Official Site of the U.S. Air Force   Right Corner Banner
Join the Air Force

News > Air Force announces civilian workforce restructuring
 
Photos 
Civilian Workforce Restructuring
(U.S. Air Force graphic/Sylvia Saab)
Download HiRes
 
Related Stories
 Keesler implements civilian workforce reductions - 11/3/2011
 Patrick undergoes civilian workforce restructuring - 11/18/2011
 
Related Biographies
  MICHAEL B. DONLEY
 GENERAL NORTON A. SCHWARTZ
Air Force announces civilian workforce restructuring

Posted 11/2/2011 Email story   Print story

    


by Lt. Col. Cynthia Anderson
Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs


11/2/2011 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Air Force officials announced several adjustments to the civilian workforce Nov. 2.

In response to the secretary of defense's direction to stop civilian growth above fiscal year 2010 levels and the need to add 5,900 positions against the Air Force's top priorities, the Air Force eliminated approximately 9,000 positions.

These adjustments reflect several initiatives designed to align limited resources based on the Air Force's priorities. This process is an ongoing effort to increase efficiencies, reduce overhead and eliminate redundancy.

"We can't be successful without our talented and experienced civilian workforce," said Secretary of the Air Force Michael B. Donley. "We are making difficult choices about how to deliberately restructure and posture the force and will continue to look for new ways of accomplishing the mission. We can't afford business as usual."

Upon receiving the secretary of defense's 2010 memo directing that civilian manpower costs stay within fiscal year 2010 levels, the Air Force began a comprehensive strategic review of the entire Air Force civilian workforce to determine whether or not civilian authorizations were in the right places to meet mission priorities.

The strategic review revealed several imbalances. Some high-priority areas needed to grow, while some management and overhead functions needed streamlining. These imbalances led to a variety of initiatives focused on realigning scarce manpower resources with the most critical missions.

In particular, the Air Force will grow by approximately 5,900 positions in acquisition, nuclear enterprise, and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and other key areas while reducing approximately 9,000 positions in management, staff and support areas.

"We clearly understand the turbulence these and future reductions will cause in the workforce," said Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz. "We are making every effort to use voluntary measures to achieve reductions whenever possible."

Beginning in May 2011, the Air Force implemented a series of hiring controls and voluntary separation programs designed to reduce overall manpower costs, but these hiring controls did not provide the results required to operate within fiscal constraints.

"The initiatives announced Nov. 2 represent the next step toward that goal, but there is more work to be done," said Brig. Gen. Gina Grosso, the Manpower, Organization, and Resources director. "The Air Force remains over fiscal year 2010 manpower levels and will continue to develop enterprise-wide solutions to achieve our goals with minimal impact to mission. The Air Force must still define an additional 4,500 civilian positions for reduction."

As details become final, Air Force officials will release information on the next set of initiatives.

One of the key restructures announced as a result of management overhead streamlining will occur with Air Force Materiel Command.

"The restructure of Air Force Materiel Command -- our largest employer of civilians -- will focus on standardizing processes, streamlining decision-making and aligning missions to allow the command to operate more effectively and efficiently," Schwartz said.

According to Schwartz, the AFMC restructure will allow AFMC to eliminate approximately 1,000 overhead positions. The command will preserve workforce and mission capabilities by consolidating management functions around AFMC's core missions. After this restructure, AFMC will move away from its traditional, management-staff model consisting of a center and headquarters staff on each AFMC base and create a "lead" center for each of its five mission areas.

The Life Cycle Management Center will be headquartered at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio; the Sustainment Center will be located at Tinker AFB, Okla.; and the Air Force Test Center will be based at Edwards AFB, Calif. The Air Force Research Laboratory will remain at Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio, and the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center will remain at Kirtland AFB, NM.

The AFMC restructure will be implemented by Oct. 1, 2012.

AFMC will not be the only major command affected. Air Force-wide, local leaders will share the results of the civilian manpower adjustments with their workforces over the next several days.

"Civilian manpower adjustments will occur at all levels of the Air Force," Grosso said. "We are focused on shaping the force within our fiscal constraints and are committed to maintaining our long history of excellence as we build the Air Force of the future.

"At this time, we are not sure whether a reduction in force will be necessary," she said. "We are pursuing all available voluntary force management measures to include civilian hiring controls with the goal of avoiding non-voluntary measures. Every vacancy we don't fill brings us one position closer to fiscal year 2010 levels and reduces the possibility for a (reduction in force)."

Given the constrained fiscal environment, Air Force members should expect continued workforce shaping measures affecting military, civilian and contractors, Grosso said.

"We understand the stress caused by uncertainty and will do our best to share information across the workforce as soon as it becomes available," Grosso added.



tabComments
1/12/2012 3:11:54 PM ET
Well I was an E-3 in the ARMY and now a GS-06 as a Federal employee and I only make 31000 a year as a civilian. My husband is active E-4 and takes home about 65000 so active duty makes way more than civilians if you want to compare they usually take more risks and spend more time working. We as civilians will do extra jobs when the active duty is deployed or training specially when the section when you work at is short already.
Alexandra , Peterson
 
1/5/2012 11:22:07 PM ET
Why are the cuts in the AF effective 30 Apr and all other Services 30 Sep
Civ, Korea
 
1/5/2012 8:32:19 AM ET
E-5 USA USA. Guess what most individuals that retired and are getting payments from the VA have an equal amout taken from there retirement pay and the only thing that they get is paying no tax on the VA funds. Guess what an E-5 that gets out after 4 years and gets a VA disability gets that tax free and it does not come out of any other benefit.
Richard, Laughlin AFB Texas
 
12/10/2011 12:39:54 PM ET
Want to save a lot of money? Get rid of all the contractors that cut grass, clean bathrooms, clean offices, etc. Airman and civilians can do all of that.
Civ, McChord
 
12/8/2011 5:14:22 PM ET
What I've have seen here is a complete lack of candor. The commands ARE NOT saying who is being cut and there is NO effort to find new jobs for those cut. The persons losing their jobs are on the lowest rung of the ladder, they are the persons actually doing the work. The middle managers who make much more money and produce only paperwork are keeping their jobs.
Navbm7, Wyoming
 
12/8/2011 3:15:19 PM ET
The Contact Us is not working. This is addressed to Leadership Perspective. Does DoD and or AF leadership's strategy include the possible forced retirement of retirement eligible civil servants? Do statutes or an Executive Order prohibit such a move by management? Most retirement eligible employees are not taking the paltry 25K incentive. Why fund incentives? If the law allows, forced retirements would reduce the budget by reducing the larger civ pay salaries associated with seniority. Forced retirements would also reduce the potential for subsequent adverse personnel actions I.e. RIFs. Forced retirements would also enhance career paths for our next generation of energetic civil servants. VR
Concerned, Pentagon
 
12/8/2011 3:03:33 PM ET
E-5 USA USA: One thing you are not taking into account when you talk about the airman only making 20K a year vs. the GS making 50K a year. That airman is getting free room and board, free medical and free dental, discounted or free education. None of which the GS is making. Also, the money for that room and board is not calculated in their taxes, so they pay less in taxes and get more back at the end of the year. I am currently a GS-11; six months ago I was an E-4. I do the same job, my take home is approximately $100 a month more than I made as an E-4, counting the take home pay, and my BAS and BAH I got as an E-4. As a GS, the government does not have to pay my rent or for my food or for my medical coverage. I am forbidden by law to use Tri-Care, even if I qualify for it as a member of the guard/reserve or as a retiree, so yes, making an E-5 into a GS-05, a GS-11 position can and does save the military a lot of money.
Mark, Beale
 
12/8/2011 2:15:56 PM ET
Mister E5, those veterans/civilians your bashing have served their country for 20 years, through good time and bads times. We deploy and the civilians watch our backs so our needs are met, but since you haven't deployed much-you wouldn't know what serving really is. It's all fun in games until you get sent home and don't even have to skills/services you need to make in the civilian workforce.
Retired Veteran, Robins AFB
 
11/19/2011 3:20:27 PM ET
Why not cut the folks making the BIG BUCKS and over retirement age.
Mark Mulik, Luke A F B Az.
 
11/17/2011 12:50:44 PM ET
Be careful what you wish for, E-5 USA. You too will be a civilian one day and maybe trying to get a government job.
David, Pearl Harbor
 
11/10/2011 4:00:27 PM ET
Why don't you put a statement on this page that says certain characters like the ampersand cannot be used?
GSer, AFMC
 
11/10/2011 3:59:22 PM ET
Interesting a little over a year ago AFMC said they were going to get rid of all A and AS contractors because it was too expensive.
GSer, AFMC
 
11/10/2011 3:43:11 PM ET
To E-5 USA calling for civilian jobs to be cut, I have been on both sides. I was an E-5 and and currently a GS-09. My bottom line income was much greater when I was an E-5. Now that I am GS, I do not get Tricare, I do not get BAH and I do not get BAS. I have to pay my own mortgage and my own healthcare. Before you generalize civilians and say most should be cut and that civilians make way more money, maybe you should do some actual research. We are supposed to be a country fighting together, but it seems like you want to turn it into a civil war where it is military against civilians. We are fighting the same fight regardless of what our rank our uniform may look like. And as far as dipping into an extra amount of money such as military retirement while working as a civilian, are you saying that the military retirement wasn't earned and the civilian employee should just give back their 20-30 years? You are right, take away their retirement they spend half their life
CIV, USA
 
11/10/2011 1:44:51 PM ET
Who do you think taught that E-3 how to do their job?
GS-09 Instructor, Lackland
 
11/10/2011 5:55:50 AM ET
Hey E-5 genius... Civilians are the continuity in most career fields. I work in Contracting and our airmen are deployed 6 mos at a time, so who do you think is providing contracting support at home? I have recently deployed as a civilian as well taking a slot so an airman didn't have to deploy.
Civilian, Georgia
 
11/8/2011 4:28:01 PM ET
Who is performing the print news proofreading and editing functions at AF.mil? Basic principles of AP and AF-unique journalism are being ignored.
Joe Bela, Lackland AFB
 
11/7/2011 9:34:44 AM ET
I think most CIV jobs should be cut. What I can see in my work area that our civ's are making 50K a year doing exactly what our 20K a year airmen are doing. It is a huge waste of money for a GOV CIV to do a E-3 job at O-5 pay. If someone could please explain how this is saving the government money, please let me know. Cause even with training cost it, does not add up after a year to be any better in budget. Plus, most CIV are collecting retirement pay and disability from the VA also. A triple dipping CIV vs. an Airmen is just wrong for the Force's budget. Please investigate this and find the truth
E-5 USA, USA
 
11/3/2011 5:41:04 PM ET
Somebody didn't get the memo. The day after this article posted, people who simultaneously work in the nuclear and ISR fields are getting notified that their positions are being cut. Not too smart considering these positions were created to address deficiencies that led national and international incidents. Don't be surprised if the deficiencies they were created to address raise their ugly heads again.
Realistic, CONUS
 
Add a comment

 Inside AF.mil

ima cornerSearch

tabSubscribe AF.MIL
tabMore HeadlinesRSS feed 
Army UH-1H finds new home with Air Force

Academy cadets to conduct 'Flightline of the Future' research

Intel experts converge for 2012 GEOINT Symposium  1

AF training instructor responds to traffic accident  1

Air Force leaders salute Navy on 237th birthday  1

AFSPC commander speaks at 11th Annual Air Force IT Day event

Through Airmen's Eyes: U.K. Airman places in 61.2-mile ultra-marathon  1

Academy cyber competition team takes 1st at NYU event  1

Gen. Shelton convenes accident investigation

Airmen rally to help save lives  1

Lost Johnny Carson film found at March

Brig. Gen. Witham nominated as ANG deputy director

AFPC Airman: Don't forget, they're not all home

Muncy Honored With Second Highest Private Citizen Award

tabCommentaryRSS feed 
Standards? What standards?   3

First things first: Get your degrees in order  40


Site Map      Contact Us     Questions     Security and Privacy notice     E-publishing