Ranks of general officers are diminishing

2015-02-09T10:31:43-05:00

From: Air Force Times

The Air Force has cut its ranks of general officers by more than 5 percent in recent years.

Budget documents show the Air Force budgeting for 289 general officers in fiscal 2016, the same as in fiscal 2014 and two fewer than it had budgeted for in fiscal 2015. That's 16 fewer general officer billets than the 305 that were budgeted for in fiscal 2013.

Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said in an editorial board meeting with Air Force Times last May that the service was planning to "scrub" its general officers to reduce their ranks. At the time, the Air Force's proposed 2015 budget showed no plans to reduce generals.

And many airmen — thousands of whom were facing budget-driven force management cuts that could end their careers — said it was unfair for them to bear the brunt of those cuts while leaving generals untouched.

"It's being scrubbed," James said, when asked if it was fair not to cut generals. "Let me just tell you that. We're actively looking at it."

It appears those cuts have taken place.

Air Force spokeswoman Maj. Melissa Milner said in an email that those budgetary numbers include general officers in joint positions that fall under non-Air Force commands, reservists on active duty for more than 180 days, generals in exempted contingency positions, and retiring generals on terminal leave.

When generals in joint positions are excluded, Milner said, the Air Force has cut the number of active-duty generals from 198 to 187 over the past three years — also a more than 5 percent reduction — as part of cuts ordered by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates in 2011.

That year, the Air Force had budgeted for 317 total general officers. That means the Air Force has cut generals overall by nearly 9 percent since Gates' order.

The number of generals in both Air Force and joint positions — excluding generals in those other circumstances — is within the limit of 279 generals allowed by law, Milner said. The Air Force is not planning to shrink its ranks further, she said.

To make these cuts, Milner said, the Air Force simply didn't replace some generals as they retired or otherwise left their positions, and limited promotions. Departing generals were replaced with lower-ranking personnel, or their positions were eliminated entirely. In some cases, she said, colonels are doing jobs that were previously done by one-star generals.

As part of the Gates-ordered reductions, Milner said, six wings and their accompanying general positions were downgraded. Three judge advocate general positions and three Air Force headquarter general positions were also downgraded, she said.

Air Force secretaries and chiefs of staff have decided which general positions to adjust "based on mission and organizational requirements," Milner said.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/careers/air-force/officer/2015/02/09/fewer-general-officers-air-force/22984823/

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Feb 9 at 2015 11:39 AM

2015-02-09T11:39:45-05:00

This is a good thing. Less GO's mean less staff which mean less personnel cost for HQ positions which in turn can be returned to line units or weapon systems. Win-Win

Response by SMSgt Gary Calhoun made Feb 9 at 2015 4:39 PM

2015-02-09T16:39:45-05:00

It is favorable for the service as a whole. Using the AF's numbers as 31 Dec 2014, the total number is 309,339; of which 61,283 are officers (~19.8%). Remove the rated pilots, navs and ABMs that are LtCol and lower - the officer number drops to 43,132 (~13.9%). That I substantial considering that large career fields (SF, MX, etc) don't have an abundance of officers. As MSgt Joshua Copeland pointed out - drop general officer slots and the corresponding number of support staff also drops. The "excess" personnel resources can be rebalanced and flow to the field to turn wrenches and stand posts.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Feb 9 at 2015 4:57 PM

2015-02-09T16:57:02-05:00

Well, when you do a draw down, you have to do it at all ranks. It can't just be privates, and lieutenants.

It sounds like the Air Force is doing an intelligent draw down, letting specific billets be retired, and replaced (likely by Colonels, or the next Star down). This isn't really surprising.

If we staff at 85% T/O using reserves to fill in the gaps for contingencies, we should be fine.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 9 at 2015 5:13 PM

2015-02-09T17:13:45-05:00

When you have a large draw down of Personnel Cuts, it needs to go from the bottom to the top. The big bang for the buck are the senior officers. They cost you the most. As with most companies, they tend to hit the workers who actually make the money, cost less, and are the value added part of the organization. With that said however, there are certain positions at various ranks and salaries that are required regardless of how much something is cut unless the door is closing.

With less wings, we should need less NAFs, less staff positions. Even without the recent cuts, the Air Force has had enough cuts that there could have been combining of jobs to eliminate positions while maintaining mission requirements

Response by MAJ Ronnie Reams made Jan 7 at 2024 1:40 PM

2024-01-07T13:40:19-05:00

Around 2015, date of article, the USAF stopped one base, one boss, so a lot less BGs needed.