Article

2014-07-09 Government

Army initiates Reduction in Force (RIF) on Captains and Majors.

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Besoeker 2014-07-09 00:00|| || Front Page|| [6 views ] Top

#1 Back then there was something call the 'Regular Army'. The concept, incorporated in the institution from the 19th century was for the army to be 'expandable'. The notion from the beginning of the old republic was to keep the army small (see-Oliver Cromwell who weighed heavily on former British subjects now independent with a new nation). In times of need the regular army would be expanded for the duration of the emergency. During those times long serving officers had two ranks, one in the Regular Army and one in the Army of the United States (the expanded edition). When the war was over, the 'reserve' officers were to be released and the long term officers would revert to their RA rank (see-'Colonel' Custer). In the case of RIFs, the RAs were to be 'tenured', but they were also subject to reduction in rank, usually for retirement calculations.

The '72 rift resulted in claims filled in the federal court system. The argument before the judiciary, which as we have seen in most cases lacked knowledge of the subject they were reviewing, was presented as an 'equal protection' clause debate. After around a decade of appeal through the system, the judiciary decided the system was 'unfair' and struck down the legislation on officer selection and promotion. So Congress put a new law on the books which removed the old Regular Army from the accession commissioning process for West Point, ROTC scholarships, and top 5 percenters. RA designation was moved to selection for major. However, the overall effect was to do away with the design concept of an 'expandable' army that had been in place for over a hundred years.

It's interesting as the Big Brother Beltway grows like a cancer sticking its tentacles and protruding ever more into every aspect of our lives, the only place cut in personnel is one of the very few departments called for in the old Constitution.

Posted by Procopius2k 2014-07-09 08:33|| 2014-07-09 08:33|| Front Page Top

#2 Yes, it became a very convoluted process. If a RIF'd officer was a prior enlisted soldier, he could in some cases revert to his previous enlisted rank and retain his commission in what was referred to as a reserve 'hip pocket' commission status. If he or she had a total of 10 years commissioned time, he might eventually retire as an enlisted man with 'highest rank held' grade. Meaning a Master Sergeant might actually retire as a Captain or Major.

Reverting to enlisted ranks at least enabled the Army to retain experienced personnel and call upon them as officers once again, if needed.

Posted by Besoeker 2014-07-09 09:11|| 2014-07-09 09:11|| Front Page Top

#3 Yep. I remember a couple of those at the end of month 'retirement parade' on posts. Day before in NCO stripes, and on that day in his commissioned officer's uniform.

However, there's still something not right with an institution that on one hand insists on using civ education as a heavy promotion/selection requirement that results in a 16 year (straight line) NCO with a BA degree taking orders from a 2LT with a BA and only a year of experience. At least my instructors at OBC were clear about the concept - go in, sit down, shut up, and learn from them.

Posted by Procopius2k 2014-07-09 09:43|| 2014-07-09 09:43|| Front Page Top

#4 However, there's still something not right with an institution that on one hand insists on using civ education as a heavy promotion/selection requirement

As you and I both know, there were other, non-performance criteria at play as well. No sense going there however, water long under the bridge.

Posted by Besoeker 2014-07-09 09:52|| 2014-07-09 09:52|| Front Page Top

#5 Can't be good for the military. Many of the captains and majors are the leadership ranks with combat experience in Iraq/Afghanistan.

Posted by JohnQC 2014-07-09 10:48|| 2014-07-09 10:48|| Front Page Top

#6 ..can't be good for those fomenting a political coup in the Beltway either. All that real combat experience out there in the population. No political generals to control them and hired rent-a-~~thug~~cops won't fare too well on contact.

Posted by Procopius2k 2014-07-09 12:05|| 2014-07-09 12:05|| Front Page Top

#7 this stuff shouldn't happen this way

Sec of Def, Army Chief of Staff and a few below that rank should have to state, under oath, why this happened

after that, there should be legislation to dock the pay of those higher ups

Posted by lord garth 2014-07-09 12:10|| 2014-07-09 12:10|| Front Page Top

#8 "The '72 rift..."

Yes I remember this well and, to address Besoekers point of "hip pocket' commission status," I was outprocessed by a Master Sergeant to whom I reported when he was a Major. Don't know which of us was more uncomfortable.

Posted by Uncle Phester 2014-07-09 22:21|| 2014-07-09 22:21|| Front Page Top

23:58 Zenobia Floger6220
23:46 Richard Aubrey
23:34 Pajama Boy
23:22 JosephMendiola
23:15 JosephMendiola
23:09 JosephMendiola
23:06 JosephMendiola
23:01 JosephMendiola
22:50 Uncle Phester
22:47 Uncle Phester
22:45 Uncle Phester
22:41 Uncle Phester
22:40 Frank G
22:35 KBK
22:34 Uncle Phester
22:32 Uncle Phester
22:21 Uncle Phester
22:12 Sean Connery
21:39 49 Pan
21:36 Steve White
21:29 Frank G
21:08 Frank G
20:40 rammer
20:39 Frank G