MEMO TO GLC FROM LLM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75B00380R000100050002-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 26, 2006
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: December 28, 1973
• Content Type: MEMO

Re: Personnel Ceiling for FY-75
1. It all comes off a little bit as a snow job. Although in
congressional terms it is to be addressed as a sweeping new look at
personnel policies, it in reality is a design to get more staff ceiling,
retain contract flexibility under a "derived ceiling, " take care of
Brownman and,Duckett's need for additional staff slots for converting
contract types.
2. Additionally, as you have pointed out, even if we can get
STATINTL away with it we could only do so by talkin a total personnel ceiling
between approximatelyl far higher than the ceiling
figures we have given to Congress before and during an era when we
are supposed to be reducing.
3. Additionally is your point and that recognized by Taylor
that the long-term result might be that we lose flexibility.
4. Finally, I think that there is a fundamental underlying error
in placing all full-time personnel under contract in the same category.
It makes sense to lump all personnel together whether they be contract
or appointed as a management device to get hold of and control overhead,
but many contract types, particularly contract agents (are they in the
contract ceiling?), and even contract employees, are tied
exclusively to projects, do not become a burden for retirement and
other long-time Government benefits, and are hired and severed
theoretically as just one more asset of a particular project.
In this sense they are money problems associated with a project and
not an overhead problem where.ceiling makes managerial sense.
STATINTL
Approved For Release 2006/09/25 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000100050002-8