Has the army’s reduction of force plan hindered its strategic and operational capabilities?

2015-08-17T15:11:27-04:00

Ok, so the Army is cutting 40k troops (I’m assuming that about 10k are officers and senior NCOs) from the ranks while the demands imposed upon the organization (applies to the other sister services as well) is rapidly increasing. However it needs to contract civilians to perform the very same staff and planning functions that the soldiers they are separating do it- to include sensitive/compartmental ones. Wouldn’t it be better to keep those folks in the service? Perhaps the army is handicapped when it comes to talent management. I just find it interesting how they get rid of personnel on one side and then contract cheap labor on the other side. Note: I’m totally aware of the budgets cuts imposed by the congress and how it affects the services.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Aug 17 at 2015 3:15 PM

2015-08-17T15:15:18-04:00

I wouldn't be too quick to call contract labor 'cheap' ... there are some very hefty costs in those contracts.

Response by MAJ Jim Steven made Aug 17 at 2015 3:57 PM

2015-08-17T15:57:50-04:00

what I find interesting...we are cutting all of these soldiers, not just the 40K....did we reduce any workload?? Lower any operational expectation?? Did we increase wait times for certain staff actions? Are there some quarterly requirements that are now yearly?
its like saying, I want you to reduce the horsepower of your engine, but I dont want you to go any slower...