May 9, 2014

 

On May 6, the Joint Chiefs of Staff made a rare unified appearance before the full Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) in support of the Pentagon’s FY 2015 budget proposals to “slow the growth” in personnel costs in pay and benefits.

MOAA Chairman of the Board, Gen. John H. Tilelli, Jr., USA (Ret.) provided the counter-argument to the Pentagon’s proposals during a second panel that included representatives from the Association of the United States Army (AUSA), the Association of the United States Navy (AUSN), and the Air Force Association (AFA).

Tilelli explained that while debt reduction is a national priority, a disproportionate share of the burden of reducing it must not be placed on the backs of servicemembers and military families.

He called on Congress to support a bipartisan debt reduction package to replace sequestration. “Continued sequestration cuts for FY 2016 and beyond will place national security at risk,” he said.

Much of Joint Chiefs testimony focused on personnel cost growth since 2000. Tilelli countered their argument saying, “Since 2000, personnel and health care costs experienced an average 7.8-percent rate of growth due to the necessity of correcting previous cutbacks from breaking the career force. However, since 2011, personnel cost growth has not just slowed, but [rather] declined on an average of 1.5 percent per year.”

 

Not all associations were in agreement about the recent deceleration of personnel cost growth. AFA President Gen. Craig R. McKinley, USAF (Ret.), said in his opening statement, “Our airmen and retirees deserve every dollar they earn. However, as you have heard today, personnel compensation costs continue to climb at unsustainable rates, and if not addressed, they will consume our combat, training and modernization spending over the next few decades.”

The dramatic impact of sequestration led some organizations to support the FY 2015 proposal to cap military pay below private sector pay growth for a second year.

AUSA President Gen. Gordon Sullivan, USA (Ret.) outlined in his statement, “AUSA is committed to military pay raises that match the Employment Cost Index (ECI), but this year because of sequestration, the funds freed by a slightly smaller pay increase is the price that must be paid to have soldiers who are trained and ready.”

McKinley said, “We felt that the cost of living adjustment at one-percent was a valid approach, and as General Sullivan said, we have to look at the out-years. We can’t sustain that over a period of time.”

Tilelli said no federal obligation is more important than protecting national security and the most important element of national security is the sustainment of a dedicated, top-quality career military force. “The past 12 years of unprecedented demands and sacrifices highlight how radically different military service conditions are from civilian life, something many budget analysts and think tanks don’t understand.”

“The only times the all-volunteer force has been jeopardized have been due to the budget-driven cutbacks in the military compensation package that gave insufficient weight to the extraordinary demands and sacrifices inherent in a service career,” Tilelli continued.

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), SASC ranking member expressed his concern over the DoD proposals by stating, “We are now being forced to make a false choice between paying our troops and their families what they deserve and giving them the training and capabilities required to accomplish their mission and return home safely to their loved ones. This is an irresponsible and reckless choice.”

MOAA agrees and believes these budget proposals would be a major step backward. They would repeat the same mistakes that led to retention and readiness problems in the past, undoing the needed compensation improvements Congress put in place since 2000.

Tilelli concluded by saying, “These structural changes that we are talking about are a reduction in compensation, earned benefits. To prioritize prior to…the Commission [findings] is preemptive. You can continue to piecemeal year on year – benefits, compensation for retirees, servicemembers and survivors – and pretty soon you create a volunteer force that’s no longer viable.”