DACMC listens to ROA

In early October, LtGen Dennis McCarthy, USMC (Ret.), ROA's executive director, spent an hour meeting with members of the Defense Advisory Committee on Military Compensation (DACMC). The discussions were about a letter that the Reserve Officers Association had sent to the committee.

This letter was considered important enough to hold a special session of DACMC's subcommittee on Reserve Compensation. ROA met at DACMC's offices in Crystal City, Arlington, Va. Key committee members who could not attend were teleconferenced into the meeting. As ROA's legislative director, I joined the general at the meeting.

ROA pointed out that today's manpower system is stifling the flexibility of Reservists' call-up. "The manpower management system that evolved over decades to implement Cold War policies and procedures is a crude tool. Generations of servicemembers have had to muscle the system into compliance or find workarounds and cosmetic solutions," ROA stated.

Having heard from other associations, the committee members were anxious to talk about ROA's diverse ideas. In its letter, ROA wrote of a "continuum of service ... [that] needs to be supported. This continuum is a ... full spectrum of availability, ranging from members of the Individual Ready Reserve who do not routinely train, to traditional Reservists who train on weekends and two-week active duty, to individuals who perform short-term active service during the course of the year, to Reservists who volunteer for active duty up to 365 days.

"The manpower management process needs to become a flexible and precise pay and compensation system that facilitates this continuum of service for Reservists and their services.

"The first step is to break down the systemic administrative, manpower, and personnel barriers that prevent Guard and Reserve members from efficiently moving to different duty statuses across the continuum of service ... A modern integrated pay and personnel system is overdue."

ROA suggested that DoD "adopt the Active Component model, which assumes that a person is on duty and is entitled to pay and allowances unless an administrative action is taken showing the contrary. Selected Reserve personnel should be paid for 48 drills per year unless an administrative action shows that they aren't on duty."

Further, ROA suggested that DoD "change the retirement system.... Reserve chiefs have [already] noted an increase of skilled members retiring after 20 years. An earlier retirement could be earned by combining longevity of service with the magnitude of employment."

There is also a need to "explore changes to the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (ROPMA) and the Defense Officer Personnel Management Act (DOPMA) to eliminate tenure restrictions, extending mid-grade officers' length of service. Key skillsets could be retained at a time when work life expectancy is increasing.

"Active Component leaders must recognize that the Reserve is the true all-volunteer force and must be managed differently from the Active Component in a complementary manner rather than forcing members and units to utilize a reimbursement system that is designed for their active counterparts."

ROA emphasized the need to "retain the two-a-day drill pay structure. The current pay system mitigates this risk, sustaining retention. It should not be viewed as double compensation. One-half of the drill payment is reimbursement for duties performed or training received. The second half should be viewed as the retainer payment to assure further obligated services for when the Guard or Reserve member is needed for mobilization."

As Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airmen, and National and Coast Guard are putting in extra time without pay, ROA recommended that the committee should look at "removing the 90-point ceiling on points earned for [the] inactive duty" year.

ROA also suggested that the DACMC "review the rule which limits Guard and Reserve special pay amounts to 1/30 of the active duty amount for each day served. Guard and Reserve members should receive full special pay when they meet qualification standards even when not on active duty. These skills are often required to maintain Military Occupation Specialties (MOS) credentials, and may be contributing to operational support."

ROA concluded that "Guard and Reserve forces have always been a cost-effective way to meet national security manpower challenges. Not only are pre-mobilization Reserve manpower costs significantly less than a full-time force, but these forces do not require the extensive and expensive overhead, such as housing, base facilities, and DoD schools that the Active force needs. Development and implementation of flexible manpower management tools to maximize the use of warrior-citizens is a key element to the affordable national defense that tax-payers seek."

The Defense Advisory Committee on Military Compensation was a group appointed by the secretary of defense to make recommendations for adjusting the philosophy and mechanics of military compensation programs. It first met last May and is expected to report out before the end of calendar year 2005.

CAPT Marshall Hanson, USNR (Ret.)

COPYRIGHT 2005 Reserve Officers Association of the United States
COPYRIGHT 2005 Gale Group