Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57

Thread: cutting headquarters staff

  1. #11
    Senior Member BRUWIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    Quote Originally Posted by Drackore View Post
    Next on the chopping block should be a serious focus on DoD civilians, then the Guard and Reserve.
    I am tired of watching Airmen stand around with the hands in their pockets waiting for PT hour to roll around while I do all the work anyways...so if they axe me I am fine with it.
    "Respect My Authoritah!" - Eric Cartman

  2. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Truth or Consequences, New Mexico
    Posts
    50
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    If anything should be cut it should be contractors and civilians...way too many.

  3. #13
    Senior Member VCO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    worldwide
    Posts
    190
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    We could halve the civilian positions here and hold the remaining employees to some type of productivity standard. Most of them seem to waste a lot of time. I think part of the problem is that there isn't a whole lot of accountability, so we get a lot of scumbags hanging out collecting free money.

  4. #14
    Senior Member ChiefB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Far, West Texas
    Posts
    294
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    Quote Originally Posted by BRUWIN View Post
    I have been reading that our leaders gripe about personnel costs being so high and threaten cuts to personnel in an effort to get more money out of congress because our leaders know that congress is hesitate to reduce personnel. It's a game they play...and it involves people's livihoods and earned benefits. Our leaders do this to protect their precious weapons programs. The reality is that personnel costs takes less of a percentage of the defense budget than it did 15 years ago. Yes more is spent on personnel now...but with all things factored in, personnel costs are a smokescreen our generals are using to hide the real issue.
    You are correct, Sir!
    ChiefB

    It's the same in all wars, the very young and adventurous give up their lives for the old and cautious, and so the bluecollar for the privileged, the uneducated for the student, the poor for the well off, the patriot for the politician, and the few for the many.

    TC6, C5

  5. #15
    Senior Member ChiefB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Far, West Texas
    Posts
    294
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    Quote Originally Posted by efmbman View Post
    Good info - everyone should be aware of this.

    There is more to the story, however. However, all provisions of 10 U.S. Code 525 were superceded by Executive Order 13223 dated 14 SEP 2001. This executive order is still in place. In laymans terms, the laws which dictate the personnel strength of the armed forces no longer apply. The President can now direct the armed forces to maintain whatever size and composition he wants. Here is the section of the executive order:
    Correct you are. Suspension of the code in this case was a result of 911 3 days prior and will eventually be lifted but, IMO, only after Congress writes more appropriate POTUS flexibility into the code.
    ChiefB

    It's the same in all wars, the very young and adventurous give up their lives for the old and cautious, and so the bluecollar for the privileged, the uneducated for the student, the poor for the well off, the patriot for the politician, and the few for the many.

    TC6, C5

  6. #16
    Senior Member efmbman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,042
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefB View Post
    Correct you are. Suspension of the code in this case was a result of 911 3 days prior and will eventually be lifted but, IMO, only after Congress writes more appropriate POTUS flexibility into the code.
    Do you really think would appropriate considering that one of the enumerated constitutional powers of Congress is to "raise and support armies" and to "make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces"?

    Not picking a fight, but I have always been curious about the opinions of those in uniform about which branch should have more control over the military.
    When things go wrong in your command, start searching for the reason in increasingly larger concentric circles around your own desk.
    -GEN Bruce C. Clarke

  7. #17
    Senior Member ChiefB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Far, West Texas
    Posts
    294
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    Quote Originally Posted by efmbman View Post
    Do you really think would appropriate considering that one of the enumerated constitutional powers of Congress is to "raise and support armies" and to "make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces"?

    Not picking a fight, but I have always been curious about the opinions of those in uniform about which branch should have more control over the military.
    Ultimately, shouldn't the "Commander in Chief" have the final say and authority? I think the Founding Fathers
    pretty clearly wanted him to. Congress still has the power of the purse and use it often to reign in the POTUS.
    ChiefB

    It's the same in all wars, the very young and adventurous give up their lives for the old and cautious, and so the bluecollar for the privileged, the uneducated for the student, the poor for the well off, the patriot for the politician, and the few for the many.

    TC6, C5

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    851
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    Quote Originally Posted by BUDJR8 View Post
    If anything should be cut it should be contractors and civilians...way too many.
    While it's true that many civilians are worth cutting, they (gov employees) are still cheaper than active duty.

  9. #19
    Senior Member efmbman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,042
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefB View Post
    Ultimately, shouldn't the "Commander in Chief" have the final say and authority? I think the Founding Fathers
    pretty clearly wanted him to. Congress still has the power of the purse and use it often to reign in the POTUS.
    Which establishes the traditional balance of power. Unfortunately, sometimes the tipping of the scales puts the lives of the troops in danger. POTUS may exercise command and send troops to a dangerous area. Congress, if not in agreement with the mission, can choose to not fund the mission. Bad news.

    At the same time, POTUS can make this decision known to the people. The people (voters) would not look favorably on troops in harms way without the means to succeed.

    On the flipside, having the same branch command and fund the military places a great deal of control in one place. Could also be bad news. I feel the balance is what the Founding Fathers wanted. Things seem to go well when one party controls the Executive and Legislative branches. When it is split between parties - not so much.
    When things go wrong in your command, start searching for the reason in increasingly larger concentric circles around your own desk.
    -GEN Bruce C. Clarke

  10. #20
    Senior Member efmbman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,042
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Re: cutting headquarters staff

    Quote Originally Posted by FLAPS, USAF (ret) View Post
    While it's true that many civilians are worth cutting, they (gov employees) are still cheaper than active duty.
    I've heard this many times and I have heard that troops are cheaper. I have seen detailed articles which support both claims. I still don't know which is the truth. I doubt anyone in the Pentagon knows either.
    When things go wrong in your command, start searching for the reason in increasingly larger concentric circles around your own desk.
    -GEN Bruce C. Clarke

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •