MANPOWER UTILIZATION IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TUESDAY, MAY 14, 1963 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MANPOWER UTILIZATION OF THE Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 a.m., in room 215, House Office Building, Hon. David N. Henderson, presiding. Mr. HENDERSON. The subcommittee will come to order. I would like to explain that three of our subcommittee members are in another subcommittee meeting in an adjoining room this morning, and will join us shortly. I thought it might be well that we open this session and get your statement in the record and then we can get on with questions. When Mr. Beckworth comes in, I will ask him to preside. I will help to make the quorum, but I can't contribute very much this morning, due to my laryngitis. Mr. BECKWORTH (presiding). Yesterday we discussed with the Under Secretary of the Navy, Hon. Paul Fay, Jr., several manpower issues currently facing that Department. Today we are happy to welcome before the subcommittee the Special Assistant for Manpower, Personnel and Reserve Forces, to the Secretary of the Air Force, Mr. Benjamin Fridge. Mr. Fridge, we are quite interested in learning more about the military-civilian mix. Almost daily our subcommittee receives complaints, from all over the Air Force, regarding the increasing use of military personnel in place of civilians in support-type jobs. We also want to know more about the use of contractor employees, the Air Reserve technician program, and your followthrough on several Comptroller General studies. Since your statement is not unduly long, will you first read it and then we will ask questions? 219 STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN W. FRIDGE, SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND RESERVE FORCES, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE; ACCOMPANIED BY MAJ. GEN. B. 0. DAVIS, JR., DIRECTOR OF MANPOWER AND ORGANIZATION, JOHN A. WATTS, DIRECTOR OF CIVILIAN PERSONNEL, AND JAMES GOODE, DEPUTY FOR MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND ORGANIZATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE Mr. FRIDGE. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, it is a pleasure for me to appear before you again this year to discuss Air Force manpower control and utilization. Our concerns and objectives in this matter are identical to your own-to achieve more effective utilization of personnel resources and, in so doing, enhance our defense posture by reducing manpower costs and obtaining the maximum return for the defense dollar. We are aware that these goals can best be attained through sound manpower and personnel practices. We recognize and appreciate the rights and desires of the individual employees to job security, a reasonable chance for advancement, and a decent wage for an honest day's work. This goes for all Air Force personnel, military as well as civilian. I shall start with a brief overview of the total manpower program and the effect of some of the major force changes and budget adjustments on that program. I shall then discuss some of the trends in civilian employment followed by a review of our more significant management programs. The final portion of my statement will be devoted to topics of special interest to this subcommittee which will not have been covered earlier. MANPOWER PROGRAM The Air Force in-service objectives from end fiscal year 1962 to end fiscal year 1963 show a downward trend in both military and civilian spaces; the net reduction amounts to around 23,600, of which 18,700 are military and 940 are direct-hire civilian. The balance of the reduction, 3,960, is applied to indirect-hire foreign nationals. These reductions are associated chiefly with the phasedown of the Berlin contingency forces. The Cuban situation of last October was met with only minor manpower adjustments and had no specific impact on the fiscal year 1963 manpower program. This was due primarily to the short duration of the emergency and to the state of operational readiness of both the active establishment and the Air Reserve forces, The fiscal year 1964 program will also be downward. The net inservice manpower reduction during fiscal year 1964 will be close to 15,760 roughly 8,930 military and 6,830 civilians. All but 260 of the civilian loss will be direct hire. Some of the major adjustments and reductions in the fiscal year 1964 program are caused by the shift from manned bombers to missiles, expansion of the tactical forces in support of U.S. Strike Command and the emphasis on small war capability, dispersal of air defense forces, modernization of airlift forces, and closure of Moroccan bases. The civilian direct-hire space reductions can be attributed chiefly to transfers to defense agencies, reductions in depot maintenance and supply activities, and the President's plan to partially offset the cost of the civilian pay raise by increased productivity, which I shall discuss in a moment. In addition to adjustments in yearend manpower objectives, there are many transactions which take place throughout the year that effect increases in one functional or mission area and decreases in others. Such changes usually are not reflected in the total ceilings. For example, in fiscal year 1963 we met a new, unprogramed requirement for 1,500 spaces in southeast Asia by internal reprograming and management actions. The ability to respond to such contingencies as Cuba and southeast Asia depends to a large extent upon the effectiveness of our manpower controls and programs to improve utilization. It also depends on the flexibility allowed under fixed ceilings to adjust the military-civilian-contract mix as necessary to get the job done. In this connection, it is the continuing policy of the Air Force to use civilians in certain types of positions as provided by OSD directive. However, during a period of retrenchment and because of the dual personnel systems existent within the Air Force, commanders must have sufficient flexibility in the use of personnel resources to accomplish their mission. But the direct conversion of civilian to military spaces is not authorized as a means of reaching a reduced civilian ceiling unless manpower and fund limitations make it absolutely essential on a temporary basis. In this event, commanders must be able to justify such decisions. The regularly prescribed Air Force manpower program cycle and procedures provide the appropriate medium for reflecting the military-civilian ratio on a longrange basis. CIVILIAN TURNOVER AND RECRUITMENT The turnover of U.S. civilans during fiscal year 1962 was slightly higher than in the year before. Our accession rate increased from 16.8 percent in fiscal year 1961 to 19.7 percent in fiscal year 1962. The rate for the first half of fiscal year 1963 was higher, but this will be offset by the civilian reductions which I shall discuss in a moment. There were no special problems encountered in recruiting civilians except those normally experienced in the scientific and engineering skills. The latter are in short supply in the economy which results in a high degree of employment competition throughout both industry and Government. We expect that the recent pay legislation will improve this situation. Overall, the separation rate increased from 18.2 percent in fiscal year 1961 to 18.7 percent in fiscal year 1962 and to a projected 22 percent rate for fiscal year 1963. The increase represented by this latter figure is primarily the result of transfers to Defense Supply Agency and termination of summer employment. The turnover of scientists and engineers during 1962 indicates that though they are difficult to recruit, they are a relatively stable group once employed. Only about 2.3 percent of the total USAF civilian separations are from this group, yet they represent about 4 percent of the total USAF civilian work force. Also, while the overall USAF civilian separation rate is 18.7 percent, only 10.7 percent of the scientists and engineers were separated. In other words, the turnover rate among this group is a little over half that of the overall work force. FISCAL YEAR 1963-64 CIVILIAN REDUCTIONS As you know, the President has recently instructed that the number of Federal employees be limited to the absolute minimum necessary to get the public business done. In amplifying these instructions, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget has stated in Circular A-44 that each department and agency must develop a plan designed to increase productivity by the use of improved manpower control and utilization, strengthened supervision, and better management techniques. These improvements should result in identifying personnel positions no longer required. On January 21, the Office of the Secretary of Defense announced that planned improved productivity worldwide will enable Department of Defense civilian employment levels to be reduced gradually through June 1964. This announcement also noted that a large portion of the planned reductions result from Secretary McNamara's decision to reduce service estimates of average employment about 1 percent based on the expected improved productivity. The combined Bureau of the Budget and Secretary of Defense decisions levied an overall 4 percent reduction in our forecasted fiscal year 1964 employment projections. While the fiscal year 1964 civilian employment limitations do not become effective until July 1 of this year, the magnitude of these changes requires that we commence reductions in our civilian employee strength during the remaining months of fiscal year 1963. In this way, we will be able to make a more orderly transition and minimize use of involuntary separation procedures. As things now stand, between December 31, 1962, and June 30, 1963, the Air Force will remove from its rolls about 5,500 direct-hire civilians. Roughly 5,000 more will have to be removed by June 30, 1964. We are attempting to utilize normal attrition to absorb as many of these reductions as possible. However, because of the size of the program and the potential skill imbalances, we expect that it will be necessary to use involuntary separation procedures to some extent. REDUCTION IN FORCE PROCEDURES One of the most serious effects of civilian reductions of this magnitude is the potential large-scale reductions-in-force which may be required at some installations, particularly in the Air Force Logistics Command. This is a matter which the Air Force views with grave concern. Our policy is to accomplish these reductions by normal. attrition insofar as is possible. But, because attrition is usually greater in the more critical skills, it will be necessary to employ reductions-in-force in the less critical skills. A number of measures are normally used to lessen the impact on individual employees. We try to place surplus people in other positions at the same grade. They have the right to "bump" other employees with less longevity or they may retreat to lower grades. We also have retraining programs to prepare employees for needed skills. Before initiating reductionin-force procedures to separate 50 or more civilian employees at one location, prior clearance by Headquarters, U.S. Air Force, is required. Only after all of these possible avenues are exhausted do we resort to layoffs. At that point we attempt to place the individuals in jobs at other Air Force installations or other governmental activities in the local area. Where this is not possible and they are willing to relocate, we try to place them in Government jobs outside the area. An example of just how this works may be found at Harlingen Air Force Base, Tex. When this base was deactivated there was a total of 764 employees declared surplus. Of these, 105 resigned or retired, 465 were placed at other installations, and 28 remained as standby crew. Only 166 employees were actually separated and they declined job offers outside the local area. A similar outplacement program is currently in effect at Chennault Air Force Base, La., due to the impending closure of that base. In addition, the Air Force in cooperation with the OSD Economic Advisor, has instituted an area outplacement program. For example, an area composed of eight States in the Southeastern United States has been surveyed to find jobs for the civilians being reduced from Air Force bases in that area. So far, the results look very promising indeed and we expect to expand the concept to other hard-hit areas. BUREAU OF BUDGET CIRCULAR A-44 The program reductions for fiscal year 1963-64 will be accomplished without degrading primary Air Force missions. We expect to accomplish this by better management and by reprograming actions. In March of this year, the major commands were put on notice that niceto-have activities would have to be eliminated, marginal mission support requirements would be reduced to a minimum and only the highest priority requirements would be considered in the utilization of available funds. By "highest priority" we mean those requirements directly contributing to mission capability and operational readiness. Prior to the publication of Bureau of Budget Circular A-44, the Air Force had taken steps to effect a continuous program for the improvement of manpower controls and utilization. I shall discuss the most significant of these. CONTROL OF VACANCIES In January of this year, all major air commands were advised and directed to comply with the requirement of Public Law 87-793 which directed all executive branch activities to review with meticulous care each vacancy resulting from voluntary resignation, retirement or death, and to determine whether the duties of the position could be abolished without seriously affecting the execution of essential functions. Major air commands were instructed to certify, as required, that all positions which become vacant during the period are reviewed. The determination to refill certain vacant positions is to be based on that review, in keeping with the spirit and intent of Public Law 87-793. MANPOWER VALIDATION We have been gratified by the recognition the manpower validation program has received from other governmental agencies and foreign air forces. The U.S. Post Office Department, the General Services Administration, and even commercial firms have obtained information about the program and are considering adoption of the techniques used. We have had numerous demands for the Air Force Manual |