Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. NORBLAD. What is the overall reenlistment rate in the Air Force at the present time, approximately, at this time?

Mr. MORRELL. I don't know. I think Colonel McRae might be able to answer.

Mr. NORBLAD. Just a general, overall figure, throughout the entire Air Force.

Yolonel McRae. Colonel McRae, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. NORBLAD. I don't want an exact figure. Just approximately.

Colonel McRAE. The enlistment rate for first-term airmen is approximately 25 percent. This figure increases to approximately 90 percent in the case of career airmen with 12 to 15 years' service.

Mr. NORBLAD. Is that because of the location?
Mr. MORRILL. Yes.

Colonel RECTOR. Another factor here is the requirement for this skill in industry. These skills are readily picked up by industry. This is a highly technical skill.

Mr. HARDY. Your R. & D. contractors try to get them, don't they?
Colonel RECTOR. And the manufacturers. [Laughter.]
And at five times the salary.

Mr. NORBLAD. All we have to do is read the back end of the financial section of the New York Times on Sunday. For years, if you go through it you see there are at least 10 pages solid with ads asking for these people.

Secretary IMIRIE. Personally, I would like to see the A.C. & W. a “blue suit” system. I think the theory is correct. It ought to be military.

I think we are in a problem of feasibility, and the point is whether we can do it. We have almost given up the ghost. Our big challenge is to try to get some competitiveness in these things that we can do nothing about.

Mr. Hardy. When the Army gets the Nike-Zeus, you won't need all of them.

Secretary IMIRIE. Maybe.
Mr. Kirchin. May I ask one question in connection with that?
Mr. HÉBERT. Yes, Mr, Kitchin.

Mr. KITCHIN. Getting back to the 17 percent reenlistment figure and the statement the colonel just made with reference to about four or five times the salary that industry could offer these boys, and probably being one of the reasons why you do not have a higher reenlistment rate: Are we getting down to where we are gettingand I say this not critically, but are we getting the dregs in the bottom of the barrel that industry won't hire, or what is the reason for the 17 percent reenlistments?

Colonel RECTOR. No, sir. This is reflected in terms of added training costs, to train new people to replace them.

If we had the retention that we wanted, our training costs of new people coming on would be appreciably reduced.

So the people we have are new and they are efficient, but not as capable as they would be if they had two or three or four tours; that is, enlistments.

Mr. HÉBERT. You are addressing yourself to service people?
Colonel RECTOR. Yes, sir.
Mr. KITCHIN. That is all.

Mr. HÉBERT. Well, have you given any consideration—this crops into my mind at the moment. Have you given any consideration to an extension of enlistments, initial enlistments?

Your present enlistment is what? Three years, isn't it?
Colonel RECTOR. Four.
Mr. HÉBERT. Four years?
Colonel RECTOR. Four.

Mr. HÉBERT. Has any attention been given to a longer enlistment? Because, after all, you have to train these people, and you know they go in there to get trained to go out and get more.

Colonel RECTOR. That is true. And it has been considered, sir. I would like to refer this to Colonel McRae.

Colonel McRAE. There is a current exercise that would involve the extension, sir, of the enlistments in a number of the more critical skills. But this is only a temporary measure.

There is no intention at the moment to extend it beyond 4 years for

Mr. HÉBERT. You see, Colonel, the other day the Congress, in passing a bill relating to the academies, to fill out the vacancies, made it mandatory that anybody going to our academies have to serve 5 years. An effort was made on the floor to put it at 7 years, which found favor in many places.

Now I think the same logic should apply: that it costs us X number of dollars to educate an officer, and that he must remain in the service

all groups.

[ocr errors]

for 5 years.

The same should apply to the enlisted man, who is certainly receiving equal or comparable or relative training in his field, and which is costing the Government money to train him. And if he knows very well that he goes in to be trained. And which is right. And to capitalize on that training, economically, financially, after he leaves the service.

So I think it is something that the services should address themselves to, in this technical field.

The recruiting service always boasts—that is one of the come-ons they have. “We will train you. We will train you. Come in, we will train you; we will train you."

Well, that man goes in, and rightly so, and serves the country and is in uniform. He is trained.

But I think some exploration should be given to an extension of tours in the technical services, where the Government is investing money to train technicians, as compared to training a man to carry a rifle.

Colonel Hill. Mr. Chairman, we are approaching this thing that you are speaking of in a slightly different manner.

We are now in the process of offering people additional technical training only if they do reenlist.

After they complete their first enlistment, they are not eligible for this training unless they reenlist. Mr. HÉBERT. Do I understand you to mean by that that

you

do not recruit from the lowest level the civilian into the uniform, on the basis of training?

Colonel Hill. Yes, sir, we do, do just as you said.

But there is additional training which an individual becomes eligible for if he does reenlist the second time.

Mr. HÉBERT. Yes, but he doesn't want the additional training.
Colonel HILL. Yes, sir.

Mr. HÉBERT. He has enough training to go out and get that job, and as you say, at four or five times what the Government can afford

to pay him.

So that money is lost. That investment in that man is lost.

Mr. Kitchen. But they may-we gave the President the emergency powers to extend the obligated service the other day. And at least I expect this emergency is going to continue for some time.

Secretary IMIRIE. Yes, sir. And that is what the colonel addressed himself to.

We are considering specifically extending skills we need, and so forth.

Mr HÉBERT. Under the recent legislation.
Secretary I MIRIE. Under the recent legislation.

But I understood the chairman was addressing himself to what are we going to do over the long run, notwithstanding.

Mr. HÉBERT. Over the long term. This is emergency.

Secretary IMIRIE. I am not aware of any such plans. But I admit it is out of my field.

Mr. HÉBERT. But it is something I think the services should give attention to.

Secretary IMIRIE. Yes, sir.

Mr. NORBLAD. What is your tour on these so-called hilltops that you face in upper Canada and in Alaska and the Aleutians?

Mr. MORRILL. Twelve months.

Mr. HÉBERT. We now get to the interesting part of the hearings, of the contracts.

Do you have those contracts! ?

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Sandweg is prepared to address himself to the research and development contracts, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HÉBERT. Mr. Secretary, I presume your people are ready? Secretary IMIRIE. Yes, sir. Just call off the contracts you wish to discuss. I will name the witnesses.

Mr. HÉBERT. We will start off with Bryn Mawr. That is the most interesting.

Dr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Dr. Charles Hutchinson.

Mr. HÉBERT. Sit down and be comfortable. We want you to be relaxed.

Dr. HUTCHINSON. I am Deputy Director of Life Sciences in the Air Force Office of Scientific Research.

I can thoroughly understand your interest in Bryn Mawr.

I am afraid that anything that I say is likely to prove a disappointment-anything that I am at least prepared to say.

I have another apology to make.

I am a psychologist. And anything that an intelligent human being can say in simple English, a psychologist can say in jargon that is not understandable even to another psychologist.

Mr. HÉBERT. We are accustomed to such jargon.

Mr. COURTNEY. Feel right at home, Doctor.
Mr. SANDWEG. So we can get it on the record, Doctor.

Air Force type contracts that were supplied to the committee were reviewed and several were picked out for further explanation. One that is under discussion now I might read it was let by the Air Research and Development Command. The number is DDP61-4-607. It reflects two contracts with Bryn Mawr College at Bryn Mawr, Pa. Combined total amount in excess of of $22,000. And the title of the contract and all the data we have on it is “Psychological Adjustment Factors in Self-Estimate of Body Space." (The contract data not read is as follows:)

AIR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND

DDP-61-4-607Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pa. Psychological adjustment factors in self-estimate of body space--- -$9, 020 Psychological adjustment factors in self-estimate of body space--- 13, 340

Mr. SANDWEG. We are wondering, Doctor, just what does that mean?

Mr. COURTNEY. First of all, Bryn Mawr is a female college. Is that right?

Dr. HUTCHINSON. That is correct-
Mr. COURTNEY. “Self-Estimate of Body Space”.

Dr. HUTCHINSON. The graduate school is coeducational. They grant a Ph. D. in psychology, and in the graduate department. They do accept male students. Also

in this regard they have a cooperative arrangement with Haverford College, which is all male, and Swarthmore, which is co-ed, to exchange courses and to exchange research facilities.

Mr. HÉBERT. Not exchange students.

Dr. HUTCHINSON. They do. That is correct, they do exchange students where there is a particuarly strong course in one of the colleges.

The subject, as you heard it, is one which is rather easy to misunderstand, I am sure. The kind of a judgment that I would reach.

And I would like it understood that the kind of questions you have are the kind that we have, and that we don't pick these things out of the hat, but that we have a rather extensive selection process.

And I think—since I am the only one here talking about basic research, I thing this ought to be understood, that we are interested in those kinds of work which will develop new concepts, which will make discoveries and inventions, and develop materials or procedures which will be helpful to the Air Force 10, 15, and 25 years into the future.

And therefore we don't pretend that we are coming up with a gadget or a piece of useful information that will be used next week, although at times this does occur, that someone has called the serendipitous results.

Mr. HARDY. What kind of results?

Dr. HUTCHINSON. Those unexpected results which have an immediate application which we didn't intend in the first place.

Mr. HARDY. You know, Mr. Chairman, I wish we could get the doctor to take the title of this contract and break it down to see if we can understand it.

74109-6117

Mr. NORBLAD. What is the overall reenlistment rate in the Air Force at the present time, approximately, at this time?

Mr. MORRELL. I don't know. I think Colonel McRae might be able to answer.

Mr. NORBLAD. Just a general, overall figure, throughout the entire
Air Force.

Colonel McRE. Colonel McRae, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Norblan. I don't want an exact figure. Just approximately.

Colonel McRAE. The enlistment rate for first-term airmen is approximately 25 percent. This figure increases to approximately 90 percent in the case of career airmen with 12 to 15 years' service.

Mr. NORBLAD. Is that because of the location?
Mr. MORRILL. Yes.

Colonel RECTOR. Another factor here is the requirement for this skill in industry. These skills are readily picked up by industry. This is a highly technical skill.

Mr. Hardy. Your R. & D. contractors try to get them, don't they?
Colonel RECTOR. And the manufacturers. [Laughter.]
And at five times the salary.

Mr. NORBLAD. All we have to do is read the back end of the financial section of the New York Times on Sunday. For years, if you go through it you see there are at least 10 pages solid with ads asking for these people.

Secretary Imirie. Personally, I would like to see the A.C. & W. a “blue suit” system. I think the theory is correct. It ought to be military.

I think we are in a problem of feasibility, and the point is whether we can do it. We have almost given up the ghost. Our big challenge is to try to get some competitiveness in these things that we can do nothing about.

Mr. Hardy. When the Army gets the Nike-Zeus, you won't need all of them.

Secretary IMIRIE. Maybe.
Mr. KITCHIN. May I ask one question in connection with that?
Mr. HÉBERT. Yes, Mr. Kitchin.

Mr. KITCHIN. Getting back to the 17 percent reenlistment figure and the statement the colonel just made with reference to about four or five times the salary that industry could offer these boys, and probably being one of the reasons why you do not have a higher reenlistment rate: Are we getting down to where we are gettingand I say this not critically, but are we getting the dregs in the bottom of the barrel that industry won't hire, or what is the reason for the 17 percent reenlistments?

Colonel RECTOR. No, sir. This is reflected in terms of added training costs, to train new people to replace them.

If we had the retention that we wanted, our training costs of new people coming on would be appreciably reduced.

So the people we have are new and they are efficient, but not as capable as they would be if they had two or three or four tours; that is, enlistments.

Mr. Hébert. You are addressing yourself to service people?
Colonel RECTOR. Yes, sir.
Mr. KITCHIN. That is all.

« PreviousContinue »