Officials Stress Keeping Faith on Military Retirement

WASHINGTON, Oct. 26, 2011 — The Defense Depart­ment has no pro­pos­als or rec­om­men­da­tions on revamp­ing mil­i­tary retire­ment at this time, but any future pro­pos­al must not break faith with those in the mil­i­tary today, senior Pen­ta­gon offi­cials told Con­gress yes­ter­day.

Jo Ann Rooney, prin­ci­pal deputy under­sec­re­tary of defense for per­son­nel and readi­ness, and Vee Pen­rod, deputy assis­tant sec­re­tary of defense for mil­i­tary per­son­nel pol­i­cy, tes­ti­fied on mil­i­tary retire­ment before the House Armed Ser­vices Committee’s mil­i­tary per­son­nel subcommittee. 

The Defense Busi­ness Board has pro­posed mak­ing a mil­i­tary retire­ment sys­tem more like pri­vate-sec­tor sys­tems. The mil­i­tary sys­tem has remained fair­ly con­stant over time, Rooney said, while the pri­vate sec­tor has changed its retire­ment sys­tems to cater to the increas­ing­ly mobile workforce. 

“Unlike [the pri­vate] sec­tor, the mil­i­tary ser­vices must grow most of their mil­i­tary work­force inter­nal­ly,” she said. “It gen­er­al­ly takes 15 to 20 years to devel­op the next gen­er­a­tion of infantry bat­tal­ion com­man­ders and sub­ma­rine cap­tains. As a result, the mil­i­tary must ensure com­pen­sa­tion, pro­mo­tions and per­son­nel poli­cies that all fos­ter the reten­tion and longer careers nec­es­sary to cre­ate these expe­ri­enced leaders.” 

The mil­i­tary, she said, needs greater longevi­ty and con­ti­nu­ity to devel­op lead­ers, and a retire­ment sys­tem mir­ror­ing a pri­vate-sec­tor approach — with con­tri­bu­tions from indi­vid­u­als and trans­portable ben­e­fits — may not be the best way for the uni­formed ser­vices to go. 

This does not mean that the cur­rent sys­tem is sacro­sanct, Rooney said. The depart­ment should exam­ine the retire­ment sys­tem in the con­text of a total mil­i­tary com­pen­sa­tion sys­tem, she added. 

DOD offi­cials, she told the pan­el, are exam­in­ing all aspects of the retire­ment sys­tem for all com­po­nents. Rooney said the review has been delib­er­ate, care­ful and prag­mat­ic, and that offi­cials are review­ing pro­pos­als and mod­el­ing them to deter­mine the impact on recruit­ing and retention. 

The Defense Depart­ment, she said, is work­ing to strike the cor­rect bal­ance. “This includes weigh­ing the impact of a new sys­tem on recruit­ing and reten­tion, con­sid­er­ing the wel­fare of the indi­vid­ual ser­vice mem­bers and fam­i­lies — which includes grand­fa­ther­ing our exist­ing force who took their oath under the cur­rent sys­tem — and acknowl­edg­ing our respon­si­bil­i­ty to the Amer­i­can tax­pay­er,” she said. 

The cur­rent mil­i­tary retire­ment sys­tem has sup­port­ed the most-suc­cess­ful vol­un­teer force in the world, Pen­rod noted. 

“The ques­tion now,” Pen­rod added, “is whether the cur­rent sys­tem is still rel­e­vant in today’s envi­ron­ment. If not, should it be mod­i­fied in a man­ner more in line with the pri­vate sector?” 

Offi­cials are not look­ing at retire­ment in iso­la­tion, Pen­rod point­ed out, but rather at how per­son­nel and pay poli­cies affect deci­sions to join the mil­i­tary and then to stay. 

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs) 

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →