CIA CAREER COUNCIL 31ST MEETING THURSDAY, 26 JULY 1956 DCI CONFERENCE ROOM ADMINISTRATION BUILDING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-01826R000700190001-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 23
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 14, 2000
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: July 26, 1956
• Content Type: MIN

.' Approved For Releas,2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007.Qg,190001-8
31st Meeting
Thursday, 26 July 1956
DCI Conference Room
Administration Building
Present
25X1A9a
Harrison G. Reynolds
Director of Personnel
Chairman
Matthew Baird
Director of Training
Member
Assistant to the Inspector General
Alternate for IG, Member
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
Chief, Adniin Staff, OC
Alternate for D/CO, Member
Chief of Operations, DD/P
Alternate for DD/P, Member
Assistant to the DD /I (Admin)
Alternate for DD/I, Member
Lawrence K. White
Deputy Director (Support)
Member
Executive Secretary
Reporter
Guests
Deputy Director of Security
Deputy Chief, Benefits & Casualty Division, OP
Chief, Management Staff
, Deputy Director of Personnel
~Tt :i"'"SIT !, .
PTAs. 0
Annroved For Re16ase 20
L7 :'w S bE-~ .L,
TP,
y p20
lk:i'd1#Ftl PTE.
1;/03/Q1 CIA-RDP80-01826R00 19 Q 3'
~0 CJb REY1EWiit_~ 8995
CS&7~
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007,790001-8
%
Agenda
Item
No.
SUBJECT
Page
1
Approval of Minutes of 26th Meeting . . . . . .
1
2
Approval of Minutes of 27th Meeting . . . . . .
1
3
Approval of Minutes of 30th Meeting . . . . . .
1
4
Discussion of Hospitalization Insurance
Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1-6
5
Approval of Merging of Junior Officers
Training Program (JOT) and Junior Career
Development Program (JCD) . . . . . . . .
(Subject presented by DD/S)
Discussion of Staff Study on "Senior Career
Development Program," dated 19 July 1956;
and approval of abolishment of Senior
6-10
Career Development Program . . . . . . . . .
10-13
6
Summary Report of the Activities of the
Career Services, 1 October 1955 to
31 March 1956 (For information) . . . . . .
14
25X1A
`
7
Career
Approval of Regulation No. -
Planning for Individuals"; and discussion
of the "Career Preference Outline" . . . . .
14-19
8
Status of Membership in the CIA Career Staff
as of 30 June 1956 (For information) . . .
19-21
Adjournment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
ry ,
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA 26ROO0709i (~-1 >~' 11
 Approved For Releas001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000700190001-8
. . . . The 31st meeting of the CIA Career Council convened at 4-:00 p.m.,
26 July 1956, in the DCI Conference Room, Administration Building, with Mr.
Harrison G. Reynolds presiding . . . .
MR. REYNOLDS: The meeting will please come to order.
The first item on the agenda is the minutes of the 26th meeting,
under Tab 1, for approval. Are there any comments, errors or omissions? Since we
have such a long agenda today, if they are of a minor nature, if you will report
them to us after the meeting we will make such corrections as are necessary. I
hear no comments. They stand approved as reported herewith.
Item 2 is the minutes of the 27th meeting, and the same holds good
for those minutes. The minutes of the 28th meeting were approved at a previous
meeting. And then the 29th meeting was the insurance meeting, which was approved
by tacit consent.
Item 3 is the minutes of the 30th meeting, under Tab 3. If there
are no comments, errors or omissions they will stand approved as herewith reported
to the Council.
25X1A9a
MR. - If anybody has any comments, if they will call me we will
25X1A9a
MR. REYNOLDS: There is a special item today on insurance, and we have
invited Messrs. to be present here today to take up
this matter.
25X1A9a Mr. _ would you be good enough to start?
25X1A9a MR. This is a hospitalization problem, with particular reference
to GHI. Don't fight this sheet of paper in front of you Comparison of Current
GHI Contract and new Mutual of Omaha Health Plan, which bad been distributed at
the meetingJ. I will take you through the problem and make it much easier to get
the problem on the table and get some possible solutions to the problem on the
table.
25X9A2 The Board of Directors of GEHA considered this and have taken certain
action, which I will tell you about. The problem originates in the Office of Security
wherein a pretty strong position was taken with respect to the fact that there are
about _ employees of the Agency who have GHI - Group Hospitalization, Incorporated.
The other plan, as you know, is the Omaha one. Now the best way to pose the problem
25X1A9a,o you is to have Mr.
"OODEN 1 -
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : C -[1826R000700190001-8
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007Q0190001-8
25X1A9a
MR. Briefly, around the first part of June the Board of
Directors of GEHA asked us to check into the security situation as regards the
policies that employees hold with GHI; and concurrently with that I received a
report from the FBI. The investigation revealed this, that we have Montra9A2
25X1A with Group Hospitalization, of which are what are known as "Class A." A
"Class A" contract is one where the identity of the individual is known to GHI,
and is so listed in their records. Now in listing their records GHI has worked
on the group plan pretty much, and they have a state group, and they have a war
group, and then a commercial group. But we prevailed upon them in the original
setting up of our relationship that they would not have a CIA group but would give
us, instead, a number--and this is a prefix of our contract number, which is= 25X1A
25X1A Now to outsiders theM does not designate CIA, but now, say, with GHI and through
the hospitals which service these contracts - when the employees appear for treat-
25X1A ment the-is identified as CIA, and that result being this: that GHI itself has
25X1A the names of _ employees on this roster, and it would be quite easy and quite
25X1A simple for them out of that to compile the identity o' of our employees. I
do not know of any parallel situation through credit organizations or anything else
where this same situation attains. This became a problem--doubly--when we had this
Bureau CFBIJ report. They reported an incident where an employee of GHI, in a
conversation with an individual whom we now have identified as being interested in
intelligence activities of a foreign embassy here in Washington, stated that she
worked in the section where the roster of CIA employees was maintained, which would
identify those employees. Now the Bureau is following through and doing some
additional work on it. But that is one incident highlighting this problem.
Now when the Agency started out on its insurance program the GHI was
already in existence. A number of employees had GHI with other departments, and
when they transferred to CIA they transferred their GHI insurance plan with them.
It was the best and the only thing available during that period. But now with the
development of the Omaha program where the Agency administers the program, where
there is no listing of the names of individual employees with the insurance company,
where even though we are servicing, say, treatment requests and payment thereof to
the different hospitals here in Washington, it is not possible that they can compile
a list of CIA employees except on a very minor scale, and they would have to work
at it quite a bit, as opposed to the GHI program where, without much difficulty, you
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : Cl
18 26E pQpj7pp
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007Q 190001-8
25X1A can compile- names. From a security standpoint we feel there is a risk element
here in such a listing, and it was our recommendation to the GEHA Board that this
situation did represent a risk and that some action ought to be taken, if possible,
to alleviate this situation and work out some arrangement whereby we could eliminate
the "Class A" type of insurance with GHI whereby all the names of employees are
listed. Now our recommendation at that time was to try and, say, embrace the "Class
B" plan which GHI has, of which we have about 600 members. Now that plan operates
much the same as does the Omaha plan, where the Agency services the contracts,
where GHI does not have a list of names, all they have is a list of numbers. But
25X1A the difficulty which is presented here, and which Mr can present, is that
this transition would not be painless, because in the "Class B" category the bene-
fits are less than those offered under "Class A." So any automatic transfer or
direct transfer means the employee suffers under the benefits he may derive. And
from our standpoint we have a security problem. The next step is the judgment as
to whether, from the standpoint of the employee - the benefits derived, or the
interests of the Agency transcend the risk element here and make this move impera-
tive and necessary.
25X1A
The Board agreed to pose two questions to GHI. First, are
25X1A you willing for us to handle the "A Class" of_ in the same manner as we handle
the "B Class" in GHI? They said, "Yes, but you won't be doing your employees any
favor, because the benefits are not nearly as good." We said, "We would like to
have you answer if we could have the "A" benefits under "B" handling process and
method" - and they said, "No, but . . ." - and I quote: ". . . we MIGHT BE WILLING
to consider raising the B benefits" - but they would be nowhere near Omaha. So
they went on to say, "But we don't want to do it. We are NOT an indemnity company."
The heart of their planning is what they call "full benefit days"- and the heart of
our problem is in Item No. 1 [referring to the comparison previously noted) - the
first two comparisons, and leave Omaha out of it - Item No. 1 and Item No. 5 of
"Current GHI Contract." The difference between A and B is shown in fairly simple
English, but it needs a little interpretation. (Reading)
"Full cost of semi-private room (in participating hospital)
plus 16 named (allocated) extras for 31 days with 90-day
interval on frequency."
And in that list of allocated extras there is window dressing. There is significant
omission of expensive extras which are common, and the individual gets in hospitali-
zation those extras which are pertinent to his hospitalization, and if he has
3
Approved For Release 2001/08/0L690 1826R00
~ o0 SI? AL
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007QO190001-8
low
surgical he gets those which are pertinent to the surgical aspects of his case.
Now the comparison would be--right across--the Class B Overseas,
Unvouchered Funds: up to $10 per day for 31 days with 90-day interval on frequency,
plus $84 for 16 allocated extras. There is the biggest part of the problem. Now
we can't tell you, because they won't tell us, what they pay the hospitals. We
are confident that they have a "deal" with the participating hospitals whereby
they pay less than the market rate or the going rate. Therefore they have never
been willing to release to us any information on that point at all, and therefore
they get automatically propelled by our question into the indemnity business. If
they say, "You can have $10 here for Class A, or $11 or $12" - they are in the
indemnity business, and they say, "We're NOT an indemnity company, we are a service
company."
Now look at Item 5 - Maternity - for the second part of the problem.
Now it reads the same except for the very last words, and the "No. 1 above" refers
to the "No. 1 above" in both cases. Now our problem is: What are we going to do
with these people that we are worrying about? Require them to take lesser benefits?
Or put it up to them that one possibility is to consider Omaha?
So therefore I have put the Omaha comparison over here on the other
side, and I should tell you that within the last month or two we have negotiated
four improvements from Omaha. You will notice the rate for Omaha is $7.40. It is
effective September lst, and it's 500 higher than GHI, which is $6.90. in addition,
we have got the overseas Class B Omaha--at the top of the page--up to $13.50 per
day for 90 days. In addition, we have eliminated the waiting period on maternity.
In addition, we have got a change in No. 5 on Omaha, from $9.00 to $10.00 for
pregnancy, for five cents. They had offered us a rate of $7.35. The Board felt
that this comparison with Gill on maternity was so important because of the high
frequency of maternity, that we ought to make it $10, the same as GHI has. And
there you are. The rest of it is the same, pretty much, on GHI, domestic versus
overseas, and the same with Omaha, but the differences in benefits on the two of
them are very substantial.
Now, without taking you through all the benefits, as a comparison -
first we should deal with the security question. Is it your opinion that this is
a real security problem and a risk, and if so then how do you think we ought to
handle this important point? I propose to you: (a) that it is a risk; (b) that
we ought to get a firm answer from GHI, not an informal one--which was what I was
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CI
26R00 D ) {t1PL
 Approved For Release 001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007QI90001-8
qir_
25X1A9a
told--and if they won't make the benefits equal to Omaha that we write each GBHA
policy holder and tell him that the Agency takes a very dim view of the security
problem here and "proposes to you that you accept the improved Omaha plan." That
is about as far as I think we can go. Therefore, you have these three aspects of
the problem, and I felt because there were so many employees involved, I asked Red
L 'White
_7 to have the matter considered here.
25X1A9a NR._ If you move over from GHI to Omaha, it means that the premium
goes up this 50 cents - is that it? - per family? Is that really what is involved
in terms of money?
MR. M Yes.
25X1A9a MR. But they get greater benefits.
25X1A9a
MR. Then it's $6.00 a year more per family?
MR. BAIRD: That is the ONLY disadvantage?
MR. The only one I know.
MR. Then in addition to getting extra security they get better
benefits for the $6.00 a year more - I would think most of them would want to do it.
25X1A9a MR. I would, too.
25X1A9a MR. Did we ever make a special pitch to the GHI people
when the Omaha plan came in?
25X1A9a MR. M No. We considered it and the reason we did not do it is
because we had not negotiated with Omaha to take it up immediately without a
waiting period.
25X1A9a MR . _ I would like to move we accept Mr ~ proposal as 26X1 A9a
line of action, and that we proceed accordingly.
COLONEL WHITE: Second.
MR. BAIRD: Is it the proposal that we almost direct the employees to
25X1A9a
I don't like that word.
That is not within our rights, but I think what Mr.
25X1A9a
had in mind was that we recommend they do this.
25X1A9a MR. M And the Agency deems it to be a security risk.
MR. Is it not likely, John, that as the volume goes down in
GHI, they may cancel?
25X1A9a
MR. M They told us that they would do that.
MR. And then everybody would have to take Omaha.
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 :826R000
w0A' W.
 Approved For Release 001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007 190001-8
25X1A9a
thing to do.
25X1A9a MR. _ If Omaha gets these the spread is so much better, 25X9A2
so the chance of cutting the rate again next year is very good.
25X1 Aga MR. REYNOLDS : Mr. Mhas moved and Colonel White has seconded tha,&X1 Aga
Mr. proposal on the GHI-Omaha problem be approved.
25X1A9a Are you ready for the question?
MR. M I have two questions. Did I understand you to say that
if you switched to GEHA there is no waiting period for maternity?
25X1A9a MR. E No waiting period - take them immediately.
MR. The second question is, couldn't we make this more effective
by stopping the Agency's part? In other words, the Agency does not sponsor Blue
Cross or have a facility for collecting money from Blue Cross. Wouldn't it be
more effective to stop the Agency from participating with GEHA?
25X1A9a MR. Then it's 20% higher.
25X1A9a MR. Is anybody actually buying GEHA now?
. - Are the applications out of ignorance or what?
GHI had it over Omaha, which we have just negotiated out, but we have not done a
real publicity job yet - but we plan to. I would like very much--if you ever get
a moment--for you to keep these sheets and see that comparison yourself, between
Omaha and GHI, both domestic and overseas, and I think you will be quite impressed
with the kind of contract we have here.
MR. REYNOLDS: Are you ready for the question? Those in favor, please
signify by saying "aye." Contrary minded? The motion is carried.
25X1A9a Thank you very much, Mr. -
25X1A9a
COLONEL WHITE: We're not penalizing our people.
MR. I think with the additional benefits it's the sensible
MR. - It sounds like a good job, to me.
Yes.
The reason is there were several significant points on which
MR. REYNOLDS: A very good job.
25X1A
MR. REYNOLDS: The next item, Item 5, will be presented by Colonel White,
and he will also present Item 6, which is re-numbered Item 5.
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA`-RDP8O!0'1826R00070
 Approved For Release2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007 0 90001-8
COLONEL WHITE: As you know, we have had a Junior Officer Trainee
Program operating under the Office of Training for sometime now, and for a year
or two we have been trying to get the Junior Career Development Program off the
ground. Really, the only essential, fundamental difference between the objectives
of the two is that the JOT people all came into the Agency from the outside, and
the JCD people all came into the program from inside the Agency.
About a couple of months ago the Inspector General made a study of
the JOT Program and the JCD Program as related to the JOT Program. I won't go
into a lot of details except to say that his comments about the JOT Program were
laudatory and certainly indicated that it had fulfilled everything the Council
had expected it to. One of his recommendations was that there should be people
brought into the JOT Program from inside the Agency as well as outside the Agency,
and, therefore, that the Junior Career Development Program, as such, should be
eliminated and merged with the Junior Officer Trainee Program. This recommendation
was concurred in by Training, Personnel and myself, and forwarded to the Director,
along with other comments on the Program. General Cabell approved of that recom-
mendation, subject to our directive that we prepare a "blueprint" which would spell
out the roles to be played by the Office of Training and the Office of Personnel
in the merged Program. That has been done and he has now approved of that procedure.
However, when I forwarded it to him the last time for his approval, I pointed out
to him that the Junior Career Development Program was set up by the Career Council
and therefore I thought before it was finally signed off it should be brought here.
So it's just that simple. I am not preparing papers on it, and unless someone
feels that you need to have a more careful study, I would recommend that we go
along with the merging of the two Programs. However, I'd like to say in the same
breath that because we have recommended this based on an IG report, and based on
General Cabell's approval, does not mean the Council is expected to rubber stamp it,
unless you really feel that way.
25X1A9a MR. Actually, the only difference is the slotting. They
will still be run by the same group, won't they? By Won't they?
25X1A9a COLONEL WHITE: Yes. And we have taken the ceiling completely off of
JOT's. They have no ceiling. They can recruit as many JOT's as they can recruit,
and enter them on duty.
Part of the IG's recommendation was that this Program should be
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 01826RQ"~!' ~~~ *J0E 1 1AL
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R00070 190001-8
expanded to an extent where we might be bringing in as many as 50% of our
professional employees through this mechanism. That will take some time, but they
have no ceiling problem.
25X1A9a MR. : Does that mean the JCD also has no ceiling?
COLONEL WHITE: Right
25X1A9a
MR
As a point of detail, Red, what is the volume of JOT's
coming aboard now?
25X1A9a
COLONEL WHITE: Matt, would you like to respond to that?
MR. BAIRD: We have 100 on board now.
M. I meant the rate of recruitment. About how many per month?
MR. BAIRD: Not many.
COLONEL WHITE: It isn't very large at the moment. We had something
like less than 200 total in the Program up to now, Matt.
25X1A9a
MR. It's been about 50 a year.
MR. About 180.
MR. Total since the beginning.
MR. This year I think it will probably recruit in excess of 50 -
perhaps 65. Next year, in a stepped-up recruitment program we might be able to
get in excess of 100.
25X1A9a MR.- One other question I'd like to ask: If this is going to be
merged, then, in effect, the JOT would be the way most young men get into the
Agency from now on, I would assume, from the description of this. Has there been
any particular look given lately as to the criteria for selection? I have no
criticism of it. I have absolutely no reason to criticize. I assume it is good.
But in recent times have we had a look at it to be sure we are getting the types
and kinds of people we need to keep some balance in this? I assume we are recruit-
ing "All American Boys" but aside from that fact are we getting a reasonably repre-
sentative number of characters?
25X1A9a MR.
it has been reviewed very carefully with both Training and
Personnel very recently.
25X1A9a MR.
I would think with the standards as high as they
have been, the recruitment would have to go down.
COLONEL WHITE: We feel that that is going to be difficult to do. That
was Kirk's objective. What we have done or are doing is taking the experience
factor in the major components by categories of personnel we have brought on duty
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CI 26Ra 'f99Q1NT1AL-
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007VO 90001-8
Vftw
here in the past three or four years and trying to project that through as our
recruiting objective, and we will have to check that every 30 or 60 days to see
how close we are coming, because if we don't find some way to broaden the base,
either by bringing more people in from the outside or more people in from the in-
side, we will never hit it.
One thing I didn't go along with - in Kirk's memorandum on the
subject there was a suggestion that we ought to enter into this Program more people
who didn't appear to have the very top potential but would fit in the middle
categories. Maybe this is highly theoretical, but my reaction is that we will
make enough mistakes to take care of the people who don't quite get to the top,
and that we shouldn't go out and recruit people who will be li's and 12's and not
go any further. We will find enough disappointments in people that we thought
would go further, to take care of that.
I don't know how successful we are going to be in expanding it but
Personnel and Training have a program worked out so that we can measure it as we
go along.
MR. REYNOLDS: We're planning to have a brochure, for exatle, that
Security has signed off on now, and I would look, Dick, to a better 1957 than
1956, with no lowering of the standards.
25X1A9a MR._ You see, what I had in mind, and this may not be a valid
thought--it just came to me now--I could see where in taking a very few in you
would have a very narrow focus, because it was compensated for by other recruitment,
and things of that kind. So what was concerning me a little bit was whether this
Program might give us too much of a certain type of American fellow and not enough
interest in some second-generation Poles and Slovaks and Magyars, etc., who might
have a little language and a few other things that would make them a little better
for some of our types of work. Because, after all, the crew-cut boy from a certain
type of college stands out pretty well on the horizon all around the world, and
I'm not sure we want all of that type.
COLONEL WHITE: I suggested to Matt and Harry, and they both agreed with
this idea, that we might and probably should broaden the selection machinery to
25X1A9a
include an Advisory Panel on which your f indicating Mr. people and DD/I's
people, and somebody from our side of the shop, would sit, as well as the people
who actually run the Program, for that kind of thinking.
25X1A9a M. - We certainly want to contribute to it. This is our life's
blood that is being pumped into us here.
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA 826R0
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R00070?190001-8
qw,
COLONEL WHITE: But I do believe we are sort of kidding ourselves in
having both of these Programs.
I would move the Inspector General's recommendation to merge the
JOT and JCD Programs, under the principal jurisdiction of the Office of Training
and with Personnel participation, be adopted.
25X1A9a
MR.- Second.
MR. BAIRD: Don't you think you ought to make reference in your motion,
Red, to the paper that is all ready prepared?
COLONEL WHITE: Yes.
MR. BAIRD: Because that is the blueprint.
COLONEL WHITE: We can put that in the motion.
MR. REYNOLDS: You have heard the motion, with the amendment suggested
by Mr. Baird, and seconded by Mr._
25X1A9a
. . . This motion was then passed . . .
MR. REYNOLDS: Next is Item 6, which is now Item. 5.
25X1A9a COLONEL WHITE: We have had running along here at the same time the Senior
Career Development Program under the Office of Personnel. has done a
very thoughtful and detailed study of this whole situation and if you have looked
at it you can see how many people have been in it and where they came from, and so
forth. The facts of life are that this has been a rubber stamp program which
doesn't really serve any useful purpose, as I see it, except that it's a hell of a
lot of bookkeeping down in the Office of Personnel. The facts are when somebody
wants to use this it can be used and the Council has never had an opportunity to
really dig into it and say, "Well, should this fellow go to Princeton for a year,
or should he do this, that, or the other." So in fact anything ever proposed has
always been approved. So it really has amounted to nothing more than a system of
bookkeeping whereby certain components thought they were getting a free slot which
they could not otherwise have had. The facts aren't actually that, because under
our ceiling ground rules and under our training ground rules we are first of all
required to keep 5% of our people in training. This number is just part of that
5%. And, secondly, when a person is in any kind of status away from the Agency or
away from his regular job for a period of three months or more, he does not count
against the ceiling.
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 1826FF1~
.AM-1 Wflk
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007O00190001-8
COLONEL WHITE: So as far as I can see we are just engaged in an
unnecessary lot of bookkeeping in a Program which this Council is supposed to be
sponsoring but which in fact exercises no real judgment over. I don't see that
it serves any purpose whatever, and I would like to recommend, as Rud has in his
staff study, that this Program be eliminated.
25X1A9a MRS _ in other words, when we want to transfer somebody to OCI
and OCI wants to send somebody over to us - just handle it in a perfectly routine
manner.
25X1A9a
MR. We have been using this for the War Colleges, for
language courses, etc. Nov if they could be detailees--
25X1 A9a MR. - I think you should modify this - if they are on leave
without pay they don't count against the ceiling, but if they are paid but detailed
somewhere, they do.
COLONEL WHITE: I am certainly willing to do that right here and now.
Here's the point: If they are gone for less than six months - you could put it
that way - "for less than six months" - you can't recruit somebody to take his
place, anyway, and if he's gone for more than six months he shouldn't count against
the ceiling.
25X1A9a MR.~ In other words, persons in the National War College won't
count against the ceiling.
25X1A9a MR.
example.
25X1A9a
In the same way we now send people to ODM, for
MR. Shall we say for six months?
25X1A9a COLONEL WHITE: Yes.
MR. The way it's put in the Regulation to describe
detailees--
COLONEL WHITE: If he is gone from the Agency for more than six months
on pay or without pay he doesn't count.
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
MR. - That would take care of Anacostia and Monterey.
What about the Staff Colleges - five months.
COLONEL WHITE: Make it three months, if you like.
MR.- I believe it's 30 days or 60 days--
MR. If we could tie it into the existing Regulation--
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : Cl
2 6ROOU U ~
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007 Q 0Q 90001-8
25X1A9a
COLONEL WHITE: What do you want? 60 days?
MR I believe it's 30 days.
MR 30 days will make another kind of bookkeeping - of going
in and out.
25X1A9a MR. M It won't create a problem if it's 30 days.
COLONEL WHITE: This is a mess and it doesn't serve any useful purpose
the way it is.
25X1A9a MR. BAIRD: Red, I would like to ask a selfish question. I had hoped
to use the Senior Career Development for the kind of thing I have embarked on with
DD/P. Take a man like -which we have discussed--he needs to get out to the
DD/P. He has been in the Office of Training since OSS days, and he has got up in
OTR to a grade 15 and is occupying a 17 slot. I want to get him to the DD/P.
Well, the DD/P can't give him a job that is commensurate with his grade, but they
can take him and put him in a GS-12 or 13 slot where he can be gainfully employed.
How do I go about that unless I can put him in a Career Development slot?
COLONEL WHITE: You don't need a Career Development slot, because in
your Career Service under the competitive promotion system you can have so many
grade 15's. and if you want to put in a grade 12 for training that25.X1 A9a
perfectly all right provided you in the Office of Training stay within the total
number of grade 15's you have in that Service.
25X1A9a MR. BAIRD: Suppose I want to give him to the DD/P for two years?
MR. You can double or triple "Black Duck" him and put him in
a GS-12 slot.
MR. BAIRD: Leaving the grade of the slot out, how do I get him to the
DD/P?
COLONEL WHITE: I think to use these for what I think you are talking
about would be contrary to my concept. I think if a man is going to the DD/P to
carry his weight in a job--I don't care what grade the job is--then he should not
be free. That is the problem. Everybody will take a free slot. If he is going
to be a grade 15 and you say he can't carry a grade 15 but he can carry a grade
]A--okay, let him carry the 14, but I don't think that added to that you should
have a free slot to go along with it.
25X1A9a MR. Suppose you took the 27 slots and gave nine of them
to each of the DD's to use themselves?
25X1A9a
MR. - We went through that. That worked even less than this
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CI 826R@ 00
 Approved For Release2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007V 90001-8
did. Let's don't go back to that.
COLONEL WHITE: Let's face it, boys - this ceiling thing is a real
thing. We're all up against it, and the Director is dead serious about this
business, and we're not helping ourselves or helping him if we set up or tolerate
gimmicks to get around it, because what he wants is pressure on the ceiling.
25X1A9a
MR. You're going to wipe these 27 jobs out?
COLONEL WHITE: Yes. They don't go to anybody. They're just cleaned
MR. BAIRD: If you're sure that by this exercise we are not wiping
Career Development out--
25X1 A9a COLONEL WHITE: I don't think BO.
MR. I don't think so, Matt.
MR. BAIRD: I can see sending a guy to the War College - that is easy.
But I do feel it's going to hurt me.
25X1A9a MR. - I don't honestly think so, Matt, I swear I don't. I don't
think--if you take the case of _-that it's going to be any more difficX1A9a
to place him as an active person occupying a slot than it is if you say, "Look,
would somebody put him to work - and I'll send his slot with him." I don't think
it's going to be essentially different. He is an unusual case. Most of them
don't cause any flurry.
25X1A9a
MR. BAIRD:
I am perfectly willing to try it.
MR.
Matt has a very good point. We may have to--
25X1A9a
R
oing to have to be a little more liberal
I think we are
M
.
g
25X1A9a
MR.
That is the key.
MR. REYNOLDS: That is the key.
Would you care to put that in the form of a motion, Red?
COLONEL WHITE: Recommend the Senior Career Development Program be
abandoned and that the slots now on the T/0 of the Office of Personnel also be
cancelled. And further, that whatever is consistent with regulations now in
effect as to the time of personnel away from the Agency - are exempt from ceiling,
regardless of their pay status.
MR. REYNOLDS: Do I hear a second?
25X1A9a
MR ~ Second.
. . . This motion was then passed . .
13
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 :
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007Q001,90001-8
1%001 ~
. . . Colonel White then left the meeting . . .
MR. REYNOLDS: The next item is Item 4 on your agenda, which is now
Item 6.
I point out to you that this is the cross-fertilization in the
Agency. This is the quarterly report on the activities of the Career Services,
which is required by this Council of each one of the Deputies.
25X1A9a
Copies of this go to the Heads of all. Career Services and
to the Executive Secretaries so that this technical and production data is
available at the working level.
MR. REYNOLDS: This is for your information only and does not require
a vote. I presume if you have any questions on it which have a bearing on all
of us, they be asked now, otherwise we would be glad, in the Office of Personnel,
25X1A9a;o take it up with you through Mr office. It's a very comprehensive,
excellent report.
If there are no questions, we will go to the next item, Item 7.
This you will recall was the subject that was discussed at the 28th meeting in
which we had all the representatives of the Career Services throughout the Agency
in here--the senior representatives. And this paper--Career Preference Outline--
was cut down to one sheet, in accordance with a unanimous request. And this
25X1A Regulation we believe covers the field - Career Planning for Individuals.
There is only one question in it which has not been settled and that
is whether or not it should be shown to the individuals. Some offices have already
decided to show it to their people and they say they wish to continue to follow
that practice.
25X1A9a MR.'
I would suggest we have an Agency policy on this to
avoid the business that we had on the previous Fitness Report where the whole
Agency was different, one office from the other.
MR. REYNOLDS: I would vote for Colonel White by proxy, with whom I
have discussed this, who feels that it should be shown to people.
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
MR. BAIRD: I feel strongly that way for my own Office.
MR._ This is the Career Preference Outline?
MR. REYNOLDS: That is right.
MR. Is this showing before or after the supervisors have
14
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : Cl
4ff8T1AL
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000700190001-8
25X1A9a
We are talking about the finished thing which goes into the
25X1A9a
1bA1A 1a
I'm all for it.
because it was not settled at the Council meeting, although Mr. - and mx25X1A9a
25X1A9a
25X1A9a
MR.~ Is there any reason why it shouldn't be optional?
You remember the Fitness Report before the last one -
it varied throughout, and we had office decisions, and some offices said, "Let
the Division decide" - and I think that is a loose way to do it, particularly when
I'm sure everybody believes that this should be shown and it's a moral obligation
to show it.
25X1A9a MR. had a point which I think is worthy of con-
sideration right here. We have a mechanism for management talking to management
through the Fitness Report, Potential, Part II, which is not shown to the in-
dividual. Therefore point is that things which have to be said w251A9a
cannot be said to the employee should be in there, but in the Career Preference
Outline you don't have to put that sort of thing, and therefore you can and should
show the Career Preference Outline, and keep it clean that way, so that people know,
categorically, what is going to be shown and what is not going to be shown, and
there is no longer any unrest or uncertainty and confusion.
25X1A9a MR.
I'd just as leave it be shown.
MR. BAIRD: I would like it to be shown, but I also feel, and this has
a direct bearing on it, that in the Regulation under "GENERAL" in subparagraph a
we should have some kind of a positive statement that there are three priorities
in career development: that the first priority is the needs of the Agency, the
second priority is the requirement that the Agency places on the component, and
that after those two priorities have been met, then the priority of the individual's
career development would be considered. And we ought to hammer on this. It should
be there in the Regulation and on this Career Preference Outline someplace, because
irrespective of how we feel about it, if the individual employee--GS-4 or GS-7--gets
this he is going to say, "Boy, here is my chance to go to Harvard next year and to
Yale the next."
25X1A9a MR. ~ Won't this statement at the bottom of Form 1030, in the
15
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 :,,5 1826R000700190001-8
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000700130001-8
lower left-hand corner, satisfy? The Council hammered on that.
25X1A9a
MR. BAIRD: Not at the bottom - at the TOP.
MR. - We tried to get it over the man's signature.
MR. BAIRD: Let it be down there, too. But it's stated sort of
negatively. Boy, here is a chance for the individual to go hog wild. I'd state
it positively, right off the bat, that the individual really has a third priority
in this, and then it gives us some leeway when we say to the individual, "No, we
can't do all this in the Program you want. Here are the reasons: We have to
stay in business and we have a production line--
25X1 A9a MR. - I think you can do that anyway, Matt.
M. BAIRD: You can, Dick, but I think this helps set it in the right
frame of reference so that the individual doesn't start off with thinking that
anything he puts down he is going to get. I'd like to see it stated a little
more positively. In the Regulation where it says, "with continuing satisfactory
work performance and conduct on his part, just and equitable attention will be
accorded to his personal progress" - that is where I think we ought to get in that,
sure, we will do that if he keeps his nose clean, but the important thing is it
has to be consistent with the needs and requirements of the Agency and the office
in which he is working. I still think we can do a hell of a lot for the individual,
but let's first of all make clear that he is working for an outfit first, and then
for his career development second.
25X1A9a MR. - I think it can be stated more strongly, Matt. The reason
we chose that language is because that is the language in the application for
membership in the Career Staff. In other words, we stuck as close as we could to
the obligations of membership in the Career Staff, from a language point of view.
MR. BAIRD: I may be belaboring a point but I think we would have fewer
disappointments if the employee starts with the frame of mind that, yes, he is not
going to get everything to meet his wishes, but the most important wishes to be
met are those for the requirements of the Agency that the National Security Council
gives to Mr. Dulles and Mr. Dulles puts on the office, and after those are met
there is still room for career development, but not everybody is going to get what
he wants, because of those limitations.
25X1A9a
MR. REYNOLDS: Any comments on Mr. Baird's feelings on this?
MR. I would certainly buy any strengthening of any
16
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : C1826R000700190001-8
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000700190001-8
Iftow *W1
25X1A9a MR. REYNOLDS: Would you favor strengthening it, Dick?
MR._ I don't know. I'm twiddledee-and-twiddledum on this.
It seems pretty strong the way it is now. I see Matt's point very clearly and
agree heartily. The only thing that concerns me at all is that if we pound it
down too hard we will water down the Career Preference Outline and the fellow will
get the idea - what's the sense in filling it out, they will tell us what they
want anyway. I don't know where the happy medium is. I don't honestly have a
strong view on it, whether we strengthen it or leave it the way it is.
25X1A9a
MR.- It's a little bit academic to us because we have truly beat
on our people for the last four or five years, and if you ask any one of them
which comes first, they would say "the Organization." But it's taken four or
five years to do that. So if it can be done more easily, I am in favor of it.
It is most difficult to sell. Our people do believe in it, and I believe strongly
in the concept.
25X1A9a MR. REYNOLDS: General- how do you feel about this?
25X1A9a GENERAL- Mr. Baird has a point. I wonder if it can be taken
care of on the form itself either by capitalizing or underlining the needs of the
Organization?
MR. BAIRD: You see, it's the "needs of the Organization" on these
statements, that come last. I think they ought to come first, in this Career
Preference Outline.
25X1A9a MR.- Well, this instruction sheet will go out with all of them,
and that is to be torn off and thrown away. That was General desire25X1A
and I think a good one. Couldn't we put the strengthening in the "DESCRIPTION"
and "PURPOSE" of the Career Preference Outline?
25X1A9a
MR. BAIRD: Why not quote the Regulation in both places?
MR. And put in the instructions to the supervisors: Make
certain that in discussing this with your people you point out to them that this
priority exists.
MR. REYNOLDS: It would seem to me--sitting here and hearing these
arguments--that we could make the changes you suggest without hurting it, and I
don't believe that the average man would say, "Well, what's the use in filling it
out." I think there is a lot of desire to ride the gravy train, which we unfor-
tunately see in our office more than anywhere else.
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : Cl
821 AL
 Approved For Release 2.001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000700190001-8
1W
25X1A9a GENE This isn't a promise or a commitment - this is "for
consideration."
MR. BAIRD: I think the Como point of view, as expressed, is indicative
that regardless of whether you say that, there is a feeling that grows up, and
it's taken them a couple of years to disabuse it. We have been hammering at
this in OTR for two years, also, but you would be surprised how often we have to
go back to the individual, in spite of having stated it, and say, "Read not only
the fine print but the BIG print."
MR. REYNOLDS: Therefore a motion would be in order on Mr. Baird's
suggestion that three priorities should be placed in the instructions both to
the man and the supervisors, and in the Regulation.
25X1A9a MR.- That ought to do it.
M. REYNOLDS: Is that correct? Would you so move, Matt?
25X1A9a
MR. The only question I had was the difference between the first
two priorities. I didn't understand that.
MR. BAIRD: In the wording of it - Mr. Dulles is given a requirement by
the National Security Council. To translate those requirements into CIA action
he places requirements on the various components. Those are the two priorities.
One is the priority on the Agency, and then, in varying degrees, those put on the
components of the Agency. You have to count on some of these individuals to carry
out those responsibilities. And after those two priorities the priority of the
individual's wishes can be met.
25X1A9a MR.
Could we simplify it, Matt, by saying that there are two:
the requirements of the Agency and the interests of the individual?
MR. BAIRD: Yes.
25X1A9a MR. _ I believe it's plainer to the individual that way.
MR. REYNOLDS: May I suggest that this be written up in Mr. 1A9a
office and be shown to Mr. Baird, and then we will give a final approval at our
next meeting.
25X1A9a MR.
Do we want to hold it up for another meeting?
MR. REYNOLDS: No, if Mr. Baird is satisfied with the language.
MR. BAIRD: I don't think it's up to me. Rud can give it over the
telephone.
25X1A9a M. - I'll work out something with you and then check with the
18
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 :. 711 826R000700190001-8
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000700190001-8
'WSW, 1W
others by telephone.
MR. BAUD: I have no desire to hold this up.
25X1A9a MR~ I give Matt my proxy.
25X1A9a
. . . This motion was then passed . . .
MR. - We will go to press on this Career Preference Outline in
order to get it underway as fast as possible, and then we will circulate the regu-
lation through the regular coordination channels.
MR. REYNOLDS: Now, the last item on the agenda.
Now the next paper is our own computation and the high spot of this
is that we are now caught up, as far as we ever will be caught up, in membership
in the Career Staff. In Part I of this paper you will see there were - peop2X9A2
eligible on the 30th of June, and there are only 1392 cases not acted upon, of
which 700-odd are applications not returned. Only 236 applications have been
returned. Now the problem that meets the Council here is what is going to be our
procedure and what policy are we going to set up for those who have not been ad-
mitted to the Career Staff on performance - No. 1 - how do we handle that? We
know what "intent" means, and "security consciousness" is a minor item. "Habitual
indebtedness" - if we check back we will find 90% of those are colored. "Finan-
cial irresponsibility with Government funds" is infinitesimal, and "inter-personal
relations" is small, and "inconsistency" doesn't amount to anything. Therefore,
"performance" is the item here. Does this Council want to decide what to do
about that?
25X1A9a MR.
The table shows the difference between B and C.
MR. BAIRD: I don't think they should be lumped together.
MR. REYNOLDS: There were 69 B's.
MR. BAIRD: The action taken should not be uniform--
MR. REYNOLDS: I don't think it is a question we can decide today, but
I think it's a question that should be given very serious consideration as to
what we are going to do. Why do we have this if we don't remove people who are
unsatisfactory?
25X1 A9a MR ?- The C cases on the grounds of performance are the
One of the things that troubles me--not to drag on this
discussion--but the reason I would like to go along with the Chairman's motion
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : Clfl 82
 Approved For Release1112001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R0007001190001-8
11W Ve
here is that I was noticing one name on the list of a fellow who worked with me
for a time and during that time I thought his performance was very good. Well,
apparently somebody else didn't think it was good. But I wouldn't say that that
guy deserved to be read out of the Organization, because I don't think he is in
that category, at least from my personal knowledge, but somebody else apparently
feels differently. But I think they need a little bit of individual attention
before we develop a policy of getting rid of all the C's.
MR. BAIRD: Harry, wouldn't your Selection Board be able to recommend
action to the Council on that?
25X1A9a MR.- I think the Selection Board ought to review the C cases
more thoroughly and in more detail and make a positive recommendation to the
Deputy concerned.
MR. REYNOLDS: I think that is the proper machinery for it.
25X1A9a
Isn't the proper action just the reverse, for us to refer
these to the Employment Review Board for review, not for disposal. We feel any
C category should be reviewed to decide whether or not he should be continued--
25X1A9a MR ~ You mean the new procedure - the Advisory Committee to
the Director of Personnel?
25X1A9a MR. E Whatever mechanism there is to review.
MR. That is short of the Employment Review Board. Maybe that
IS the Committee. The Selection Board has already paid serious attention to these
cases, and maybe an Advisory Committee composed of people who are not on the
Selection Board should review the cases under this new separation procedure, and
you will automatically get a double-check that way.
MR. BAIRD: I was trying to cut down on the amount of work that people
have to do on the same GS-4 chauffeur, or GS-3. You have a lot of people spending
a lot of time arriving at the B and C categories.
25X1A9a MR. We have asked our Office to consider all B cases as
to whether they should receive warning letters. There were some individuals made
C by the Selection Board on which our Offices violently disagreed, and they wouldn't
fire those people for anything. But that is all right. I think that is their
decision.
MR. REYNOLDS: I'd like to make this suggestion--wearing my other hat
and not as Chairman of this Council--that we as the Office of Personnel be directed
to come up with a constructive, simple plan to handle this thing, at the next
1
826R
Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : Q ww"Mmm
 Approved For Release 2001/08/01 : CIA-RDP80-01826R000700190001-8
NO, 1W
meeting of this Council, and submit it for approval to the three components.
25X1A9a MR._ Fine. Excellent.
MR. REYNOLDS: Is that satisfactory to all of you? If so, that is
what we will do. I think we will have to do that, Vern because 25X1A9a
otherwise we will be spinning our wheels with boards and committee meetings. Some-
body has to fish or cut bait.
25X1A9a
MR. - I would like to have you keep these papers, but please
remember that they are strictly numbered and "EYES ONLY", because there are names
of people on here whose cases have not been settled, and we don't want those
names to get around.
MR. REYNOLDS: The meeting is adjourned.
. . . The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. . .
21
Approved For Release 2001/08/01: C _9WENTIAL