________________________________________________________________________Richard S. Kem
It was really a comedown for me to have participated in realistic Army training tests in
Europe over many miles, exemplified by the example of the challenge of planning a bridge
operation on the go, figuring out how you were going to fix the bridge before it went in,
compared to taking Army training tests at Fort Leonard Wood, a very small installation
where we couldn't roam very far and where we did not even have Army maps. We took that
Army training test on Texaco maps because the regular ones weren't available. We were
short so much and the standards of training were just so far lower than in Europe that it was a
substantial change. It just made me think that we should never let a unit of the Army get into
this kind of a situation if we can affect it.
Q:
Now, you started out, I think, indicating that we should keep these things in mind with what
we're doing with the force structure today. Right? The effect on morale when we're
changing, we ought to keep that in mind with what we're doing now with reducing the
military. I wonder if you could comment on that.
A:
Yes, what I meant by that was, as we start making decisions on the build-down of the Army,
we're planning to take out 35,000 annually. We've decided that's the ramp we could do
considering the impact on the Army with all the personnel policies that will impinge on
promotions, selections, and job satisfaction. We need to make sure we don't do something
like, say, eliminating the company exec, because there's a building block that says after
you've been a platoon leader so long, you should be given another development opportunity.
I felt very little satisfaction, having been a platoon leader, having been a company exec,
having been an assistant S3, then going back and driving a platoon after three years of
service. So, what I meant was, let's don't set up some scheme that fits the bean-counter
notions but that really adversely impacts on a person's self-esteem, job satisfaction, and
development. That's what I was referring to.
University of Illinois
Q:
You indicated that all of your peers were getting ready to go back for civil schooling at that
time, so you must have been doing some thinking during this period about where you'd like
to go, what you'd like to do. How did you arrive at those decisions?
A:
Well, in those days we received a form from Engineer Branch that said that I was selected for
civil school, pick where I wanted to go. I submitted my desires by university choice and by
discipline choice, and then the powers that be decided who was going where. Then I was told
in December of '59 that I was going to go to the University of Illinois to study civil
engineering with a physics minor for 20 months. So, that's the way it came back to me. I'd
indicated Illinois as a choice and I'd indicated civil engineering. I don't recall if I'd indicated
physics as a minor or some other program as a choice, but it was a one, two, three kind of
choice indication.
49
Previous Page
