This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
The “Wear and Tear’ of Uniform Requirements
Poor Noah Webster would probably roll over in his grave if he saw what we have done to the word “uniform.” I began to compile a list of male and female officer and chief petty officer uniform requirements with little success. I have begun keeping excerpts from Uniform Regulations and The Naval Officer's Uniform Guide in my dresser drawer to ensure that I am properly dressed to go to work in the morning. The list I began contains at least 22 possible uniform combinations for officers and does not include maternity combinations. The enlisted uniform requirements are equally complicated.
Just when I thought my list was nearing completion, I remembered the medical department personnel and chaplains who serve with the Fleet Marine Force. 1 reminisced about my younger days trying to explain to a young boatswain’s mate in San Diego why I was wearing a green and black Navy rating badge on my marine uniform. It was difficult since the guy on my right was calling me “Private.” As my daydream ended, I thought of the Seabees with their working uniforms with boondockers and I added them to my list, which was beginning to look like a laundry list from a major hotel.
As I was putting the finishing touches to my list, NAVOP 063/79 crossed my desk. Getting this document translated into English took some doing. But I finally realized the futility of my efforts to compile a list, so I placed it in my circular file for future reference. As I did, I had visions of staff meetings taking several hours to determine what uniform to advise for a personnel inspection.
If one considers the medical department personnel who may wear the summer uniform all year, red, blue, and green ball caps with dungarees and khakis, 50 different kinds of belt buckles, 18 kinds of materials with different weaves and shades, soft shoulder boards, flared and straightlegged trousers, raincoats and working jackets, etc., . . . one can get an appreciation of the problem—just examine the July 1979 Proceedings cover.
I think it is time to take a long hard look at uniform requirements with an eye towards simplification. Not only do these changes and additions cost us money, they are complicated, misunderstood, and unappreciated. I, for one, would be much happier if we could get back to a sensible uniform requirement and allow Mr. Webster to rest in peace.
Nobody asked me either, but . . . __________
Lieutenant Commander David P. Mozgala, U. S. Navy
It’s Just Not Fun
Recently, one of my young, hard- charging E-6s and I discussed his forthcoming discharge. Even though his Navy career promised to be totally successful, he had decided, after nine years of exemplary service, to seek work in the civilian sector. In utter frustration and near anguish he resolutely stated, “It’s just not fun anymore, sir.”
Although serving on one of our latest nuclear-powered aircraft carriers is definitely an improvement facilities- and habitability-wise over earlier class CVs, current socio-economic-political conditions have made the seagoing life less attractive than in the past. The men-money-material triad which we are tasked to manage is not what it was just a few short years ago. Doing more with less is our credo. Consequently, the added pressures are felt not only by officers, but also by our senior enlisted supervisors.
Among the reasons for talented individuals leaving the service are deployments and long family separations—but these will remain as long as we have a Navy and ships. However, concern about future pay and benefits (perceived real losses) is a major factor in a second-term careerist’s retention plans. The two-year 5.5% pay cap, in light of double digit inflation, $800 million being given to Israel for air fields, and studies being conducted to upgrade Egyptian armed forces, causes an intelligent young man to wonder where he lies in the
pecking order of national priorities. Added on top of a real pay cut because of inflation are the specters of dollar- per-gallon gasoline and, of all things, the possibility of having to pay a parking fee at his own duty station. The man’s standard of living and even his quality of life are at stake.
Highly technically trained personnel (e.g., aviation electronics technicians, electronics technicians, etc.) are sought by civilian companies which need technicians and are able to offer attractive pay and benefit packages. The E-6 technician/shop supervisor, whose responsibilities concerning production, morale, discipline, paperwork, etc., are all-encompassing, compares his pay and responsibilities with an on-board ship civilian contractor representative (an ex-Navy techni-
102
Proceedings / October 1070
Clan, himself) who makes considerably more money, is responsible only for Production, and has wardroom privileges.
As a result of the all-volunteer force, personnel shortages are being felt. The difficulty in detailing senior enlisted personnel (E-7 and above) to sea duty afloat (if eligible, many trans- er to the fleet reserve) has added to foe burdens of our officers and rniddle-grade petty officers. Recently, ®n appeal requesting the filling of a foJ-man department’s much-needed E~9 billet was met with a naval management program rewrite which de- eted the billet authorization. Reflec- tlVe also of manning difficulties are foe high percentages of selectees for advancement (both officer and enlisted). With a greater percentage of those eligible being selected, the natural selection” of the best candi- ates is degraded. Overall quality of °ur Navy has suffered and, in the long run, will continue to decline.
And liberty ports aren’t all that attractive anymore. Deployments to the
Mediterranean area are fraught with political caveats which have reduced the fun-factor of being overseas. The "liberty risk” policy restricts or reduces the shore leave of those personnel who, as a result of intoxication or other incidents, indicate an inability to conform to required standards of conduct. However, should a minute percentage of the crew be involved in “incidents,” liberty ceases for the entire crew. This Sword of Damocles adds additional pressures to supervisors and division officers. Additionally, the presence of a nuclear carrier in the Mediterranean apparently does not enthrall our potential host countries, for port visits are restricted to a small number of Mediterranean nations.
The tightening of material and financial assets also leads our supervisors to frustration. Meeting flight schedules by cannibalizing parts, shifting test bench and material requirements’ list items from one carrier to another (because sufficient assets for all are lacking), and enduring a complicated test equipment calibration/repair program are management nightmares which reflect our complex times.
Finally, the lack of defined priorities keeps the pressure on to such a degree that the leader is unable to sort out the truly “hot” priorities. Everything from damage control, counseling, zone inspections, retention, port visits, and VIP tours to a myriad of internal and external inspections and, of course, the mission, is considered to be a priority-one. Attempting to satisfy everyone’s desires and requirements in light of today's tight resources often leads to total exasperation, to say nothing of exhaustion.
Although far from being a prophet of doom, I do love the Navy. But 1, too, have wondered where Admiral Zumwalt’s “fun, zest, and adventure” of going to sea have gone. We are asking more of ourselves and our men in spite of fewer people and material assets in an ever-growing bureaucracy. Optimistically, however, I hope the current trend will bottom out soon so that we may see some relief. Until then, I agree—it’s just not fun.
Engineering for the Officer of the Deck
By Commander Dan Felger, USN
Here is a practical guide for the naval officer who is not also an engineer. Written by an experienced officer with an extensive background in writing and engineering, this new book will help the non-engineer to make the best use of his ship’s main propulsion and auxiliary machinery while maneuvering at sea. The author has incorporated the views of the Commanding Officer, the Engineering Officer, and Engineering Officers of the Watch concerning propulsion plant reliability, economy, and the effects of various categories of propulsion plant casualties and their control procedures. Engineering readiness is presented in its relation to combat readiness.
19791256 pages 127 illustrations
A Naval Institute Press Book List: $16.95 Member’s: $13.55
Add $1.50 to each order for postage & handling. (Please use order form in Books of Interest section.)
'Toceed
ings / October 1979
103