COMMENTARY
GENDER GAP IMPACTS Te GAO report documented that DOD hired about 500,000 civilians over the last 10 years, with the largest volume of hires belonging to the Army. However, it also lost more than 500,000 civilians, with the Army also having the most departures. Tis high turnover could be related to the gender gap found across the board in DOD. For instance, in fiscal year 2020, women left their jobs at a higher rate than men (9.2% versus 5.7%). Moreover, women were underrepresented in senior positions, especially in the Army, where they held only 20% of Senior Executive Service (SES) roles. Another area where women were underrepresented was science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) occu- pations, where women accounted for only about 28% of all employees. Women also had the lowest representation among engineering technicians, at about 9% annually.
Tese disparities, coupled with recent research from the RAND Corp., also reveal significant pay gaps in the DOD civilian workforce.
SKILL GAPS AND AN AGING WORKFORCE Te GAO has identified skills gaps as a high-risk issue since 2001, signaling a stark warning that the government lacks the necessary skills in critical occupations such as human resources; STEM; cybersecurity and acquisitions. Tese skills gaps affect the government’s ability to perform its missions and deliver its services efficiently and affects DOD significantly. In fact, in its latest report on high-risk issues for the federal workforce, GAO cites skills gaps, staffing, training and workforce planning issues affecting DOD business systems modernization, weapons system acquisition and protection of technologies critical to U.S. national security interests.
Te percentage of workers over age 55 has almost doubled in the last two decades. Te Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that by the year 2028, one in four American workers will be 55 or older. Te federal workforce is also facing a retirement wave as a large percentage of federal employees will be eligible to retire in
SAME OLD SAME OLD
GAO data shows that the DOD civilian workforce has not become more diverse in the past decade:
• The percentage of women decreased slightly from 33.0% to 32.1%, while the percent- age of historically disadvantaged groups increased slightly from 31.0% to 32.6%.
• Both groups were underrepresented in higher general schedule (GS) grades and SES positions.
• Women left DOD at a higher rate than men every year, with the Army having the highest attrition for women.
• Employees from historically disadvantaged groups left DOD at a similar or slightly higher rate than other groups.
the next few years, leaving behind gaps in leadership and insti- tutional knowledge.
Te aging of the workforce affects DOD and the Army’s future, as it may worsen the skills gaps and impact the mission outcomes in the next decade. Tis could also become a “perfect storm” for the federal government, since only 8% of its workers, on aver- age, are under 30. Te low number of those early in their careers in the federal workforce, compared with those who can retire— especially in critical fields like information technology (IT), cyber, human resources, acquisition, and data science—raises serious concerns about how agencies can fulfill their mission if we don’t change. Tis is also proof of why we must adapt to the chang- ing nature of work and attract and retain talent for the future of the federal workforce.
PAY GAP
RAND’s report found that white males earned more than other demographic groups in DOD’s civilian workforce from fiscal year 2012 to 2021, without a clear explanation. The research revealed that among U.S. Navy civilian engineers, IT specialists and computer scientists, Black women in a GS-12 IT management job in Virginia made $5,185 less, and white women in the same positions made $6,570 less, on average, than their male counterparts.
https://
asc.ar my.mil
87
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112
