While 2024 marks the 30th anniversary of women first serving on combat ships, women represent fewer than 6.8 percent of the Navy’s flag officers—a number that has decreased in recent years. Most Navy officer communities have narrow paths to O-5 command, O-6 (major) command, and flag. But for married women in the Navy—nearly half of whom are in dual-military marriages—career-path management is an even more significant task. As the burden of balancing two military careers disproportionately falls on women, creating new policies that allow for more career flexibility for all officers is crucial to making it possible for more women to stay in the Navy—and remain competitive—longer.
By the Numbers
A recent annual demographics survey revealed that as of 2022, women comprise about 23.4 percent of the roughly 25,500 Navy junior officers (paygrades O-1 to O-3), but only 17.1 percent of the 17,000-plus control-grade officers (O-4 to O-6). For flag officers, the number decreases to 6.8 percent. Figures 1 and 2 depict the percentages as compared from 2005 until 2022, respectively.
There are limitations to this data. For instance, there is no breakout of the restricted-line community, where the number of female officers has traditionally been significantly higher. However, the numbers do still illustrate some interesting trends. We would expect the number of women within the flag ranks to increase as more women join the officer corps, but it has not. Further, women made up 20.3 percent of O-4s within the 2022 control grades, but just 14.6 percent and 12 percent of O-5s and O-6s, respectively. This suggests women are not staying in the Navy long enough to comprise more of those groups.
Dual-Military Marriages
One in five women on active-duty across the military are married to another service member, but only one in 25 men are in a dual-military marriage. Put differently, 44 percent of all women in the Navy who are married are married to another service member.
Obviously, these numbers by themselves do not tell the whole story, but they illustrate a problem that women in the Navy face far more often than men: how to manage two military careers. It is possible women do not stay (and remain competitive for promotion) long enough to become senior and flag officers at the same rate as men because managing those two careers becomes near impossible. For instance, 36 percent of the 18,970 officers in dual-military marriages have children. Childcare, family health, and officer progression are very hard objectives to align over the long term.
Take the hypothetical couple of Lieutenant Jane and Lieutenant John (it could of course be a Jane and Jane, or a John and John as well). Imagine these two officers meet while both are in their first or second tour while on sea duty. After getting married, they head to their first shore tour. Jane and John want to have a family and decide to do so during this shore tour.
After their first shore tour as unrestricted line officers, Jane and John will have to go to back to sea. However, as a dual-military family with a child, they cannot both be on sea duty at the same time. For line communities, the path to command is both rigid in timing and narrow in types of acceptable billets. If John cannot go to his department head tour on time because he stays on shore duty with the child, he will forever be behind his peers, seriously affecting his chances at future promotion or command screening boards. Furthermore—and arguably most important—Jane and John effectively must commit to being single parents for much of their career.
Even if these imaginary lieutenants wait to start their family until they are already “mismatched” in terms of sea and shore duty (no easy task for Jane, who may have a newborn while John is deployed), every detailing cycle will be a battle to keep the timing of their careers on track while simultaneously trying to get stationed in the same location at roughly the same time.
Obviously, it can be done. One encouraging example is Naval Academy Superintendent Vice Admiral Yvette Davids, who is married to Rear Admiral Keith Davids, commander of Naval Special Warfare Command. However, it is not enough for it simply to be possible for a few extraordinary individuals to go the distance. To keep women in the Navy long term, personnel policies should reflect the unique challenges faced by dual-military couples trying to manage two careers.
There are several policies already in place meant to provide military families with support and some level of flexibility, theoretically making it both possible and attractive for dual-military couples to serve long term. Those policies and programs—career intermission (CIP), parental leave, and colocation—are important, but they do not solve Jane and John’s long-term problem of career management.
CIP allows an officer to take a year-long “sabbatical,” during which they temporarily enter the inactive ready reserve (for up to three years) to pursue something outside of the Navy—higher education, starting a family, etc. An officer using CIP will have their time in rank adjusted, so when they return to active duty they are not still competing against their former peers. It can be a tremendous risk mitigator from a career timing standpoint. However, there are disadvantages to CIP for both the individuals and the Navy. First, participating officers do not get paid a salary and allowances (although they do keep their health insurance and base privileges), making the program cost prohibitive for many families who require dual incomes to afford where they live. Second, CIP causes short-term manning losses for the Navy.
Parental leave is another step the Department of Defense has taken in support of military families. As of 2023, both primary and secondary caretakers are entitled to 12 weeks of parental leave. It is worth acknowledging that this policy is quite progressive compared with many U.S. companies. However, there is still significant work needed to normalize the actual taking of this leave for both caretakers. In practice, secondary caregivers (often men) are not yet able to take the full leave period, whether from true mission constraints, cultural inertia, or something in between. As a result, the primary caretakers (usually women) still find themselves with the bulk of the childrearing responsibilities in those first few months after birth or adoption.
Finally, and perhaps most important, is the colocation policy. While Navy colocation makes a great effort to keep families together, it is a much harder task to move both service members in a manner that is equally advantageous to their respective paths in the Navy. “One of your careers is going to have to take a backseat to the other,” is the hard advice given by many a detailer or commanding officer. Such advice acknowledges the difficulty inherent in lining up timing for fitness reports, turnover, and trying to negotiate between communities that have defined “golden paths” for career progression. The Navy will likely continue to struggle retaining women at the higher officer strata until it has given dual-military couples more tools to tackle dual career management. Since childcare remains a de facto maternal responsibility out of both societal and institutional habit, women suffer most when a military couple is forced to choose one career to take a back seat.
Career Intermission While on Active Duty
If John and Jane were both aviators in the same platform community, it would be next to impossible for them to both make command and have children. If Jane cannot go straight from her first shore tour to her disassociated sea tour, she may not screen for department head. But as she and John cannot both be on sea duty at the same time, she will likely be forced into that position. She is already off path. Her chances for command are now slim.
The CIP would be a possible solution: either John or Jane takes a multiyear pause while the other spouse goes to sea, so that when they come back on active duty, their careers now naturally create the required sea/shore combination. However, the Navy cannot afford to let every dual-military couple participate in CIP from a manning standpoint, nor can every dual-military couple afford to participate in CIP from a financial standpoint.
Totally reworking every community’s career path to allow more flexibility is not immediately feasible. Instead, the Navy should institute a program where officers can take a career intermission while remaining on active duty. That is, they can choose to take a traditionally “off-track” billet and reset their lineal number. The officer would go to a nonoperational billet not part of the standard career track; but, have their time in rank adjusted so they do not lose their place along the career path. This would allow dual-military couples to remain competitive while also maintaining a family. While the issue of mandatory sea/shore billets in dual-military couples with children is the most obvious concern for career management, couples without children could easily use this tool. It is easy to imagine a scenario in which a couple might be forced to take billets on opposite coasts for both spouses to remain on track for command. If one spouse could co-locate without being penalized in their career path, this could incentivize dual-military couples to stay in the Navy long term.
The individual benefits are obvious: maintaining base pay and allowances, increasing the ability to co-locate, and remaining competitive. However, the Navy also benefits—not just from the increased long-term retention, but from sending high-talent, committed, and driven officers to billets they might not otherwise have filled. Navy Talent Acquisition Groups (NTAGs) are a prime example.
Navy Talent Acquisition Groups
NTAGs are recruitment hubs in charge of recruiting sailors and officers to the Navy, formerly known as recruiting districts and commands. There are 26 hubs strategically located across the country, with recruiting stations placed across each state. Despite the obvious importance of recruiting for the Navy writ large, most unrestricted line communities do not value these billets. NTAG command is considered “special mission,” which is not operational and therefore takes an officer off the path toward command at sea and major command at sea. An officer goes to recruiting at the cost of future career prospects, meaning that officers sent to recruit other officers are themselves likely getting out of the Navy after compulsory O-5 sea duty. Instead, imagine sending a career-driven officer who is staying competitive for the highest ranks to recruit officers to join and stay in the Navy.
Looking Forward
Sound personnel policies are difficult to engineer and execute for an organization like the Navy, where constant rotations and deployments are a fundamental part of its operating constraints. However, it is no secret that manning retention is a major issue. The current demographic of 25–40-year-olds want to build families and spend time with their families. They do not want to have to choose between career and family; and when forced to choose, many decide to part ways with the service. Under current policy and trends, Lieutenant Jane will probably get out after her first shore tour. But if either she or Lieutenant John could take a non-operational billet, reset their lineal number, and then get back on track—then perhaps she stays in, and perhaps one day she becomes Admiral Jane.
