Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Army leaders give subordinates two weeks to cut staffs

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,275
    Likes (Received)
    264
    Thanks (Received)
    35

    Default Army leaders give subordinates two weeks to cut staffs

    Army leaders give subordinates two weeks to cut staffs, budgets by 25 percent


    The Secretary of the Army and the Army Chief of Staff have given their staffs just two weeks — until Sept. 11 — to report back with “a comprehensive set of recommendations” as to where the service can make 25 percent cuts in funding and manning levels at all Army headquarters elements at the 2-star level and above.
    The “2013 Army Focus Area Review Group” plan was spelled out in an August 14 Army document obtained by Defense News.
    In some of the strongest language yet about how seriously Army leadership is taking the cuts, the memo bluntly says that “Let there be no mistake, aggregate reductions WILL TAKE PLACE. The money is gone; our mission now is to determine how best to allocate these cuts while maintaining readiness. We expect Army leaders, military and civilian, to seize this opportunity
    to re-shape our Army. This effort will take PRIORITY OVER ALL other Headquarters, Department of the Army activities.”
    So... staffs reduced, but what of those people? Obviously they will simply be reassigned. They will still draw all pay and benefits, so what is the reduction? Hopefully, the goal is the remove the billet from the manning roster. Until these contract is expired, those people will still be on active duty. Or is this the beginning of a RIF?

    Link to story: http://www.armytimes.com/article/201...-by-25-percent
    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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    1,029
    Likes (Received)
    241
    Thanks (Received)
    46

    Default Re: Army leaders give subordinates two weeks to cut staffs

    If you read the appendix of the linked pdf, it clearly states that moving personnel to subordinate unit is not acceptable. It seems like what Big Army is saying is, "the money is gone, figure out how to minimize the impact, by making smart cuts."

    The pdf repeated says things like, "reduction in personnel commensurate with reduction in budget" [paraphrased]. I don't know if that means a RIF or not, but it sure seems like they are considering it, at least for contractors and DoA Civilians.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,275
    Likes (Received)
    264
    Thanks (Received)
    35

    Default Re: Army leaders give subordinates two weeks to cut staffs

    Thanks - PDF would not open for me. I don't have much luck with links on the ArmyTimes site.

    This does seems like the intended effect of sequestration. I did not see any mention of re-evaluating the mission. Was that in the PDF? I would hate to think this is another dose of "do more with less".
    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

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    1,029
    Likes (Received)
    241
    Thanks (Received)
    46

    Default Re: Army leaders give subordinates two weeks to cut staffs

    From the pdf, appendix 1, which outlines the focus areas for reduction consideration:

    c. Operational Force Structure and Ramps.

    BG Roger Cloutier (G-3/5/7 Force Management) will lead this team with Ms. Gwen DeFilippi (ASA(MR&A) as a directed member. Mr. John McLaurin will temporarily lead this team until BG Cloutier's arrival. The goal of this team is to determine the appropriate mix of the formations in our Army and the proper drawdown ramps in order to achieve that structure by 2019.
    Appropriate mix of formations, and drawdown ramps, suggests cutting AD and Reserve/Guard personnel. In aggregate, the document suggests that this is PART of a larger effort to "refocus" the Army as an organization to be meet "national security objectives" with the minimum personnel and infrastructure. The 1st paragraph states this in "military speak":
    Given these reductions, we must focus on the Army's core missions, sustaining the Army's ability to provide a smaller, more capable Army able to provide ready land forces to meet combatant commanders' global requirements...

    *****

    I'll given them credit for making the effort. But I'm not holding my breath for the cuts that will mean "doing less with less."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

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