This is the change in the Army's Personnel system that has been in the works.
Army Policy To Reduce Soldier Relocations
Change Seeks to Aid Training, Family Life
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 10, 2004; Page A01
The Army announced yesterday that it will discourage the type of nomadic career that has characterized Army life for generations and will instead station soldiers at one base for much of their service, an effort to improve combat readiness and make life easier on troops and their families.
The new policy calls for troops to remain at their first post for six to seven years -- twice as long as the current average -- and envisions bringing them back to the home base later in their career as well.
Army officials said the goal is to make units more cohesive by keeping them together longer, and to help soldiers specialize in ways that enhance their effectiveness. That is a departure for an Army that has moved soldiers around frequently to give them the broadest set of experiences and training possible.
The change is also meant to make military life more attractive to families by letting them set deeper roots in their communities, buy homes and keep children in the same school longer. The fast pace of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and their danger have caused concern that the Army could start losing troops in large numbers as spouses balk at the strain of repeated deployments there or elsewhere.
The personnel changes, along with other aspects of a broad reorganization, amount to some of the biggest revisions yet for the three-decade-old all-volunteer Army.
"These are going to be major cultural changes for the Army," Brig. Gen. Sean Byrne, the Army's director of personnel policy, said in announcing the changes yesterday to reporters at the Pentagon.
In practical terms, the new policy of supporting "homesteading" at one base means that junior officers will become captains -- and most will have commanded a company -- before they make their first move. Then, after tours in advanced schooling or as recruiters or trainers, they will be encouraged to return to their original post.
Likewise, enlisted soldiers will rise to become sergeants who have led a squad before they move. In addition, officials said the Army intends that soldiers generally will serve longer tours throughout the remainder of their careers, which are designed to last 20 to 25 years.
Outside experts on military personnel policy generally applauded the changes.
The best way to boost combat effectiveness is "keeping people together -- train them together, send them into danger together and bring them home together," said Jonathan Shay, a Department of Veterans Affairs counselor and author of "Achilles in Vietnam," a study of unit-cohesion problems.
But Shay, a Harvard-trained psychiatrist, warned that to make the changes permanent, the Army must follow up with far-reaching alterations in training programs and other personnel-management policies.
Since World War II, spending much of one's career at one post generally has been discouraged by the Army.
One reason was the fear that troops would gain expertise only in certain types of units -- light infantry or heavier mechanized formations. That was a drawback in an institution that has historically wanted to be able to move people quickly and plug them into new formations.
But Byrne said the Army hopes to reduce the differences between light and heavy units as it carries out a parallel reorganization, in which it will transform 10 active-duty divisions into about 45 "brigade combat teams."
The personnel changes will begin in September, but it will take several years for them to take full effect. Initially, at least, they won't apply to the 27,000 U.S. troops in South Korea, where one-year tours are the norm, or the 70,000 in Europe, where the three-year tour will remain the standard.
The new policy may hold implications for the next big round of base closings. The homesteading idea appears to be a strong vote for big, multifunction bases such as Fort Hood, Tex., and Fort Bragg, N.C. Those bases house several units and also have training centers, unlike scores of smaller outposts that host only one training unit.
For example, at a big base, a soldier could serve in one division, then become a drill sergeant at one of its training centers, and then move back to his original division, or to another one at that base -- all while keeping his family in one place.
In some ways, the policy change also is a belated recognition that the Army's demographics have changed since the end of the draft. In 1973, only one-quarter of soldiers were married. Now the proportion is double that. In recent years, military spouses have complained that it is difficult to start and sustain a career while moving every few years.
The new emphasis on staying at one post for long periods generally will be good for military spouses and dependents, said Joyce Raezer, director of government relations for the National Military Family Association.
"Any time you talk about stabilizing families, it's good news," she said. "Moving is expensive; it's disruptive to a spouse's career and a child's education."
But, she warned, it also means that when families do eventually move, "it will be harder" because they are likely to have stronger ties to the community.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company |
