Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. DITTER. Are we to assume, therefore, Admiral, that if the President's request for an extension of the building program, in view of the serious world conditions, is followed by authorization by the Congress and the necessary appropriation, that we can anticipate in the Naval Establishment certain definite changes with respect to existing law touching personnel? I mean by that, Admiral, that since 1916, when the original law was enacted dealing with selection, there have been a number of amendments, finally culminating in the proposals embraced by the Vinson bill of last year. I am correct in that, am I not?

Admiral ANDREWS. As to your last statement; yes, sir.

Mr. DITTER. Now, my inquiry is whether or not a series of proposals for enactment will be forthcoming as the result of the President's suggestion of a world condition that can be looked upon as an emergency?

Admiral ANDREWS. I may answer that in this way. The present Vinson bill, which was introduced in 1937, will admit of the employment of all available officers in the Navy at the present time if they be qualified, whether or not they be passed over. That is the source of supply of officers at the present time. The Naval Academy, the natural source of officers, is running to four-fifths full capacityabout 2,200 midshipmen.

Now, to your question as to the plan for immediate increase in officer personnel, I can answer "no." There would be no necessity, as I see it, for an immediate increase in officer personnel other than increasing the number of midshipmen at the Naval Academy. I have stated before that I am strongly in favor of continuing officers, who are qualified but who have failed of selection, in the Navy and retaining their services.

Mr. UMSTEAD. Admiral, your present officer limit is based upon existing law fixing the strength of the Navy.

Admiral ANDREWS. That is correct, sir.

Mr. UMSTEAD. Now, if and when additional legislation is passed changing the present limits and size of the Navy, and thereby changing the requirements for officer personnel, at that time you would have to modify your plans to meet the changed personnel situation as I

understand.

Admiral ANDREWS. Perhaps we would, sir.

Mr. DITTER. Pursuing the chairman's inquiry, am I to understand. therefore, that a change in the selection law is contemplated by the establishment as the result of the possible increase?

Admiral ANDREWS. No, sir; other than the changes included in the Vinson bill.

Mr. DITTER. In other words, the principle of the selection law as it presently exists is to be continued irrespective of the additional requirements that may be made upon the establishment by reason of an increase in the Naval Establishment; that is right, is it not?

Admiral ANDREWS. Yes, sir, we believe in a continuation of the selection law, because we believe that the President and the United States demand the most efficient Navy obtainable and that the most efficient Navy which may be obtained is based upon the efficiency of the individual officer. We think that the selection system fulfills that requirement in obtaining the most efficient officers. Now as to the number of officers available, obviously with a larger Navy we shall

need more officers. There are two ways in which we may increase the number of officers available; one is by increasing midshipmen at the Naval Academy, the other by reducing the number of separations from active duty. This last we accomplish by the Vinson bill. Also, as the Navy expands in total number of officers, so also, by the percentage allocation in grade, promotion opportunities, vacancies, increase, and the number of selections that may be made annually increases. Therefore I think the percent law, if modified by the enactment of the Vinson bill, will fully meet the situation.

Mr. DITTER. Now, right in point, Admiral, will you tell us how many of the present men in the rear admiral group have come into their present positions by successive stages from ensign to their present grade as a result of the selection system?

Admiral ANDREWS. Yes, sir. All of the officers of the rear admiral grade today have been selected to that grade and are in that grade by reason of selection.

Mr. DITTER. You mean from the time that they came into the establishment?

Admiral ANDREWS. No; I mean from the time

Mr. DITTER (interposing). For instance-I am not being personal, Admiral; I am not picking you out as an individual, but simply as a member of the group-do you mean that you have risen to your present position as rear admiral through the successive stages from ensign by reason of action of selection boards from the time you were an ensign? Admiral ANDREWS. Oh, no. I mean to say that I have risen, as other officers have in the grade of rear admiral, by reason of the selection system. In other words, each one has been selected to that grade and I, if you refer to me personally

Mr. DITTER. No; I am not referring to you personally.

Admiral ANDREWS. I have been selected since I was a lieutenant. commander.

Mr. DITTER. I am thinking of you only as a member of the group. Admiral ANDREWS. What I wish to say is that selection has existed since I have come up from lieutenant commander.

Mr. DITTER. So that we can state, can we not, with reasonable certainty, that the very high degree of efficiency exemplified by the present rear admiral group has not been based from the beginning on the selection system?

Admiral ANDREWS. The answer to that, Mr. Ditter, is that that is true, except that all of the flag officers have been subject to selection and all but the senior four have been promoted by reason of selection since they were lieutenant commanders; the senior four have been promoted by selection since they were commanders. That is correct,

sir.

Mr. DITTER. Admiral, is the national defence program of the country based upon a cooperative effort between the Army and the Navy? Admiral ANDREWS. I think it is, sir, absolutely.

Mr. DITTER. Do you think the national defense needs are in any way lessened as a result of an inefficiency on the part of the Army end of this national-defense program?

Admiral ANDREWS. I would prefer not to answer that, Mr. Ditter. Mr. DITTER. Do you know whether or not a selection system similar to that which exists in the Navy exists in the Army? Admiral ANDREWS. I know that it does not.

Mr. DITTER. Admiral, do you know that the national defense needs contemplate a very much increased appropriation if the recent utterances of the President are translated into an enlarged Navy, and that we are looking with a great deal of concern on the tremendous sums that must be appropriated by the Congress of the United States? Admiral ANDREWS. I presume you are; yes, sir.

Mr. DITTER. Now, if a law were passed suspending throughout the next fiscal year the convening of any selection boards and barring any measures being taken during the next fiscal year in consequence of selection board action taken at any time prior to next July 1, it would have the effect, would it not, of preventing some officers from being transferred to the retired list?

Admiral ANDREWS. It would not. The effect of selection board action is not to accomplish retirements, but to prevent the retirement of such officers as have been selected. This is because the basic law requires the retirement of officers on reaching given lengths of service, fixed for the respective grades, unless they have been selected for promotion. Cessation of selection board action would simply prevent the naming of any officers for promotion, and all reaching the respective lengths of service would have to retire, rather than only those not selected.

Mr. DITTER. Admiral, if such a law were passed as I just suggested, would it have the effect of stopping some officers from being placed on the additional-number list?

Admiral ANDREWS. No, sir. They would become additional numbers on completing 7 years, service if junior lieutenants, or 14 if lieutenants, if not selected prior thereto. Čessation of the selection boards would simply mean that all, rather than only those not selectel, would become additional numbers.

Mr. DITTER. What about officers already carried as additional numbers, would any of them go to the retired list?

Admiral ANDREWS. Yes; four junior lieutenants will be retired this June 30, unless they are selected by the board meeting this winter or early spring. No others would be retired.

Mr. DITTER. Not this next year?

Admiral ANDREWS. No, sir; not until they arrived at the legal requirement of service.

Mr. DITTER. Well, would they in any year, irrespective of this next fiscal year?

Admiral ANDREWS. Yes; the remaining additional numbers will ultimately be retired, if not selected, unless you made some special provision; but to the original question, the answer is no.

Mr. DITTER. If such a law were passed would it result in the retention of any officers on the active list?

Admiral ANDREWS. No, sir; for the reasons I have explained.

Mr. DITTER. Would such a law in any way affect the needs of the establishment insofar as the men coming from the graduating class of the Naval Academy are concerned?

Admiral ANDREWS. I do not think so.

Mr. DITTER. In other words, assuming that no selections as a result of operations of the selection system are made, you would still require the influx of the group that you contemplate during 1938 and 1939 coming from the Naval Academy?

Admiral ANDREWS. That is right, and even more, since the effect of selections is actually to decrease the retirements which would otherwise take place under the law.

Mr. DITTER. Would any economies be effected if officers were not retired, or moved from the active list to the additional numbers list? Admiral ANDREWS. May I have that repeated?

Mr. DITTER. I say, would any economies follow or ensue if officers were not retired or removed from the active list to the additional numbers list?

Admiral ANDREWS. Moved from the active list to the additional numbers list? The additional numbers list is an active list, Mr. Ditter. Mr. DITTER. Well, I realize that, but, nevertheless, the additional numbers list is carried in excess, is it not?

Admiral ANDREWS. Yes, sir.

Mr. DITTER. Again my question, Admiral, would any economies result if the officers were not retired or removed from the active list to the additional numbers list, just yes or no.

Admiral ANDREWS. No.

Mr. DITTER. The removal of any officers from the active list creates a flow of promotion, does it not?

Admiral ANDREWS. Yes, sir.

Mr. DITTER. That flow of promotion may not always be in pay, but it is in grade, is it not?

Admiral ANDREWS. Yes, sir.

Mr. DITTER. And that fact is true particularly where the removal is made from a grade that is up to the legal quota, the quota provided by law? That is true, is it not?

Admiral ANDREWS. That is true.

Mr. DITTER. Therefore you would have the retired pay of an individual or the active pay as an additional number, plus, in some cases, increased pay all down the line because of promotions ensuing from the vacancy, and plus, in some cases, an increase in the amount of the allowance, and on top of that if you were up to your authorized strength there would need to be added the cost of the men coming in at the bottom, would there not, as a result of the present program of promotions?

Admiral ANDREWS. I might answer that in this way by stating that to retire an officer and replace him by another officer is more economical than it would be to retain that officer on active duty. In other words, the retired pay, plus the pay of the entering replacement officer, is less than the active-duty pay of the original officer if he continues on and does not retire.

Mr. DITTER. But your answer, Admiral, does not take into account all of the factors. As I stated before, you would have the retired pay of an individual, or the active pay as an additional number, plus, in some cases, increased pay all down along the line because of promotions ensuing from the vacancy, plus, in some cases, an increase in the amount of allowance, and on top of that, if you are up to your authorized strength, there would need to be added the cost of a man coming in at the bottom. Now, all of those factors are a part of the present program, are they not, of promotions growing out of the selection system?

36929-38- -51

Admiral ANDREWS. No, sir. That is all a part of the program of any service whether it be lineal or selection whereby you have a flow of promotion. If the flow of promotion is effectively stopped, in one manner or another, some slight saving may be made, but at the cost of a major loss of efficiency.

Mr. DITTER. Do you mean by that that the same conditions prevail in the Army as prevail in the Navy based on the factors that I have specifically enumerated in the foregoing question?

Admiral ANDREWS. Some of them; yes.

Mr. DITTER. I said all of them, sir.

Admiral ANDREWS. If you take your specific case, which you have enumerated, an officer in the Army retires and another officer comes up to take his place. You pay the officer who is retired his retired pay, and you pay the officer who replaces him his active pay, and you pay the lieutenant colonel who taked the colonel's place his active pay, and you pay the major, the captain, the lieutenant, and all the way down exactly as you have stated, but there is no selection in it at all. It is the natural flow of promotion whereby one man dreps out, you fill his position, and you pay that man who drops out his retired pay.

Mr. DITTER. Now, getting back to a categorical "yes" or "no" answer, do you mean to say all of these factors that I have enumerated are present with the same degree of potency and effectiveness in the Army as they are in the Navy?

Admiral ANDREWS. No; not perhaps to the same total but each retirement in both Army and Navy carries the same chain of results. Mr. DITTER. No; that is it.

Admiral ANDREWS. The total in the Army may be less, because the Army does not have the service in grade retirement.

Mr. DITTER. So that these factors which I have enumerated which are not present in the Army program are due and the additional costs ensuing are due to the fact that there is a selection system in the Navy which does not prevail in the Army?

Admiral ANDREWS. No, sir; the answer to that is no, unless practically all promotion is blocked and officers remain indefinitely in the lower grades there are no additional costs.

Mr. DITTER. Now, Admiral, I do not want to quibble with you, sir. Admiral ANDREWS. No, sir; I do not want to quibble either, Mr. Ditter.

Mr. DITTER. But it seems to me your admission makes that observation of mine a definite conclusion.

Admiral ANDREWS. I have tried to make my statement to you as definite as I can. The selection system is a factor, but the thought regarding retirement and the filling of vacancies which you have enumerated is not due to selection.

Mr. DITTER. No; but those factors which are not present in the Army program, growing out of promotions, which are present in the list that I have just given you, are present in the Navy by reason of the selection system?

Admiral ANDREWS. Only to a certain extent.

Mr. DITTER. Then to some extent?

Admiral ANDREWS. Yes; to some extent.

Mr. DITTER. To that extent it represents an increase in the cost of the maintenance of the personnel of the officer group in the Navy?

« PreviousContinue »