Twitter Facebook Google RSS
National Defense > Blog > Posts > Air Force, Guard, Reserve: Can't They All Just Get Along?
Air Force, Guard, Reserve: Can't They All Just Get Along?
By Sandra I. Erwin

The National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force has the tough job of figuring out how to size and organize the Air Force for a future of shrinking budgets.

The panel’s final proposal is due Feb. 1. But there are no guarantees that the work of the commission will help end the bitter budget war between the Air Force and its reserve components.

During the group’s final hearing Jan. 9, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James told the commissioners that the next Air Force budget, for fiscal year 2015, will “rely more heavily on the Guard and Reserve.” Her comments should be reassuring to lawmakers who have pushed back on proposed cuts to the Guard. The devil, as always, will be in the details.

The commission — a congressionally mandated body of former government and military officials — will produce detailed recommendations to the president and Congress on how the Air Force and its three components — the active, Reserve, and Guard — should divvy up their missions and resources.

There are currently about 330,000 active-duty airmen and 354,000 in the Guard and Reserves.

James, who was nominated Aug. 1 and sworn in Dec. 20, takes over at a time of extraordinarily tense relationships between the service and members of Congress over budget and policy issues. Mending fences is said to be high on her agenda. She will also have to keep fighting budget battles that started two years ago when Air Force leaders recommended force-structure cuts that angered lawmakers. James’ predecessor Michael Donley ran into a buzz saw when the service proposed cuts that hit Air National Guard units and weapon programs in members’ home states.

Russell Rumbaugh, defense budget analyst at the Stimson Center, noted that the Air Force submitted a fiscal year 2013 budget in which the active duty force absorbed 17 percent of the unit cuts, even though 67 percent of Air Force personnel are on active duty.

“Congress reacted furiously, forced a compromise, and created a National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force to report back before any further decisions are made,” Rumbaugh wrote in an op-ed article.

Congress established the commission in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2013.

During the Jan. 9 hearing, James talked about plans to bring the components closer together into a “total force.” One initiative, known as “continuum of service” will seek to retain skilled airmen for a longer time of service to make for a smoother transition from active to reserve and Guard status. The Air Force also will create “associations, or associate units” with guardsmen and reservists operating and maintaining equipment with active-duty counterparts.

Over the past year, commission members have dug into the contentious issue of whether it makes financial sense to rely more on part-time reservists and guardsmen because they cost less than full-time airmen. To come up with credible estimates, commissioners enlisted the help of Pentagon accountants. 

Scott Comes, the acting director of the Defense Department’s office of cost assessment and program evaluation testified about methods and metrics used to calculate personnel costs, in war and peacetime.

Any estimates of how to size the force also would have to take into account that the active component has to be large enough to ensure it can supply enough members to the Guard and Reserve.   

The commission conducted hearing across the United States and heard from the leaders of the active Air Force, National Guard and Air Force Reserve, the Air Staff, Pentagon budget officials, the National Governors Association, U.S. congressmen and state legislators, military association leaders, and the Defense Business Board.

The Air Force is under mounting pressure to cut costs, even though the Pentagon was temporarily relieved from sequester cuts in 2014 and 2015. It has to modernize aircraft and equipment as personnel costs continue to grow. One of the problems is that the Air Force has had difficulties measuring the true cost of active, versus reserve, component personnel.

The definition of “deployment” is another hot-button issue in the Air Force. Volunteering for overseas assignments is not the same as official mobilizations, and in some assignments such as natural disaster relief, Reserve and Guard members conduct missions that do not count as deployments. “We need to work on that definition,” said Chief Master Sgt. Cameron B. Kirksey, command chief master sergeant of Air Force Reserve Command.

The eight commissioners include four appointed by the president and four by the chair and ranking members of the Senate and House armed services committees.

Three served in the Air Force: Janine Davidson, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for plans; Raymond E. Johns Jr., recently retired commander of Air Mobility Command, and Harry M. "Bud" Wyatt III, recently retired director of the Air National Guard. The commission's vice chair, Erin Conaton, served as undersecretary of the Air Force. F. Whitten Peters was a secretary of the Air Force during the Clinton administration. Margaret C. Harrell is a senior social scientist at RAND Corp. and R.L. (Les) Brownlee is a retired Army colonel. The chairman, Dennis McCarthy is a retired Marine Corps lieutenant general and former assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs.

The commission will release its report to the public, but much of the sensitive data will be set aside in a classified annex.

The commission expects to brief Congress Jan. 30, said J. Eric Minton, a commission spokesman.

Photo: Chief Master Sgt. of the Air Force James A. Cody prepares to testify at the National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force. (Air Force)


Re: Air Force, Guard, Reserve: Can't They All Just Get Along?

There's a math disconnect between this line:
There are currently about 330,000 active-duty airmen and 354,000 in the Guard and Reserves.

And this line:
... the Air Force submitted a fiscal year 2013 budget in which the active duty force absorbed 17 percent of the unit cuts, even though 67 percent of Air Force personnel are on active duty.

Appreciate a clarification.
Joe Davis at 1/14/2014 8:44 AM

Re: Air Force, Guard, Reserve: Can't They All Just Get Along?

354,000 is an Army Guard number.
The correct total for Air Guard & AF Reserve is around 175,000
BJ Craw at 1/14/2014 11:01 AM

Re: Air Force, Guard, Reserve: Can't They All Just Get Along?

Another wrinkle that adds to that number disconnect is the fact that a certain number of reservists are "full-time" reservists, so for all intents and purposes, they cost the same as active duty.
Patricia Rose at 1/14/2014 12:32 PM

Re: Air Force, Guard, Reserve: Can't They All Just Get Along?

The cost of a "full-time" reservist is NOT the same as an active duty member - not even close! Most of us are either Air Reserve Technicians or ANG Military Technicians - paid as Wx or GS civil service employees. I make a great deal less as a GS-09 than I would as a Master Sergeant/E-7. Plus, the infrastructure costs of running an ANG or even a mostly AFRC joint base are much lower than what it takes to run an active duty base. Regardless of how the active duty folks like to cook the books the ANG and AFRC are a better bang for the buck for a great many Air Force missions. Trying to fix the Air Force's money problems by cutting the much smaller budget of the ANG is not going to work - it's just going to make things worse for our national defense capabilities.
John Bryan at 1/14/2014 12:49 PM

Re: Air Force, Guard, Reserve: Can't They All Just Get Along?

I agree with Mr. Bryan's comment.  The Guard and Reserve full time technicians are much cheaper than their counterparts.  100% of their income is taxable, they have to pay for their own medical etc.  In addition, they don't get 50% retirement after 20 years, instead they have to work till basically 55 before they can draw a retirement.  Lastly, a technican works for a longer period therfore the turnover is less so the costs associated with constantly training new replacements every few years as the AD climb the rank ladder/retire are not required.  This in itself is a huge cost savings and a quality of force benefit because it allows for a more experienced worker.
Chris at 1/14/2014 6:32 PM

Re: Air Force, Guard, Reserve: Can't They All Just Get Along?

The ART program was first implemented in 1958 as the result of an Air Force study which showed that Air Force Reservists and Air National Guardsmen could be trained, and their operational readiness maintained, by fewer full-time Air Reserve Technicians than by a larger number of full-time active duty Regular Air Force personnel. The Air Reserve Technician program saved the Air Force $13 million (in 1958 $USD) during its first year of operation.
The "experiment" debate continues 50+ years later.  KOREAN WAR TUNE: "In peace time the regulars are happy
In peace time they're happy to serve,
But let them get into a fracas
And they'll call out the God damn reserves!"
PAUL CLEMENT Lt Col USAF (Ret) 1967-2003, Served in active, guard, reserve, technican, AGR, and civilian
Paul Clement Lt Col. USAF (Ret) at 1/17/2014 3:39 PM

Re: Air Force, Guard, Reserve: Can't They All Just Get Along?

We SHOULD get along.  Both are needed You have to have the active duty and the Reserve components.  Certain missions make more sense for reserve units.  The ANG took over the duties of the old ADC and they do a great job but for rapid deployments the active duty is essential.  Almost by definition they can maintain a higher level of readiness.  In our Reserve unit, most of our pilots and senior NCOs came from active duty.  Their training and experience provided us with a core of outstanding leadership.  When we deployed, we relied on these guys to get us up to speed in a hurry.  Within a few days we were hitting on all cylinders and you couldn't tell the difference (except our people were a little older).  I hope the Air Force got its moneys worth out of me and I think it did. But, as a traditional reservist, I didn't do it for the money. I just wanted to be out on the ramp and smell the kerosene burning. 
William Eudy, TSgt. USAFR (Ret) at 1/28/2014 10:33 AM

Add Comment

Items on this list require content approval. Your submission will not appear in public views until approved by someone with proper rights. More information on content approval.

Name: *

eMail *

Comment *



Name: *

eMail *

Comment *


Please enter the text displayed in the image.
The picture contains 6 characters.

Characters *


Legal Notice *

NDIA is not responsible for screening, policing, editing, or monitoring your or another user's postings and encourages all of its users to use reasonable discretion and caution in evaluating or reviewing any posting. Moreover, and except as provided below with respect to NDIA's right and ability to delete or remove a posting (or any part thereof), NDIA does not endorse, oppose, or edit any opinion or information provided by you or another user and does not make any representation with respect to, nor does it endorse the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement, or other material displayed, uploaded, or distributed by you or any other user. Nevertheless, NDIA reserves the right to delete or take other action with respect to postings (or parts thereof) that NDIA believes in good faith violate this Legal Notice and/or are potentially harmful or unlawful. If you violate this Legal Notice, NDIA may, in its sole discretion, delete the unacceptable content from your posting, remove or delete the posting in its entirety, issue you a warning, and/or terminate your use of the NDIA site. Moreover, it is a policy of NDIA to take appropriate actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other applicable intellectual property laws. If you become aware of postings that violate these rules regarding acceptable behavior or content, you may contact NDIA at 703.522.1820.



Bookmark and Share