The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 1995 (Public Law 103-337, Section 533) requires that the Department annually submit this report of readiness factors by race and gender as part of the annual Department of Defense posture statement. This appendix responds to that reporting requirement.
The Department is strongly committed to studying the issue of nondeployability and its impact on readiness, and earlier this year reviewed permanent and temporary limitation factors with the Services. However, since DoD has not required the Services to collect or report individual nondeployability data in the past or utilize a standard reporting system representing standardized definitions, comprehensive historical data was not available for this report. To address this issue for future reports, under the leadership of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force Management Policy), the Department contracted the Logistics Management Institute to perform a comprehensive analysis of the impact of nondeployable personnel on readiness and equity. This study also will look at the degree to which individuals in active component units, who are not deployable, are adversely affecting readiness. The objective of this study is to review and enhance Service personnel management systems capacity to track individual deployability. The Department is totally committed to studying nondeployables aggressively with the Services to facilitate an anlaysis for future reports.
The following provides a brief discussion of DoD's approach to this issue. In addressing individuals restricted from deploying and their effect on the readiness of units, we assign individuals and deploy units. When a unit deploys, the individuals assigned to that unit are expected to participate in that deployment, and the overwhelming majority do, regardless of personal circumstance. That was an important finding of the Department's December 1993 study titled Family Status and Initial Term of Service.
Inevitably, when a unit is called upon to deploy, some of its members may not be able to accompany the unit. A temporary medical condition or a family emergency, for example, may temporarily prevent a member from accompanying his or her unit. Each such problem is unique to the servicemember and to the circumstances of his/her unit, and is properly managed at the unit level. Current Department policy recognizes Service-unique and unit-unique circumstances, and provides the Services with the flexibility to manage those situations to meet readiness goals. Accident, illness, and family emergencies are inherently unplanned and pose the greatest challenges to commanders of units about to deploy. Permanent medical limitations (HIV-positive, cancer, heart disease, asthma, diabetes, and other progressive illnesses) are a small part of the medical problem. The actual number of members with permanent limitations is small--around two-tenths of a percent of the active force--and is far too small to exert a significant impact on readiness.
The problem is manageable through the assignment process. Since only a very small number of servicemembers have medical conditions that preclude them from taking certain assignments, when such a medical condition is diagnosed, the servicemember is given an assignment limitation. These individuals are not assigned to deploying units; and if an assigned member becomes permanently restricted, he or she is reassigned and replaced. If that individual's medical condition affects duty performance, he or she is referred to the Physical Evaluation Board to determine retainability.
The Department will continue to aggressively review existing Service methods designed to account for individuals in a nondeployable status, to enhance and standardize the personnel accounting systems designed to track availability for deployment, and to develop necessary policy changes to improve deployment capacity by monitoring individual availability.
DoD policy clearly prohibits discrimination and sexual harassment. Furthermore, the Department is building a diverse force, a force reflecting the rich tapestry of this nation. Diversity can serve as a source of vitality to an organization.
The composition of the U.S. military is a positive statement about what is possible in a multiracial, multiethnic society. Most nations are multiracial, and most nations are divided along lines of race, religion, or language. When the U.S. military is deployed, whether for warfighting or peacekeeping, it shows that diversity can be a strength. To achieve and manage a diverse force successfully, DoD leaders must promote fair treatment, and prohibit discrimination and sexual harassment.
The Department has made substantial progress in addressing equal opportunity issues -- first with the full integration of African Americans and more recently with enhanced and expanded opportunities for women. Nevertheless, the Services have experienced increases in reported incidents of discrimination and sexual harassment. The discrimination complaint processing systems currently used by the Services work well most of the time. The chain of command is effective in administering these systems; however, evidence of mishandling indicates that systemic improvements are justified. In April 1994, the Department developed a five-past plan for addressing the issue. One of the major components of the plan established a special task force co-chaired by the Secretary of the Air Force and the under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to:
The report of the task force will be provided to Congress under separate cover. Congressionally requested information concerning discrimination and sexual harassment cases for previous years in provided in Tables G-1 and G-2.
While DoD has established reporting requirements and historical data on discrimination and sexual harassment complaints, no similar reporting requirements had existed, prior to this statutory provision, for reporting the number of such cases that resulted in disciplinary proceedings. Consequently, there is currently no mechanism to correlate the existing discrimination complaint data with disciplinary action to give reliable information and disposition of discrimination and sexual harassment cases.
DoD has recognized this problem for some time, and it is being addressed through the implementation of the Defense Incident Based Reporting System (DIBRS). The DIBRS reporting mechanism is being designed to capture incidents of unlawful discrimination through bias motivation indicators, and incidents of sexual harassment through a special designator. DIBRS is based on the National Incident Based Reporting System of crime reporting to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and is expected to be on-line in mid-1996.
Overall, retention rates within the Department are healthy. Variations evident over the previous few years are the result of conscious decisions associated with drawdown management strategies. During FY 1992 and FY 1993, Army, Marine Corps, and Air Force rates were artificially depressed by expanded separation programs. Similar trends were evident in the Navy in FY 1993 and FY 1994. In general, limited involuntary programs, coupled with more extensive voluntary separation tools provided by Congress, allowed the Department to manage its build down in a manner that maintained readiness, yet was fair to people.
As with all personnel on active duty, the overall number of women and minorities has declined since the drawdown began. However, analyses indicate that minorities and women will constitute as least the same percentage of the future force as they did at the start of the drawdown. Thus, the demographics of the force have not been substantially altered as the Department manages personnel reductions.
With the conclusion of the drawdown, the Department is beginning to see a return to more stable retention patterns. Assuming that deployment tempos do not remain at extreme levels for prolonged periods, and that quality of life and compension needs continue to be met, it is likely retention will remain at levels necessary to maintain a well-seasoned force.
Since 1975, the Department of Defense annually has conducted the Youth Attitude Tracking Study (YATS), a nationwide computer-assisted telephone interview of approximately 10,000 young men and women. This survey provides information on the propensity, attitudes, and motivations of young people toward military service. Research has shown that the expressed intentions of young men and women are strong predictors on enlistment behavior.
Enlistment Propensity Trends
Enlistment propensity is the percentage of youth who state they plan to definitely or probably enlist in the next few years. The 1993 YATS data show 28 percent of 16-21 year-old men expressed enlistment propensity for at least one active-duty Service (see attached tables). This is a 1 percentage point decline from the 1992 YATS survey, and a 6 percentage point decline from the historically-high 34-percent level in 1991.
Service-specific enlistment propensities for 16-21 year-old men were lower in 1993 than in 1992 for all Services, The decline for the Marine Corps, from 13 to 10 percent, is statistically significant. Similarly, 16-21 year-old women's overall enlistment propensity declined from 1991 (13 percent) to 1992 (11 percent), although there was no significant change from 1992 to 1993.
Across-the-board, 16-21 year-old white males and females expressed lower propensity to enlist in the Service in 1993 than in 1991. Similarly, enlistment propensity of 16-21 year-old black men was 36 percent in 1993, down from 37 percent in 1992 and 49 percent in 1991. Since 1989, black male propensity has declined 17 percentage points overall. Black female enlistment propensity decreased from 24 percent to 15 percent from 1991 to 1992. This trend reversed in 1993, and black female propensity to enlist increased to 20 percent. This increase, however, was not universal across all services. In 1993, black female propensity to join the Marine Corps or Air Force increased and decreased for the Army or Navy. Enlistment propensity for young Hispanic men has also declined (from 43 in 1991 to 39 percent in 1993), although enlistment propensity for Hispanic women has remained fairly constant (24 to 23 percent from 1991 to 1992 and 1993), although Hispanic women were more inclined to join the Marine Corps, and less inclined to join the Army, in 1993 than they were in 1991.
Factors Influencing Propensity
While YATS can identify trends in youth propensity, the question of why is not as clear. The Department has several efforts underway to better understand this issue. First, DoD is working with the Army and conducted a special administration of the YATS this past summer. Although fewer youth than usual were surveyed (4,000), those youth not interested in military service were asked why they feel that way. Currently, the Department is conducting its large, annual survey of youth and have incorporated similar questions that explore the reasons why youth are less interested. Second, the Department is conducting a number of special analyses of the YATS data that could shed some light in this area. Those analyses are under way at this time.
Although the Department is trying to understand the question of why, it does have some idea about what youth cite as reasons they would or would not want to join the military. As shown in the attached tables, 16-21 year-olds cite some common reasons for propensity to join the military and also for not wanting to join the military. Reasons cited to join include educational funding, job training/experience, duty to country, pay, travel, and development of self-discipline. Reasons cited for not wanting to join the military include a dislike for the military lifestyle, other career interests, their reluctance based on the length of enlistment commitments, the danger and threat to life, a perceived inability to fulfill family obligations, or a conviction military service is against their beliefs. Looking at the responses for 16-21 year-old youth from 1991 to 1993, a larger percentage of white males and Hispanic males and females expressed a wish to join for educational funding in 1993 than in 1991, compared to a decreasing percentage of black males and females. Also, fewer black males and females expressed a wish to join the military for pay. A larger percentage of Hispanic males and females expressed a dislike for the military as a reason for not wanting to join. A smaller percentage of white and Hispanic males mentioned other career interests constitute a reason for not wanting to join the military. Similarly, a smaller percentage of black males and females state that danger and threat to life have turned them away from considering the military. Finally, a smaller percentage of Hispanic males, and a larger percentage of white females, cite family obligations as a reason for not wanting to serve in the military. In addition to this descriptive information, some speculative reasons for the decline in recent years include misperceptions, declining defense resources, increased risk, and the influence of others.
There also is an apparent misperception among youth and their influencers (for example, parents, siblings, counselors) that the military is no longer hiring or that the military is a declining industry. Misperceptions may have been fueled by recent events -- the drawdown and personnel cuts, base closures in many communities, press reports of unfavorable events, a perceived shift in relative importance of military versus domestic issues (crime, health care, economy, jobs), and a decline in defense-related industries in many communities. Consequently, there are many youth and their influencers who believe the military is not hiring, or that the militry is not an attractive career option at this time.
Propensity declines parallel DoD's reduction in recruiting and advertising resources. Since FY 1989, recruit advertising budgets have been cut in half; only recently has the Department begun to reverse that fall (over $89 million for FY 1995). It is difficult to counter negative perceptions and sustain youth awareness about opportunities and benefits of military service without an aggressive advertising program.
There may be a growing perception among youth and their influencers that military service entails greater personal risk. Recent military operations in Bosnia, Somalia, and Haiti, along with tragic accidents in Iraq and at Pope Air Force Base, vividly demonstrate the real physical dangers of military service. Youth may be less inclined to enlist if they perceive greater personal risks.
There also appears to be less support by influencers for military service. A growing number of influencers have no military experience, so they might not encourage youth to join the military. Moreover, influencers might question the relevance of military service in today's world, and be less inclined to encourage military service.
In sum, there is no single theme to explain the decline in enlistment interest. Collectively, however, the factors outlined above create a very difficult recruiting environment. Preliminary research with focus groups indicates the above factors may be creating a perception among youth of uncertainty about the future and instability in the military environment. Consequently recruiters have to work harder to get the type of high quality recruit required for enhanced individual and unit performance.
In the long term, the Department must continue to improve the military image and culture so that it remains an attractive option for those who serve, and those who might consider such service. This means that DoD must change mistaken impressions and counter negative publicity. Therefore, the Department shall continue to work toward equitable pay and benefits, excellence in training, improved quality of life, and a healthy environment in human relations. Collectively, the resulting tangible and intangible outcomes will serve to boost morale and performance, recognizing that the best recruiters are the soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen themselves. To the extent that the enormous contributions of those in the military are recognized by continued attention in these areas, those who serve will continue to perform with excellence, while conveying the benefits of their service to the next generation of military men and women.
Tables:
Table G-1 to G-2 (Trends in Discrimination or Sexual Harassement)
Table G-3 to G-5 (Army Retention Trends: Male, Female, Total)
Table G-6 to G-8 (Navy Retention Trends: Male, Female, Total)
Table G-9 to G-11 (Marine Corps Retention Trends: Male, Female, Total)
Table G-12 to G-14 (Air Force Retention Trends: Male, Female, Total)
Table G-15 to G-17 (Department of Defense Retention Trends: Male, Female, Total)
Table G-18 to G-20 (Trends in Enlistment Propensity: Definitely or Probably, Common Reasons for Joining, Common Reasons for Not Joining )
