Active Duty Governance
As America relies on its “total force,” so should MOAA.
By Vice Adm. Norbert R. Ryan Jr., USN-Ret.

In the July issue of Military Officer, the chairman of MOAA’s board of directors, Adm. Jerry Johnson, USN-Ret., recounted how the board had decided earlier this year, after changing the association’s name at the end of 2002 from The Retired Officers Association to the Military Officers Association of America, to take a logical next step. In March, the board unanimously voted to recommend to the membership that MOAA eliminate the requirement, stated in its bylaws, that officers serving on the board of directors be retired.

The chairman put it well when he said, “After deliberating this proposal carefully, the board concluded that MOAA should, indeed, have active duty, active-status (drilling Guard and Reserve), and former-officer representation on the board. Since the ‘jointness’ legislation of the late 1980s and the end of the Cold War, our nation has explicitly relied on its ‘total force’ capabilities—that is, the efforts of active duty, Guard, and Reserve forces. And MOAA should have a governance structure that is comparably ‘joint.’

“Additionally, the composition of MOAA’s board of directors should mirror the association’s mission and objectives. MOAA’s mission statement says it should be ‘the professional association for every officer, at every stage of life and career.’ And many ‘retiree’ issues—such as TRICARE For Life (TFL) and amendments to the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP)—are followed closely by active-force personnel, who someday will be retirees themselves.”

This month I’d like to provide some additional information regarding this board recommendation and have tried to anticipate some questions officers might ask before they vote.

What will active duty and active-status officers contribute to the board?
Some current directors have retired only recently, and their perspectives are of great value as we reach out to active duty and active-status officers. Nonetheless, currently serving officers have up-to-the-minute knowledge of issues, decisions, and trends that affect the active force. Equally important, the active duty and active-status officers who will serve on MOAA’s board will do so because they care— that is, they will be uncompensated volunteers who want to ensure the association is in the best possible position to represent the interests of all members of the uniformed-services family.

Does this mean MOAA no longer will focus on retiree issues?
Absolutely not. As the chairman said, retirees will always predominate in MOAA’s membership, and our support of retirees will never waver. The list of retiree-related legislative issues on which MOAA has helped secure victory in recent years is impressive: cola equity, TFL, repeal of dual compensation, repeal of Redux, concurrent receipt, and combat-related special compensation. And this year MOAA’s No. 1 legislative goal is to fix the SBP.

Will there be more active duty and active-status officers on the board as MOAA recruits more such officers into its membership?
The figures quoted last month by the chairman are pertinent. Active duty officers now comprise less than 10 percent of MOAA’s membership, and drilling Guard and Reserve officers comprise less than 2 percent. We don’t anticipate that many of the 36 board seats—perhaps four or five—will eventually be filled by these officers. In the long run, we expect retired officers will continue to predominate on the board, reflecting the composition of the association’s membership.

Do DoD regulations permit an active duty or active-status officer to serve on MOAA’s board?
The DoD Standards of Conduct Office has advised MOAA that an active duty or active-status officer, when acting in his or her personal capacity and out of military uniform, may serve on MOAA’s board, providing the officer was not offered the position or selected because of his or her duty station or billet. In addition, because MOAA and DoD interact on common concerns and issues, there are various potential conflicts of interest that must be avoided. MOAA will work closely with the DoD Standards of Conduct Office to ensure that active duty and active-service directors are aware of, and avoid, all such pitfalls.

What happens if the status of an active duty or active-status officer changes during his or her six-year term of service on the board? For example, what if an officer receives permanent-change-of-station orders, deploys, or retires?
In any of these cases, the officer will be able to complete his or her board service unless the change of status—overseas deployment, for example—would place an undue burden on the officer in completing that service. In the event the officer feels it necessary to resign from the board of directors, the board will elect another officer to serve the unexpired portion of the resigned officer’s term.

Is MOAA hoping to have active duty and active-status officers of any particular ranks on its board?
Current directors range in rank from chief warrant officers to flag and general officers. MOAA hopes to attract, from the active duty and active-status ranks, officers of all grades who, like current directors, have the capacity to govern with vision, to think strategically, and to understand their responsibility to govern in the best interest of the membership. In other words, we’ll be looking for officers who are fully qualified to provide sound direction to the business management and other affairs of the association.

Won’t it be difficult for an active duty officer to take nine to 12 days of leave each year to attend to MOAA board responsibilities?
While all current board directors are retired, most are active in post-military careers and must take vacation time in order to serve MOAA. The association would encourage active duty directors, in order to avoid having to use leave, to seek orders from their commands authorizing Permissive Temporary Duty, sometimes called “travel at no expense to the government.”

If the recommended bylaw amendment is approved, when will the first active duty and active-status officers join the board?
Because board elections are held only in even-numbered years, the first opportunity for an active duty or active-status officer to apply to the board would be in 2006. If a sitting director were to resign from the board before then, his or her successor would be elected by the board to serve the unexpired portion of the director’s term, and the board could elect an active duty or active-status officer to so serve.