Engineer Memoirs _____________________________________________________________________
terms of officer distribution policy, that is strength support, to be replaced by captains. When
you do that and you get a captain out of his first assignment plus advanced course, then
you're getting a person who's got a very narrow perspective, a perspective of only one unit.
With engineers that could be a combat heavy perspective, or it could be a divisional combat
perspective, or a topography perspective, or a training perspective, or a divisional
perspective. When we put somebody on that platform, we want somebody that has the
broader perspective to be able to teach others. So, although there are some very good people
here, because of their lack of breadth of experience, we don't get a full capability in
effectiveness in the job they're supposed to do as a teacher and as a writer of doctrine.
They're really too narrow in experience to be fully effective.
So, when you talk about kind of people, I'm putting it in terms of authorizations for people
and making the point that we really need more majors at this place where we're training
captains--not more than we're due, but our full share of what we're due in terms of what the
structure people say we ought to have.
Q:
So, the basic problem is one of authorizations; you don't have the authorizations?
A:
That's right. It's the officer distribution policy. It's how the Army allocates the available
officers to fill what's authorized worldwide. We're continually resourced at a level
considerably less than what we're authorized in majors with captain substitutes, and that
hurts very much at a training base.
Q:
Nothing that can be done about that, though? That's set at the Department of the Army level?
A:
Well, I think we could stop the downward spiral of staffing and officer cuts, which has lots of
different parts. Congress has mandated an officer cut, I've heard. The Army has tried to
establish new divisions, and to find the capabilities to do that has caused a down trend in
officers elsewhere. I guess what bothers me is from time to time you hear that we can do
these reductions without any hurt, and what I'm saying is, it does hurt. We tend to look at
this year's cut against last year's numbers. If 20 was okay last year and you get cut 2 to 18,
that shouldn't hurt too bad. That doesn't reflect that over the five years you've been cut from
30 to 20. So, now you measure 18 versus 30 rather than 18 versus 20. So, yes, something can
be done about it, but it really takes a recognition throughout the Army. It's a recognition that
we need people with the right kind of experience and perspective in TRADOC schools so
that we can have that capability to develop our future leaders.
Q:
What about enlisted soldiers?
A:
The noncommissioned officers we have here at the Engineer School, I think, are superb. I've
been impressed with the senior sergeants major in the battalions. I think we've got a fine
engineer noncommissioned officer Corps that cares for their soldiers and knows a lot about
what they're doing. I think once again we have a bottom third, a middle third, as well as a top
third, and I don't begrudge that because you have to recognize I am talking about the whole
installation.
362
Previous Page
