CIA CAREER COUNCIL 30TH MEETING 21 JUNE 1956 ROOM 154 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 20
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 25, 2000
• Sequence Number: 7
• Publication Date: June 21, 1956
• Content Type: MIN

Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
wool Iwdw
30th Meeting
21 June 1956
Room 15L
Administration Building
Present
Harrison G. Reynolds
D/Pers, Chairman
Robert Amory, Jr.
DD/I, Member
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
USA, Retired
Assistant to the IG
Alternate for IG, Member
COP-DD/P, Alternate for DD/P, Member
D O, Member
C/PPS/TR, Alternate for DTR, Member
Lawrence K. White
DD/S, Member
Reporter
Guests
~Pers
Assistant to DD/I (Adman)
/OP
D00!ltAEtlT NO-
1(0 Lf1AHGE IN CUSS. C]
,~ pECLASSIFIED
GLASS. CHANGED TO TS S C
t{rXT U-VIEW DATE.
Au u.^
DATE Zo_ REVtEWERE-(1'18995;
Approved For Release 2001/04
RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
Agenda
Item Subject
No.
Page
1 Approval of minutes of 28th meeting. . . .
1
Approval of Draft Notic
25X1A
Announcement of Assignments to Key
Positions - CIA Honor Awards Board . . .
1-3
Discussion of correspondence re
dissemination of information concerning
Agency Honor Awards. . . . . . . . . . .
1-3
3 Competitive Promotion System:
Continuation of discussion of this
subject at 28th meeting of Career
Council on 7 June 1956 . . . . . . . .
3-15
Biographic Profile . . . . . . . . . . .
15-17
Recommendation of GEHA Board per
instructions of 29th meeting of
Career Council on 11 June 1956 . . .
17-18
Adjournment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-0181 26R000700180007-3
. . The 30th meeting of the CIA Career Council convened at 4:00
25X1A
p.m., Thursday, 21 June 1956, in Room 154, Administration Building, with Mr.
Harrison G. Reynolds presiding . . . .
MR. REYNOLDS: The meeting will please come to order.
The minutes of the 28th and 29th meetings are attached to this
agenda for your approval. If there is any comment on the joint meeting of the
Career Council with the Board of Directors of GEHA I think it should be withheld
until we take up that subject at the end of this meeting today. They have had a
Board of Directors meeting this afternoon and will submit a paper to us later this
afternoon, in accordance with our request that they report back to this Council -
as you see in paragraph 4 of these minutes.
Therefore, if there is no objection to the minutes of the 28th
meeting, and no errors or omissions, they will stand approved as listed herewith.
Item 2 on the agenda is self-explanatory, and prior to the main
part of this meeting we would like to have your approval of this notice [Notice
Announcement of Assignments to Key Positions - CIA Honor Awards Board-7
and of the procedure. We would like to point out there is a typographical error
25X1A9a
here in that memo dated 20 April 1956 stated, in paragraph 4.b.: "...we
would be opposed to the publication in an annual announcement, newsletter or posting
of numbers of names of CS Honor Awards." In memo dated 15 June 1956 it 25X1A9a
came out differently. In his memo he says: "...we would be opposed to the publi-
cation in an annual announcement, newsletter or posting of numbers or names of CS
Honor Awards." I think - version is the correct one. 25X1A9a
I think so.
25X1A9a I don't know what "numbers of names" means.
MR. REYNOLDS: 15 people got this, and 12 people got that, and 9 got that--
that is all.
MR. AMORY: What possible harm could come from that? Would it indicate
a successful or unsuccessful year?
25X1A9a
I'm trying to locate the exact piece of language. I have it
MR. REYNOLDS: Paragraph 4.b. is your language.
25X1A9a
April 20th.
The 4th line from the bottom of page 1 of your memo of
Approved For Release 2001/04/ DP80-01826R000700180007-3
 25X1A9a
language here?
MR. REYNOLDS: We think your language is correct, and it means something
25X1A9a
I
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
different from the language in memorandum.
COLONEL WHITE: You say "posting of numbers of names" and Colonel
Msays "posting of numbers or names."
25X1A9a
It's really the same thing, isn't it? Because` 25X1A9a
says he doesn't want the numbers of people who received awards posted.
MR. REYNOILDS: There was never any question of posting the names, that is
the point. In memorandum it sounds as if you could publish names.
25X1A9a What we have in mind is that we don't want it.
MR. REYNOLDS: I think that is clearly understood by the members of the
25X1A9a
Is there any comment 'on this Regulation? I don't know where the
proposed Regulation is now.
It's on the Director's desk. General Cabell has indicated
25X1 A9a to me through that he holds the Regulation in favor but he believes
that the Director himself should sign it, so he's holding it until Mr. Dulles
returns.
COLONEL WHITE: Well, I would assume that the Honor Awards Board here
25X1A9a
says they don't agree with - and that they would be pleased to develop
their views further if the Career Council believed such a step would be helpful--
I don't see what the point is. Is this a question of
is the Honor Awards Board expecting some guidance from us?
25X1A9a I was a little baffled when I saw these minutes, as to why
this matter had been referred to the Career Council.
MR. REYNOLDS: The only thing the Career Council has to pass on is the
announcement of assignments to key positions.
25X1 A9a You L indicating addressed your memorandum 25X1A9a
to the Career Council.
25X1A9a
I recognize that, but if it was a question of argument
between me, we will say, and the Honor Awards Board, it seems to me it would be
more sensible to get the thing thrashed out first, rather than bring it here and
lash around with it, because apparently no one else here is even interested in this
debate. So I don't see why it was ever referred here to the Career Council in the
first place. That is why I say I was puzzled, because it seemed to me this was
Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
'Now, Moe
2
Approved For Release 2001 /04/0 ii P80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01426R000700180007-3
the wrong forum for quarreling about this now.
MR. REYNOLDS: I would think we can dismiss this problem by the Council
approving this Notice CAnnouncement of Assignments to Key Positions), and at
the next meeting of the Honor Awards Board this question will be brought up and
will be submitted to the Deputies for their consideration.
COLONEL WHITE: I move the Notice be approved.
25X1A9a Second.
. . . This motion was then passed . . .
MR. REYNOLDS: We will now turn to item 3 of the agenda, which is the
reason for this meeting, and which is a further discussion of the promotion system
which was discussed two meetings ago.
Do you want to say anything, Red, about your meeting yesterday?
COLONEL WHITE: I called the Support Board, which is made up of the
Heads of the Career Services in the DDS area, to a meeting yesterday to discuss
this matter, and I have tried to condense and summarize the points raised at the
meeting in a brief paper here. I will read this paper.
fReadingJ
"I met yesterday with the Support Career Board, which is
composed of the Heads of the Career Services in the DDS area,
to discuss the 'Proposed Competitive Promotion System' as it
was presented to the Council. Generally speaking, the Heads
of the Career Services in our area recognized the need for a
Competitive Promotion System and believed the proposed program
to be workable. I would like to summarize for you, however,
the pertinent points raised for consideration at this meeting.
I will divide them into two categories. I believe that there
are fairly simple solutions to the points raised in the first
category, but that in the second there are more fundamental
questions which should be considered by the Council.
"CATEGORY I:
"1. Will not this system penalize a man who is particularly
well suited for a specific job and, therefore, should be given
priority over others with whom he is in competition?"
I believe the answer to that question is simple, in that this system is not
intended to be that rigid or to prohibit "spot promotions," if you will, and the
promotion is in the hands of the Head of the Career Service.
Continues reading)
"2. Will this system not have a tendency to relieve immediate
supervisors of their responsibilities for recommending pro-
motions?"
I think the answer to that is "no," that the supervisors will recommend just as
they do now.
Approved For Release 2001/04/05 P80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-0182ZR000700180007-3
(Continues reading)
"3. Is it desirable to create an additional group of panels
in addition to the Career Service Boards already in
existence?"
We believe under this system a Board or existing Panel can do this if that is the
way the Head of the Career Service would like to do it, and it's not necessary to
have an additional one unless that was necessary.
(Continues reading]
%. Won't the preparation of profiles be a considerable
workload?"
Yes, but I think that we are coming to this regardless of the promotion system
which we use in order to afford greater "privacy of the files."
(Continues reading
"5. Would Career Services be able to sub-allot their promotion
quotas in order to provide competition between functional
specialists such as psychologists, rather than to have a
psychologist competing against an administrative officer,
which, of course, would be difficult to judge?"
We believe that the system is designed to permit sub-allocation. For instance, in
the Office of Training where they have psychologists, their Career Service would
have a quota and it would be perfectly appropriate for the Head of that Career
Service to sub-allot his quota so that psychologists were competing with psycholo-
gists and administrative people with administrative people, etc.
Now for those above five questions I don't believe the answers are
difficult. But there are four more serious ones.
(Continues reading)
"CATEGORY II:
"l. Is mandatory review each six months manageable? Will
the sheer volume of work for a panel result in superficial
consideration? In order to cut down the workload, should we
confine competitive promotion to the higher grades for the
time being?"
That is all one point dealing with the volume.
(Continues reading)
"2. Is it desirable to have mass promotions in a given grade,
or would it be better to have a system which distributed these
promotions over the entire six months period?"
I believe the thought there was that if all these promotions, let's say in grade
7, come up and they're approved, then there isn't much point in saying, "We will
hold up this group for two months or three months, or what have you." I think
everybody would normally say, "Yes, go ahead and promote these people." Then
Approved For Release 2001/04/0. ~ '105 ^ OP80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
everybody recognizes there aren't going to be any more promotions in this group
for another six months. That was that question.
(Continues reading)
"3. Should we have a quota system, or should Career Services
be able to promote within the limits of authorized tables of
organization?"
And this fourth question is one that I believe the Council itself raised.
(Reading)
"i+. Since promotion is only one facet of personnel admini-
stration, are we not placing too much emphasis on the words
'promotion' and 'zone of consideration'? Should we not think
of this examination as a 'performance review' which would
consider who to get rid of, who should have additional training,
etc., and who to promote?"
Those last four questions are fairly fundamental. I think there are answers to
all of them, but I think these questions should be considered. I have two or
three copies of these notes, if anybody would like to look at them, but I don't
have a copy of them for everybody.
I suppose, Harry, it would be appropriate to take each one of
these four points and discuss them a little bit.
25X1A9a would you comment on the first one? Would you give
us some ideas about the volume involved, and whether if it's going to be every
six months it's going to be too much of a burden.
25X1A9a
To begin with, the Panels will be reviewing the employees
who have been nominated by the operating officials. Those people will be auto-
matically considered and ranked. Secondly, the Panels will review the files for
the profiles of people who have not been nominated for promotion. This review
probably won't be too time-consuming, particularly if we can prepare the Profiles.
With respect to the number of people in the zone, the total was - in grades 7 25X9A2
25X9A2 through 14; of that - approximately ^ are in grades 7 and 8, so an alterna- 25X9A2
tive, in terms of workload., might be to consider eliminating the 7's and 8's from
the competitive ranking. Perhaps another advantage of that would be that the
system proposes two different panels, the lower panel and the intermediate panel,
which ranks 7's through 11's and has a much larger population to rank. If the
intermediate panel had just 9's, a few 10's, and the 11's, then we would split the
25X9A2 remaining - approximately equal. So that might be one alternative for cutting
down the workload. Another might be--since we would have two different panels--to
alternate in terms of the months; in other words, the panel that would rank the 9's
Approved For Release 2001/04/011S, P80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Reltse 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
%ow
would meet one month, and the panel that would rank the 13's would meet the next
month, and that would provide time for the preparatory work to be done while one
panel or the other was in session.
COLONEL WHITE: How about the timing if you extended the period? Of
course, you have the other side of the coin, that if you extend the period it means
that much longer a period that everybody knows that nobody in that grade was getting
considered.
25X1A9a
But why six months?
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
We took that as a fairly arbitrary means. We had six groups
of grades to evaluate. It seemed to fit in at a month for each grade.
25X1A9a COLONEL WHITE: Let me ask this question, and it ties in with General
point, what is the time-in-grade requirement for a grade 7?
25X1A9a One year.
COLONEL WHITE: Well, then, once you have the thing going normally, then
once a year ought to be enough.
25X1A9a It would be better once a year, and allow yourself a little
more flexibility to catch up with yourself.
25X1A9a I'd like to suggest an alternate procedure, and
that is the man comes in the zone of consideration when he has been sufficient time
in grade to make him eligible for promotion to the next grade. If he is promoted
that is all right, but if he isn't promoted and if he is passed over after having
served the necessary time in grade to be eligible then on the anniversary of that
pass-over he is up for consideration, so that everybody knows he is under consider-
ation under certain well-established groundrules. And I think you can give much
more careful scrutiny to the individuals if this is done this way, because we pass
over people because there isn't evidence that the individual is the best qualified.
This is a hard thing to determine. The first category we come up with will give
careful consideration to somebody we think deserves a spot promotion - and pulls
the outstanding man right up. So there is no penalty there. I prefer that to
every six months, for an outfit that has people overseas. Let's take an example
of a man who gets a recommendation for a promotion when he assumes his next assign-
25X1A meat. Well, he comes home on leave and maybe he has to be nd take some
training, and it is going to be more than six months before he is on his new
Approved For Release 2001/04/0`, r80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Reljse 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
I-aw
assignment where he has to prove himself. Also, I think this proposal of mine
spreads the work out through the year. The six months thing is very much like the
military, in which you have a promotion board that considers a whole group of
eligibles and passes them over or promotes them, and they meet for about two or
three weeks and then it doesn't come up again for a long time. The system I am
proposing we have had in effect now for about two years, and it seems to work--for
an outfit that has a lot of people overseas.
COLONEL WHITE: It seems to me, though, that if the minimum time in grade
25X1A9a for 7's is a year, certainly the time in grade for everybody else is supposed to be
longer--that that is a good yardstick. And then the other part of
suggestion, though--General, you don't handle the grades, say 7's and 8's, at any
particular time? You handle everybody--
25X1A9a As soon as a man comes into the zone of consider-
ation--because he has been the necessary time in grade. Let's say a grade 7 is up
for consideration for promotion to an 8. He doesn't reach that zone unless he has
been 12 months in grade. If we have had a recommendation on him from his super-
visor - or we solicit it and say, "He's coming up for consideration. What are your
recommendations?" Now let's say that we have M GS-7's--I think I have at least 25X9A"
that number--and you have only 50 that you can promote to a GS-8, the others are
passed over. Are you going to consider them again in another six months? What is
the point of that? It seems to be a waste of time--because under this if the GS-7
wasn't considered for promotion should you have to consider him again in another
six months?
25X1A9a You would still consider a group at one time, rather than
one individual - under this proposal.
25X1 A9a Yes. Not one individual - it would be a group,
and not all of the GS-7's but the GS-7 that has the necessary time in grade.
25X1A9a But isn't the point of this whole thing to ensure, inside
the Agency, that everybody that gets promoted runs against the field? If we see
to it that everybody runs against the field each time, it seems to me we're accom-
plishing what this program was designed to achieve.
COIANEL WHITE: I think the one year is a good suggestion.
25X1A9a
: This is if a man is passed over in his first
consideration, then he is reconsidered on the anniversary of the date he was passed
Approved For Release 2001/04/05P80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01 2 R000700180007-3
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
As an individual but not as a group - is that it? You
wouldn't be considering all the other 7's at that time, you would just be consider-
ing that one individual on the one year anniversary of the date he was passed
over.
Unless there happened to be a group that had
been considered at the same time, and passed over, which is probably going to
happen when you get into the higher grades.
COLONEL WHITE: I like the one year proposition, but I'm not clear in
25X1A9amy own mind, and I think this is the point you are getting at indicating Mr.
7 --as to how you ensure that he is considered against the field, unless
you take them by groups--take all the 14's at one time, and so forth.
25X1A9a You've got a partial seniority system. Their time
in grade dates from the time they came into the Agency for whatever grade it is.
So there's a certain amount of seniority there. Then we have to count on the super-
visors stating that of all the GS-7's in his area, regardless of the time in grade--
"this man is the best qualified." So there is a partial selection down in the
lower echelon, particularly in an overseas area.
25X1A9a Wouldn't it work like this, General--if you say you
reconsider him one year after he has been passed over, that really means recon-
sideration on a one-year cycle? If it's one year on the anniversary of his enter-
ing the zone of consideration, that would be different--but consider him one year
after he has been passed over and then it's a straight one-year cycle, and he
would be considered against the field again one year later.
25X1A9a But isn't there a restrictive element in the number of slots
you have available to promote these people? A man comes into the zone of consider-
ation and you have three slots available, from a 14 to a 15, we will say, so he is
running for one of those slots but being in the obviously difficult position of
25X9A2
having maybe ^ GS-14's, and unless he's in the zone of consideration you have to
take his application for this against the seniority of the other fellows, and all
the other factors. Isn't that the limiting thing, the number of vacancies avail-
able?
25X1A9a
You will find out the supervisors will say, "I
have 3 vacancies for an 11, and I have ten 9's who are all fully qualified, but I
Approved For Release 2001/04/ P80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Reuse 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-0182CR000700180007-3
have to pick the best three. How am I going to get the best three?" So then we
canvass all the people in this particular category--let's say Communications/Security
people--all over the world, so they're all competing for those slots. We include
the people who have not been time in grade long enough and try to find who is the
best qualified. It may be a man so outstanding that we would go to Personnel and
say, "We want an extra scheduled promotion."
25X1A9a The point you raised, if a man is passed over and is
not promoted he still has had the time in grade.
25X1A9a So a year later he would get reconsideration.
25X1A9a But if his supervisor thinks there has been an
injustice - well, he will be considered before the year is up, and be reconsidered
before that year is up.
COLONEL WHITE: Once you got it started it would work out all right. But
let's say your grade 14's were on the tail end of this circuit; then if we started,
say, in July, no consideration would be given to 14's until next July. Maybe there
is some merit in trying to get through the whole cycle within the next six months
in order to get the thing moving, and then thereafter take it on a one-year basis.
25X1A9a That was the original intent, starting on a 6-month basis
and then reduce it to a one-year cycle.
25X1A9a And the paper says - later on going to the one-year basis.
COLONEL WHITE: Otherwise if your grade 14's are on the end they would
travel a long time before they got any consideration at all.
25X1A9a To use the existing policy until the panel met for the first
time on the group.
25X1A9a Don't you have a senior panel to handle the 13's
to 14's and the 14's to 15's?
25X1A9a That is right.
25X1A9a ? And they would meet when they had candidates.
25X1A9a Twice a year and on certain dates.
MR. REYNOLDS: Well, I would judge it's the consensus of opinion of
this Council that the one year is better than every six months. If so, we will
consider that when we make up the final paper.
25X1A9a : And it should not be mandatory, it should be
permissive, shouldn't it--that you could consider them within a shorter period of
Approved For Release 2001/04 DP80-01826R000700180007-3
M
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-0'J6R000700180007-3
time if it were desirable to do so?
MR. REYNOLDS: I would think so. Is that satisfactory to the members
of the Board?
25X1A9a
Yes, provided that this will be instituted on a fairly
flexible basis. In other words, I don't see how we can crank this all up overnight.
I would prefer to work down through the grades until we catch everybody rather
than try to put this into effect all at once.
MR. REYNOLDS: Dick, as a mechanical fact it would be very much easier
for the Office of Personnel, who has to prepare the Profiles and procedures, to do
it that way. The 15's we know about, but the 14'a and 13's and so on down--
COLONEL WHITE: Obviously if we started gradually we would start with
the higher grades, because if you make mistakes there it is worse. We would start
immediately on the higher grades, working down, and let the present system continue
for the lower grades, until we can get down and get everybody into the cycle, and
then thereafter it would be all right.
25X1A9a On a one-year cycle.
COLONEL WHITE: Yes.
Well, I think that pretty well answers this second question here,
too, whether it's desirable to have mass promotions in a given grade. If they
are considered on a one-year cycle, that answers that, with the understanding that
they may be considered more often.
The third point was whether or not we should have a quota system.
It seemed to me sort of the crux of the whole matter was some sort of a quota
system to make sure that people in all parts of the Agency had somewhat nearly
equal opportunities for promotion. I don't know whether the other members feel
differently about this.
MR. AMORY: My AD's are, in varying degrees of intensity, pretty much
opposed to that. We don't see any need for it on our side. We have no objection
to it being applicable elsewhere, if it is helpful. But with such a wide range
of activities, skills, professions, and other things--the one you pointed out about
a psychologist as against an administrative officer--I won't bother to give you a
mass of other examples, but the one thing I don't want to see this Agency getting
into--and we have so far avoided over-bureacratization, inflexibility, and hardening
of the arteries--getting into something where we will lose some of the eclat and
Approved For Release 2001/04
P80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Re,se 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01?6R000700180007-3
esprit that we have of the free university or a private enterprise organization.
The best performances we have had in individual offices or sub-divisions of offices
have been where we have been able to avoid that kind of thing. Right at the moment
we are organizing a brand new office and we are hiring individuals well under their
grades, but if the thing works out I don't want them penalized just because to get
them we had to get them cheap, just because there happens to be a GS-11 bulge in
CIA. It's like saying let's look at the whole damn Civil Service. And I think
everybody in this room would bristle if the Bureau of the Budget came in and said
there was an overall bulge in GS-11's and that the promotion rate is going to be
1.6 for fiscal year 1957 because the Department of Defense and the Coast Guard got
out of line. So when you sit down in M Building or someplace like that, the rest
of CIA looks as big as the whole Federal Civil Service looks to us. And I can
well see the need, possibly, as we said this morning, to exercise a form of post
censorship if we're bulging way forward, but none of the documentation submitted
with this indicates there is a great problem. And I don't see why we can't have
some of the advantages of this with the required consideration. of people so they
are not overlooked. I think that is excellent personnel administration. But I
think the other works just in the wrong direction.
25X1A9a In Training we think the quota system would work against
25X1A9a
the best interests of the Agency, for certain reasons. For example, we depend on
to give us qualified people from the DD/P as instructors. It's a
question of how the quota system would act on that against the best interests of
those people while they're in Training, and this would apply to other shops as well.
I think the real, practical limitation is the T/O structure, and the quota system
would only have the effect of reducing the rate at which you would match T/O
structure and your on-duty grades, but I wonder how practically useful that control
is.
25X1A9a COLONEL WHITE: Vernon, you o might be able to remember better
than I can, but I think what they're shooting at is to avoid what has happened too
many times in the past, of some fellow who maybe on his own initiative--or not
necessarily on his own initiative--is a grade GS-9 and he gets himself maneuvered
one way or another into a grade 11 job--let's say it is in the Office of Training--
and then he is there for three months or six months and then the natural question
comes up - he says, "Well, I am in a grade 11 job, I should be promoted to a grade 11."
Approved For Release 2001/04 RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Re ea a 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01R000700180007-3
We don't say he shouldn't be but we say there may be some other fellow who just
by circumstances isn't sitting in a grade 11 job but by reason of his excellent
service in the Agency, and his Fitness Reports, etc,., should be promoted before
this other fellow. That is the control I think we're trying to seek, to keep one
fellow, just because he happens to be in the right place at the right time, from
getting promoted way ahead of another man who has done just as good a job and in
every way is just as deserving, but it takes him three times as long to get there.
MR. AMORY: I agree that is a perfectly plausible hypothetical case,
but I just have a feeling that for every one of those, Red, on my side of the house
there are ten examples of where the guy is a genuine specialist and he's hired as
a cartographer or a metallurgist, or something like that, and he will look at it
as nothing but a rank injustice if he is put into an-almost-impossible-to-judge
competition with a quite different profession. He would say, "Here I've been doing
a GS-11 cartography job and I'll have to continue to do it for a grade 9's pay
because a bunch of economists and scientists have decided an IBM repairman is
doing a better job than I am." You're never going to sell that in a million years.
It's better to get these guys into slots that are available to them. And if you
have a guy that has reached his service ceiling and you can't get management to
raise that job, good management says to give the guy an opportunity somewhere else.
We're awfully worried that mathematically this thing is going to result inevitably
in a severe brake being put on the approach to having people of the authorized
grade in the jobs of that grade because of a regular ratchet effect, that if you
have a bulge in GS-1l's in certain small offices a long way from it, then it can
only do the historical promotion rate, which may be one out of five guys, up to
that, but it still has to get up, and the next year if that bulge hasn't been
thinned out by abnormal attrition somewhere else, the fraction will be so small
they won't be able to get anybody up.
25X1A9a The promotion rates were to be Agency-wide rates over a period
of time. So in the particular staffing of any unit the Agency-wide rate would be
used. And the quotas would be set by this Council, which could consider any new
office's need for promotions in any area.
MR. REYNOLDS: I can't agree, Bob CAmoryJ, that we are being inflexible.
We are trying to be more flexible than we were before. That was the whole purpose
of this--we were directed to do it to try to get more flexibility.
Approved For Release 2001/04 DP80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-018 R000700180007-3
i%we
25X1A9a It seems to me after your grade structure has been
established that is enough control.
COLONEL WHITE: The issue is: is that what we want, or do we want to
ensure that a grade 7 in one of the components of Bob's shop, and a grade 7 some-
25X1A9a
where in shop, receive roughly the same opportunities for
25X1A9a You can't do that in a really truly heterogenous
organization like this.
COLONEL WHITE: That is what the formula would try to do, by taking into
consideration the Agency promotion rate in a given grade.
MR. AMORY: But we feel that it just does it on too big a basis. We
would say among the economists in ORR we are doing that, and if we're not we would
be happy to have the IG or anybody else point out why we are not. But if something
comes up like that every possible candidate is considered. So it isn't just a
bumpkin's luck that he happens to be sitting in a place where there is a trapdoor
open over his head. So I think that is broad enough. And when we get up into the
higher grades, the 14's or 15's, we do it on a DD/I-wide basis.
25X1A9a : Your attrition is in the lower grades. I don't
think anybody would promote right up to the top of his grade structure and then
just sit there stagnant.
COLONEL WHITE: Isn't what we are saying this, that this is a way to try
to get Agency-wide competition? What I believe you are saying,
is that this Agency-wide competition is too wide, and what you want is competition
within a Career Service?
25X1A9a
Yes.
25X1A9a That is what I understood this was to be.
MR. AMORY: So the only thing we are objecting to is the quota thing.
The quota business is the one thing where it doesn't make it within the Career
Service.
25X1A9a
The quota method had a second purpose. The paper provides
flexibility in assignments; in other words, if you have to keep a grade 9 in a
grade 11 you may do so under this proposal. But a number of those promotions of
grade 9 individuals to grade 11 would be set by the quota.
COLONEL WHITE: We could institute the system on the T/O basis with the
Approved For Release 2001/04/0, 80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01 6R000700180007-3
stipulation that we now have that no Career Service could exceed in any category
the number of grades authorized for that Career Service. We could do that. And
then after we have had a look at it for six months we could see whether we think
we need a quota or not.
MR. AMORY: This wouldn't cancel the 1%?
COLONEL WHITE: The 1% has long gone by the boards. You have unlimited
freedom now so long as you don't exceed the total number authorized in any given
Career Service.
MR. AMORY: We never had to use it.
25X1A9a I think the proposal you made, Red, was the one which was
discussed by the Council in February--the Career Service grade authorization, where
each Career Service would have identified its positions on the T/O, by which you
could then establish the quota that you just mentioned. The Council didn't want
to do it that way, so we came up with this other system.
25X1A9a This would cancel the 1%. This would take care of it.
25X1 A9a I thought.that was washed out. I thought you
could promote anybody you wanted to so long as you don't exceed the total number
of GS-9's, GS-11's, or whatever, that you have on your T/O.
COLONEL WHITE: That is right.
25X1A9a Well, that is a control. Isn't there something
else there that if you promote a man to GS-11 and he's in a GS-9 slot, that his
next assignment has to be in a slot appropriate to his grade? That is another
control. So you couldn't keep a man in a 9 slot for an inordinate length of time.
I don't know whether there is a time limit on it or not. It would work all right
where you have rotation. I can promote a man in _ who is the best qualified 25X1A6a
to be an 11 and leave him in his 9 slot but then I have to assign him to an 11
slot when he finishes his tour.
25X1A9a The Agency does not have comparable controls over its grade
structure as other agencies and private business might have. We do not have an
effective budget control over grades, for example. This quota would allow the
Agency, as a matter of policy, to determine in advance its average grade--what it
is going to pay its employees.
COLONEL WHITE: That is right, Vernon. I am inclined to think, though,
we are starting an important movement here, and we may need the quota system but
14
Approved For Release 2001/04
RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For R .lee se 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-06R000700180007-3
we can start this without having the quota in the very beginning, and it seems to
be the consensus that people would rather not have the quota system. Maybe the
correct way to start it is to start along the line Bob suggested, and General
25X1A9
without the quota system, and within six months, say, when we get
through this cycle we will have another look at the quota system.
25X1A9a I certainly agree with you, Red. I think in this Government
you have to take advantage of some of the breaks you have, and this Agency has
some breaks, and we are not being pressed on this point, and the day we are pressed
we will volunteer, but let's live it up while we can.
MR. REYNOLDS: Then is it the pleasure of the Council that we do not
establish this with the quota system until we have taken a further reading on it
at some future date? All right, then that is in the books.
Now, what is the next one, Red?
COLONEL WHITE: The last one is the suggestion which was made here, too,
about using this not for just promotions but as an overall performance review to
decide who you are going to select out, train, etc.
I think that is a very good suggestion, but there again I would
suggest that we learn to walk before we start to run, and that we use this initially
for promotion and then as we can work other things into it, all well and good, but
let's not bite off too much at one time.
MR. REYNOLDS: It was pointed out yesterday at the Support Career Board
meeting that this Profile would be a medium which would be of great assistance as
time went on. So on that last question we will go on the principle that we are
going to learn to walk before we run, and we will see the way the cat jumps. Isn't
that all right?
COLONEL WHITE: Sure.
MR. REYNOLDS: Okay, that is the way we will go at it. Are there any
further questions about this? May I put it this way, then, if this is satisfactory
to the Council, we will start to prepare a draft of the necessary papers to put
this competitive promotion scheme into effect, and then we will have to bring them
up, of course, at a future meeting of the Council, probably a month hence. I
don't think we will have them prepared before that because it's going to be quite
a job. If that is satisfactory, we will so proceed - if there is no objection.
And we will have a look at the Regulation?
25X1A9a
Approved For Release 2001/04/09!"DP80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-0826R000700180007-3
MR. REYNOLDS: Yes, the regulation and everything else.
25X1A9a
May I suggest that we take a look at this Profile, which
has been revised according to your suggestions at the last meeting. That will
move us along, if we can get any views the members of the Council have here.
25X1A9a
Profiles be shown to the individual to see if they are correct. I notice this
one can't go overseas. It's not a sterile form, so it can't go overseas. You
couldn't send this overseas, could you?
25X1A9a And I'd be a little inclined not to do it anyhow, General
25X1A9a
on the grounds that people are so close overseas, and with everybody
opening everybody else's mail - "By God I never knew Joe was assigned there" - it's
liable to cause problems. Maybe when people come back from overseas the Personnel
Office could catch them in their processing.
25X1A9a But I think it should be shown to the individual,
because I'm sure there will be errors.
25X1A9a I think that could be done in the processing on returnees.
n answer to your question, Rud, the Profile now has taken
care of the points I raised, and it looks all right to me, for one.
25X1A9a Wouldn't it save Personnel a lot of work if these
Profiles were submitted to the individuals to fill them out?
25X1A9a
We have gone into that but we think it would be a lot more
work. It would mean a complete re-write anyway, because the individual doesn't
have access to the dates on all these things. And it would be a terrific job
trying to get them back. You would have to be asking people for the next five
years: Where is your Profile?
25X1A9a It's the same objection I would have if you asked
me to fill them out for you, because I don't have access to those dates, etc.,
either.
25X1A9a In the case of the Reserve Officer personnel, do you think
it would be helpful to have the rank and date of rank on here?
25X1A9a It isn't necessary for any mobilization planning.
MR. REYNOLDS: We want to be sure of that. We better ask 25X1A9a
about that.
25X1A9a It's been checked out with him.
MR. REYNOLDS: Any other suggestions or comments?
16
Approved For Release 2001/04/0 P80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Rise 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-0' -6R000700180007-3
MR. AMORY: Isn't box No. 19 L lion-CIA education (including military
training) J going to be pretty hard to get all that education in there, if you
include the military?
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
It would be very easy for me.
We will try to give more space to that.
I don't think any amount of space would take care
of that. I think you have to say, "See attached memo."
MR. AMORY: If you have to do this for
it will run up.
at $10 apiece, 25X9A"
25X1A9a
To start with it will be only those 25X9A2
within the competitive promotion system who are l4's, and when they're done then
the 13's, etc.
MR. REYNOLDS: And for new employees coming in we will ask them to fill
Any further questions in connection with the competitive promotion
system? [No response.J We will consider that piece of business closed and
we will go on to the next item.
25X1A9a . . . Messrs.
left the meeting . .
MR. REYNOLDS: The answer from the Board of Directors of GEHA has just
arrived and there's a copy here for everyone so it might be just as easy for you
to read it, because it's rather long.
MR. REYNOLDS: Red, would you care to make the first comment on this?
COLONEL WHITE: I think the recommendation of the GEHA Board has to
be studied by the General Counsel.
MR. REYNOLDS: It's different from what I thought it was going to be.
COLONEL WHITE: I think the General Counsel will have to study this.
I don't think I can say we can or cannot do it. Legally we could pay the death
gratuity, there is no question about that being legal, but as to whether we
could legally underwrite GEHA, so to speak, I don't know.
17
Approved For Release 2001/04/ P80-01826R000700180007-3
 Approved For Release 2001/04/05: CIA-RDP80-01826R000700180007-3
25X1A9a
we try to decide it.
I think the lawyers ought to study it, certainly, before
MR. REYNOLDS: I think we better have all of these papers back again.
25X1 A9a There is assurance in this that the remaining people will
be covered, and that's the main point for the moment.
COLONEL WHITE: That is the main point. I don't suggest we do this
this afternoon, but I think we do have the problem with us about what the Agency
policy and intent shall be with respect to coverage of hazardous or extra-hazardous
duty, because this will pop up all the time. I know right now people are flying
in airplanes out in the Pacific and it's damned risky every day they're flying,
25X1A6a
and it isn't so healthy on nowadays either. So we have the problem with
us and I think we have to face up to it. But our immediate problem is to cover
these people, and they are covered.
25X1A6a MR. AMORY: I think we could work out a fairly good proposition for the
thing on that GEHA undertook to risk, but when you talk about flying in
hostile countries, or something like that, I think the Agency should be the self-
insuror, to give the operational funds, if necessary, and clear it with the
President and the Budget, and have a flat policy or gratuity.
COLONEL WHITE: Bob, the problem is not that we can't do that but the
problem is that dependents are deprived of certain other benefits if they do not
have the so-called Eisenhower insurance.
MR. AMORY: If we have the legal authority, I'm sure the Director would
want to do the right thing by our people.
It may come down to the day when we will have to write
25X1A6a
. . The meeting adjourned at 5:00 P.mm. .
18
down what "extra-hazardous" means. The term now has gotten all out of focus, and
we see people staring down a 16 inch gun that is about to go off. You could
carry this to ridiculous proportions. You could say those people who aren't ever
going to stick their necks out--they know how to get commercial insurance, all
they have to do is pay for it. The reason we're in this program is to take care
of those people who can't get commercial insurance.
MR. REYNOLDS: The meeting is adjourned.
Approved For Release 2001/04/05 ;P80-01826R000700180007-3