Avatar feed
Responses: 5
SSG Pete Fleming
4
4
0
This is just another scare tactic from CNN... There is always someone in charge, a chain of command. It isn't like they are just running around doing nothing with no leadership
(4)
Comment
(0)
LTC Self Employed
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
You figure eight years have Democrats so maybe these managers left to spite the president or were told to leave but it's normal standing operating procedure that all managers hand in their resignations when the new president comes in because it's at the discretion of the president who is going to be in those post on those Congress have to approve them but it is strange that four and a half months later there's nobody there.
(1)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Bryan Zeski
MAJ Bryan Zeski
>1 y
LTC (Join to see) - In order to get someone in the position, someone has to be nominated - by the President. What purpose does it serve to not have a real head of an agency? It makes the agency less capable of advocating for itself.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Pete Fleming
SSG Pete Fleming
>1 y
Perhaps they are reviewing the need of these agencies, they might be merged into one or dissolved completely. The government is too big and many of the various agencies could be reduced or dissolved all together.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MCPO Roger Collins
4
4
0
If there is no successional planning, shame on them. In the military and during my career as a civilian, we always knew who would move up temporarily or permanently, if one of my people left or I did. If there is no one to step up, there is a major management problem.
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Maj John Bell
3
3
0
There is always the possibility that the temporaries may do a better job. After all they are there in high echelon positions because they were interested at the beginning of their career. Or they could be master bureaucrats that will spends billions to accomplish nothing.
(3)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close