Information on Agency Retirement Policy and the Agency's Unique Treatment of the Retirement Policy of the Federal Government

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 21
• Document Creation Date: November 11, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 22, 1998
• Sequence Number: 44
• Publication Date: February 2, 1970
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For R lease 1999/09/01 : CIA-RDP79-@9317A000100010044-1
ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
ATTACHMENT #2
ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 1999/09/01: CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
 25X1A9a Approved For R ease '!?~4 ? lA-RDP79- Y1
25X1A9a
?5X1 A9a
VISIT BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF SCIENTIFIC INTELLIGENCE
AND DD/S&T REPRESENTATIVE ON THE AGENCY RETIREMENT BOARD TO ORD
CAREER SERVICE PANEL ON 2 FEBRUARY 1970
SUBJECT: Information on Agency Retirement Policy and the Agency's
Unique Treatment of the Retirement Policy of the Federal
Government
Chairman/ORD Career Service Panel welcomed 25X1A9a
and informed the Panel that had come to the meeting in order 25X1A9a
that he might have an informal discussion with the Panel members on
questions raised by the Panel in memorandum ORD-7422-69. 25X1A9a
further stated that the Panel would like to know what the thinking
of the Agency is on this policy and how some of the problems stated
in ORD-7422-69 could affect this policy.
I do want to make clear, at the outset, my own personal
viewpoint is aginst the Agency policy. I have been on the Retirement
Board for the last four years and I am the only charter-. member left.
We have gone "around and around this track" many times. The policy is
a long-standing one. Some of the discussions we have here are going
to be my own interpretation and you will not find it in any of the
regulations or books.
If you think back, the Agency began to have its first personnel
problems in the 50's which was when people began to think of shortening
the work life span. In January 1950, I went over to and took 25X1A6a
a team of ten OSI people. There were 1800 Agency personnel in - 25X1A6a
then. The problem was the same. There was a tremendous number of
people under DDP management. Beginning about mid-50's, this had to
change. All these people began to come back here and DDP had difficulty
absorbing them -- some of which had only one particular skill and
were not needed here. The retirement policy came from DDP, and it
was its way of selection processing --arbitrarily "chopping off the top"
to get some movement in personnel and enable the Agency to get rid of
people who were surplus.
In 1959, Allen i.lles became Director of Central Intelligence
and was entirely sympathetic to the problems of DDP and, during his
tenure with the Agency, the retirement policy was established. The
DDI, at the time, did not lile.this policy as he was not concerned with
people overseas. He had some duties assigned to him such as the
National Board of Estimates where everyone of them were senior citizens.
The only components ever really given exceptions wherein retirement
policy was a little more forgiving was to the people of DDI and DDS.
You probably have looked at the policy's two bases for exception:
(a) Agency's need of the service of a person, and (b) administrative
personnel.who are hardship cases of some sort. The latter is difficult
to be fair about. There is no real way of being impartial or fair
about it. What is important to one person might not seem important to
another.
-l~ E ONLY
Approved For Release I 999 Qi 1 1 :` CIA-RDP79-003
 Approved For R&&ease I 9 - -k__, - IA-RDP79-OG317A000100010044-1
25X1A9a
ATTACHMENT 2 (Continued)
ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
Several people have threatened to challenge the DCI's authority to
establish a policy like this. It has never been done successfully -
they have never carried the challenge to the limit. The only time
we come close to a challenge is when somebody evokes the name of his
congressman in his challenge. The result at most is a 9 - 12 months
extension. The policy has been upheld in many of the tests that have
been attempted. But I think that the challenge has never been carried
to the final stages. The Director has been assured by his legal
people that they will accept the challenge. They think that legally
they are on solid ground. I wish somebody would go to the final stages
so this could be proven.
- Has this policy been brought up before the House or Senate,
and have they been asked for their judgment of the policy?
25X1A9a Not in any formal way. One or two members have been in
touch with employees of the Agency.
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
They are very reluctant to do anything about it.
25X1A9a At the same time, the current voluntary involuntary
retirement seems to hinge directly on the CSC retirement system.
5X1A9a I don't know how formally the Agency has talked with the
CSC. We are an "excepted" Agency and how far the privileges of an
"excepted" Agency go --I don't know. DCI can use the Act of 1947. It
is interpreted as a security authority but the Director's powers are
very broad. Again, if he had to get legislation to backstop the policy,
I don't think he would have any trouble.
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
What about the employees who were not given adequate
notice about retirement at age 60? Compare it to the equivalent of
CSC, there is quite a disparity - 60 at the Agency - other Agencies can
retire at 65 and others at 70. If this is true, would it not be the
proper time for Colonel White and OGC to go to Congress and discuss
relief of those who must retire at 60 such as percentage remuneration
or some other relief? Is it not the timely thing to bring up now?
This has been considered from time to time. I think most
vigorously before the fairly recent pay legislation came up. If
government gets pay raises, interest in retirement drops off. I have
not heard anything of an organized effort. An effort, a few years ago,
to formulate a package to compensate those who must retire at age of
60 failed.
ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 19.99109/01 CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
a xu _ _ E
 Approved For ReThase 19999f1-IA-RDP79-0A317A000100010044-1
25X1A9a
ATTACHMENT 2 (Continued)
ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
Injustices come from apparently being under CSC
regulations for benefits but under agency rules for retirement age.
Either system (Agency or CSC) is fair in its entirety, but unfair to
those who come only partly under each.
25X1A9a I don't think there will be many years before there will
be one Agency retirement system to cover all and the present Agency
retirement system might be set aside. There are quite a few DDI and
DDS&T types in the Agency now.
!5X1 A9a
?5X1 A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
!5X1 A9a
?5X1 A9a
Do you think the Agency will lose the 2% annuity.
I think it will go to the rest of the Agency retirement.
We still may get the severance pay. In CSC, they have certain privileges
of getting relocated. This is one of the inequities of the Agency
retirement system.
lessening?
Do you feel the mark of the DDP on the Agency policy is
I think the next thing is the selection system patterned
after the Dept. of State foreign system. You will have to do evaluations
every year. The employees on the low list for two or three years will be
out. This will be rough on DDP. the need of two retirement systems then
might go.
In the CIA with DDP and conventional office types, isn't
it reasonable to have a different retirement age? Why is it necessary
to have the same retirement age as DDP when their problems are of a
different type?
For those not under the Agency system, couldn't their
retirement age be consistent with CSC retirement?
That is the way I wish it were. The only mechanism that I
have been able to find is relief through your Deputy Director. If he
could get Colonel White to sit down with the Deputy Directors and
review the retirement problems of the Agency -- that is the only effective
way to bring the information home to the "boss." I wish we could get a
discussion set up like this with DD/S&T. Jack Smith would be agreeable
to go along with him. DDS is tied close to DDP and they do not take much
initiative.
Would there be any use to come forward with a specific case
to focus attention on this problem - such as my situation. I came in
1964. In 1966 I was told I would qualify for the Agency plan, and that
I could rely on the CSC retirement age. Then I was notified that I
was now under CSC and must retire at 62. I was counting on working
more years. I want to appeal that I am not being fully compensated
ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 19%+ CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
 Approved For Release 1999-/O9/Q* IA-RDP79-0O 7A000100010044-1
= ORD
I
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
?5X1 A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
- .a
- NTERNAL USE ONLY
ATTACHMENT 2 (Continued)
(Continued)
for what is happening. The game was changed without my being consulted.
You are absolutely right. There was very poor communication
of this fact with the people affected by this change.
I came from a CSC system as late as 1966 and no
differentation was made at EOD and I just naturally assumed that it was
the same CS story here. Althoughi it is an academic question so far
as I am concerned, at least for the others, is there any advantage to
making an issue of this?
I don't think an individual case would be any good.
If we went forward to DD/S&T Career Board, how could we
encourage similar action in the DDS and DDI to make their voices heard?
Send them a memo and ask their assessment of the system.
I want to see the facts on my case; therefore, I sent a memo directly
to Director of Personnel - did not go through ORD channels. He was the
one that signed correspondence sent to me. The memo was sent to him in
November; I am still awaiting a reply for I cannot go to Mr. Duckett
without a position-taking response.
What do the other offices say about this?
No other group is raising the question. Jack Smith never
misses a chance to put his endorsement on a case. If we can get
Carl Duckett and Jack Smith to team up, we might get this question aired.
An individual case is not going to be persuasive.
I think it is important for an individual to get on record.
Setting my retirement date is what prodded me. One either acts at: that
time or finds himself in a weak position.
How should we proceed after this discussion with the Panel?
Is it correct to ask the DD/S&T Senior Career Board to get the Director's
point of view?
That would be a mechanism. I would not overestimate the
response you will get. OSI doesn't think it is a problem - no push from
them. OSI finds it a useful tool.
Many of us were not paying any attention to the retirement
policy until the five year notices were sent out.
25X1A9a I only received my note a year and a half ago and I will. be 60
in September 1970.
ORD- INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release I 99 . ' - IA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
4Yr
 Approved For Re X 1999/&91p1 ;,('IA-RDP79-0047A0OD1tOiM1QO44xty
25X1A9a
5X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
5X1A9a
25X1A9a
ATTACHMENT 2 (Continued)
In October 1968, I was given a notice that I was not
eligible under the Agency plan, but was informed I would have the
benefits of the Civil Service Retirement plan. I was later (Feb 1969)
notified that in June 1974 I was through.
Is Management aware of an ethical problem here?
Any question of an ethics "breech" must have been
decided when they set the policy up.
All communications are stamped SECRET. If we want to
talk to a Congressman, can we approach him?
Just talk to him. Not classified as a secret matter.
Can cut off classification. This might be a different story with
DDP. It might be useful for your Panel, who feels more strongly
than most about this, if they were to surface these problems and
talk it out at DD/S&T Career Board meeting. Supply Carl Duckett with
this information.
What would you recommend?
I think, with the passage of time, the Agency will realize
something unusual or unfair is going on. Little by little, the
public relations part of this was recognized in Personnel, and they
have been more careful about telling people coming on board about
retirement and future employees are asked to sign retirement understanding
agreement. I think that with the passage of time, the problem will
drop off. The people who feel they have a problem will get organized
and get another job. It is a useful management tool for DDP but you
are going to lose a lot of good people in other parts of the Agency. One
policy is not a good policy for the entire Agency. It is going to
affect offices like ORD which have had to use more than normal recruitment
practices to fill their jobs.
Since it is set up as a management tool, how rigidly are
they adhering to it. What are the percentage of cases for exceptions?
Does this become a very selective situation?
When we began work under the Agency system and the problem
of classifying under the Agency or CS, it became quite apparent that DDP
would put in who they wanted to have the CS classification and not those
people they didn't want to have it. The Board applied the same standards
to the rest of the Agency. There was quite a bit of manuevering in the
early stages. The "in" group in DDP requested extensions and got them -
and those not "in" were out. The Agency policy should be most rigidly
adhered to so that the CS retirees don't think they are being left out.
-5- ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 1999/09/01: CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
j ~~
 Approved For Reuse 19W 4 1- L A-RDP79-07AOOO1OOO1OO44-1
ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
25X1A9a
ATTACHMENT 2 (Continued)
(Continued)
We voted against extensions right and left. Recently, there has been
very little of it. I think the Board has been able to generate some
guidelines. One is when you know you will have someone retiring -
get somebody to replace him. Don't wait until a man is ready to retire.
Exceptions were being asked because of this problem of no replacement.
Special guidelines have helped. Very few extensions on this now. The
most numerous requests for extensions are clerical. They have by and
large been for women who have no other interest other than their job
and they are not blocking anybody. We get six of those for every
25X1A9aprofessional these days. The attitude towards these is very liberal.
25X1A9a
Was the original intent to cut down the size of the
Agency or get young people in.
This was a tool to structure the policy intent to move the
people out of top slots. Have some figures - 96 GS-18's or heads of
independent groups, some 17's, are due to leave in the next five years
and almost entirely because of the 60 year age. This opens up the
whole system underneath them.
25X1A9a Yes - in 13 years this is the first time the average age
curve is going down in the Agency. Not much but it is going down.
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
This system is not fair. DDP uses the CT program as their
way of bringing new people in and when they find them leaving because
there is no room for them to progress within a group, they are going to
find some solution to the problem.
DCI feels that the Agency is above the age law.
25X1A9a Discrimination against age is against the law.
25X1A9a If Carl Duckett is to hear discussion of the problem, can
someone define the problem. They are giving notice to employees. They
are now aware of the retirement regulations when they come on board.
25X1A9a Part of the difficulty stems from lack of information on
areas normally in the CSC retirement system. We get reports and
Personnel looks them over and sees:
Retirement at 60 with 34 1/2 years of service.
Retirement at age 65 with 37 1/2 years of service.
Average annuity was very close for both groups.
The decision to retire is tied to the annuity you will get.
5X1A9a
What about extra relief for those who must retire at age
-6- ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release I 99 9/O l : CIA-RDP79-00317AO00100010044-1
``l j.
 Approved For Re1ase 19991 'Fy RDP79-0E 7A000100010044-1
ORD -INTERNAL USE ONLY
25X1A9a ATTACHMENT 2 (Continued)
(Continued)
25X1A9a
of 60 in comparison to other Agencies. Should the Agency ask for
Legislative relief - say an additional 1/2% or 1% for each year under
age 65?
Better talk than legislation. Legislation tends to bring
up problems. It is better to wait and work within the Agency's personnel
system and prerogative. We have a Board of National Estimates. The
DCI has put them aside and separate from these other regulations.
DD/S&T should make a special case. You could use it sparingly. I)CI
could give DD/S&T some authority to establish a special category. I
think this would fit ORD's case.
25X1A9 I guess they could set up a criteria to vote the people
in this special category out between ages 60 and 65.
25X1A9a
:It is an evaluation on the idea that he can contribute a
function so unique to the organization and it can be looked at in this
light. It has never been formulated in a clear system.
25X1A9a It might be a wise course to get in touch with other Panels
and come up with a set of questions to the Panel which then can be
considered by the Senior Career Board.
25X1A9a If you can get it, leave it up to somebody else to get it
back to the DD level.
25X1A9a
Why wasn't more attention paid to this retirement feature
which so differs from the implementation by the other Agencies under
the CS retirement system?
25X1A9a In 1957 -1958, people did not know what was being decided.
People were so impressed with DCI's powers.
25X1A9a I cannot understand why when I came on board in 1963,
they could not inform me of this policy.
25X1A9a I came in 1964 and was given no inkling of this.
25X1A9a DDI felt strongly enough about it to adc. Paul Borel to look
into it. He wrote a long treatise on the subject. He suggested an
Agency development of a management climate to make employee's last years
happy ones. He stopped short in recommending changes in the policy.
25X1A9a In connection with the overall personnel problem, are
they thinking seriously about modification of the program urging early
retirement, i.e., make this approach more attractive?
-7- ORD - INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 1999/ CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
L
 Approved For Re1Zase 1 'v CIA-RDP79-00WA000100010044-1
%J 4ORD--INTERNAL USE ONLY
ATTACHMENT 2 (Continued)
25X1A9a
There is interest in voluntary separation using this to
relieve some ceiling pressure. But here again, you have to make the
offer available to those qualified under age and service.
QUESTION: Did you ever have employees come out of the Agency retirement
system into CS retirement?
25X1A9a Since Agency retirement is figured on 70% of high 3 maximum
and CS is 80% of high 3 - we have had a fair number.
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
ORD will write some options on this retirement
problem for the Senior Career Board.
Perhaps this will work. All standard approaches have not
moved anybody.
F~, = E A~~9lS
Approved For Releas~.IG 9109 9 : CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
 Approved For Release 1999/09/01 : CIA-RDP79-003 7A000100010044-1
Approved For Release 1999/09/01: CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
 25X1A9a
Approved For Relirase51999/09/01 CIA-RDP79-00,7A000100010044-1
AGENCY POLICY CONCERNING THE HIRING OF CLERICAL HELP AND THE PROCEDURES
FOLLOWED WHEN THEY COME ON BOARD.
Reported:
1. Recruiting for clerical support personnel is carried out in
various ways: newspaper ads, recruiter contact with business and
secretarial schools, etc. Applicants may be interviewed and, depending
upon the interview, given the PHS to fill out.
2. In interviewing secretarial personnel being assigned from the
pool to ORD, I have frequently heard complaints that the procedures
followed by the pool in testing and the tests themselves were "unfair."
Some of the complaints heard are:
a. "I wasn't told that I would be reduced in grade if I
didn't pass the test until just before the test was
given."
b. "The person giving the test reads from a document
containing words and phrases which exercise overall
shorthand capability. I was not use to this type of
work since my practice was on standard business letters
and reports. Also, the reader appeared bored with the
whole thing, and the size of the class combined to give
a very bad environment for such testing."
c. "Too much pressure before and during the test. Class
too noisy and gossip before the test about reductions
in pay and grade tends to build up apprehension."
d. "It had been so long since I had taken shorthand that
I simply was out of practice."
e. "They (the pool) said that as soon as I passed the
(shorthand) test I would be automatically promoted
to a GS-5."
3. In determining the legitimacy of the complaints, I reviewed the
correspondence in the files of five ORD secretaries and discussed the
complaints with Clerical Staffing Branch, Staff Personnel Division/OP.
Generally speaking, if a potential secretary can qualify in both short-
hand and typing, has no business experience, is not a business school
graduate or has less than two years of college, she is offered a GS-4
rating. If she has one year or more experience, is a business school
graduate (2 year), has a college degree (i.e., AS, BS, etc.) she is
offered a GS-5 rating. Prior to EOD, each secretarial applicant signs
an agreement which states, in part, that the grade offered is contingent
upon passing the Agency tests in shorthand and typing prior to assignment
to a component, and that failure to pass the test will result in reduction
to a lower grade and a reduction in pay.
Approved For Release 11994/09/O1 CIA-RDP 9J03t7Ac00100010044-1
 Approved For Rease 199
RDP79-0417A000100010044-1
AGENDA
Career Service Panel
Office of Research and Development
2 February 1970
0900 hours
Room 607 - Conference Room
1. Review of agenda for 2 February 1970.
2. Review of minutes for 5 January 1970.
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
4. Information on A ency Retirement Policy.
/DD/OSI)
5. Consider promotion action for
from GS-14 to GS-15.
6. Report on Agency policy concerning the
hiring of clerical help and the procedures
followed when they come on board.
7. Nominations for External Management Courses:
a. MIT Program for Senior Executives.
b. Stanford - Sloan Program.
8. Nominations for Federal Executive Institute for
FY-71.
3. a. Promotion actions.
b. ORD staff additions or changes.
c. Advance notice of special ORD
training.
ATTACHMENT:
DIVISION RATING ASSIGNMENTS --GS-12s
L. J 1 1
E n " l u d a d . " , I 1 a t lath
d3 7a:in, and
Cs~la.=iflu lnn
Approved For Release 1999/09/01: CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
 Approved For Rase 1999/09i : A] DP79-0 17A000100010044-1
CAREER SERVICE PANEL
Minutes of the Meeting
5 January 1970
A
Chairman
25X1A9a
25X1A9a Recording Secretary
Absentees:
25X1A9a
1. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 0909 hours.
25X1A9a 2. stated he would have an item under new business
to discuss.
3. The following corrections were made to the minutes of
1 December 1969:
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
The name of was added to the
list of attendees at 1 December 1969 meeting.
Change Item 3: (Item 6 - 3 November 1969 meeting)
to read as follows:
Change last sentence to read:
stated that he had taken the Industrial War College
Correspondence Course and recommended it and the
Industrial War College for training.
c. Item 8.a., second sentence should read:
They had discussed the problem of new groups
being set up in the Agency to do work for which
talent already exists in ORD.
1 xnd
Approved For Release 1999':!CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
 Approved For Rase 1999/0S/0' 'DIA-RDP79-QLj17A000100010044-1
25X1A9a 4. requested information as to how the Panel arrived
25X1A9a at a "C" rating for in the competitive evaluation
discussion on 1 December 1969. The Panel explained that this rating was
25X1A9a given to based on his potential in ORD.
5. Minutes for 1 December 1969 were approved as amended.
25X1A9a 6. reported the following:
PROMOTIONS:
a. , Clerk Stenographer, Support Staff/ORD from
GS-3 to GS-4 on 14 December 1969.
25X1A9a b. Info Control Asst., Support Staff/ORD from
GS-7 to GS-8.
QUALITY STEP INCREASES:
25X1A9a a.
Secretary Steno, RP/ORD from GS-5, step
2 to GS-5, step 3, on 28 December 1969.
TERMINATIONS:
5X1A9a a. Optics/ORD, GS-4, Clerk-Steno transferred
to Office of Logistics - 28 December 1969.
25X1 A9 ADDITIONS:
a. Optics/ORD, Clerk Typist, GS-4. EOD -
10 December 1969.
TRAINING:
25X1A9a has been selected to attend the Mid-Career Development
Course starting 18 January 1970.
Brochures on Industrial College and Long Term Educational
Opportunities have been sent to the CSP members.
7. Discussion followed on Agency policy when hiring clerical help
and the problem of reduction in grade after they have come on board.
25X1A9a 8. moved that CSP recommend that Office of Research and
Development discuss with Office of Personnel, the Agency policy on
hiring clerical help and the procedures followed when they come on board.
)X1A9a - seconded the motion. Vote unanimous. Motion carried.
25X1A9a 9. appointed as ORD
25X1A9a representatives to find out from Office of Personnel what the Agency
policy is on hiring clerical help, and to what extent it has been
useful in processing an applicant. He asked that
report their findings at the next meeting of the Career Service Panel.
25X1A9a
Approved For Release 19094QI : CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
 CS:P/ORD
Approved For RLase 19990 101-; CIA-RDP79-OQ417A0001OOb1fb0744-1
25X1A9a
10. -moved that the CSP postpone decision on the promotion
25X1A9Ation for BSD/ORD from GS-13 to GS-14 for another month
so that CSP members could explore this matter further. Motion seconded.
Vote was three in favor and five opposed. Motion denied.
25X1 A9a 11. moved that the CSP recommend
25X1A9a seconded the
25X1A9a BSD/ORD for promotion from GS-13 to GS-14. s
motion. Four members voted in favor of the action and four opposed the
recommendation. The action was forwarded to D/ORD.
25X1A9a 12. moved that the CSP recommend
the motion. o e
25X1A9afor promotion from GS-13 to GS-14. seconded
unanimous. Motion carried.
25X1A9a
25X1A9a 13. stated that the promotion recommendation for
told the Panel
25X1A9a that he had talked with TSD about who is on loan to
TSD from ORD, and there is no question that he has been doing an
25X1A9a excellent job. However, TSD explained that ORD seems working e ones"notch"
for a promotion to GS-14. Under the TSD
is being grade
considered TSD.
-I,A AP1 who higher
--14A bp
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a grain 5 L1 U%-`u`?'
stated he felt that
GS-14
.
ould not come out a
25X1A9a should be a GS-14. He also stated that he would like to
25X1A9a get back. He further stated that when 25X1A9a
returned to RP/ORD, he would put him in for promotion to a GS-14;
until then, he will bring up for review every six months, the question
25X1A9a of where should be assigned.
25X1A9a 14. informed the Panel that Deputy Director 25X1 A9a
of Scientific Intelligence would write a response to ORD memorandum
on Agency Retirement Policy. He will then brief the Panel on this
policy.
15. There were no ORD nominations for:
a. Educational Program in Systems Analysis.
b. Stanford Executive Program.
c. Career Education Awards Program. 25X1A9a
25X1A9a
16. stated that he would like to talk to
privately about a possible nomination from MBSD for Management Development,
Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration. There
were no other nominees from the other ORD divisions.
25X1A9a 17. stated that ORD division chiefs should think
very carefully about nominees for the Harvard University Graduate School
of Business Administration.
Approved For Release 1999/09/01 CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
iw .J3.
 Approved For Release 199,..Q ?(i dA-RDP79-0 17A000100010044-1
25X1A9a
18. made a statement of intent to promote
25X1A9a
25X1 A9 from GS-14 to GS-15.
19. The next CSP meeting was scheduled for 2 February 1970.
20. Meeting adjourned at 1100 hours.
25X1A9a
Execu,ive Secretary '
Career Service Panel/ORD
25X1A9a
Chairman/CSP/ORD
Approved For Release 19991?91601--RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
 i
Approved For Release 1999/09,(11.,,: CIA- DP79-00317A000100010044-1
, 11
i: 1.
" i LJ 7
L"~o+ 4ifi~
AGENDA
Career Service Panel
Office of Research and Development
5 January 1970
0900 hours
Room 607 - Conference Room
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
1. Review of agenda for 5 January 1970.
3. a. Promotion actions
b. ORD staff additions or changes
c. Advance notice of special ORD training
4. Consider promotion action for
from GS-13 to GS-14.
5. Consider promotion action for
from GS-13 to GS-14.
6. Consider promotion action for
from GS-13 to GS-14.
25X1A9a
5X1A9a
mmmni
7. Request for Guidance on Agency Retirement Policy
(HR-20-44).
(Memo ORD 7422-69 dated 12 November 1969)
8. Nominations for Educational Program in Systems
Analysis.
9. Nominations for Stanford Executive Program.
10. Nominations for Career Education Awards Program.
11. Nominations for Management Development, Harvard
University Graduate School of Business
Administration.
Uit
Approved For Release 1999/09/01: CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
1
 Approved For Release 1999/0`970-- ,: `I DP79-0034000100010044-1
CAREER SERVICE PANEL
Minutes of the Meeting
1 December 1969
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
Attendees:
Chairman
ecording Secretary
1. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 0907 hours.
2. There were no additions to the agenda for 1 December 1969.
3. There was one correction to the minutes of 3 November 1969
as follows:
Item 6: Change last sentence to read:
stated that he had attended the Industrial
War College Correspondence Course and
recommended it for training.
4. Minutes were approved as amended.
25X1A9a 5. reported the following:
25X1A9a
PROMOTIONS:
25X1A9a a. rom GSS-11 to GS-12, Phys. Scien.-Res,-- AP/ORD.
b. Computer Operator, from GS-10 to GS-11 - An/ORD.
25X1A9a c. ter Programmer, from GS-7 to GS-8 - An/ORD.
25X1A9a d. Secretary Steno from GS-6 to GS-7 - An/ORD.
25X1A9a e. Clerk from GS-4 to GS-5- An/ORD.
TERMINATIONS:
25X1A9a a. Clerk Typist, GS-4, ORD/Registry to join
Federal Home Loan Bank Board - 14 November 1969.
25X1A9a b. GS-10 ORD/Library to join Shell Oil Co. -- 28 Nov 1969.
Approved For Release 19W - of RDP7 C 1 E 00010044-1
OIYfl!TG 0; l
 Approved For Release 4999/09 1, l P79-00317A 0100010044-1
TERMINATION & CONVERSION TO CONTRACT EMPLOYEE
3. (Continued)
25X1A9a a. GS-14 - AP/ORD - Phys. Scien - Research.
Terminated 14 November 1969 - Reinstated as contract
employee on 17 November 1969..
25X1A9a
explained to the CSP members that -
is wore ng as Director of the Nuclear Reactor Division
in the Chemical Engineering Division, University of
Maryland. This entails full time, 2 1/2 days a week.
This leaves him 2 days available to work with ORD.)
25X1A9a
LWOP/Maternity
25X1A9a a. Clerk Typist, GS-4 - D/ORD - 14 November 1969.
TRAINING REPORT
4. CSP postponed consideration of promotion action for
25X1A9a ~rom GS-13 to GS-14 until January 1970, when will 25X1A9a
be able to attend the CSP meeting.
25X1A9a
5. Results on Competitive Evaluation - GS-9s - GS-lls
25X1A9a
Division Reviewer's CSP
Name Grade Div. Rating Rating Rating
25X1 A9a 6 made a st tement
i t t t t 25X1A9a
a o n en
r
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
I.
o p
omo e
Wrom GS-13 to GS-14. (Out of schedule)
7. made a statement of intent to promote
from GS-13 to GS-14. (Out of schedule)
Approved For Release 1999/09/01: CIA-RDP79-00317A000100010044-1
25X1A9a
 Approved For Releasa,1999/0910' DP79-003170100010044-1
vkw
8. CSP members discussed the problem of ORD not receiving enough
Agency support. Some of the comments made were as follows:
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
a. reported that he had met wit., J is staff.
They had discussed the problem of new offics being
set up in the Agency to do the work for which talent
already exists in ORD. Relate this fact with that
of budgets and ceilings, continued, and
you have an unhappy group in PC/ORD.
reported that MBSD had a meeting to
discuss what MBSD is doing and where MBSD is going.
He stated there was a lot of disagreement but not
once did his staff raise the issue as to the
advantages or disadvantages of the current office
climate.
stated that the kinds of programs that
OSP and OSA run, which fit in between the Agency
and, the Pentagon, are the kinds that get Agency
support as well as support at the OSA - OSP levels.
ORD does not have the same policy or support in
order to get people and funds.
d. stated ORD never can hold on to a program
that it develops. These projects have to be turned
over to OEL, OSA, etc.
25X1A9a e. - stated that if there is a new system
developed in other Agency components, they don't
come to ORD;they go ahead and do it themselves.
25X1A9a f. stated that if ORD projects are to
be carried on under the guidance of others, ORD
should discuss requirements as to how ORD should
work from a project and personnel standpoint.
25X1A9a g. stated he did not believe that men on
25X1A9a
the operating line are equipped to interpret research.
They will turn down things that are important.
told the CSP that he would like to see
ORD line up projects that are good ones for ORD and
would make a significant contribution to the Agency
and see if ORD could sell the Agency on the idea of
working out a general philosophy on ORD working
with the Agency.
Approved For Release I 999/09/01 'Cif t,DP79-00317A000100010044-1
 LIi.
Approved For Release4'999/ ~~,: A-RDP79-00317AQii0100010044-1
9. The next meeting for the CSP was scheduled for 0900 hours on
5 January 1969.
10. Meeting adjourned at 1025 hours.
25X1A9a
Chairman/CSP
Executive Secretary
Career Service Panel/ORD
Approved For Release 1999/0'910:1 DP79-00317A000100010044-1