Posted on Sep 11, 2014
Lack of minority officers leading Army combat units? How do you respond to this article?
85.7K
562
309
17
15
2
WASHINGTON — Command of the Army's main combat units — its pipeline to top leadership — is virtually devoid of black officers, according to interviews, documents and data obtained by USA TODAY.
The lack of black officers who lead infantry, armor and field artillery battalions and brigades — there are no black colonels at the brigade level this year — threatens the Army's effectiveness, disconnects it from American society and deprives black officers of the principal route to top Army posts, according to officers and military sociologists. Fewer than 10 percent of the active-duty Army's officers are black compared with 18 percent of its enlisted men, according to the Army.
The problem is most acute in its main combat units: infantry, armor and artillery. In 2014, there was not a single black colonel among those 25 brigades, the Army's main fighting unit of about 4,000 soldiers. Brigades consist of three to four battalions of 800 to 1,000 soldiers led by lieutenant colonels. Just one of those 78 battalions is scheduled to be led by a black officer in 2015.
Leading combat units is an essential ticket to the Army's brass ring. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the Army's chief of staff, commanded artillery units; his predecessor, Gen. Martin Dempsey, led armored units, and is now the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
"The issue exists. The leadership is aware of it," says Brig. Gen. Ronald Lewis, the Army's chief of public affairs. Lewis is a helicopter pilot who has commanded at the battalion and brigade levels and is African-American. "The leadership does have an action plan in place. And it's complicated."
Among the complications: expanding the pool of minority candidates qualified to be officers, and helping them choose the right military jobs they'll need to climb the ranks, Lewis says.
To be sure, there are black officers who have attained four stars. Gen. Lloyd Austin, an infantry officer, leads Central Command, arguably the military's most critical combatant command as it oversees military operations in the Middle East. Another four-star officer, Gen. Vincent Brooks, leads U.S. Army Pacific, and Gen. Dennis Via runs Army Materiel Command, its logistics operation.
The concern, however, is for Army's seed bed for four-star officers — the combat commands from which two-thirds of its generals are grown. They're unlikely to produce a diverse officer corps if candidates remain mostly white.
"It certainly is a problem for several reasons," says Col. Irving Smith, director of sociology at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Smith is also an African-American infantry officer who has served in Afghanistan. "First we are a public institution. And as a public institution we certainly have more of a responsibility to our nation than a private company to reflect it. In order to maintain their trust and confidence, the people of America need to know that the Army is not only effective but representative of them."
Black officers at the top ranks of the brass show young minority officers what they can achieve. Their presence also signals to allies in emerging democracies like Afghanistan that inclusive leadership is important. Diverse leadership, research shows, is better able to solve complex problems such as those the Army confronted in Iraq and Afghanistan, Smith said.
"It comes down to effectiveness," Smith said. "Diversity and equal opportunity are important, but most people don't point out that it makes the Army more effective."
The Problem
The Army's — and the Pentagon's — main ground fighting force remains the Army's infantry, armor and artillery units, although aviation and engineering units are also considered combat arms. Many of their names have become familiar to the American public after more than a decade of war: The 101st Airborne Division; the 82nd Airborne Division; the 10th Mountain Division.
They share a proud history of tough fights and multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. They also share a lack of black leaders. In all, eight of 10 of the Army's fighting divisions do not have a black battalion commander in their combat units.
(For now, they also lack women. The military plans to open combat roles to women in 2016.)
USA TODAY obtained the Army's list of battalion and brigade commanders. Several officers familiar with the personnel on them identified the black officers, which the Army refused to do. The paper considered officers in infantry, armor and field artillery — the three main combat-arms branches.
The results: In 2014, there is not a single black commander among its 25 brigades; there were three black commanders in its 80 battalion openings.
In 2015, there will be two black commanders of combat brigades; and one black commander among 78 battalions openings.
"It's command. If you don't command at the (lieutenant colonel) level, you're not going to command at (the colonel level)," says Army Col. Ron Clark, an African-American infantry officer who has commanded platoon, company, battalion and brigade level. "If you don't command at the (colonel) level, you're not going to be a general officer."
Capt. Grancis Santana, 33, knows about the long odds he faces as an artillery officer hoping to become a colonel.
He found few black officers in his specialty — about two of 20 when he was a lieutenant, and about three of 30 when he made captain.
"It's not a good feeling when you're one of the few," Santana said. "There was no discrimination; there are just not a lot of people like you."
A key reason is the paucity of black officers graduated by the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, its ROTC programs and Officer Candidate School.
For instance, the newly minted officer classes of 2012 and 2013 in combat arms remained mostly white, according to data released by the Army. Of the 238 West Point graduates commissioned to be infantry officers in 2012, 199 were white; seven were black. At Officer Candidate School, which accepts qualified enlisted soldiers and graduates with four-year degrees, 66 received commissions as infantry officers — 55 were white, none was black. The figures remained nearly unchanged for 2013.
The downsizing of the Army is having a disproportional effect on African-American officers. From the pool of officers screened, almost 10 percent of eligible black majors are being dismissed from the Army compared with 5.6 percent of eligible white majors, USA TODAY reported in early August. The Army is cutting 550 majors and about 1,000 captains as the Army seeks to reduce its force to 490,000 soldiers by the end of 2015.
The Causes
Two forces seem to reinforce the lack of black officers in combat command. For decades, young black men have tended to choose other fields, including logistics. With fewer role models and mentors in combat specialties, those fields have been seen as less welcoming to African-American officers.
Irving Smith remembers his parents being "heartbroken" that he chose infantry.
"African Americans have historically used the armed forces as a means of social mobility," says Smith, who joined the infantry, has risen to the rank of colonel and now is professor and director of sociology at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. "That is certainly true for African Americans who have used the armed forces as a bridging opportunity (to new careers)."
Parents, pastors and coaches of young black men and women considering the Army often don't encourage them to join the combat specialties.
"Why would you go in the infantry?" Smith says of a common question. "Why would you want to run around in the woods and jump out of airplanes, things that have no connection to private businesses? Do transportation. Do logistics. That will provide you with transferable skills."
Developing marketable skills has been a key motivation for many African Americans, said David Segal, a military sociologist at the University of Maryland. That has often meant driving a truck, not a tank.
"There has been a trend among African Americans who do come into the military to gravitate to career fields that have transfer value — that pretty much excludes the combat arms," Segal said.
Clark, who now works at the Pentagon, wasn't encouraged initially to join the infantry. His father enlisted in 1964 and had an Army career in food service.
"He grew up in a small town in southern Louisiana in the middle of Jim Crow South," Clark says. "He was tired of having someone telling him where to sit on a bus, which water fountain to drink from and which bathroom he could use."
At age 11, the younger Clark remembers climbing on a tank when the family was stationed in Grafenwoehr, Germany. The U.S. invasion of Grenada in 1983 sealed the deal for him: He wanted to be infantryman.
"I wanted to be an Airborne Ranger in a tree," Clark says, "and my dad was not having it. He said, 'Nope, you are not going following my footsteps. I want you to go to college.'"
The compromise, after his father had him speak with an African-American brigade executive officer named Larry Ellis, was to enroll at West Point. Ellis went on to become a four-star general, and Clark graduated from the academy in 1988.
Clark and Irving remain exceptional cases.
The downsizing of the Army is having a disproportional effect on African-American officers. From the pool of officers screened, almost 10 percent of eligible black majors are being dismissed from the Army compared with 5.6 percent of eligible white majors, USA TODAY reported in early August. The Army is cutting 550 majors and about 1,000 captains as the Army seeks to reduce its force to 490,000 soldiers by the end of 2015.
The Army's Response
The problem has attracted attention at the Army's highest ranks. In March, Army Secretary John McHugh and Odierno, the chief of staff, issued a directive aimed at diversifying the leadership of its combat units.
USA TODAY obtained a copy of the memo, which notes that the Army historically has drawn the majority of its generals from combat fields, specifically "Infantry, Armor and Field Artillery." For at least two decades, however, young minority officers have selected those fields in the numbers necessary to produce enough generals.
"African Americans have the most limited preference in combat arms, followed by Hispanic and Asian Pacific officers," the memo states. While black officers make up 12 percent of Army officers in all competitive specialties, they make up just 7 percent of the Army's infantry, armor and artillery officers. For junior officers, that figure is lower, 6 percent.
Minority groups need a "critical mass" of about 15 percent to feel they have a voice, Smith says.
The Army's plan calls for enhanced recruiting and mentoring for minority officers, particularly in combat fields, tracking their progress and encouraging mentorship.
Mentors needn't be of the same race, Clark and Lewis say. Lewis noted that several of his closest mentors were white officers, including retired general Richard Cody, who retired as Army vice chief of staff. Cody advised him to spend time at the Army's National Training Center, in the California desert. It paid off, Lewis says.
"Everyone does not have to look like you," Lewis says. "You have to be able to receive mentorship, leadership. And you have to follow some of that. You may have to spend some time at a really hard place for a bit."
Byron Bagby, a retired African-American two-star artillery officer, applauds the Army for acknowledging the problem and taking steps to address it. He cautions progress will be slow. Bagby retired in 2011 from a top post with NATO in the Netherlands.
"We're not going to solve this tomorrow, or a year from now," Bagby says.
Smith has another suggestion for the Army. Ask an in-house expert: him.
The brass could also stop by his office for a chat, he says.
"I've never had anybody from the Department of the Army come to me. I'm a sociologist. I've studied these issues for six years."
The lack of black officers who lead infantry, armor and field artillery battalions and brigades — there are no black colonels at the brigade level this year — threatens the Army's effectiveness, disconnects it from American society and deprives black officers of the principal route to top Army posts, according to officers and military sociologists. Fewer than 10 percent of the active-duty Army's officers are black compared with 18 percent of its enlisted men, according to the Army.
The problem is most acute in its main combat units: infantry, armor and artillery. In 2014, there was not a single black colonel among those 25 brigades, the Army's main fighting unit of about 4,000 soldiers. Brigades consist of three to four battalions of 800 to 1,000 soldiers led by lieutenant colonels. Just one of those 78 battalions is scheduled to be led by a black officer in 2015.
Leading combat units is an essential ticket to the Army's brass ring. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the Army's chief of staff, commanded artillery units; his predecessor, Gen. Martin Dempsey, led armored units, and is now the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
"The issue exists. The leadership is aware of it," says Brig. Gen. Ronald Lewis, the Army's chief of public affairs. Lewis is a helicopter pilot who has commanded at the battalion and brigade levels and is African-American. "The leadership does have an action plan in place. And it's complicated."
Among the complications: expanding the pool of minority candidates qualified to be officers, and helping them choose the right military jobs they'll need to climb the ranks, Lewis says.
To be sure, there are black officers who have attained four stars. Gen. Lloyd Austin, an infantry officer, leads Central Command, arguably the military's most critical combatant command as it oversees military operations in the Middle East. Another four-star officer, Gen. Vincent Brooks, leads U.S. Army Pacific, and Gen. Dennis Via runs Army Materiel Command, its logistics operation.
The concern, however, is for Army's seed bed for four-star officers — the combat commands from which two-thirds of its generals are grown. They're unlikely to produce a diverse officer corps if candidates remain mostly white.
"It certainly is a problem for several reasons," says Col. Irving Smith, director of sociology at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Smith is also an African-American infantry officer who has served in Afghanistan. "First we are a public institution. And as a public institution we certainly have more of a responsibility to our nation than a private company to reflect it. In order to maintain their trust and confidence, the people of America need to know that the Army is not only effective but representative of them."
Black officers at the top ranks of the brass show young minority officers what they can achieve. Their presence also signals to allies in emerging democracies like Afghanistan that inclusive leadership is important. Diverse leadership, research shows, is better able to solve complex problems such as those the Army confronted in Iraq and Afghanistan, Smith said.
"It comes down to effectiveness," Smith said. "Diversity and equal opportunity are important, but most people don't point out that it makes the Army more effective."
The Problem
The Army's — and the Pentagon's — main ground fighting force remains the Army's infantry, armor and artillery units, although aviation and engineering units are also considered combat arms. Many of their names have become familiar to the American public after more than a decade of war: The 101st Airborne Division; the 82nd Airborne Division; the 10th Mountain Division.
They share a proud history of tough fights and multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. They also share a lack of black leaders. In all, eight of 10 of the Army's fighting divisions do not have a black battalion commander in their combat units.
(For now, they also lack women. The military plans to open combat roles to women in 2016.)
USA TODAY obtained the Army's list of battalion and brigade commanders. Several officers familiar with the personnel on them identified the black officers, which the Army refused to do. The paper considered officers in infantry, armor and field artillery — the three main combat-arms branches.
The results: In 2014, there is not a single black commander among its 25 brigades; there were three black commanders in its 80 battalion openings.
In 2015, there will be two black commanders of combat brigades; and one black commander among 78 battalions openings.
"It's command. If you don't command at the (lieutenant colonel) level, you're not going to command at (the colonel level)," says Army Col. Ron Clark, an African-American infantry officer who has commanded platoon, company, battalion and brigade level. "If you don't command at the (colonel) level, you're not going to be a general officer."
Capt. Grancis Santana, 33, knows about the long odds he faces as an artillery officer hoping to become a colonel.
He found few black officers in his specialty — about two of 20 when he was a lieutenant, and about three of 30 when he made captain.
"It's not a good feeling when you're one of the few," Santana said. "There was no discrimination; there are just not a lot of people like you."
A key reason is the paucity of black officers graduated by the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, its ROTC programs and Officer Candidate School.
For instance, the newly minted officer classes of 2012 and 2013 in combat arms remained mostly white, according to data released by the Army. Of the 238 West Point graduates commissioned to be infantry officers in 2012, 199 were white; seven were black. At Officer Candidate School, which accepts qualified enlisted soldiers and graduates with four-year degrees, 66 received commissions as infantry officers — 55 were white, none was black. The figures remained nearly unchanged for 2013.
The downsizing of the Army is having a disproportional effect on African-American officers. From the pool of officers screened, almost 10 percent of eligible black majors are being dismissed from the Army compared with 5.6 percent of eligible white majors, USA TODAY reported in early August. The Army is cutting 550 majors and about 1,000 captains as the Army seeks to reduce its force to 490,000 soldiers by the end of 2015.
The Causes
Two forces seem to reinforce the lack of black officers in combat command. For decades, young black men have tended to choose other fields, including logistics. With fewer role models and mentors in combat specialties, those fields have been seen as less welcoming to African-American officers.
Irving Smith remembers his parents being "heartbroken" that he chose infantry.
"African Americans have historically used the armed forces as a means of social mobility," says Smith, who joined the infantry, has risen to the rank of colonel and now is professor and director of sociology at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. "That is certainly true for African Americans who have used the armed forces as a bridging opportunity (to new careers)."
Parents, pastors and coaches of young black men and women considering the Army often don't encourage them to join the combat specialties.
"Why would you go in the infantry?" Smith says of a common question. "Why would you want to run around in the woods and jump out of airplanes, things that have no connection to private businesses? Do transportation. Do logistics. That will provide you with transferable skills."
Developing marketable skills has been a key motivation for many African Americans, said David Segal, a military sociologist at the University of Maryland. That has often meant driving a truck, not a tank.
"There has been a trend among African Americans who do come into the military to gravitate to career fields that have transfer value — that pretty much excludes the combat arms," Segal said.
Clark, who now works at the Pentagon, wasn't encouraged initially to join the infantry. His father enlisted in 1964 and had an Army career in food service.
"He grew up in a small town in southern Louisiana in the middle of Jim Crow South," Clark says. "He was tired of having someone telling him where to sit on a bus, which water fountain to drink from and which bathroom he could use."
At age 11, the younger Clark remembers climbing on a tank when the family was stationed in Grafenwoehr, Germany. The U.S. invasion of Grenada in 1983 sealed the deal for him: He wanted to be infantryman.
"I wanted to be an Airborne Ranger in a tree," Clark says, "and my dad was not having it. He said, 'Nope, you are not going following my footsteps. I want you to go to college.'"
The compromise, after his father had him speak with an African-American brigade executive officer named Larry Ellis, was to enroll at West Point. Ellis went on to become a four-star general, and Clark graduated from the academy in 1988.
Clark and Irving remain exceptional cases.
The downsizing of the Army is having a disproportional effect on African-American officers. From the pool of officers screened, almost 10 percent of eligible black majors are being dismissed from the Army compared with 5.6 percent of eligible white majors, USA TODAY reported in early August. The Army is cutting 550 majors and about 1,000 captains as the Army seeks to reduce its force to 490,000 soldiers by the end of 2015.
The Army's Response
The problem has attracted attention at the Army's highest ranks. In March, Army Secretary John McHugh and Odierno, the chief of staff, issued a directive aimed at diversifying the leadership of its combat units.
USA TODAY obtained a copy of the memo, which notes that the Army historically has drawn the majority of its generals from combat fields, specifically "Infantry, Armor and Field Artillery." For at least two decades, however, young minority officers have selected those fields in the numbers necessary to produce enough generals.
"African Americans have the most limited preference in combat arms, followed by Hispanic and Asian Pacific officers," the memo states. While black officers make up 12 percent of Army officers in all competitive specialties, they make up just 7 percent of the Army's infantry, armor and artillery officers. For junior officers, that figure is lower, 6 percent.
Minority groups need a "critical mass" of about 15 percent to feel they have a voice, Smith says.
The Army's plan calls for enhanced recruiting and mentoring for minority officers, particularly in combat fields, tracking their progress and encouraging mentorship.
Mentors needn't be of the same race, Clark and Lewis say. Lewis noted that several of his closest mentors were white officers, including retired general Richard Cody, who retired as Army vice chief of staff. Cody advised him to spend time at the Army's National Training Center, in the California desert. It paid off, Lewis says.
"Everyone does not have to look like you," Lewis says. "You have to be able to receive mentorship, leadership. And you have to follow some of that. You may have to spend some time at a really hard place for a bit."
Byron Bagby, a retired African-American two-star artillery officer, applauds the Army for acknowledging the problem and taking steps to address it. He cautions progress will be slow. Bagby retired in 2011 from a top post with NATO in the Netherlands.
"We're not going to solve this tomorrow, or a year from now," Bagby says.
Smith has another suggestion for the Army. Ask an in-house expert: him.
The brass could also stop by his office for a chat, he says.
"I've never had anybody from the Department of the Army come to me. I'm a sociologist. I've studied these issues for six years."
Officers
Diversity
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 104
53
53
0
This is not a story about EO/Racism. I was talking about this topic today with two LTCs. Minorities do not chose to be officers. BAM, I said it. And when they do, they tend to pick logistics or signal. I think the "transferable skills" point is a good one that I had not considered. With logistics, there is legacy because that branch was one of the earliest accepted roles for minorities (both race and gender minorities). There was also the point that it takes a 15% presence of a group for that group to feel heard. I don't know where that statistic comes from, but I can understand that people feel drawn to branches that their brothers/sisters, college buddies, cousins, etc chose. That causes it to become a circular problem.
The basic problem is that if minorities are not choosing to be officers at all, and those who do chose career paths that basically put them on the side-lines, how do we change? I was *the* black officer in my MIBOLC cycle and there was not one in the cycle before or after mine, so in a quarter, I was it. I hate filling out the Army's "anonymous" surveys because after I get done entering my race, rank, basic branch and duty station, I might as well write my name on it. Before I chose my branch, I felt no pressure to chose a different one because of my race. But it was no secret that I was going into a white career field. I was ok with it, but that is not the norm.
Many people don't think of all of the ramifications that minorities face if they chose to go it alone on the racial front. It's hard to find people who grew up in the inner city like I did, so there's not many people to swap "back in the day" stories with. For those that have a native language that is not English, that is another challenge. What if no one likes to worship like you do (many black churches are not remotely like most white churches)? What if the other kids don't invite yours to their birthday parties? And for the young ones (and us divorced types), you have to consider the dating pool. That's just a reality. I'm tired of being the star of "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" This is a reality that white people in America do not normally have to face. The same people who claim they would have no problem being the only white person at their job, in their apartment complex, at their gym - all of it, 24/7 - are the ones who lock their doors driving through a black neighborhood, so I'm not buying it.
I am not trying to be all gloom and doom, but I really don't know when/if this will change. I think programs like the one where you can come in with a friend or group of friends and be guaranteed to stay together from BCT through first duty station (if it still exists) could help if they offered it to officers, through the 09S program. That's starting from scratch, but we have to. The real problem, as highlighted by the article, is that there are not many even in the pipeline (so bag the "quotas" talk LTC (Join to see), there are not bodies to fill the quotas that people are so sure exist). In MI, I know of one black LTC...her last name is Ellis and yes, GEN Ellis is daddy (and he is pure awesomeness). When she gets her star, I'm sure a big deal will be made of it, but there are not too many others to follow in her footsteps.
The basic problem is that if minorities are not choosing to be officers at all, and those who do chose career paths that basically put them on the side-lines, how do we change? I was *the* black officer in my MIBOLC cycle and there was not one in the cycle before or after mine, so in a quarter, I was it. I hate filling out the Army's "anonymous" surveys because after I get done entering my race, rank, basic branch and duty station, I might as well write my name on it. Before I chose my branch, I felt no pressure to chose a different one because of my race. But it was no secret that I was going into a white career field. I was ok with it, but that is not the norm.
Many people don't think of all of the ramifications that minorities face if they chose to go it alone on the racial front. It's hard to find people who grew up in the inner city like I did, so there's not many people to swap "back in the day" stories with. For those that have a native language that is not English, that is another challenge. What if no one likes to worship like you do (many black churches are not remotely like most white churches)? What if the other kids don't invite yours to their birthday parties? And for the young ones (and us divorced types), you have to consider the dating pool. That's just a reality. I'm tired of being the star of "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" This is a reality that white people in America do not normally have to face. The same people who claim they would have no problem being the only white person at their job, in their apartment complex, at their gym - all of it, 24/7 - are the ones who lock their doors driving through a black neighborhood, so I'm not buying it.
I am not trying to be all gloom and doom, but I really don't know when/if this will change. I think programs like the one where you can come in with a friend or group of friends and be guaranteed to stay together from BCT through first duty station (if it still exists) could help if they offered it to officers, through the 09S program. That's starting from scratch, but we have to. The real problem, as highlighted by the article, is that there are not many even in the pipeline (so bag the "quotas" talk LTC (Join to see), there are not bodies to fill the quotas that people are so sure exist). In MI, I know of one black LTC...her last name is Ellis and yes, GEN Ellis is daddy (and he is pure awesomeness). When she gets her star, I'm sure a big deal will be made of it, but there are not too many others to follow in her footsteps.
(53)
(0)
CPT Michael Moyers
SGT(P) Freeman- the CPT who refused to sign your packet needs a violent circuit check to the back of his head. One of our many jobs as officers is to identify those in our formation who possess the qualities necessary to lead and encourage them to seek higher responsibility. I know this first hand...it's how I went from being an NCO to an officer. I had a company commander and XO who convinced me that it was not only in my best interests but the best interests of the Army for me to seek a commission.
To CPT Wolfer, as one of the only white people in my neighborhood in the western Chicago area, some of us understand it quite well. Please do not foment divisiveness by feeding the idea that all white people have it easy.
To CPT Wolfer, as one of the only white people in my neighborhood in the western Chicago area, some of us understand it quite well. Please do not foment divisiveness by feeding the idea that all white people have it easy.
(1)
(0)
CPO Lauren Farrow
I had a similar experience to the SGT, but in the Navy. They found out in "A" school that I already had my Bachelor's so they pretty much forced me to apply. When I did, they turned me down because I didn't have a 3.0 GPA; I had a 2.7. Guess they didn't read the part about the minimum GPA was 2.5. So I got my M.A. and Ed.D. while I was on active duty. By that time, I was an E6, and a Command Career Counselor. Someone recommended I should apply for a commission. I was like, "Are you crazy? Why would I want to be and Ensign and to to sea now? (I was Active Duty Reserve Aviation).
I think the main problem is that a lot of minorities do not feel they are qualified, and then we had the problem where Senior Enlisted did not want to see a E3 or E4 head of to become an officer. They are also unaware of the special programs available to them, and if they are, they are rarely accepted. The Navy had a program called BOOST that was supposed to help enlisted from an educationally drpirved situation obtain the skills to succeed in ROTC. I had a friend (USMC) who was accepted to the program. He ended up washing out. All of his classmates were Nukes.
I think the main problem is that a lot of minorities do not feel they are qualified, and then we had the problem where Senior Enlisted did not want to see a E3 or E4 head of to become an officer. They are also unaware of the special programs available to them, and if they are, they are rarely accepted. The Navy had a program called BOOST that was supposed to help enlisted from an educationally drpirved situation obtain the skills to succeed in ROTC. I had a friend (USMC) who was accepted to the program. He ended up washing out. All of his classmates were Nukes.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
CPT Michael Moyers, I'm not fomenting that sentiment. I find it frustrating when people find a tiny exception and use that to claim that someone else's entire point is invalid. I would extend that it might also be more difficult for whites in the branches/MOSs with more minorities, but another thing that frustrates me is when people complain about their treatment without seeking to improve the situation for everyone. So before pointing out about your experience in Chicago, you might want to think about how that made you feel, look at the US and see how vastly more often this experience you had is true for minorities, and argue for better for everyone instead of trying to say that pointing to the situation at all is "fomenting divisiveness."
(1)
(0)
22
22
0
I'm going to be bluntly honest in my remarks. I wish to state up front I'm speaking with the utmost respect to you all. I find this question to be the "other side" of racism. The thought that a leader of any caliber would be more desirable because of the color of their skin or their ethnic background is disturbing. As an enlisted man, I never gave much thought about what color my officers were. What counted to me was that they knew their stuff and looked after our well-being. We need to encourage color blindness in looking for leadership potential. Now if it is found that persons of color are being systematically or institutionally held back then we need to hammer the practitioners into the ground.
Our primary focus needs to be the development of the best leaders possible, regardless of color (or sex for that matter). Diverting resources into special programs that favor any particular group does nothing but stir resentment in those who aren't given that advantage. That divides the very troops you need to unify. We have programs in place to raise educational levels for those who lacked prior opportunities and leadership ability is evaluated at regular intervals along with performance levels. The key ingredient is the ambition of the individual. It's up to our current leaders to recognize and encourage those individuals, regardless of any other consideration other than leadership potential. To do any thing other is to short-change your brothers and sisters in arms. God bless you all!
Our primary focus needs to be the development of the best leaders possible, regardless of color (or sex for that matter). Diverting resources into special programs that favor any particular group does nothing but stir resentment in those who aren't given that advantage. That divides the very troops you need to unify. We have programs in place to raise educational levels for those who lacked prior opportunities and leadership ability is evaluated at regular intervals along with performance levels. The key ingredient is the ambition of the individual. It's up to our current leaders to recognize and encourage those individuals, regardless of any other consideration other than leadership potential. To do any thing other is to short-change your brothers and sisters in arms. God bless you all!
(22)
(0)
16
16
0
http://www.stewart.army.mil/units/biography.asp?u=1ABCT&t=CDR
I agree we have work to do in representation at the highest ranks, but
whoever wrote the article did not do any research or they totally disregarded any information that did not support their hypothesis.
From the Article "The problem is most acute in its main combat units: infantry, armor and artillery. In 2014, there was not a single black colonel among those 25 brigades, the Army's main fighting unit of about 4,000 soldiers. "
COL Robert P. Ashe is the Commander of 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division.
The link to his Bio is attached. COL Ashe is a great man, Officer, and American. I served with him in Iraq during the surge.
Since it is not too hard to google the different brigade commanders, I really question the motives of the author, because you would really think double checking your facts would be the first thing you would do before you submitted this type of article.
I agree we have work to do in representation at the highest ranks, but
whoever wrote the article did not do any research or they totally disregarded any information that did not support their hypothesis.
From the Article "The problem is most acute in its main combat units: infantry, armor and artillery. In 2014, there was not a single black colonel among those 25 brigades, the Army's main fighting unit of about 4,000 soldiers. "
COL Robert P. Ashe is the Commander of 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division.
The link to his Bio is attached. COL Ashe is a great man, Officer, and American. I served with him in Iraq during the surge.
Since it is not too hard to google the different brigade commanders, I really question the motives of the author, because you would really think double checking your facts would be the first thing you would do before you submitted this type of article.
(16)
(0)
CW3 Jared Hickox
CPL Robert Mitchell: "The Military's allowance of minorities had nothing to do with trying to be on the cutting edge of steering racism for the good, it was all about numbers." - This was the best part of your post. You are right, it is and always has been about numbers. Look at where the majority of our recruiting offices are. Poor neighborhoods. Not black, not white... poor. To assume blacks were recruited because too many whites were dieing is absurd.
(0)
(1)
CPT (Join to see)
CPL Mitchell voting you down on this response. Attitudes like this only help to keep racism alive.
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
[~84992:CW2(P) Jared Hickox If you're basing your comment on the location of the majority of Recruitng Offices, then you're wrong and way off base. The schools that recruiters are assigned are in all kinds of neighborhoods, wealthy, middle-class and inner city and poor. The Recruiters visit these schools for future applicants. This is where the majority of enlistments come from. Recuriting Offices will generally be found in areas like strip malls, multi-story complexs, some government buildings of high pedestrian traffic.
Every military recruiter is out there looking for that person who will be a Catagory 3A or higher to enlist. We could care less what color that person is. If the person were pink or purple and scored in that catagory....USAREC wants them in the Delayed Entry Program NOW.
Every military recruiter is out there looking for that person who will be a Catagory 3A or higher to enlist. We could care less what color that person is. If the person were pink or purple and scored in that catagory....USAREC wants them in the Delayed Entry Program NOW.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
CW2 Jared Hickox, I down voted your comment because you are not only way off base, but out of your lane in regards to recruiting. Statements about the Army or military recuiting in poor areas perpetuates an ignorant myth at the expense of the service you are in. USAREC places middle-class as the predominant socioeconomic group enlisting in the military, statistically speaking.
As I was a recruiter in San Diego, I feel I have the luxury of being an SME in that regard. While I have no issue with the remainder of your statement or comment, I will leave it there. Pending your questions.
As I was a recruiter in San Diego, I feel I have the luxury of being an SME in that regard. While I have no issue with the remainder of your statement or comment, I will leave it there. Pending your questions.
(2)
(0)
10
10
0
A simple, yet lengthy, process to determine the cause of this racial disparity would be to poll/question potential officers attending West Point, OCS, and ROTC and determine their want to become Combat Officers. Secondly, poll present and recently retired African American Officers and question why they chose or opted not to choose positions as Combat Officers.
The results of these polls should be very clear! Personally, I would love to become an officer, however, the combat arms branches would not be in my "top 5".
The results of these polls should be very clear! Personally, I would love to become an officer, however, the combat arms branches would not be in my "top 5".
(10)
(0)
COL Vincent Stoneking
LTC Jason Mackay Your memory is very similar to mine, except we were told (as I remember) that you had to have one of each in the top 5. Do you know what the actual reference for filling out the dream sheet is? I've always wondered if this was governed by more than the cadre's personal opinions.
(0)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
Da Form 61 is the Appointment Application. AR140-9 is the (old ancient) reg. It says preference considerations are issued annually by Milperscen message. No instructions appear on DA61.
(1)
(0)
I read this today and was shocked by it. My friend, who is the only other Portuguese Officer in the Army that I know of, sent me a text about this.
I come from combat arms. I recall only have a couple at most black soldiers in my company that were infantry. But the issue is that they choose their job. This is clearly a hit piece. It seems that someone out there has an agenda.
Lets look at it from a white males perspective being the one that is the victim here. "White soldiers forced into positions that don't have transferable skills while other racial groups learn valuable lessons that will help them after the army." That is what is happening. At the end of the day the ones, such as myself that is an infantry is going to suffer in the long run. But that is what I choose.
Targeting minorities to join combat arms is fine. Why don't they just force branch them. As we all know that your branch is pretty much up to you. You do well and you get your choice. You can't withhold the information that more of one racial group wants to be infantry and then blame the Army.
This is simply an attack on the Army. My commander is not white but what does that matter. He choose infantry. I am sorry to those out there that may not approve that Combat Arms is the Heart of the Army. That is where most of the generals come from. You have to realize if you pick branch like Chemical your chances of being the Chief of Staff are pretty dismal. But you may get a good job on the outside.
I come from combat arms. I recall only have a couple at most black soldiers in my company that were infantry. But the issue is that they choose their job. This is clearly a hit piece. It seems that someone out there has an agenda.
Lets look at it from a white males perspective being the one that is the victim here. "White soldiers forced into positions that don't have transferable skills while other racial groups learn valuable lessons that will help them after the army." That is what is happening. At the end of the day the ones, such as myself that is an infantry is going to suffer in the long run. But that is what I choose.
Targeting minorities to join combat arms is fine. Why don't they just force branch them. As we all know that your branch is pretty much up to you. You do well and you get your choice. You can't withhold the information that more of one racial group wants to be infantry and then blame the Army.
This is simply an attack on the Army. My commander is not white but what does that matter. He choose infantry. I am sorry to those out there that may not approve that Combat Arms is the Heart of the Army. That is where most of the generals come from. You have to realize if you pick branch like Chemical your chances of being the Chief of Staff are pretty dismal. But you may get a good job on the outside.
(9)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
CPT (Join to see) Do you not think we are currently picking the best for these commands.
(0)
(0)
SPC Randy Torgerson
Ok CPT Ann Wolfer, so you were not joking....
"I challenge you to look at yourself and your own prejudices" is what you said to me. So while you may not have meant it, your words support calling me racist.
You are basically calling everyone who disagrees with your way of thinking some level of racist. You make the claim that "otherwise qualified" candidates are not given the opportunity they should be getting, means there is a problem. How the hell do you know that the "blacks" that didn't get that opportunity are as qualified as the other applicants that did get the opportunity? After you can explain how you know that with your magical telepathic crystal ball, maybe you can tell me why your not mentioning all the whites who did not get that same opportunity? Why are you not supporting them?
Yeah, I'm a little upset at your entire attitude and more importantly your entire way of thinking. You have no stinking idea what my experiences are with minorities. You have no idea who my friends are and you have no idea where I stand in my thoughts about minorities. But for some reason your able to tell me that because I don't agree with affirmative action or that I'm not aware of the disproportionate representation of a particular group of people that I must not understand and I'm either ignorant, naive, or prejudice. Furthermore, because I made a point about the "best man for the job" must mean thats code for some kind of prejudice... Why can't best man for the job just mean best man for the job?
All I was trying to say in my first email about this subject matter, is at some point everyone needs to quite complaining about whats fair and whats not fair. Life is NOT fair for everyone from time to time. Some people are born in wealthy family's, some are born in poor family's. Some people have one parent, some people have 2, some people have 1 parent that is outstanding and some people have 2 that are crappy parents. We all have struggles. Some are more serious than others. Some people catch a break while others don't.
Honestly, the only reason I'm a little upset is because you think you know something about life that I don't. You couldn't be more wrong. After serving 4 years in the United States Army, 12 years in Law Enforcement and 14 years running my own private detective business, you might think I have a little experience in the under privileged communities. Do I have black friends? nope. Do I have japanese friends? nope. Do I have mexican friends? nope. I just have friends. Are some of them black, japanese and mexician? Sure. I think the best thing you can do to help the subject matter is to stop thinking you can teach everybody how right you are and how wrong everyone else is. There will always be bad people, I know that pretty well since damn near everyone I deal with that is work related are usually not nice people. But I don't let that change me. Anyway, please don't lecture to me and tell me how frustrated you are by the comments and attitudes of others who seem to not see the world through the same disparaging glasses as you and several others. But otherwise, you seem really nice. I hope I get to sit down and have a glass of wine with you sometime. I'm glad we both got to say what was on our minds. Now lets continue the mission of defending our country in the military and in the civilian communities regardless of where we came from.
"I challenge you to look at yourself and your own prejudices" is what you said to me. So while you may not have meant it, your words support calling me racist.
You are basically calling everyone who disagrees with your way of thinking some level of racist. You make the claim that "otherwise qualified" candidates are not given the opportunity they should be getting, means there is a problem. How the hell do you know that the "blacks" that didn't get that opportunity are as qualified as the other applicants that did get the opportunity? After you can explain how you know that with your magical telepathic crystal ball, maybe you can tell me why your not mentioning all the whites who did not get that same opportunity? Why are you not supporting them?
Yeah, I'm a little upset at your entire attitude and more importantly your entire way of thinking. You have no stinking idea what my experiences are with minorities. You have no idea who my friends are and you have no idea where I stand in my thoughts about minorities. But for some reason your able to tell me that because I don't agree with affirmative action or that I'm not aware of the disproportionate representation of a particular group of people that I must not understand and I'm either ignorant, naive, or prejudice. Furthermore, because I made a point about the "best man for the job" must mean thats code for some kind of prejudice... Why can't best man for the job just mean best man for the job?
All I was trying to say in my first email about this subject matter, is at some point everyone needs to quite complaining about whats fair and whats not fair. Life is NOT fair for everyone from time to time. Some people are born in wealthy family's, some are born in poor family's. Some people have one parent, some people have 2, some people have 1 parent that is outstanding and some people have 2 that are crappy parents. We all have struggles. Some are more serious than others. Some people catch a break while others don't.
Honestly, the only reason I'm a little upset is because you think you know something about life that I don't. You couldn't be more wrong. After serving 4 years in the United States Army, 12 years in Law Enforcement and 14 years running my own private detective business, you might think I have a little experience in the under privileged communities. Do I have black friends? nope. Do I have japanese friends? nope. Do I have mexican friends? nope. I just have friends. Are some of them black, japanese and mexician? Sure. I think the best thing you can do to help the subject matter is to stop thinking you can teach everybody how right you are and how wrong everyone else is. There will always be bad people, I know that pretty well since damn near everyone I deal with that is work related are usually not nice people. But I don't let that change me. Anyway, please don't lecture to me and tell me how frustrated you are by the comments and attitudes of others who seem to not see the world through the same disparaging glasses as you and several others. But otherwise, you seem really nice. I hope I get to sit down and have a glass of wine with you sometime. I'm glad we both got to say what was on our minds. Now lets continue the mission of defending our country in the military and in the civilian communities regardless of where we came from.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
CPT (Join to see) I will let our current OIF/OEF record speak for itself. Maybe there was no one who could have done any better...maybe not. We can argue whether the glass is half full or half empty, but can we agree it isn't, in fact, full? (that's a modified Aaron Sorkin quote from West Wing, but it applies.)
(2)
(0)
9
9
0
I'm going to answer this one simply, and from the heart. If you are black, white, green, or have rainbow stripes superimposed with polka-dots, I couldn't care less. I'm an Infantry guy. Do you know your job? Do you know mine? can you both lead and follow?
If you can answer yes to ALL of those questions, then you can lead me, and I can follow you.
This is going to get less simple....
Where the disconnect lies, I think, is in the application process. if any particular demographic makes up a given percentage of society, but doesn't make up the same percentage of a given career field, the first thing to explore is the whether the entry level applications to the field are proportionate.
Example in this case: let's say that purple people make up 20% of the population, If they make up 20% of the leadership, we have no problem. Call it a day.
How about if the purple people make up 20% of the population and 17% of the leadership? Do we have an issue? Maybe. Let's explore.
With experience/education being equal, do they make up 20% of the applications for leadership? if yes, we might have a problem. If the applications are higher...say 30%....the problem gets bigger. If it goes the other way...say the demographic is 20% of the population, the applications are 15% of the applications, and the positions are made up of 30% to the said demographic..is that a problem? Yes, it might be...only from a different perspective.
The point is, ALL facts are necessary. Skin color is FAR from enough. At the end of the day, It shouldn't matter at all. If it does, it needs to be fixed....regardless of the direction of flow.
If you can answer yes to ALL of those questions, then you can lead me, and I can follow you.
This is going to get less simple....
Where the disconnect lies, I think, is in the application process. if any particular demographic makes up a given percentage of society, but doesn't make up the same percentage of a given career field, the first thing to explore is the whether the entry level applications to the field are proportionate.
Example in this case: let's say that purple people make up 20% of the population, If they make up 20% of the leadership, we have no problem. Call it a day.
How about if the purple people make up 20% of the population and 17% of the leadership? Do we have an issue? Maybe. Let's explore.
With experience/education being equal, do they make up 20% of the applications for leadership? if yes, we might have a problem. If the applications are higher...say 30%....the problem gets bigger. If it goes the other way...say the demographic is 20% of the population, the applications are 15% of the applications, and the positions are made up of 30% to the said demographic..is that a problem? Yes, it might be...only from a different perspective.
The point is, ALL facts are necessary. Skin color is FAR from enough. At the end of the day, It shouldn't matter at all. If it does, it needs to be fixed....regardless of the direction of flow.
(9)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Right, it shouldn't matter *after* reasonable parity in numbers is reached. You are right that there needs to be a lot more research about why the disparity exists. The Army tends to act toward a solution before figuring out the full problem. There is no need to do that here because this is not an emergency. We should take our time to really understand the problem.
(3)
(0)
SGT Richard H.
Yes Ma'am, they would actually have to look at pretty exhaustive list of "what if" questions to really determine if it is even a problem, then another set of questions to determine the where & why if there is a breakdown to explore. Each and every level would have to be looked at for percentage competed/percentage promoted, starting at the top and working backward...possibly all the way to elementary school if they wanted to be detailed about it.
I am by no means suggesting that they not do this. Just saying that a snapshot percentage doesn't provide nearly enough information.
I am by no means suggesting that they not do this. Just saying that a snapshot percentage doesn't provide nearly enough information.
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
The late, great MLK said it best, "...where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character..."
If we start playing the race card and mandating affirmative action amongst the ranks, it will backfire. Guaranteed. Let's stick to evals, achievements, accomplishments, and character over exterior appearances, please, for whatever reason it's happening!
If we start playing the race card and mandating affirmative action amongst the ranks, it will backfire. Guaranteed. Let's stick to evals, achievements, accomplishments, and character over exterior appearances, please, for whatever reason it's happening!
(8)
(0)
PO3 John Jeter
I had forgotten that particular quote. I feel bad for doing so because it really grabbed my attention when it was spoken....... Thanks for the reminder!
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
I attended CAS3 back in 97 or so. My small group instructor was a black LTC in the MP Corps. This study had just come out back then, we do this ever five years or so, and he had an informed decision on it. Minorities of every type do not choose to serve in Combat Arms because by and large they see the military as a way forward or a stepping stone to a larger future. They would prefer a job in logistics or even MP and Intelligence where they can see the next step in the civilian world. At the time they were much more likely than their white counterparts to leave after their initial term of service.
There is nothing wrong with this. And it is not the business of the Army to fix societies problems. It is also not the business of the Army to "reflect society"! And it doesn't matter how often we repeat that phrase. Our job is to defend society. Anything that weakens that position is antithetical to the military and should be stamped out!
There is nothing wrong with this. And it is not the business of the Army to fix societies problems. It is also not the business of the Army to "reflect society"! And it doesn't matter how often we repeat that phrase. Our job is to defend society. Anything that weakens that position is antithetical to the military and should be stamped out!
(6)
(0)
6
6
0
I saw this on Army Times. The thing I would focus on is the "why infantry". In the article it talked about how many African American Officers choose combat support or combat service support branches.
Many choose these units because of the development of skills that will help them in the civilian world, and an easier path for higher rank.
Now I'm an infantry officer. I chose infantry going from 74D (chemical) to 11B (enlisted infantry) to 11A (officer infantry) because that is what I wanted to do. I enjoy being in the woods, shooting, and military strategy and tactics. Now my civilian career mirrors more Signal and I get many people wanting me to go Signal being my degree is electrical engineering.
There are challenges to choosing the Infantry field being black. But go off into the civilian world into an area where your not represented in great numbers and you will deal with the similar issues.
Others have done it before. General Colin Powell is a great example. I would say to read his autobiography and learn from the examples he has given.
Many choose these units because of the development of skills that will help them in the civilian world, and an easier path for higher rank.
Now I'm an infantry officer. I chose infantry going from 74D (chemical) to 11B (enlisted infantry) to 11A (officer infantry) because that is what I wanted to do. I enjoy being in the woods, shooting, and military strategy and tactics. Now my civilian career mirrors more Signal and I get many people wanting me to go Signal being my degree is electrical engineering.
There are challenges to choosing the Infantry field being black. But go off into the civilian world into an area where your not represented in great numbers and you will deal with the similar issues.
Others have done it before. General Colin Powell is a great example. I would say to read his autobiography and learn from the examples he has given.
(6)
(0)
6
6
0
Two phrases that stand out in regards to the question:
"Among the complications: expanding the pool of minority candidates qualified to be officers, and helping them choose the right military jobs they'll need to climb the ranks, Lewis says."
and
"Parents, pastors and coaches of young black men and women considering the Army often don't encourage them to join the combat specialties."
Two questions:
1) By which means would the "pool be expanded"? You are either qualified for commission or you're not. If a combat job held higher potential for "climbing the ladder", qualified non-minorities would be competing as well, and we'd be back to the original question.
2) If black youth are dissuaded from combat specialties, in general, wouldn't it stand to reason that black officers would compose an even smaller bracket in the combat MOSs?
"Among the complications: expanding the pool of minority candidates qualified to be officers, and helping them choose the right military jobs they'll need to climb the ranks, Lewis says."
and
"Parents, pastors and coaches of young black men and women considering the Army often don't encourage them to join the combat specialties."
Two questions:
1) By which means would the "pool be expanded"? You are either qualified for commission or you're not. If a combat job held higher potential for "climbing the ladder", qualified non-minorities would be competing as well, and we'd be back to the original question.
2) If black youth are dissuaded from combat specialties, in general, wouldn't it stand to reason that black officers would compose an even smaller bracket in the combat MOSs?
(6)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google