John W. Morris
acquisition needs, et cetera. Then the third year I was exec to the head of the military
assignments. By this time Colonel Ploger had been replaced by Kelley, Roy Kelley. Both of those
people made general. The fact is, practically everybody assigned to that position made general.
So anyhow, during those three years I became familiar with the Pentagon and also saw the Chief
of Engineers on occasion. I learned how staffs worked and began to know many people I would
see later.
The assignment team at OCE always went to the military schools and announced assignments,
just like Hennessy at Leavenworth. Well, I did that for the
and senior service schools
and also West Point. I'd tell the
graduates who selected the Corps of Engineers where
they were going to go and discuss the Corps' opportunities. Frequently we'd go to Belvoir and
talk to the advanced course officers.
The Chief of Engineers commanded all engineer officers, the troop units, and the Engineer
School. I left OCE in 1960. Later, the Chief lost personnel management, and though it may have
been good for the Army, it wasn't too good for the Corps because the Corps absolutely had the
best career management program in the Army. I left there in 1960. In 1962 or 1963 they did away
with the branches. Every branch soon reached a common level, and in the process the Corps'
branch career management suffered because the career management within the Army as a whole
has never quite equaled the level of personal consideration and quality that the Corps had before.
Q .. So the idea-taking personnel functions away from the branch chiefs-often is associated with
reforms, but the idea was around before that, really, you're saying?
part of the
A..
That's right. By 1958, the Army was told to get smaller. We had a lot of heart-rending problems.
I recall one colonel at the port ready to go overseas with his family. I had to call him on the phone
and tell him that he was not to move because he had been selected out of the Army. You know,
these were tough personal things. Many people were caught with one foot off the ground.
Q ..
Did this tend to be a little heavier at the higher ranks, at major and above?
A ..
Well, of course; however, it wasn't quite so painful if the officer was eligible to retire.
Q ..
Yes.
A..
None of the colonels let go were to be generals, and they
that. Still, it's a big
appoi ntment those affected.
Q .. Did this hit a little higher and not so much at the lieutenant-captain level? Or was there a big
reduction there too?
A ..
No, we tried to keep the lieutenants and captains because we were short in these grades.
Q .. So it's that World War II bulge that's some of the problem?
A .. Yes.
Q .. I have just one follow-up question. Did the Chief, General Itschner, take a personal interest in
assignments?
A ..
Yes, and he took a special interest in the War College list and generals' assignments.
Q .. In the War College?
Yes. In fact, the Chief took an interest in all the assignments. We would have a slating session
A
every year of personnel to fill battalions, the districts, and other important jobs. Mr. Percy would
take the colonels and we'd take the lieutenant colonels and we'd match them with job needs.
Previous Page
