer easily into a civilian job. This is likely due to the diverse nature of the occupations that comprise this group. From air traffic controllers to sonar operators and intelligence specialists, this occupational area is comprised of a wide variety of occupations, some of which are very specialized and may not have a direct match in the civilian economy. For example, occupations such as radar and sonar operators may not have direct civilian counterparts, thus, making comparisons difficult. Accordingly, it is understandable why perceptions of personnel in this group could be less optimistic compared to those of other enlisted personnel. Figure 25 shows the areas where enlisted personnel saw civilian life as being better than military life. Communications and intelligence specialists viewed several aspects of civilian life as being better than military life. The amount of personal/family time, total compensation, general quality of life, hours worked per workweek, promotion opportunities and retirement benefits were all seen as being better in the civilian world. The responses of communications and intelligence specialists were generally similar to those of other enlisted personnel. The only significant difference was with regard to the number of hours worked per week. Fewer communications and intelligence specialists thought that the hours worked per week in the civilian world would be better than in the military. Figure 26 shows the areas where enlisted personnel saw some aspects of military life as being somewhat better than civilian life. Communications and intelligence specialists viewed several aspects of military life as being better than life in the civilian world. Many indicated that vacation time, health care benefits, education and training opportunities and a sense of accomplishment were somewhat better in the military than they would be in the civilian world. However, the only significant difference between communications and intelligence specialists and other enlisted personnel was with regard to education and training opportunities. Fewer communications and intelligence personnel indicated that education and training opportunities would be better in the military than in the civilian world. The satisfaction and career intentions for those working in communications and intelligence occupations were about the same as for other enlisted personnel. Nearly half (47 percent) of the communications and intelligence specialists were satisfied with the military way of life. On the other hand, one-third (33 percent) were dissatisfied with military life (see fig. 27). Nearly 45 percent of communications and intelligence specialists indicated that they expect to serve 20 years or more before they leave the military. A similar percentage of other enlisted personnel held the same expectation. Figure 28 shows the career intentions of servicemembers based the number of years of military service they believed they would have when they leave or retire from the military. Communications and intelligence personnel cited similar reasons for remaining in the military compared to other enlisted personnel. Basic pay, job security, retirement benefits, job enjoyment, and future advancement were cited as top reasons for staying in the military (see fig. 29). As with all other enlisted personnel, basic pay appeared as the top reason for both staying in and for leaving the military. Overall, there were no significant differences between the responses of communications and intelligence specialists and other enlisted personnel. For both groups, the top five reasons for leaving the military included basic pay, quality of leadership, amount of personal and family time, job enjoyment, and deployments (see fig. 30). There were no significant differences between the responses of communications and intelligence specialists and other enlisted personnel. The expectations, experiences and retention intentions of personnel serving in electrical and mechanical equipment repair occupations were generally similar to those of other enlisted personnel. However there were some significant differences. For example, a greater percentage of retention-critical personnel in this occupation area raised preparedness concerns attributed to staffing, and parts and equipment shortfalls compared to other enlisted personnel. More of them were aware of what a civilian job would pay and believed their skills would transfer easily to a civilian job. On the other hand, these personnel were about as likely as other enlisted personnel to plan for a 20-year or more career in the military. Within the electrical and mechanical equipment repair occupation area, the retention-critical occupations identified by the services fit within five occupation groups. These personnel serve in aircraft and aircraft related repair, automotive repair, wire communications repair, power generating equipment repair, and precision equipment repair occupations. These personnel are responsible for repair and maintenance of electrical, mechanical, hydraulic, and pneumatic equipment. Table 10 describes each occupation and provides details about the number of survey respondents, including the size of the enlisted population their responses were projected to represent. Some occupation groups are common across all the services, but not all the services identified the same occupation groups as being retention-critical. Our analysis was conducted using only the responses of personnel whose occupation groups were identified by their service as retention-critical. Personnel that work within the same occupation group, but whose service did not identify that group as retention-critical were excluded from our analysis. The occupations described in table 10 are only those that each service identified as retention-critical. The survey asked servicemembers to recall what their career intentions were when they first entered the military. The career intent of electrical and mechanical equipment repairers when they first entered the military was virtually the same as for other enlisted personnel (see fig. 31). As with other enlisted personnel, electrical and mechanical equipment repairers were mostly unsure (47 percent) about their career intentions when they first joined the military. The remaining survey respondents were evenly split between those who intended to remain until retirement and those who intended to serve their initial obligation and leave. The survey responses of electrical and mechanical equipment repair personnel were generally similar to those of other enlisted personnel with regard to their perceptions of military life at entry (see fig. 32). When asked how military life had met the expectations they had when they first joined, around 40 percent of both electrical and mechanical equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel indicated military life was better than expected. About 30 percent indicated that military life was about what they expected. Roughly 30 percent indicated military life was worse than expected. Overall, the experiences of those personnel serving in electrical and mechanical equipment repair occupations were mixed. They worked about the same number of hours and were away from home about as much as other enlisted personnel; however, a higher percentage of electrical and mechanical equipment repair personnel indicated preparedness concerns regarding both staffing and parts and equipment, compared to other enlisted personnel. In both areas, nearly 50 percent of the electrical and mechanical equipment repairers reported that their units were poorly prepared. Figure 33 shows how many hours electrical and mechanical equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel reported working during their last full workweek before filling out the survey. Over 50 percent reported working 51 hours or more during their previous workweek. They also raised more staffing and parts and equipment concerns than other enlisted personnel (see figs. 35 and 36). However, these problems do not appear to have affected the number of hours they worked compared to other enlisted personnel. About one-fourth of each group indicated they worked 61 hours or more during their last full workweek (see fig. 33). Concerns have been raised in recent years that military personnel are away from home excessively. Electrical and mechanical equipment repair personnel reported being away from home at roughly the same rate as other enlisted personnel. Overall, about one-fifth of both electrical and mechanical equipment repair personnel (22 percent) and other enlisted personnel (19 percent) reported being away from home for a total of 5 months or more during the previous year. Nearly half reported they had been away for 1 month or less. Figure 34 shows the total number of months that servicemembers reported being away from home during the previous 12 months. Compared to other enlisted personnel, a greater percentage of electrical and mechanical equipment repairers raised concerns about staffing preparedness. Nearly 45 percent of the electrical and mechanical equipment repairers indicated their unit's preparedness was poor regarding how they were staffed compared to 36 percent for other enlisted personnel (see fig. 35). Parts and equipment preparedness has been a major concern during recent years. Figure 36 shows that a greater percentage of electrical and mechanical equipment repair personnel (45 percent) rated their unit's parts and equipment preparedness as poor compared to other enlisted personnel (34 percent). Electrical and mechanical equipment repairers were generally as optimistic about their job prospects in the civilian sector as were other enlisted personnel (see fig. 37). However, compared to other enlisted personnel, a higher percentage of electrical and mechanical equipment repairers believed they knew what a civilian job would pay and that their experience would transfer easily into a civilian job. Figure 38 shows the areas where electrical and mechanical equipment repairers saw civilian life as being better than military life. Overall, they were similar to other enlisted personnel regarding the aspects of civilian life they viewed as being better than military life. Figure 39 shows the areas where electrical and mechanical equipment repairers viewed military life as being better than civilian life. There were no significant differences between the responses of electrical and mechanical equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel regarding the areas of military life that were seen as better than civilian life. Electrical and mechanical equipment repairers were about as optimistic as other enlisted personnel with regard to their civilian job prospects. Civilian opportunities for two of the occupations that comprise this occupational area are projected to be good over the next several years. Civilian aircraft and automotive mechanic occupations are both projected to grow between 10 and 20 percent. The optimism of retention-critical aircraft mechanics may be tempered somewhat by the recent economic downturn since, according to the Bureau for Labor Statistics, aircraft mechanics can be vulnerable to layoffs during times of recession. Civilian mechanical repair occupations will likely do well regardless of an economic downturn. The Bureau for Labor Statistics projects that there will be more job openings for civilian automotive mechanics and service technicians than for most other occupations. The satisfaction and career intentions of those serving in electrical and mechanical equipment repair occupations were about the same as those of other enlisted personnel. Their satisfaction with the military way of life was about the same as reported by other enlisted personnel. For both groups, over 40 percent indicated they were satisfied with the military way of life and about one-third indicated they were dissatisfied (see fig. 40). Half of the electrical and mechanical equipment repairers and about half of the other enlisted personnel indicated they expect to serve 20 years or more in the military before they leave. Figure 41 shows the career intentions of servicemembers based upon the number of years of service they believed they would have when they leave military service. Electrical and mechanical equipment repair personnel cited similar reasons for remaining in the military compared to other enlisted personnel. Basic pay, job security, retirement benefits, job enjoyment, and medical care for their family were cited as top reasons for staying in the military (see fig. 42). As with other enlisted personnel, basic pay appeared as the top reason for both staying in and for leaving the military. Overall, there were no significant differences between the responses of electrical and mechanical equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel in the five categories measured. Electrical and mechanical equipment repair personnel and other enlisted personnel cited similar reasons for leaving the military. The top five reasons for leaving the military included basic pay, amount of personal and family time, deployments, quality of leadership, and amount of retirement pay (see fig. 43). There were no significant differences between the responses of electrical and mechanical equipment repairers and other enlisted personnel. In addition to those named above, Aisha A. Mahmood, Jack E. Edwards, John H. Pendleton, Nancy L. Ragsdale, Maria-Alaina I. Rambus, Matthew W. Ullengren, and Gerald L. Winterlin made important contributions to this report.

Summary: This report reviews the Department of Defense's 1999 broad-based survey of active duty personnel to help shed light on why servicemembers in critical occupational areas might be leaving the military. From comparing the responses of retention-critical personnel against other enlisted personnel, GAO concludes that personnel in retention-critical occupations are not being "pushed out" of the military by their experiences at a greater rate than other enlisted personnel. Rather, to the extent they possess marketable skills, it is more likely they are being "pulled out" of the military by more attractive civilian opportunities. Comparing retention-critical personnel against other enlisted personnel, GAO found that the expectations and experiences of personnel serving in retention-critical occupations were often similar to those of other enlisted personnel. Personnel in retention-critical occupations were generally as satisfied with military life as were other enlisted personnel and each group's career intentions were similar. Nearly half of both retention-critical and other enlisted personnel were satisfied with the military way of life. Perceptions of civilian life for those serving in retention-critical occupations were mixed. Overall, most enlisted personnel had a positive perception about work-related opportunities and the quality of life available in the civilian world. Those in retention-critical occupations that had highly marketable skills, such as electronics equipment repairers, were especially optimistic about their prospects for civilian employment.