Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has unveiled an ambitious plan for transforming the Defense Department's personnel system that includes, for the nation's most senior officers, careers up to 40 years and more generous retirement plans.
Changes aimed at military personnel, however, are not the most controversial elements in a legislative package called the "Defense Transformation for the 21st Century Act." Creating greater stir is Secretary Rumsfeld's call to overhaul how more than 700,000 defense civilian employees are hired, paid, and promoted. The department seeks "sole and unreviewable discretion" for managing its civilian workforce, reducing the influence of the Office of Personnel Management and labor unions.
The package would shift 40% of all federal civilians from the rigid Civil Service System into a new performance-based National Security Personnel System that has far more flexible tools to recruit, train, compensate, evaluate, and separate employees.
Dr. David S. Chu, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, said another key to transformation is a management system that allows top uniformed leaders to serve up to 40 years. Too many military leaders are rotated through assignments too quickly to make a difference, Dr. Chu said, and then their talents are lost to the military while still in their prime.
The proposed legislation, which drew immediate criticism from Democrats and some Republicans, calls for an end to mandatory retirement ceilings (for example, O-7s after 30 years) and would lift the 75% of basic pay ceiling on retired pay. Those officers who serve 40 years would draw 100% of basic pay in retirement. To accommodate longer careers, senior officers, including those in the reserves and National Guard, would be allowed to serve until age 68. The Defense secretary would have authority even to defer retirements for officers, on an individual basis, until age 72.
Keeping even small numbers of senior officers until 40 years could slow promotions for officers below. But the Department of Defense would avoid this, Dr. Chu said, by asking Congress to lift a requirement that general and flag officers serve at least three years in grade to retire at that grade. The department likewise seeks permanent time-in-grade waiver authority for officers in grades O-5 and O-6. Allowing some officers to retire after only a year or two in grade would avoid promotion stagnation when keeping top officers longer, Dr. Chu said. Indeed, he said, the pace of promotions overall could improve.
The transformation package also would:
- Allow the most senior officers to move laterally between top command and staff assignments.
- Raise basic pay of four-star combatant commanders by 10% to match pay levels of service chiefs of staff.
- Remove the limit of two back-to-back, two-year tours for the chairman and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The President could appoint them to as many tours as he thinks necessary, with the consent of Congress.
- End a restriction on service chiefs of staff serving no more than four years in their posts. Four-year limits also would be relaxed for service judge advocates, surgeons general, personnel chiefs, and directors of the Nurse Corps, giving the President more flexibility to manage his most senior officers.
Dr. Chu said the department continues to study broader changes to officer and enlisted management. "But we thought we knew enough about how we should try to manage flag and general officers that it was timely to go forward and make these changes," he said.
To improve force readiness, the package also would:
- Give military recruiters access to all high schools except those with religious objections to military service.
- Broaden call-up authority for reserve members to respond to natural or manmade disasters, or to conduct training for upcoming operational missions.
- Expand authority to screen and provide medical or dental care to reservists in units alerted for call up. This change would recognize that in the post-11 September era, mobilization must occur more quickly than was needed during the Cold War.
Many lawmakers, including members of the House Armed Services Committee, were wary of giving the Defense Secretary such authority over civilian employees. Annual raises now tied largely to longevity would be replaced with a pay-for-performance system. Employees could be transferred with greater ease than currently possible and the bargaining role of unions would be diminished.
Missouri Representative Ike Skelton, ranking Democrat on the committee, described the impact of the changes as "profound" and said the nation would not be well served if Congress rushed to approve them.