Dempsey defends brass’ perks
Remember how the chairman of the Joint Chiefs Martin Dempsey has been lobbying Congress hard to reduce military pay raises, change the retirement system, hike retirees’ health care costs? Well, he’s finally found something that the Congress needs to continuing to fund; generals’ pensions and the little perks that go along with being a flag officer, according to USAToday;
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff petitioned Congress last month to retain privileges for top officers that lawmakers are seeking to trim, including fattened pensions and the number of enlisted aides serving generals and admirals, according to a letter obtained by USA TODAY.
[…]
“Making modest reductions to the number of enlisted aides is a common sense reform that will help the Pentagon cut costs,” said Ethan Rosenkranz, national security policy analyst for the Project on Government Oversight, a non-partisan government watchdog. “It doesn’t surprise us that America’s most senior general is opposed to a smaller staff and more modest retirement package.”
Yeah, I know, I could hardly believe that he’s that much of a weasel-dicked prick, either. But there you go. I foresee a bright future for Dempsey in politics. Obviously he fits under most desks.
Category: Big Pentagon
This, this doesn’t suprise me. This person along with Odierno always talk a great game and are too good to to eat in the restaurant at the Pentagon or in the food court. Overseas, got it due to outside concerns, but the Pentagon? and why do they not only get 75% retirement like all their rank and file? Wait, wait, now where did Dempsey, Odierno and thier ilk commission form? Oh that’s right a school which caters to them to begin with
Actually, 3 and 4 star flag officers get a 137% pension rate due to “retention” issues. (185,000 a year or so?)
TAH did a story on it a few months back. I might be wrong on the exact numbers.
So, as a senior flag officer you make more retired than in the army basically. Because, you know, there are so many GO’s out there that are unemployed and can’t find a job, have to live in a “normal” house without a driver, maid, etc.
Everyone who serves over 30 now continues to get 2.5% per year ar the 75% cap was ended in 2007. The vast majority of the collecting over 75 are actually not GOs but LTC/Col who had prior enlisted service.
What I dodmpt realize until this story came out the other day was all the longevity increases that where added to the pay scale for GOs. Totally unnecessary IMHO, and probably where a cut could made, as well as instituting a cap on the retired pay at the same level as on active duty.
Luddite4change: the longevity raises were always there, at least up to 30 YoS. However, the Executive Schedule pay limits blocked some of them from taking affect while an individual was on active duty, and the former 75% limit on retired pay did the same during retirement – to an extent. It was the combination of the two (removal of 75% cap plus the new longevity raises in the published pay scales after 30 YoS that were blocked from taking effect during active service by the Executive Schedule limit) that allows retired pay for some GOs to substantially exceed their pay while on active duty.
A cap at 100% of maximum pay received during a 12-month period would fix the problem. Altering the military pay scales to “max out” at the appropriate executive schedule limits would do the same.
I’m not holding my breath waiting for either any time soon. But I might be wrong.
This seems to easy a target to fix in the way that had been described below. But, like you I won’t venture a guess on it getting done or if it get done in a way that hurts the majority of folks over 30 who are not GOs.
FWIW, when the law first went into effect I knew a guy, USAF O6 with 40 years of service, who retired 1 day before the change to over 30 rules became effective. He was a little bummed.
BTW, no post on the Somalia streamer story I sent over?
I think I speak for the majority when I say Taking one for the team is getting mighty damn old when those who are supposed to be leaders exempt themselves from the very hardships they expect us to endure.
Just like congress.
Birds of a feather … ?
Preach it, Brother.
I have no problem per se with allowing military retired pay to be calculated based on years of service above 30 – though I do think it should be capped at 100% of base pay received (that’s 40 years of service). Rather, my problem is with the legal quirk that allows retired pay for senior GOs to exceed their active duty pay received.
That quirk exists because pay for senior GOs in published DFAS pay tables exceeds legal limits on Federal pay set by Executive Schedules. While serving on active duty, pay received is thus limited. However, pension calculation is based on published tables – not actual pay received.
Two simple legal changes would fix this. Here’s the suggested language:
An even simpler fix would be to do with military pay tables precisely what has been done by OPM with senior civilian pay tables. Those “max out” and have no further longevity raises when Executive Schedule limits are reached.
The staff issue is very different. That issue is 100% bogus and indefensible; Dempsey is IMO indeed an absolute tool for “going there”. Staffs today are bloated and are in gross need of trimming. That staff bloat IMO is a primary cause of many if not most idiotic policy decisions and resulting nonsensical “make work” (everyone has to justify their position). Cut them back, and IMO a huge chunk of nonsense would go away.
I knew it was something like that.
Not to mention the obscene consulting salary they’ll get from whatever defense think tank is hiring them, if not the DoD itself.
Agree with you Hondo. Back when I was a private in Germany, the CG (2nd AD; maybe 3rd AD??) had his camper pulled to the field exercise. There was an aide that laid his clothes out and actually put his slippers under his bed. I know this because I was installing the communications in the camper and asked the guy what he was doing. Yeah, cut that guy!
JBS: I can’t really say I have that much heartburn with a 2-star or above CG having a personal staff of one enlisted aide (the individual can double as their driver), one officer aide-de-camp, and – maybe – a cook (the CG’s mess is a longstanding tradition, and someone has to run it). At the 3- or 4-star level, they might need an assistant aide-de-camp (Sr NCO or Jr Officer) – I lean towards no, but could be convinced of the need by a good enough argument from someone’s who’s served in that environment for a while (I never did).
Nondeployable HQs (like the Pentagon, TRADOC, etc . . . ) IMO wouldn’t need a cook as part of the CG’s personal staff; any CG’s mess there could be authorized via TDA. And the enlisted aide/driver’s duties in nondeploying HQs might be dispensed with as well, or could simply be slotted as the CG’s Driver vice an aide.
Anything beyond that in the way of a GO’s personal staff to me seems pretty excessive – remember, their organizations also have TOE/TDA billets for SGS, XO, Admin NCOs, Secretaries, Staff Officers, etc . . . . to support them. That’s IMO true whether you’re talking a division CG or the CJCS. They’re senior leaders, not royalty.
“The staff issue is very different. That issue is 100% bogus and indefensible; Dempsey is IMO indeed an absolute tool for “going there”. Staffs today are bloated and are in gross need of trimming. That staff bloat IMO is a primary cause of many if not most idiotic policy decisions and resulting nonsensical “make work” (everyone has to justify their position). Cut them back, and IMO a huge chunk of nonsense would go away.”
DING! DING! DING!
And … we have a winner!
Reducing the number of aides means he might have to get his own coffee. Way to sell out your soldiers, cheese dick.
It’s reducing enlisted staff. Generals have captains and majors to get their coffee for them. An NCO is too lowly to do something as important as make coffee a 4star drinks.
Besides, There is all that important mission analysis that goes into making the coffee that us NCOs are too stupid to know anything about. We aint got that cawleje learnin’ stuffs.
They won’t cut the officers positions because those are considered mentoring and development duties for up and coming officers on how to suck butt. (Though one O4 makes more than two E6s combined.)
Cutting the numbers of GOs would be a good idea as well. Remember that there are BG’s and O6’s in the five-sided asylum that have to get their own coffe because they’re the most junior in their orifice dections!
Congress, cut the troops and pay! Oh, except for MY staff and my golfing buddies staffs.
I’m curious as to exactly how many staff each 3 or 4 star has, regardless of their position. Then how many they get for a particular position.
“I’m shocked!”
said no one.
The larger overall problem is that when “the they” make troop cuts, it’s usually to company grade positions.
They are cutting BCTs off of every division, but I’m going to take a stab that those O5/6 positions will be added somewhere else due to “task reorganization”. The actual warfighters will go bye bye.
Just like when they cut Joint forces command (JFCOM), did the hundreds of personnel actually get cut? Nope, their positions got added to other commands and echelons above reality. Why?
“Well there’s no capability to do this task anymore, so we need someone else to do it sir. ”
“Make a position! Give that directorate a staff and budget! “
I’ll say it. Fuck him. The “leadership” in the Pentagon have their heads so far up their fourth point of contact. They wouldn’t know reality if it hit them in the face.
What leadership?
The Imaginary kind = Dingleberry with delusions of grandeur.
This is how I understand it. Most of the operational and logistics decisions are made by O6s and below. Most of the operational execution is done by O3-O6. General officers decide (?communicate?) strategy in consultations with their O4-O6 and civilian “leadership” (these days using that term loosely) and coordinate with GOs in other services. FWIW, I think that the coordination has real value but most real coordination is done at the O4-O6 level. Virtually all of the on-the-ground or in-the-air stuff (including actual logistics) is done by E1-E8 and O1-O4.
Is that fairly close?
I get the junior officer aide thing but what are these enlisted guys doing to perform the mission? If nothing then they are indentured servants and he can bloody well pay for them himself.
I do remember when there was that uproar over double-dipping on government pensions, i.e., getting a civil service job after retiring from the military and getting the sandcrab pension as well as the military pension, plus Social Security.
But that was back in the 1980s, I think, and I doubt that it made any real difference then.
But this? Oh, the inflated ego that says ‘more important’ just can’t stand taking a step back, can it? Hey, Dempsey, you still put your pants on like everyone else around here. It’s a shame your package shrunk when your ego ballooned.
Damn I’m glad I retired. Leadership like this is one more reason it’s becoming more difficult to convince people to enlist or stay. I understand a GO needs some staff, but to cut everything else at every level and then say “wait, you can’t take my help away” is total bullshit.
Dempsey is “a weasel-dicked prick”? Who knew? Go figure.
“Leadership”
You keep using that word, Marty. I do not think it means what you think it means.
He sorta looks like Vizini, too …
😛
Beat me to it…where is the TaH “like” button?
Hey! FO (Flag Orificer), FO (Fuck Off)!!
I was on both sides of the fence. Made CPO as enlisted, LCDR as officer.
Except for the retired pay and the fact that, as an officer, I could make a much wider impact, I preferred being enlisted (and especially a Chief!).
I worked for a BG who had been enlisted also. Certified A-1 grade hero. Awesome guy. The colonel I worked for told me that the General was chatting about his peers and blurted out how much he hated the motherfuckers.
Lot more integrity in the enlisted ranks. LOT more.
And hell, NOBODY lives better on a ship than a Chief Petty Officer. It is heaven!
That’s why, IMHO, mustangs are nearly ALWAYS a better officer. The ones who aren’t, forgot their roots.
In early 2003, the 1AD CG was more focused on perks of his job then doing his job and morale across the division was shitty. Soldiers were sleeping in foxholes or bombed out buildings while he lived it up in his own little palace on Camp Victory. No surprise that his nickname was ‘the emperor’
Then Gen Dempsey took over as div cdr. He received one of the first chu trailers on BIAP and promptly moved his driver and assigned cook into the trailer and continued to live out of a command post truck. This same general ordered that no senior officer or NCOs were allowed to have AC until every Soldier in the division had someplace with AC to sleep in.
When Gen Dempsey left as Div Cdr, the Soldiers assigned to Wiesbaden were welcome to come by and say goodbye and have a picture taken. He knew the first name of every Soldier in the div HHC without needing an aide to whisper it in his ear.
I can’t believe it’s the same guy as the tool I see on the news.
Under the timeline, the ’emperor ‘ would be Ricardo Sanchez, yes? I have only read of what a tool HE was.
“I can’t believe it’s the same guy as the tool I see on the news.”
Something happened to him. Just like Petraeus, James H. Johnson III, …