This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
law
are
ln our service states that women
or a task unit whose mission it
0 ensure that the Navy’s current position on sending U'onien to sea is presented, Proceedings editors Mark yutlin and Follin Armfield interviewed Vice Admiral ^eon A. Edney, Chief of ^*aval Personnel and Assis- unt Chief of Naval Opera- '°ns for Manpower, Per- s°nnel and Training.
Q°Ceedings: Why do the Navy and the w0ast Guard have different policies n regard to women personnel de- ^°y>ng on ships?
ney; The policies associated with , 0ri'cn are dictated by law, and the
. n°t allowed to be permanently as- cn t0 cornbatant units or serve in icy0- °bject °f 'he Navy’s pol-
all m tbe assimilation of women in With- ^ -iob rat'n8s and job codes ^ 'n the definition of the law. The avy s definition of combat is “a ship 0r Unit ,
See'c out> reconnoiter, and engage e enemy.”
'he iv tbe direction of the Secretary of p0i- . vy> we recently reviewed our exCles and accomplishments as we inanded the opportunities for women Pqj. e Navy to make sure that these and'CleS Were cons'stent with the law ^ consistent with the mission of the We’^ ^here revisions are needed,
'he M ^°'n8 t0 niake them. Our report, pro^avy Study Group’s Report on abn reSS Women in 'he Navy, makes (hatUt recommendations of things nfwe can do to improve the process fassimilation.
N Ult 'he report shows is that the Pf0 f bas made probably as much 'heTfS-S as any o'her organization in cult ^n'ted States, and in a very diffi- environment. The Navy is very different from other organizations, including other military services. We and the Marine Corps are the only service that is not totally land-based. Going over the horizon on a ship for 120 days and never seeing land is a very demanding and complex environment. If you go on any land base in the country, you can’t really differentiate— particularly in peacetime—between combat and non-combat assignments.
But if you go down to the Norfolk waterfront and an Aegis cruiser gets under way, you will get a very clear definition.
Proceedings: Could you give us the highlights of the report?
Edney: The Navy’s progress toward assimilating women—enlisted and officers—has been significant in the last 15 years. The number of female personnel has risen from about 7,000 to 54,000 in that time frame. Of 102 enlisted ratings, we’ve opened up all but 18 to women. Those 18 ratings are clearly ratings that are only assigned on ships with a combat mission and have minimal shore billets for sea-shore rotation. We have female executive officers [XOs] and chief engineers; we have our first female commanding officer [CO] of an aircraft squadron—a VC [utility composite] squadron—and our second CO has been selected. There are female XOs of major air stations. The XO of Norfolk Naval Base, which is the largest naval station in the world, is a woman, as are the XOs of Guantanamo Bay and Naval Station Pearl Harbor, two of our most challenging stations. The women in these positions are doing superbly, earning great credibility.
Proceedings: The Navy is opening up billets for women on ships and land- based reconnaissance squadrons. In a war, those ships and Coast Guard ships come under Navy control. Will these women be recalled in these situations? Is there a policy?
Edney: There is a policy. You have to understand that Congress established the policy that precludes women from participating in combat. But there is no policy that says women are not to be exposed to risk. The fact of the matter is, women are going to be exposed to risk. Women at sea on a ship are going to get sunk. We sent 240 women into the Persian Gulf on the Acadia [AD- 42] to repair the Stark [FFG-31], The mission wasn’t to seek out and engage, but those women were exposed to the same hazards as anyone serving in a ship that steams in those waters. We’re talking about the law of the United States that says women are not to be exposed to combat. My personal opinion is that it’s a correct law, that this nation has enough strength and resources that we don’t have to expose women to that ultimate bestiality—not that they can’t and not that they wouldn’t.
People try to compare a land battle environment with a sea battle environment, and there are no real similarities. There are no boundaries at sea. There is no way to control where an enemy submarine will be or what its crew decides to target. Within that environment, we’re trying to be consistent.
We have opened up 26 of the 37 combat logistics force [CLF] ships to women. Some of those ships—the AORs and the AOEs—were designed to be fast attack combatant logistic ships. They were designed to operate in and among the task group, thus we have not assigned women to those ships. But all the other supply ships can accept women. Will those women be exposed to risks? Of course they will.
Proceedings: How is the Navy planning to deal with some of the specific problems, like sexual harassment? Edney: Well, we’re planning to take it head-on. We found that sexual harassment was much more prevalent than was recognized by the majority—the male majority of the Navy. Sexual harassment makes a good headline, but it’s not surprising that it exists. We
didn’t find a large majority of people molesting males or females. What we found was that our predominantly male organization, one that’s used to going to sea on ships or over the horizon, was insensitive to the forms of sexual harassment and the impact of such improper behavior on the women in their command. There’s no real privacy aboard a ship; everything is open, whether you’re talking about personal functions or daily interactions. In a city or on a military base, if you work for a supervisor and you don’t like that supervisor, when you leave the job—you leave this problem behind. On a ship, you eat, sleep, work, rest, write letters, and go to the head with the same people. You can’t ever get away from them.
We aren’t sensitized enough, and there is too much verbal abuse. A lot of it, I believe, is generated by this lack of sensitivity and awareness that it can become an irritant factor to what is a very quality, top-performing force.
Proceedings: What can the Navy do about this insensitivity?
Edney: You can do a lot of things.
First of all, like other problems we’ve faced, whether it’s race relations or alcohol abuse, the key is awareness.
We want our women to feel they are total participants in the force. The Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Service [DACOWITS] did us a service. Members of this group went out and took a sampling, and were able to identify problem areas. Obviously, the chain of command broke down in several cases. When the committee pointed this out, we took corrective action. We started with the top leadership, with statements from the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations defining what sexual harassment is and asserting that it is not tolerable in our service. Sexual harassment is more than physical abuse, pressuring an individual for favors, or trying to arrange some sort of sexual exchange. We found very little of those types of things. But the constant, uncalled-for remark—verbal harassment—is too prevalent. Just as we did with drug use, we’re going to clearly define sexual harassment and establish a zero toleration for it. We’re going to improve and increase the training on this issue and incorporate it into officer and enlisted accession training, the mid-level training schools, the A and C schools, and the officer training programs for department heads, division officers, and XOs and COs.
Proceedings: This effort would appear to be a function of officer leadership. Edney: We’re talking about changing inappropriate behavior and attitudes. Leadership is key. You talk as if that ought to be an automatic happening, but if I take a young male officer out of NROTC or the Naval Academy and assign him for five years to a submarine, Aegis cruiser, or an F-14 squadron, he will serve five years in a close environment, where women are not present in the wardroom and where there is open give-and-take without sensitivity.
For his first shore duty, I send that individual to the Naval Academy or to a place where he becomes involved with the leadership and interaction of our entire shore establishment, where he can heighten his sensitivities to issues involving women. We should assist him with additional training.
It’s clear that the chain of command, in some cases, does not respond to the needs of the individual. Sometimes, if the chain of command is part of the problem, it’s very difficult for that individual. We are upgrading education in this area for all personnel and improving the awareness of unit leaders to all aspects of this issue. We’re also working to provide an alternate grievance procedure if the chain of command is not responsive. The Waste, Fraud, and Abuse Hotline is available as a sexual abuse hotline. You can call in and identify yourself or you can make a complaint—and it is responded to. It’s very effective. If you call and file a complaint, it will be investigated and pursued by someone outside of the chain of command. Sexual harassment will be a CNO [Chief of Naval Operations! special interest item in command Inspector General inspections.
Proceedings: Won’t the introduction of such great numbers of women to the fleet put great burdens on these women, the CLF ships, crews, and the Navy as a whole?
Edney: We will experience growing pains and adjustments, but it will be gradual and at a measured pace. We have doubled opportunities for women at sea. We have berthing for 6,000 women in ships at sea available now— of which 5,000 are filled—and it will increase by 9,000. We’re going to have to get there in a very gradual, step-bystep process, because we want to do it right.
We’re in a declining budget environment, so you just can’t snap your fingers. To put increased numbers of women on ships, we have to have ship alts [alterations]. Ship alts cost money and they have to be programmed into a normal overhaul maintenance period. We’re in that process right now. We re finding out what ship alts we need, the costs, and when they can be programmed. We also have identified the ships that can take officers now, because it’s much easier to fit officers into the environment. Some ships can handle four to six female officers, and we’re proceeding with that process. Some ships, even before they get a ship alt, can berth as many as 37 women. But that doesn’t mean you ju]t start trickling women into that ship- ^ * a very complex operation, and we wa it to succeed.
We’ve got to start recruiting and developing nontraditional ratings for women. Now we’ve got to go out and say, “Okay, detailers, get me a mixture of 37 women ranging from chief petty officer down through first class, second class, and third class. They can be yeomen, disbursing clerks, and nta' chinist’s mates, but get me a leadership structure that allows those women on board to have a reinforcing support structure.” You don’t just throw them out there without reinforcement.
You also make sure that you get another 37 trained replacements in shore billets, so we can have a rotation. Initially, we plan to introduce a minimum number of women on one CLF ship on the West Coast and one CLF ship on the East Coast. Then we’ll have a learning process from which to determine the proper mix.
Proceedings: Is this going to happen soon?
Edney: Well, the process I have described has already started. As Secretary Webb said when he presented the study, the process is going to take to seven years to complete and we learn and adjust as we go along. 3W selected 12 women at the Naval Acad' emy this year—and they took every one of the opportunities, by the way^ for the new combat logistics force ships. I was recently talking to the chief engineer on the USS Yellowsto"l [AD-41], which is a large destroyer tender, and that chief engineer was a woman officer. She was dynamite. * L operations officer was also a woman- There were seven or eight strong Per'. forming women in that wardroom, an we’ve got them throughout our destroyer and submarine tenders. So we’ve got a cadre of women ready 10 assign. Now there will be a comple16 career opportunity pattern for women surface warfare officers and aviators- They’ll be competing for command 0 those ships, for naval station commands, and other major commands.
ttake
Vou no
balanced, even-handed policies.
single
go
along.
r°ceedings: What about problems as- s°ciated with personal hygiene, pregnancy, and parenting? uney: These are challenges that don’t ^ccessarily concern women exclusively.
e have found that we need to spend ,,l0,c attention to our peoples’ hygiene and health—male and female. We °und that a lot of women are getting Pregnant without intending to or with- .^t thinking through the consequences, though we have training programs, e have to see whether at some point rir>g boot camp or an accession pro- j^arn one becomes saturated. We have evaluate our training programs and ‘^effectiveness.
e don’t have the data on pregnancy SQat We’<J like to have. But my per- w,na opinion is that there is no reason y difficulties associated with preg- taancy cannot be managed in the mili- dis^' ‘^e ot^er hand, it provides tjolnct c‘lahen8es to a military opera- hav ^hen a pregnancy occurs, you e to remove the woman from the jP when the ship gets under way. It’s the a CaSe just rern0V‘nS her from the '^hforce for the last two weeks of e delivery and for four weeks after- w • we must be concerned about the Bee ^ ‘^e an(l lhe mother,
aase of the hazardous sea environ> a pregnant woman must be re- ab . Otherwise, a mother could be a tyUrt* sh'P and able to do her job, but shi ^ Comes along and throws the a P lnto a roll, and she is thrown ti,ainst the bulkhead. It happens all the and you just can’t accept that, shi C ta^e a Prc£nant woman off the S(P’ hut that does not take her off of has Ul^' ^hen she has the child, she aVa'!° hac*c to sea duty if a billet is dut Ut> e' ^ she can’t go back to sea leav'Und care P°r the child, she has to e the Navy, because we have to care *on8er can assume that child n1;irr0r Parenting is associated with shin la®6 anc* a wh°le family relation- ehai|\^'n8ie parenthood is a growing ,°nge for us. We’ve got more male s°,ei Parents than female, so it is not Plex^ 3 ^ema'e issue. h’s very corned r.Unt‘ *t ties in to child-care centers Vou ami|y service centers, and how sistaProv'de the education and the as- pronce- ^hese are expensive, complex meaams- We’re going to have a docu- We (earning process and learn as recrJe^'"8s: How does all this affect ^dn 'tln^ anc‘ assigning women? tv0mey: "Phc 17, 18, and 19-year-old reeran n°t the college-educated ca- tvoman—joins the Navy for the same reasons that a man joins, which are varied. Some join it to get away from home, for a change of pace; some join it for the excitement of going over the horizon and having new experiences; some join it for the education. Generally, the women will come in and seek a traditional occupation specialty, so they’ll want to be personnelmen, yeomen, or disbursing clerks. We’ve discovered that if you saturate these ratings and let them qualify for advancement, they will advance, but you can’t put them on ships in the combat environment, so you get a maladjustment of assignments that affects male sea-shore rotation. An inventory-skill mismatch results. We have to control those.
Because of the expansion, we’re going to recruit to requirements, which is what we do everywhere else. We’re going to determine how many women we need to meet the noncombat assignments at sea and ashore. When we fill those, we’re going to say to the next woman that walks in, “I’m sorry, we don’t have any more opportunities.” In the past they said, “Well, just take me aboard, and I’ll wait for an opportunity to open up.” The problem is that an opportunity doesn't open up, and that becomes a problem because now you have a very bright individual who has no upward mobility, and she becomes frustrated. Frustrated females are the same as frustrated males. Frustrated people become problems. What you want is an active person who can see an avenue to get ahead, so they spend their time advancing and being part of the productive team. Idle hands get into troubled waters.
So we’re going to start recruiting to nontraditional ratings, and 1 think we can do it if we get smarter. We can go to vocational schools and recruit women who want to be machinist’s mates. We can recruit women who want to be electricians. When they come in the Navy, it will be truth in advertising. We’ll say, “We are recruiting you to be a boiler technician.”
Now, a lot of young men don’t know what it means to be a boiler technician, and when they get in there, they find out and say, “I didn’t know it was like this, and I don’t want to be a boiler technician.” But the women, just like the men, won’t be able to say, “I don’t want to do this.” We will say, “We told you this is what we needed. I’m sorry that you didn’t like the rating, but just like the men, we’re going to expect you to perform in that rating. When your enlistment is up, if we’re not able to challenge you to stay in the Navy, then you’ll leave the
Navy and do something else.”
It has to be understood there wasn’t any arm-twisting in this process. Our report has the support of the warfare commanders. I’m talking about the Assistant Chief of Naval Operations for Surface Warfare, the Assistant Chief of Naval Operations for Air Warfare, the Assistant Chief of Naval Operations for Personnel and Management, the Chief of Naval Operations, and the fleet CinCs. So nobody is out there saying, “My Lord, this is being forced on us by some pressure group from the outside.” It’s being done because it’s the right thing to do.
Considering the demographics this country will face in the next ten years, we can’t do this operation without the contribution that our women are making today. And by the turn of the next century, unless we utilize their considerable talents more fully, we won’t be able to do the mission. So we’re going in the right direction.
It’s going to take time. You can’t be a commanding officer or an executive officer of a ship because we’ve opened up an opportunity and you think you’d like to do that. You have to pay your dues. You have to be an engineer department head. You have to be an operations department head. You have to be a division officer. You have to have the respect and credibility of the sailor on the deckplate. Believe me, a chief engineer—man or woman—who has taken an engineering plant through an operational propulsion examining board and passed has got credibility. I recently talked to two women who have done that. There’s no question that they can go out and lead and earn the respect of male or female.
Proceedings: As more women enter the fleet, the potential for fraternization problems will increase. What is the Navy doing about this?
Edney: Fraternization is a complex problem in many respects. It basically involves an inappropriate military senior-subordinate relationship that adversely affects good order and discipline. The Navy is preparing a policy directive to define fraternization better and to identify required training. Obviously, no definition will cover all of the many ways such behavior could be manifested. This is where the judgment of the CO comes into play. There is a need to improve our efforts to increase awareness regarding this issue. We will pursue this requirement as part of our overall training initiatives.