CFI and Training 2025: Why Certain Funds Are Needed for Those Who Train More

The recent initiative by USMIA – Unione sindacale militare interforze associati – which on November 21, 2025, wrote to the Defense General Staff on the topic of the lump-sum employment compensation (CFI), brings back to the forefront a crucial issue: if training is robustly and structurally increased, especially in a warfighting context, it is necessary to also coherently increase the financial resources for the personnel who bear the concrete burden.

From a third-party position relative to USMIA and SMD, the request for certain CFI coverage for 2025 appears not only legitimate but fully consistent with the declared objectives of readiness, credibility, and deterrence. The international context requires more frequent, realistic, and demanding exercises: we are no longer talking about episodic activities, but about training cycles often conducted in cold, rain, at night, for long periods, and with limited psychophysical recovery breaks.

Under these conditions, the choice to intensify training is understandable and necessary, but it involves an operational and human load that cannot be ignored in financial planning. Increasing the demand for commitment without adjusting the compensation tools would mean placing the cost of strategic ambition solely on the employed military personnel.

The CFI as a Tool of Equity and a Deterrence Factor

In this context, the CFI is not a simple “expense item,” but a tool of equity and recognition. It serves to provide a concrete response to the additional burden requested from military personnel engaged in the most demanding activities, to value those who accept prolonged shifts, adverse weather conditions, and nighttime employment, and to maintain high morale in units subjected to intense training rhythms.

Systematically asking more from those on the ground, without adequate economic recognition, risks generating frustration, loss of motivation, and, over time, difficulties in retaining the most qualified professionals. The perception of justice and coherence between what is asked and what is recognized is a key element for personnel retention, especially in an organization founded on discipline and a sense of belonging.

Even strategically, the link between intense training and CFI is evident. Deterrence does not depend solely on weapon systems and platforms, but on the quality, preparation, and motivation of the people who employ them. Trained personnel, accustomed to operating in complex conditions, aware of being supported also economically, becomes a multiplier of credibility externally and a factor of internal stability. Neglecting this aspect would mean weakening, in the medium term, precisely that deterrence effect that the increase in training activities aims to strengthen.

The Role of SMD and the Consistency of Investment

For SMD, the note from USMIA represents an opportunity to give a clear signal of attention to the human factor. From a third-party perspective, the choice most consistent with the declared objectives appears to be to include in the planning documents for 2025 a CFI coverage that is certain, stable, and proportional to the level of activity expected, avoiding emergency or fragmented solutions.

The willingness to dialogue offered by USMIA – with data, experiences, and proposals collected directly from the “field” – can help better calibrate resources and application criteria, identifying any imbalances between units, areas, and types of employment. A structured dialogue between leaders, commands, and personnel representatives would allow for a more transparent and shared application of the CFI, reducing misunderstandings and perceptions of disparity.

Ultimately, supporting the request for adequate economic coverage of the CFI for 2025 means making operational ambitions consistent with personnel protection. If personnel truly is the center of the military instrument, recognizing those who train more and in harsher conditions is not a favor, but a direct investment in the security, deterrence, and overall credibility of the country.