4 hours Ago
The purpose of the United States Army is to fight and win our nation’s wars. Everything that supports preparation for this endeavor and contributes to mission success is deemed essential, while anything that does not is considered nonessential. This last category is usually the first targeted during budget reduction drills.
However, determining what is essential within the military is a complex challenge. What might seem unnecessary may often turn out to be indispensable, and vice versa. Currently, the Army has 450,000 active-duty soldiers , supported by a federal civilian workforce of 265,000, which is a full 37% of the total.
Another 12,600 civilians support the Army Reserve. These Department of Army civilians (DACs) play a critical role in ensuring the Army functions properly. Reducing their numbers too quickly, by a slapped-together team of outsiders who wouldn’t know an Army installation if one fell on them, could be disastrous.
Dan Possumato is retired after 25 years as a senior Department of the Army civilian employee. The last 10 years of his career he managed federal civilian workforces of 4,000 employees each in Germany and Alaska. He is a former Professor at the Army Management Staff College and a graduate of the U.
S. Army War College. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is now proceeding to do just that.
Terminating probationary employees may be the easiest and swiftest means to save money, but it can create a false impression that they are expendable. These workers are typically hired to fill vacancies resulting from retirements, promotions or transfers. Eliminating them could mean that critical work goes undone or is shifted onto already burdened employees without additional compensation, further lowering morale, which is already a concern.
In my 25 years of experience as a senior DAC, I have overseen numerous budget reductions at military installations, which presented significant challenges and consequences. One particular incident stands out. An exemplary employee whose position was eliminated came to my office to show me pictures of his family, asking how he was now supposed to provide for them.
About half the cost of operating a large Army installation is personnel salaries, both military and civilian. Since soldiers’ pay is controlled by the Pentagon, budget reductions at the base level often result in federal employees losing their jobs — employees who run essential programs that directly support soldiers and their mission. These programs include firing ranges, maneuver areas, training simulators, supply warehouses, barracks, family housing and a whole host of other services.
When Reduction in Force (RIF) procedures are implemented, competent and dedicated employees may find themselves reassigned to positions for which they are not properly trained, forced to relocate to geographical areas where they do not wish to live, or, in the worst cases, terminated unless eligible for retirement. These workforce reductions, if not well justified, can severely weaken the support structure that sustains the Army in ways that most Americans — and even many generals — fail to grasp. When making cuts at military bases, the firing ranges and maneuver areas I mentioned are often deemed “sacred cows” and remain largely untouched.
However, other essential services, such as child development centers and barracks maintenance, may suffer. Subsidized child development centers enable soldiers and their spouses to go to work. Eliminating them would force families to seek expensive alternatives outside the base, which many military households simply could not afford.
Delaying or cancelling maintenance on barracks can lead to deteriorating living conditions, including outdated and malfunctioning infrastructure. Soldiers discuss their living conditions with family and friends, and if word spreads that their base housing is substandard, recruitment and retention will ultimately suffer. The Army has pledged to provide soldiers and their families with a quality of life comparable to that of the civilian society they protect.
Excessive cuts to civilians who manage the programs that enhance their well-being will inevitably affect overall readiness. Retired Lt. Gen.
James Pillsbury has emphasized the value of DACs, stating, “A real strength of our civilians is that they are stable, remaining in their jobs for much longer periods of time than the military. They thus learn their jobs and are able to hone their skills necessary to be at the highest level of skill and knowledge in their fields.” James McNaughton of the U.
S. Army Center of Military History has also highlighted the importance of Army civilians, noting that they have been essential to the total force by “delivering ‘beans and bullets’; treating the sick and wounded; procuring and maintaining equipment and supplies; operating state-of-the-art technologies; managing posts, camps and stations; and caring for families. Too often overlooked, these quiet professionals have always been a vital part of the Army profession.
” Through my own experiences with troop deployments to Iraq, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Rwanda, Somalia and Haiti, I have witnessed firsthand the indispensable role that federal civilians play in ensuring that soldiers leave properly equipped, trained and otherwise prepared for what they will face in conflict zones. They manage the installations where soldiers live, work and train. When soldiers deploy, these civilians also support the families left behind, sometimes for a year or more.
DOGE plans to cut 5% to 8% of the Department of Defense’s civilian workforce, which numbers approximately 754,000. An 8% reduction would mean the loss of 60,000 workers, but there will surely be more reductions to come. If these cuts result from a methodical, objective and fact-based review of each position — conducted by individuals who understand the actual work involved, not just read the job descriptions — then they may be justified.
However, arbitrary reductions will be misguided and reckless. Financial savings on a spreadsheet mean little if our troops are deployed ill-prepared, ill-trained and ill-equipped to put their lives on the line in service of our nation. We invite you to add your comments.
We encourage a thoughtful exchange of ideas and information on this website. By joining the conversation, you are agreeing to our commenting policy and terms of use . More information is found on our FAQs .
You can modify your screen name here . Comments are managed by our staff during regular business hours Monday through Friday as well as limited hours on Saturday and Sunday. Comments held for moderation outside of those hours may take longer to approve.
Please sign into your Sun Journal account to participate in conversations below. If you do not have an account, you can register or subscribe . Questions? Please see our FAQs .
Your commenting screen name has been updated. Send questions/comments to the editors. « Previous Next ».
