You know, when Roughhead became CNO-I actually looked on it as a good thing. An initially he did try to reverse some of the insanity of the previous years. But now-heading out the door-it would appear Admiral Roughhead has been binging on the Kool Aid:
Asked about layoffs under the $400 billion in cuts, he said, “I believe the Navy will get smaller, and by people.”
Beyond the budget-driven cuts, the Navy will discharge 3,000 additional sailors this year due to what Roughead called “extraordinary retention.”
Because of the poor economy and what the Navy’s chief called “extraordinarily favorable” compensation, too many sailors have opted to stay in uniform, the admiral told a breakfast audience at the University Club in downtown San Diego.
Today, 70 percent of sailors are opting to reenlist after their first contract is up, he said.
A Navy retention board that looked at 16,000 jobs has decided to cut 3,000 sailors, as a result.
“These are sailors we can’t accommodate in the Navy. These are good people,” Roughead said. “They would be great employees.”
Given the budgetary environment, the admiral was frank about his view on how generous the compensation package is for his sailors.
“An enlisted sailor with eight years of service living in Norfolk, Va., makes $4,000 more a year than a high school teacher who’s been teaching in the school system for eight years,” Roughead told the University Club audience.
“And that sailor has the best health care in the world, they have a terrific house to live in, they have a great community support structure to take care of them,” he said.
Asked afterward if he thinks there’s room to cut military compensation, the chief of naval operations said the question is, can benefits be offered in a less expensive way and still attract people to serve.
You know-its not really the job of the CNO to say that last part. That’s a task better left to the folks with green eye shades. After all-a teacher in San Diego stands very slim chance of being sent off to Iraq or Afghanistan for a year -immediately after he has completed three seagoing deployments in three and a half years.
Furthermore-until one acknowledges the cuts that can be achieved by ending the wars this year not in 2014-the service chiefs are have no business talking about personnel cuts. Not that I don’t think they will come-but it should be looked at from a macro standpoint. The Navy is as bit as busy as any of the other services. Without a concurrent withdrawal from other overseas locations-all you are doing is creating an increased strain on those left behind.
And then there is LCS…………..
Skip,
Reminds me of the shoes that complain about Flight Pay. Right up until the time we have a Class Alpha. Like the gents from Team 6 and the SOAR, you tend to forget about the dangers because they are so good at the job.
The CNO saying this kind of stuff is disheartening. Once Big Navy figures some good ways to get rid of the bloat and bureaucracy should we start thinking of cutting manpower numbers.
I am not going to hold my breath.
The Navy has always been really bad at personnel management. I don’t know how many times I observed them forcing people out, only to offer maximum retention incentives to the same job field six months later. Hell, I remember the time cooks were getting the maximum reenlistment bonus. As for CNO’s. I haven’t seen one worthy of my respect in many, many years. It brings to mind the comment I read during the tailhook “scandal” pogrom: “The navy lost more good men than they would have if they had been in a major war.” That was about just the ones who bailed because of the way it was conducted.
I still work with active duty sailors and the “word” out in the fleet is the Navy don’t want to keep anyone past the 10-12 year mark because it becomes too expensive for DOD if you decide to stay to retirement. Maybe that is why the CNO isn’t bashful about saying things that harm retention.
perhaps if we get a refund of 418 million for the 158 raptors and the billions for the f-35…we can build more littoral combat ships..oh wait