Air Force officials announce civilian hiring controls

News > Air Force officials announce civilian hiring controls

Photos


(U.S. Air Force graphic/Corey Parrish)
Download HiRes

Related Biographies
• PAIGE HINKLE-BOWLES • LIEUTENANT GENERAL DARRELL D. JONES

Air Force officials announce civilian hiring controls

Posted 5/13/2011

Email story Print story

5/13/2011 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Air Force leaders announced that hiring controls were instituted May 12 to reduce projected growth of the civilian workforce.

The Air Force-wide efforts to stem the civilian personnel growth are a result of Secretary of Defense Robert Gate's efficiency initiatives to maintain civilian manning at fiscal 2010 levels.

Hiring controls will allow Air Force officials to take a targeted approach to meet the mandated manning levels.

Effective immediately, one person will be hired for every two new vacancies in areas affected by hiring controls. This doesn't apply to current hiring actions when a job selection has already been made; however, all other hiring actions may only be filled at a 1:2 ratio as new vacancies occur.

"As our nation and the Air Force face significant budgetary challenges, tools such as hiring controls help us manage hiring and posture ourselves for the future," said Paige Hinkle-Bowles, the deputy director of force management policy.

Hiring controls will enable a more focused approach to hiring, giving higher priority to strategic mission areas such as the nuclear enterprise, the acquisition workforce, and test and evaluation.

"Civilian hiring controls will be used as a bridging mechanism as the Air Force develops strategic plans for the future to ensure civilian authorizations are in the right place to meet mission priorities," said Lt. Gen. Darrell Jones, the deputy chief of staff of Air Force manpower, personnel and services.

Air Force officials will continue to monitor and assess hiring controls throughout the summer and will provide additional hiring guidance and prioritization details as the overall plan develops.

"The Air Force recognizes the invaluable contributions of our civilian workforce, but also recognizes the fiscal constraints under which all the services are operating. We will do our best to balance mission needs while taking care to minimize the effect on the civilian workforce," General Jones said.

For more information about hiring controls, individuals may contact their base civilian personnel office or visit the restricted-access Air Force personnel services website at https://gum-crm.csd.disa.mil/app/home. For information about other personnel issues, call the Total Force Service Center at 800-525-0102.

Comments

6/6/2011 10:19:23 AM ET
I love the Air Force but I can see that when Civilians are in a section the Military folks get lazy. I am worn out from doing all their work for them. Civilians are a weakness for the Military in the long run. The Military will lose their edge after a short while due to the fact that they get lazy when civilians are in a section. I miss the old Military that you older guys might remember, the Military where every Airman knew their job inside out and would not let a co-worker carry the entire load. I am so ready to retire. 29 yrs of Service. 6 more to go to hit 56.

Just me , Dyess AFB TX

5/18/2011 6:58:59 AM ET
Perhaps we are moving closer to a Reduction in Force or perhaps the offer of early retirement. Most comments on here are very negative. We've always had to do more with less that is a part of the Federal workforce. If you have a bad civilian then you have a bad civilian supervisor. I look forward to the offer of early retirement.

Colleen, US

5/17/2011 4:55:06 PM ET
We are already doing more with less...can't get any lower...but it seems like Congress is doing it's best to make sure that happens. I don't agree with CMSgt Proietti-it already hurts...I work in a medical clinic on base and we are hurting for doctors, techs and nurses---more and more patients coming in the door daily. How much more do you want us to hurt?

CMAatFP, Luke AFB AZ

5/17/2011 1:30:12 PM ET
So the current administration starts a policy to convert positions from contractors to civil service and now they do this. So an agency has 50 contractors barely has enough people to get the mission done and is told to convert. They start the process and now this policy change happens. Does this mean their 50 contractors are going to be replaced by 25 civil service? There is going to be a serious effect on their mission readiness.

Bryan, NM

5/17/2011 10:01:50 AM ET
stem the civilian personnel growth 1. Convert Contract employees to Civil Service to show Government is hiring. 2. Discover the Civilian workforce is growing. 3. Take drastic actions to reduce manning. 4. Convert Government jobs to contract positions. Nothing changes...

CS Employee, Florida

5/17/2011 9:40:48 AM ET
So once again the civilian workers, the backbone of the military, are being punished because A - congress can't control its spending and B - because out of work people in this country who didn't have the forethought to become civil servants are jealous that we have jobs and benefits. Everyone is picking on us civil servants and trying to take away what we worked hard for years to obtain.

civilian worker, Andrews AFB

5/17/2011 8:04:11 AM ET
I agree with Bob in Florida - This policy is a cop-out. Just because a position goes vacant they are not going to fill it rather than take an honest look at all positions to see what we can cut or do a RIF to cut dead weight that is retirement eligible. I would add that as the AF cuts people they also prioritize requirements and standards and consider cutting to match what can actually be accomplished. You can't do everything and too much time and resources are wasted by both civilians and military performing relatively useless tasks at impossibly high standards.

Bob, Virginia

5/17/2011 6:54:39 AM ET
I know I dont know much about the Air Force and its past policies. I mean I've only been in a year, but to me it seems that the civilians are what keeps our military going after all the downsizing the DOD has been doing and with the two AORs were constantly deploying to. To be completely honest, I dont think many shops could run without them. I know that my shop is critically manned and that we wouldn't be able to function normally without the two we have. I also agree with the chief though and there is a lot of down time for other career fields. Last Friday I went on a chow run and saw an entire shop at the bowling alley. Must be nice.

AR, Sheppard

5/17/2011 2:26:55 AM ET
My question is this: why is it that every couple of years we hear the same old song about needing to trim the fat now while they strategically plan for the future? To be more to the point, why aren't any of these generals, chiefs, and senior civilians ever held accountable for FAILING to effectively plan and balance the force when they're in the seat? It seems to me it's a vicious cycle where people earn a star or top chevron stripe by screwing things up then they move on. Then someone else comes in and earns a star or top chevron stripe by fixing what was just broke. Ridiculous -- and in the middle of all this ineptitude we lose good hard-working folks and make others miserable by making them become jacks of all trades and masters of none.

RML, Deployed

5/16/2011 11:59:17 PM ET
The single best way to increase efficiency and productivity in the force is to eliminate the Whole Person Concept. I'm not sure when it happened but for some reason nowadays its perfectly okay for an active-duty troop to spend all duty day washing cars or at a blood drive. What the heck do those activities have anything to do with protecting the Constitution or taking the fight to the enemy?

JT, Destin FL

5/16/2011 7:06:53 PM ET
It appears that E-9 Prioetti is out of touch and I agree with PhilCONUS. I know for a fact that the troops in my office could do my civilian job as they are busy filling a square on their EPR or PTing or preping for a deployment. Civilians are ur continuity, E-9...

John, Northwest

5/16/2011 4:40:00 PM ET
I am going to cross my fingers and pray that in a few years this will help the budget problem and we can assess having more jobs for civilians to cover the workload while military deploy.

Sergeant , AMC

5/16/2011 4:34:07 PM ET
I wonder what positions they are going to choose to fill? My guess is the one the retired O-5O-6 is going to fill.

Just returned , SA

5/16/2011 4:29:23 PM ET
If you do the math and keep doing the 12 ratio you will eventually end up with 1 civilian running each section. How is that going to work when the military is off at war?

Smoker, AZ

5/16/2011 3:33:54 PM ET
Now would be a good time to create alternatives for folks, like part-time opportunities. Hire two part-timers against one position. I'd rather have a part-time job than no job at all.

jb, Colorado

5/16/2011 2:07:53 PM ET
This policy is a cop-out. Just because a position goes vacant, they are not going to fill it rather than take an honest look at all positions to see what we can cut or do a RIF to cut dead weight that is retirement eligible. I love the photo, too. It makes the AF civilian workforce look like we all live in the future, where everyone is attractive and uses trendy electronic devices to increase our productivity.

Bob, FL

5/16/2011 1:07:14 PM ET
Heaven forbid that Congress or the Senate take a pay cut or freeze. Those that have control continue to control. It isn't the salaries that will kill the economy, it is the blatant disregard for proper economic management across the board -- health-care, immigration, off-shoring jobs, etc. Better process controls and logical economic management could result in less spending.

Steve, Edwards

5/16/2011 12:46:45 PM ET
What about a VERAVSIP for AF civilians?

Donna, Va

5/16/2011 12:44:41 PM ET
@Jeff Peterson AFB: Not all E-9s have the outlook of Chief Proietti, though I do understand where the chief is coming from. We have all worked in a place where it seems personnel, military and civilian alike, needed to be better employed. That is the job of the person supervising those personnel. SNCOs, E-7 through E-9, are invaluable to our military service.

MSgt Chris Harvey, Eglin

5/16/2011 12:27:09 PM ET
Not only are civilians covering for deployments, but for MILITARY over-staffing of Airmen. Then they get farmed out as volunteers during the workday for bullets and do not get to learn their jobs.

RA, Midwest

5/16/2011 12:18:24 PM ET
How does this affect the plans to in-source from contracting 30,000 positions? Also, is there going to be a freeze on contracting out work, or is this going to be another outsourcing in disguise? Unless you freeze the contracting out, this doesn't save any money.

soon to retire, stateside

5/16/2011 11:56:38 AM ET
This isn't a disincentive for the buddy system used for hiring new civilians. In fact, it may make things worse since, aside from this new hiring hurdle, there still are no real quality controls for hiring other than making positions more competitive -- twice as competitive to be exact. Regardless, I'm curious if the option to use a different ratio rather than 1-to-2 hiring was investigated. That the powers that be are willing to effectively reduce overall Air Force civilian manning by half in, let's say, approximately 20-30 years seems extreme at this time. Could we have marginalized this by doing a 2-to-3 or a 3-to-5 hiring process rather than a 1-to-2? There is also the possibility that organizations will use this new hiring process to simply request twice as many civilian billets as are necessary to do the job. If I were a commander, that is what I would do.

Acitve Duty Officer, CONUS

5/16/2011 11:49:24 AM ET
Wow! It's not enough to not give us a COLA adjustment and make us pay more for medical prescriptions. Now you want to stop us from working. We can't get any jobs outside of the government we dedicated our lives to, and we certainly have to give up our first born to get one in the civilian sector. Guess I would do better adding my name to the long list of the unemployed.

Hank, Tucson AZ

5/16/2011 11:08:01 AM ET
So much could be saved by our Goverment if Congress worked on doing away with their pet projects that add nothing to our country but only cost us tax payers money and run this country into more debt, a debt that causes the Military to have to cut funding. Soon there will be no need for funding since the military will be budgeted out of a job.

RT, Edwards AFB

5/16/2011 11:00:37 AM ET
Getting rid of the five-year rule and letting me stay in my position overseas would save Uncle Sugar a half-million bucks in housing allowance over the next ten years, yet NOBODY wants to talk about that.

Tim Kregel, Ramstein

5/16/2011 10:57:45 AM ET
A lot more needs to be released on how this will work. Who will decide which jobs will be filled? Will these be rolled up by command? A necessary idea, but then why are we also using civilian pay money for the summer hire program and not filling full-time jobs?

Jerry, Oklahoma

5/16/2011 10:55:13 AM ET
OK, let's cut pennies while we ignore what really got us into this mess, e.g. those big banks and robbers. I'm all for cutting unnecessary cost, but every time I hear "cutting fat," I see amputations occur. But one thing is good: hiring people for the nuclear enterprise. That is a job that will cut all kinds of fat and reduce financial problems. With the way things are handled there, people will either die early on the job or just plain quit. Look, we don't have to pay pensions; it makes good financial sense. Enough of that little bit of tongue and cheek, and into that CMSgt MP's comment. Are you really concerned about hurting people, or are you concerned about saving money? Being a chief is not a cushy job and has a lot of responsibility to it, BUT it is secure -- much more than the jobs you are trying to cut. You can now be cut and go home with a nice pension; they can't. If you worked in the civilian sector, you would realize how much work and pressure is put on people.

EJ, McGuire

5/16/2011 10:49:08 AM ET
I believe we need to lessen the amount of civilians we have doing our normal day-to-day jobs. I currently work with two, and it's nothing more than a hassle. One day a week they aren't here; most days they don't stay the whole time they are supposed to be here. One remark or moved coffee pot desk, they go to the union and file paperwork. They do not work weekends. If you ask them to accomplish a task, they retort, "Are you asking or telling me?" They are not held accountable by any standards. How about stop all this force shaping and getting rid of good Airman and fill these jobs with people who can be held accountable and will do the job?

WE, US

5/16/2011 10:33:14 AM ET
Outsource it all.

Shawn, TheMoon

5/16/2011 10:18:59 AM ET
I still do not understand why you would retire from the AF and go into the GS system. Most start out in GS07 or GS09 positions. Why sell yourself short going into a 30-55K-a-year job. Of course that won't happen to CMSgt Proietti. As a chief I am sure he is actively spending his days trying to create another unneeded GS13 position for himself to retire into.

Retired, Ohio

5/16/2011 9:24:24 AM ET
Here's an idea: How about they only advertise the vacancies they intend to fill? The last thing I would want to do is spend the time and effort to apply for a vacancy that will not be filled anyway.

DC, MD

5/16/2011 9:22:32 AM ET
@CMSgt Matt Proietti: Congress needs to cut the E-9 position and save some money on people who really do nothing all day except post on AF.mil.

Jeff, Peterson AFB

5/16/2011 9:20:11 AM ET
The quote about history, "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it," is attributed to the American philosopher George Santayana.

Lt Col Retired, Scott AFB

5/16/2011 3:33:00 AM ET
Now if we could do something to reduce the number of LNs who are just filling a position. I know of one who barely comes to work and when this LN does work, the military OR GS civilians end up redoing all of the work because it is done incorrectly resulting in more wasted man hours.

AD, Germany

5/15/2011 10:08:14 PM ET
Chief Proietti: As a person who worked GS at Beale where you are stationed, I can tell you that we were already well employed. Not only was I the unit secretary, I also took over exec duties after BLSDM, covered UFPM until an NCO would take it months later, and covered everything else I could based on my broad prior-service and civilian knowledge and service experience. I did so willingly for the team and often without comp time. We are already covering work for military members who are deployed and because of heavy shrinking numbers. We certainly did not have slack time, at least not in the maintenance world. I think you are bit out of touch with reality.

Gaijin, Japan

5/15/2011 9:22:28 PM ET
All the catchy slogans and propaganda won't change the fact that if you keep pushing to "do more with less," you end up doing less with less. I already have so many additional duties that I only spend a small portion of my day doing my real job because of this mentality. I don't know how people buy into this. You work more, get paid the same; the government benefits, you don't. Preach all you want about only keeping the very best employees, but your very intelligent employees will see that while these policies are advantageous to Uncle Sam, they are counter-intuitive to them. You can pat yourself on the back and relish in the fact that you're a hard-worker, but that doesn't change the fact that there are myriad employers out there who are willing to do more with more. Regardless of all that, decreasing available jobs isn't going to help anyone. Where's Clinton when you need him? Talk about a guy who knew how to manage the economy.

Mike, Misawa AB

5/15/2011 6:28:09 PM ET
Chief Proietti: We're there. We work beyond normal duty hours and often on weekends. It hurts, hence the huge response the VSP received. The Air Force at large will be hurting once the 2003-2008 pilot ADSCs are up, and they think that 5 years at $125K will keep people around? How out of touch can you possibly be?

Phil, CONUS

5/15/2011 5:30:58 PM ET
Here is the problem with this: If you keep deploying military members for 6-12 months at a time, who is left with the continuity needed for successful mission accomplishment? Civilians. In my shop, the civilian is the only person who has a strategic view of operations, because the rest of us are out of the shop for months on end. By the time we get back, it's time to PCS. What happens to the mission? It gets done, but not as well as it could.

Jason, California

5/15/2011 11:42:56 AM ET
This is absolutely necessary. I'd like to see cuts until it truly hurts and people have plenty of work to keep them busy all day, every day, as a way of ensuring we have only the best people working for USAF.

CMSgt Matt Proietti, Penn Valley CA

5/13/2011 10:33:43 PM ET
Next-level do-more-with-less breakfast maneuver

PB, US

5/13/2011 9:24:22 PM ET
So how will this work? Will all vacancies still be posted on USAJobs or just the ones that will be filled? If all vacancies will still appear on USAJobs, how will the decision be made as to which ones will get filled?

Dave T., San Diego CA

5/13/2011 7:57:43 PM ET
Just call it what it is: Do even more with even less.

Sgt Whoever, conus

5/13/2011 6:11:16 PM ET
Oh, this is going to put a crimp in the retired military. Most of the civilian jobs are filled by retired military. In uniform one day, the next in civilian clothes...

Retired Civilian, San Antonio

5/13/2011 5:58:17 PM ET
Sounds a lot like the "More with less" doctrine that was attempted in the late 1970's and early 1980's. Guess everyone forgot that it didn't work so well back then either."Those who fail to acknowledge history are doomed to repeat it." Sir Winston Churchill, General Montgomery

MSgt Retired, New England

Add a comment

Inside AF.mil

GeneralImagesVideo

View All RSS

Subscribe AF.MIL

More Headlines

Osan community brightens holidays for Korean orphans  |  VIDEO

Deployed Airman receives Christmas phone call from President Obama

Air Force Week in Photos

Premier AF concert band 'wows' fellow musicians at Midwest Clinic  3

Rescue, battlefield Airmen train as one  4

Through Airmen's Eyes: High school reunion ... above Afghanistan

Space Fence program moves forward

Kunsan AB, Hurlburt Field Airmen unite to spread holiday cheer

Operation Christmas Drop  1

Air Force Week in Photos

Panetta memo describes possible sequestration effects  1

Academy firefighters recognized for Waldo Canyon Fire efforts

154 selected for captain

Special hiring program helps AF wounded warriors

Commentary

Legacy of valor

There IS an I in team 3