'Force of the Future': career flexibility, fewer moves
By Andrew Tilghman, Staff writer 1:02 p.m. EDT August 30, 2015
A detailed blueprint for how to rebuild the military personnel system has landed on Defense Secretary Ash Carter’s desk.
The dozens of recommendations from the Pentagon’s top personnel officials would fundamentally change how the military recruits, pays, promotes and manages the active-duty force of 1.3 million troops, according to a draft copy of the report obtained by Military Times.
The so-called “Force of the Future” reform package aims to yank the Pentagon’s longstanding one-size-fits-all personnel system into the Information Age by sweeping away many laws, policies and traditions that date back as far as World War II.
The proposals are designed to address Carter’s concerns that the military and its antiquated personnel system will struggle to recruit and retain the kind of high-skilled force needed for the 21st century as the digital revolution continues to gather speed and momentum.
Carter is expected to review the 120-page report and publicly endorse the bulk of the recommendations by the end of September, according to several defense officials.
The proposals will cost money — for targeted pay raises for troops, to build massive new computer systems, to send troops to Ivy League civilian graduate schools and to create new offices with highly skilled employees, among other things. In total, the package of reforms might cost more than $1 billion a year, according to one defense official familiar with the plan.
In that sense, the proposals hitting Carter’s desk signal an abrupt change in the Pentagon leadership’s views on military personnel.
Just a couple of years ago, the top concern of the Pentagon brass seemed to be the soaring cost of people and the sense that per-troop spending growth was unsustainable and eating into funds for weapons systems development modernization.
That prompted Congress to cut annual military pay raises to their lowest level in generations.
But the new report includes no major direct cost-cutting measures. Instead, it is threaded with targeted pay raises, added benefits and modernization efforts for the new forcewide personnel system.
“We should stop thinking about our people as a cost center but rather as a profit center. They’re not an expense, they’re an investment,” Acting Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Brad Carson said in a recent interview with Defense News, a Military Times affiliate.
Carson, who has led the internal reform effort, acknowledged its costs but suggested they are a fraction of the $500 billion-plus annual defense budget and pale in comparison to many of the Pentagon’s other expenses.
“We’re talking about something that might be half the cost of an Ohio-class submarine, one-fifth the cost of a new aircraft carrier, the cost of a few fighter planes over time. ... The amount we’re really talking about here would hardly supplant any other priority in the department,” Carson said.
“It’s harder than ever before to maintain a lasting technological superiority over our adversaries. But the thing that has always made us great, and will continue to make us great, is our people. ... That will be our lasting competitive advantage,” Carson said.
The fast-tracked reform effort is controversial in some corners of the Pentagon, making it unclear whether the detailed proposals will take effect and have a lasting impact. The report, circulated internally on Aug. 3, is facing some pushback, especially among the military services, according to several defense officials.
A top concern among critics is the feasibility of adding programs that will cost billions of taxpayer dollars at a time when the department continues to face the unforgiving, if arbitrary, budget caps known as sequestration. And the effort to continue scaling back troops’ pay and benefits remains official Defense Department policy.
Some of the most far-reaching proposals in the reform package would require action from Congress; others could become reality with a stroke of Carter’s pen. And others would require support from the individual services as part of the annual military budget drill.
Defense officials caution that the draft copy still can change and that Carter will ultimately decide which proposals to approve. A final version is likely to emerge this fall.
Here’s a rundown of some key proposals outlined in the draft copy of the Force of the Future report obtained by Military Times.
New pay tables
The Pentagon should ask Congress for authority to fundamentally change the military pay system by creating new basic pay tables for high-demand career fields and allowing commanders to dole out merit-based cash bonuses to individual troops.
The aim is to address one of Carter’s top concerns — that today’s one-size-fits-all personnel system is incapable of competing for the best people in cybersecurity and other high-tech fields where the private sector offers far more lucrative compensation packages.
The specific proposal would create a pilot program allowing the individual services to “amend” the pay tables for five occupational specialties that face particularly intense competition from the private sector.
Moreover, the services should have authority to use some of their existing budgets for special pays and incentive pays to reward individual troops in other career fields for good performance. Current practice is to award such bonuses to entire career fields regardless of individual performance.
Repeal ‘up or out’
The Pentagon should ask Congress to suspend the federal law that limits the number of times an officer can be passed over for promotion before being forced to leave service. The aim is to make promotions based on experience and performance rather than time in grade. That means some officers would move up the ranks more quickly, while others may remain at the same paygrade for many years.
Removing those up-or-out caps could encourage officers to pursue nontraditional assignments or develop technical expertise without fear that their career progression will suffer.
Current rules generally give officers only a small window of time to earn promotion and force them to compete against their peers as defined by their “year-group,” or time of commissioning. That’s why today’s officers often hew to a very narrow career path to ensure they complete all tasks and assignments deemed desirable by a promotion board. Those who postpone such traditional requirements in the allotted time can be passed over for promotion and forced to separate.
Removing those time-in-grade caps would also allow officers to have longer careers.
Flexible ‘joint’ requirements
MORE
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/careers/2015/08/28/force-future-report-ash-carter-review/32476549/
