THE PLIGHT OF THE UNIFORMED AIR FORCE ... - APA PsycNET

9 downloads 0 Views 316KB Size Report
THE PLIGHT OF THE UNIFORMED AIR FORCE PSYCHOLOGIST .... Air Force. This $2340 figure represents more than one-third of the Air Force PhD.
THE PLIGHT OF THE UNIFORMED AIR FORCE PSYCHOLOGIST Jacob Jacoby The recent report of the APA Division 19 ad hoc Committee to Study Career Status of Military Psychologists (Hedlund, Newman, Rasmussen, Ross, Sells, Sperling, & Trumbull, 1968) presents a rather bleak picture of both the compensation and satisfaction derived by "uniformed" psychologists (i.e., those serving on active duty with either the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Public Health Service) in contrast to their civilian brethren, both in and out of civil service. However, while the figures for military rank and compensation presented are accurate for psychologists serving on active duty with the Army, they are highly inflated and do not depict the sad state of affairs as they exist for Air Force psychologists. Thus, any generalizations made from the Committee's data to all uniformed psychologists would not be valid. Furthermore, in choosing to use the figures for Army psychologists, it was not necessary for the Committee to comment on the sensitive, inequitable, and artificially created caste system currently existing among psychologists on active duty in the Air Force. These various inequities ought to be described if only to set the record straight. More important, however, they need to be described so that those interested and/or about to be affected (i.e., those young PhDs and MS-level graduate students who are about to enter active duty in order to discharge their military obligation) may be able to make more accurate comparisons and meaningful SUMMER 1970

choices—choices which will determine three to five years of their lives. However, our purpose is not simply to dwell on the negative, but also to suggest certain practices which, if implemented, might serve to make the lot of the uniformed psychologist a bit more palatable and should result in the increased retention rates for which the military services are clamoring (cf. Hedlund et al., 1968). Pay Disparity

The ad hoc Committee's report calls attention to the PhD psychologist in the Army Medical Department who enters the service in the grade of Captain with no constructive service credit (longevity) toward pay, while a physician enters in the grade of Captain with five years constructive service credit toward pay, plus 'equalization' or 'incentive' pay which varies from $100 to $350 per month depending upon the amount of actual duty served [Hedlund et al., 1968, p. 113],

Assuming he is married, said Army psychologist enters active duty at a rate of $8,867.16 per annum, with all pay and allowances included. This does compare rather unfavorably to the physician who enters active duty at the rate of $12,234.36, again all pay and allowances included. However, in the Air Force, nonclinical PhD psychologists enter active duty as 2nd Lieutenants and for their first year, assuming they are married, make $6532.56, all pay and allowances 383

TABLE 1 Selected Monthly Salaries of Married Officers in the Army and Air Force3

1st Lieut. 2nd Lieut. (under 2 yr.) (under 2 yr.) Base pay (monthly) Incentive pay Subsistence allowance Housing allowance0 Monthly total Annual salary

$ 386.40 0 47.88 110.10d $ 544.38 $6532.56

$ 449.70 0 47.88 120.00 $ 617.58 $7410.96

Captain (under 2 yr.) $ 561.00 0 47.88 130.056 $ 738.93 $8867.16

Captain15 (5 yr. "constructive service credit") $ 741.60 100.00 47.88 1 30.056 $1019.53 $12234.36

a

Based on the military pay scale in effect July 1, 1969. Rates are those granted to entry-level physicians in all branches of military service. c Not granted to those officers choosing to live in government-provided quarters. d $85.20 per month for unmarried 2nd Lieutenants. e $105.00 per month for unmarried Captains. b

included. (If single, they would be earning a total of $6233.76.) At the end of a year and a half of active duty the married nonclinical PhD Air Force psychologist is automatically promoted to 1st Lieutenant, at which point his salary jumps to $7410.96. It is only after three full years of active duty that the nonclinical PhD psychologist in the Air Force first becomes eligible for promotion to Captain. If actually promoted at this time, that is, after three full years of active duty, such an individual would be earning only slightly more than a PhD psychologist just entering the Army. Even if one does not consider this in terms of the crossservice inequities involved, it seems incredible that uniformed PhD research scientists asked to work on some of the nation's most critical, sensitive, and complex defense problems should have starting salaries slightly in excess of $6000—a scant $3000 above the "poverty leverwhile the sanitation workers of New York City (who also retire at half pay after 20 years of service) start at $7000 per annum, and while the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces signs a bill

384

giving Washington, D.C., policemen a starting salary of $8000 per annum. However, in order to appreciate the full significance of the cross-service pay and grade disparities, one need only take note of Army Circular 624-50, under whose provisions Master's level psychologists are granted automatic Captaincy upon their entry into active duty. In other words, Master's level psychologists can enter into active duty in the Army Medical Department in the grade of Captain while all nonclinical PhD level psychologists will continue to enter into active duty in the Air Force as 2nd Lieutenants and must then wait three full years before even becoming eligible for promotion to Captain. Thus, married Master's level psychologists in the Army have a starting salary of $8867.16 while most PhD level Air Force psychologists have a starting salary of $6532.56. The figures for single officers are $8566.56 versus $6233.76, respectively. In either case, psychologists with Master's degrees in the Army start out at two grades higher and earn $2340 a year more than do nonclinical PhD psychologists in the

PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

TABLE 2 Entry-Level Grades for Army and Air Force Psychologists Psychologists PhD Clinicians Nonclinicians

Master's level Clinicians Nonclinicians

Air Force. This $2340 figure represents more than one-third of the Air Force PhD psychologist's total annual salary.1 Class Distinction

Cross-service pay and grade differences, however, constitute only one facet of the Air Force problem. Surprising as it may seem, a class distinction is made between Air Force psychologists. These classes are treated and paid differently: PhD clinical psychologists (the "upper class") are promoted to Captain after only six months of active duty while all other PhD psychologists (the "lower class") must wait a full three years, or six times as long, for this same promotion. Given that the nonclinical PhD receives his assignment based solely upon his professional qualifications (as is specifically required by Air Force Manual 36-11, p. 105, para. 1000la) and is asked to function in the capacity of a PhD psychologist, such discriminatory practices appear entirely unjustified. Although no new legislation would be required to place Air Force nonclinicians on a par with their clinical colleagues, 'A psychology graduate student may enter the Army Medical Department as a 1st Lieutenant ($7,410.96) with 30 semester credits or as a Captain ($8,884.56) with 60 semester credits to complete his doctorate while receiving full military pay and allowances.

SUMMER 1970

Army

Captain Captain

1st Lt/Captain 1st Lt/Captain

Air Force

1st Lieutenant 2nd Lieutenant

2nd Lieutenant 2nd Lieutenant

thus far the Air Force has replied negatively to requests that these provisions, contained in Title 10 of the US Code, be legitimately applied. Briefly, the problem is interpreted as follows. All officers serving on active duty are classified as either Regular or Reserve officers. Almost the entire population of PhD uniformed psychologists are Reservists, that is, individuals who volunteered to serve on extended active duty for a period of three to five years. According to the Air Force's Directorate of Personnel Planning (Pentagon), the official spokesmen on the matter, the existing provisions of Title 10 apply only to Reserve officers. Since similar legislation does not exist for Regular officers, the Air Force believes that to apply the existing legislation to Reserve officers would create an inequity. Strangely, the inequity which already exists between Reserve PhD psychologists in the Line-of-the-Air-Force (i.e., the nonclinicians) and their Reserve PhD counterparts in the Air Force Biomedical Science Corps (i.e., the clinicians) appears to be worthy of little more than ostrichlike head-in-the-sand consideration. The ad hoc Committee notes that the various branches of the Armed Service have expressed a continuing and growing concern with the difficulties of attracting and retaining qualified psychologists over the past decade [Hedlund et al., 1968, p. 112].

385

It should be obvious from the above that such practices by the Air Force are conducive to neither the attraction nor the retention of PhD psychologists, especially those of the nonclinical variety. One is reminded at this point of Etzioni's (1964, pp. 6-7) distinction between the "real" and "stated" goals of an organization. The latter are those desired states of affairs which the organization claims it is attempting to realize. An examination of the actual allocation of resources and direction of effort, however, yields an appreciation of the organization's true goals. It would appear that the Air Force's stated expression of concern is at sharp variance with its allocation of resources. Perhaps this one reason why the Air Force has only 53 PhD psychologists2 on active duty while the Army has 100.3 Desiderata

It is believed that the following recommendations, some relating to issues not covered here but touched upon in the ad hoc Committee's report, would, if implemented, do much to improve the conditions for uniformed psychologists in all branches of the military. First, and most important, adequate and uniform entry levels should be established for all uniformed PhD psychologists, preferably a minimum of Captain in the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps, and the equivalent Lieutenant (Senior Grade) in the Navy and Public Health Service. This would eliminate the cross-service disparities and make a dent in existing intraservice caste systems. Second, along with the physician, pilot, and paraG. Wright, personal communication, March 28, 1968. C. A. Thomas, personal communication, March 13, 1968.

386

trooper, not to mention numerous other categories of armed service personnel, the uniformed PhD psychologist, since he is being used in his professional capacity, should be entitled to receive "incentive" (i.e., "pro" or professional) pay. Third, preinduction counseling by knowledgeable personnel (preferably psychologists) concerning the various kinds of psychological work being conducted within the service, which is now provided by the Army Medical Department Psychology Consultants, should be provided to all incoming PhD and Master's level psychologists prior to giving them an assignment. Their desires and especially their unique qualifications should be important considerations in their assignments. Illustrative of current practices, it is possible for a PhD experimental social psychologist with strongly indicated interests in political psychology, psychological warfare, and counterinsurgency to be straight-jacketed into a purely personnel paper-shuffling function for three years, as was my particular experience. Then to read, while on active duty, that there exists a crying and urgent need for military psychologists to study precisely these sorts of problems (Sperling, 1968) is indeed frustrating. Fourth, a program should be established whereby all uniformed psychologists, at least within each branch of service and preferably across all branches, would meet for two or three days specifically to discuss their research and current problems in the field of military psychology. This would greatly facilitate the interchange of scientific information and would also serve to promote a much needed sense of identification and communality of purpose. It is further suggested that these meetings be scheduled for the site of the annual APA convention

PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

and be held either directly prior or subsequent to the convention. Last, the American Psychological Association, both as the national voice of psychologists and as an organization which counts as its purpose the advancement of psychology as a science and a profession, could also be of considerable assistance. In light of the recently revised draft regulations, uniformed military psychology is now of direct and immediate importance to many young PhD and Master's level psychologists and psychology graduate students. For example, during the 1968-69 academic year, Purdue has had eight psychology graduate students drafted (two of whom had already received the Master's degree and were only a year away from obtaining the PhD), at least one other student joined a military program in order to delay entry into active duty until completion of his PhD program, and yet another student dropped out of school entirely in the face of an imminent draft notice. It would therefore be helpful if APA (perhaps through Division 19) could compile the various programs available upon request and updated periodically. Such a publication could inform those about to enter active duty about (a) which branch of service provided their best chances for

professional development and advancement, (b) the cross-service facts about grades and compensation, and (c) which specific MOSs or AFSCs were geared to psychological work. One would predict that, if at time of publication significant differences among the services still existed in the areas of entry-level grades and rates of compensation, psychologists, especially those enlisting for only a three to five year obligation, would tend to enter that branch of service which provided the most adequate compensation and professional opportunities. In the long run, such a publication might significantly affect enlistment rates of psychologists in the various branches of military service and could thus serve to bring about much-needed reform.

REFERENCES Etzioni, A. Modern organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1964. Hedlund, J. L., Newman, S. H., Rasmussen, J. E., Ross, S., Rubenstein, E. A., Sells, S. B., Sperling, P., & Trumbull, R. Military psychology: Comparative image. (Report of the ad hoc committee on career status of military psychologists, Division 19.) American Psychologist, 1968, 23, 112-121. Sperling, P. I. A new direction for military psychology: Political psychology. American Psychologist, 1968, 23, 97-103.

JACOB JACOBY is an assistant professor at Purdue University. He is a Michigan State University PhD in Social Psychology who followed graduate school with active duty in the Air Force. Prior to his position at Purdue, he was at George Washington University.

SUMMER 1970

387