CIA CAREER SERVICE BOARD

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-01826R000500110001-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 23
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 28, 2001
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: October 22, 1953
• Content Type: MIN

ApprovedZorRekwe2002/ A-RDP80-04436ROOV0110001-8
,prit,
Informatica
'HAL
OGC Has Reviewed
CIA CAREER SERVICE BOARD
11th Meeting
Thursday, 22 October 1953
4:00 p.m.
DCI 's Conference Room
Administration Building
Approved For Release 200
DOC
NO CHAN CLASS 0
CLASS. CH ,NCED TO:
0 DECLAISSIF
NEXT REVIEW DATE:
11.78.4
DATE " 19811 REVIEWERt 02
NO.
" Approved For Release 2002/ P80-0411,26R00Q490110001-8
Security Information
*OGC Has Reviewed*
In Attendance:
CIA CAREER SERVICE BOARD
11th Meeting
Thursday) 22 October 1953
4:00 p.m.
DCI's Conference Room
Administration Building
Lyman B. Kirkpatrick) Chairman
Matthew Baird
Lawrence R. Houston
Huntington Sheldon
Lawrence K. White
ecutive Secretary
cretariat
Reporter
Approved For Release 2002/0 DP80-
Security Information
25X1A9A
25X1A9A
25X1A9A
25X1A9A
ApprovedZorRelwe2002/grigi;DP80-01.8.26ROOQ5p0110001-8
Security Information
GUN Ft DNT1&L
INDEX
Page
1.
2.
Minutes
Legislative Task Force Report - General
Especially definition of Career Service
1
1 - I.
3.
Education Allowances
4
- 9
4.
Retirement System
9
- 17
Also hazardous duty and insurance
5.
Schedule for Future Meetings
17
6.
National Security Medal
17
- 20
CIA Medals and Medal of Freedom delegation
Approved For Release 20
Security Information Fl
IA-RDP80-01826R0005001100 1-8 -
ApprovecUor Relwe 2002/0461PRERDP80-04426ROWW0110001-8
Security Information
. . The 11th Meeting of the CIA Career Service Board convened; at
4:oo p.m., 22 October 1953, in the DCI's Conference Room, Mr. Lyman B. Kirkpatriok
presiding . . .
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Well, gentlemen, we are going to keep to our one hour
schedule so will you come to order, please?
Are there any comments, corrections, etc., to the minutes of the last
meeting?
MR. WHITE: I don't know whether this is a comment or a correction but
regarding paragraph 6 it was not my understanding that we were to discuss this
promotion policy at this meeting. In any case, I have not seen the Staff Study
presented last time, nor have I had time to do anything about it since then. So I
am not prepared to discuss it.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: You would be glad to have that changed to read it will
be brought up at a future meeting? It is so done.
I think prior to moving on to the specific subjects we are going to dis-
cuss today we might take a quick glance at the covering report of the Task Force,
which is dated 9 October.
John, do you have any comments to make on that? I think it is the most
pertinent thing. Actually it is paragraph 3 on page 2 which gets into the philosophy
of career service. As you indicate there, you apparently had a slight difference of
view. 25X1 A9A
I think so, Kirk. I think that is very important. And also,
which is not completely apparent from the way this is worded here, what we had in
mind, we don't recommend legislation at this time but we do ask for specific approv-
al from this Board and from the DCI of these points, in principle, so we can move
forward in planning and approval on these things. We want to make that abundantly
clear. To read this quickly you might get the impression the Task Force dbedn't
recommend any legislation so there's nothing to study. Each of the offices that
have some concern here can be moving forward if we have an agreement in principle.
I want to make that point clear. Other than that I think the report fairly speaks
for itself.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: In other words, what you are saying is that you recommend
that the Board consider the recommendations of the Legislative Task Force and pass
on presenting them to the Director as recommendations to be dealt with when it is
practical to do so?
-1 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/09eMige80-01826R000500110001-8
Security Informatt51?
Approvectig.orReNise2002/01/WtiftDP80-01.9e6RON400110001-8
Security Information
25X1A9A
: Right.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Which I think is a fairly reasonable suggestion because
I think we all recognize that there is going to be a time for presenting any such
legislation to the Congress. It may not be the next session.
25X1A9A
That is right. You have already made the point in paragraph
3 that there may be a lot of debate, which I think this Board has to come to grips
with sooner or later, and probably the sooner the better, because some of the con-
cepts in this are inherent in what the Career Boards are doing today, plus how we
approach some of our legislative recommendations.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: My personal reaction is that the first statement made
on page 2 is the correct description of the career service.
25X1A9A
That is that statement in paragraph 3, Kirk?
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Yes. 25X1A9A
IMM1 May I have that again?
MR. KIRKPATRICK: It's page 2 of the covering memo. In paragraph 3 there
are two indented paragraphs, both of which are, in general terms, a description of
the career service, and it is my view that the first of those two better describes
the career service as I see it.
MR. BAIRD: You think it must be one or the other and not one and some of
the other? Is there anything objectionable, for instance, in the second one?
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Nothing objectionable but it just doesn't go far
enough.
MR. BAIRD: I was wondering whether it must be "and/or" or whether you
think one covers everything you want to say. That paragraph doesn't specifically
say anything about eliminating from the service, in an equitable manner, those who
fail to perform as effective nesters of the Agency. 25X1A9A
I don't think that ought to be in there. When you are speak-
ing of a career service all of your statements should be on the constructive side.
There should be no negative elements at all. 25X1A9A
On that point, General Smith specifically asked that it be
in.
25X1A9A
The first is a statement of career service and the other
one is a statement of the program.
That is the fine difference.
2 -
_
Approved For Release 2002/01/09 10001-8
Security Information
25X1A9A
? ApprovecLipor Relose 2002/01/09,*P80-04,826R00400110001-8
Security Informatiori
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Is there any violent objection to the first paragraph
as a statement of career service?
MR. SHELDON: Isn't it subject to a good deal of interpretation? What
do we mean by "extensively trained"? If you are going to pull this thing apart
in detail you have a lot of words to consider. In other words, can somebody not
become part of the career service unless he has been extensively trained? And if
so what is "extensively trained"?
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I would say that certainly some of the words in it could
be subject to question, but the general concept is what we mean.
MR. SHELDON: The question in my mind, which I think reflects a good deal
of the feeling on the DD/I side, is that if you devise that particular definition
then a force may stem from that definition to certain other acceptabilities of ob-
ligations which, while not spelled out, are inherent in this particular paragraph.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Would you care to be more specific?
MR. SHELDON: I can't at this time but I think you understand what I mean.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: But it seems to me that inherent in here is a slight
divergence of view between the DD/I side and the DD/P side based upon the perhaps
unjustified fear on the DD/I side that acceptance of that statement would automatical-
ly require, perforce, that everybody accept overseas assignments. Isn't that really
what we are skirting around?
MR. SHELDON: I wouldn't say that, no, because a lot of DD/I people would
love to have foreign assignments and can't have them. I don't think the question
of overseas assignments is the issue at all.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I think it boils down fairly simply to a feeling that
in a service like this--and admittedly we are one that encompasses everything which
is unusual--that there should be a requirement to do what the service requests in
order to obtain in return the benefits of a career service.
MR. SHELDON: I don't think anybody objects to that.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: If that is acceptable I don't see any point of
contention.
MR. SHELDON: It's a question of language.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I would recommend, then, that we not worry about the
language immediately.
MR. SHELDON: If you buy this you buy language. Perhaps it would be
- 3 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/0iittlintr80-01826R000500110001-8
Security Informatfort
ApprovecturArRelqape2002/01/0519MW80-048526R0044p0110001-8
Security InformatTon
1-
possible to attempt to redraft this in terms which would be acceptable to all
!concerned.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I think that probably would be a fairly beneficial oper-
ation because apparently the Legislative Task Force did find itself split.
MR. SHELDON: You probably had the same problem in the Task Force.
25X1A9A
Yes, the Task Force had both Kirk's problem and your problem.
MR. SHELDON: And this is so far the best language compromise?
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Apparently it isn't the best language.
MR. SHELDON: Maybe a compromise in the language could be worked out that
would really be satisfactory to both, some incorporation, without in any sense taking
the steam out of the service aspect, which is inherent in any career program.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Well, rather than hang on this suppose we pass this
25X1A9A
point and I'll ask to draft an across-the-board, acceptable version of
this, and get your concurrence as well as that of the rest of the Board.
Are you making me expendable, Kirk? (Laughter) 25X1A9A
Could I have some help on this, Kirk? Could I co-op somebody?
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Mr. Sheldon certainly mould be willing to expend an
individual for cooperation with you on it. 25X1A9A
: I think that since we have the tab on Obligations to discuss
two weeks from today, that that discussion might help us in the actual language.
After that discussion has taken place we can perhaps come up with a language that
is acceptable to everybody. But I don't mean that we will delay working on this
for two weeks.
MR, KIRKPATRICK: My only suggestion is that we get a statement that is
acceptable across-the-board, because it would provide a better point of departure
for any point of discussion. I have the Task Force paper on desk now, which I
have chewed up a bit. But that will be the next major item before the Board, and
unless we have this established before you get that why it's putting the cart before
Lthe horse.
Shall we go to Tab CI Allowances to Agency Officers and Employees for
Education of Minor Dependents. Now it has been brought to my attention that in
certain instances this has been done under existing Regulations, is that correct?
MR. WHITE: That is correct. As a matter of fact, the Agency policy at
the moment is that while we have no general legal authority to pay for schooling
- 4 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/2SiQOMP80-01826R000500110001-8
Security information
Approvesor Reles?se 2002/01rettbP80-01026R00(400110001-8
Security Information
/0?' minor dependent children it may be done under two circumstances. One is where
it is necessary for the man to live his cover, to over-simplify it, and the other
is where you can put it on the basis that if the Director did not authorize such
payment it would be impossible to operate in an area because he couldn't get anybody
25X1A
to go there. Now that, very simply, is the basis on which we have approved some
MR. KIRKPATRICK: That, however, I don't think should in any way lessen
the impact of this.
MR. WHITE: No, it's just an emergency measure, really, to take care of
some rather difficult situations.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Is there any disagreement with either the discussion or
the recommendations?
MR. SHELDON: I have one point to raise which arises from George Carey's
comments with me. I attempted to get all of the views of the various AD's and the
DD/I before appearing here, and he raises the point that can consideration be given
for equivalent benefits for "foreign National employees"? In other words, he recog-
nizes that in any one of his tightly knit little organizations there can be salary
differentials and benefits that are very likely to cause friction between the
Nationals which he employs and our own U. S. employees. Has that not been considered
in any of it?
25X1A It was considered at all as far as I can see, off-hand, in
this paper. It wasn't limited to citizens, though.
MR. SHELDON: Would that have any legal barriers to that aspect of broaden-
ing the grant?
- 5 -
Approved For Release 2002/01L09 : P80431826R000500110001-8
becurity In ormatroft
ApproveduporRelqape2002/01/41WODP80-04026RONAP0110001-8
Security Informatiort
MR. HOUSTON: No. You might have a little more trouble if you tried to
[justify that alone, but as to leaving the legislation available for that purpose I
don't think there is any problem. This is designed to do it for career employees,
who normally would be citizens, but if we make it all-inclusive we could handle that
by internal action.
MR. SHELDON: That is my only comment.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I wonder haw wide that would open the door, because
rwouldn't we then be getting into the position where the Congress would inquire whether
: that would establish a precedent where civilian employees of the Army, for example,
, overseas, could make a similar claim?
MR. WHITE: State Department has a large number of indigenous personnel.
They are prohibited by law from paying it for American 25X1A9A
Nationals so naturally they don't for foreigners.
MR. KIREPATRICK: John, did the Task Force get into any of the reasons why
State does not have this?
25X1A9A
Generally because they haven't been able to get it. They
tried twice, specifically, that I know of and haven't been able to make the grade
yet.
There is a Bureau of the Budget Task Force working on it.
25X1A9A
Defense is the only Agency that has it.
They have it by providing a facility, not money. They pro-
vide a school and teachers.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Do U. S. citizens who are employees of the Department
of the Army, for example, are their children allowed to go to these Army schools
overseas or do they have to pay the same way ours do? U. S. citizens, civilian
employees of the Army, for example in Tokyo?
MR. WHITE: They go free, yes. I would suggest that Larry's problem is
25X1A a little different. You take for instance, those are for the25xiA
most part not locally hired people. They are people that have been hired in a lot
25X1A of different places, Most of them
are not native indigenous people, and so you do have the same problem there, really,
of giving somebody who has dependent children some incentive to come. Now on
25X1A
25X1A They are people who have come from their own
- 6 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/41W3P80-01826R000500110001-8
Security informatioft
ApproverReleape2062WIRRIA-RDP80-011026R00444500110001-8
Security Information
\- countries. I think be has a real problem there which is a little different.
i MR. KIRKPATRICK: Isn't the obvious answer, then, to try in the legislation
i
1
Ito get permission for CIA to do it for its employees?
MR. HOUSTON: And control it administratively.
i ould this include college education? 25X1A9A
No, with a highschool cut-off. That is the basis on which
the Bureau of the Budget Task Force is working.
MR. WHITE: I think it would be very unwise to make any proposal for Any-
thing more than highschool to Congress.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: You are right. 25X1A9A
The Task Force certainly thought so and was unanimous on that.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Any further discussion of this?
On page 5 of the covering memorandum, paragraph c, it is
not quite in line with the recommendations in Tab C. It says that the Office of
the General Counsel should be requested to follow legislative proposals being studied
in the Bureau of the Budget and report to the Career Service Board any developments
which would indicate desirability of a different approach on this problem. This
was not included in the recommendation in Tab CI and I prefer the one I have just
read. In Tab C they recommend that the Office of General Counsel be requested to
draft appropriate legislation and that the DD/A be requested to assume over-all
responsibility for action. Do we want to follow the Bureau of the Budget effort in
this regard and see whether the approach in Tab C is what we want?
MR. HOUSTON: What we want to do is draft the legislation and hold it,
and see if the Bureau of the Budget legislation is okay.
25X1A9A
The Bureau of the Budget's preliminary draft applies to
25X1A9A
American citizens.
25X1A9A
It would cover us now.
It specifically says "citizens" and, consequently, if we
want to broaden this to include employees without any restriction as to citizen-
ship, we would have a problem. 25X1A9A
I don't think they are inconsistent. I think they might be
overlapping. The point is well taken. In a sense we approve both the Tab and the
recommendation in the over-all report.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Any dissension from that view?
- 7 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/09 ? 80-01826R000500110001-8
Security Information
Approved,,,PorRelease2002/01560FORDP80-01.86R004480110001-8
Security Information
MR. WHITE: I might interject here that there is a Task Force which is
being spearheaded by the State Department--the Kaplan Committee--primarily to try
to draft a personnel management program for all overseas personnel, for FOA, State,
etc. They had us thrown into the hopper, too, but we requested that we be thrown
out of the hopper as far as their correspondence with the Civil Service Commission
is concerned. But we have arranged for our Personnel people to sit in on all of
the deliberations that Committee goes through so we will be able to know all the
time exactly what their thinking is and be able to make some recommendations as to
whether we should or should not get in on a specific thing. And I think this prin-
ciple would be served through that mechanism.
MR. HOUSTON: There is one practical question: whenever you go for legis-
lation you are required to accompany your suggestion with an estimate of the in-
creased cost because of the legislation. Should we be working on some sort of an
estimate?
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I would recommend you hold that until we have the
legislative package put together because it might result in an economy of effort.
Actually, I think at the time we present these to the Director he may raise the
same question.
MR. HOUSTON: We may be required to do that even if we ride on the Bureau
of the Budget.
nitude?
At present does that look like a budgetary item of any mag-
25X1A9A
No.
MR. WHITE: I wouldn't think so. I would say less than half a million,
as an off-hand guess.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I think that would be high.
25X1A9A
I'm setting it at that magnitude but I think it is a little
high, yes.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Then I assume it is the will of the Board that this
Tab be approved for presentation to the Director at the appropriate time, and it
is my assumption that you would want to have all of this presented to the Director
in one package. I think he would prefer it that way.
MR. SHELDON: That is, with the consideration of including on an employee
basis or Nationals.
- 8 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/09 : 80-01826R000500110001-8
Security Information
25X1A9A
ApprovedurporRelsiese2002/01/015Etlitipp80-0*66R004$00110001-8
Security Information
It should accept the indigenous employees, however.
MR KIRKPATRICK: That is an administrative decision after we get the
We ought not miss that.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Tab D is "Liberalized Retirement System for CIA
Employees."
John, do you have some comment on a voluntary retirement fund?
: Colonel White?
25X1A9A
MR. WRITE: I have two papers here, and because one of them comes from
the Director of Security I think it would be best if I just read it, because it is
a dissent from this paper and perhaps should be incorporated into the record.
. . . The above-mentioned paper from the Director of Security was then
read into the record by Mr. White and is appended hereto as Tab A . . .
- 9 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/41a1P80-01826R000500110001-8
Security Information
Approvecl,,Fpor Relupe 2002/gifireliliarRDP80-0118e26R00400110001-8
Security Informatied
MR. WHITE: I'm not going to read this other paper, but the Personnel
Office has explored this--I think not too deeply--and has written a paper here in
which they try to make some comparison between what Foreign Service people get, how
much FBI gets, and how much you would have to put in in order to bring such a system
about. I think I can sum it up, Rud, by saying that you conclude we would certainly
have to do much more extensive research to find out whether or not it is feasible
from a security standpoint.
This is addressed to the IG and concerns allowing people
to make voluntary contributions.
MR. BAIRD: Matched by the Agency?
MR. KIRKPATRICK: You couldn't match it by the Agency without legislation.
MR. BAIRD: I wondered whether that was in the paper.
MR. WHITE: Not in the Personnel Office paper. But who contributes it?
41111111111 The individual. 25X1A9A
MR. WHITE: But I think their proposal is that the DCI would contribute it.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Your contribution would be much more profitable if you
contribute to an insurance policy than if you contribute to a retirement fund. 25X1A9A
That is the whole approach we have taken, and the Security
Advisor to the Insurance Task Force is prepared to brief the actuaries who will be
on duty within three weeks to explore this problem of hazardous duty. That is why
we have the Insurance Task Force. This Board agreed we would attempt to solve the
hazardous duty problem through insurance rather than through hazardous duty pay or
retirement.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I'd like to address myself to Colonel Edwards' paper
first. I think he has a point there that by the phraseology of making this ex-
clusively apply, in certain terms, to overseas that perhaps hazardous or hardship
activities within the teritorial or domestic limits of the United States have been
excluded. From a practical political expediency I can't think of anything more
fatal than putting that in legislation affecting the CIA , because the whole tenor
of the Congress is that we operate outside the limits of the United States, and if
we put in our Bill something about hardship posts within the United States, why I
would hesitate to want to be around at such time.
MR. HOUSTON: Possibly you could state the authority broadly enough with-
out raising the question, because--and, John, you can check me on this--but these
25X1A9A
- 10 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/041MS.80-01826R000500110001-8
Security Informatiow
ApprovedarporRelgese 2002/01/09 : CIA-RDP80-01166RON,500110001-8
Security Information'
people working in the United States, unless they can certify that they expect to
be sent overseas, are not even entitled to take up WAEPA Insurance, for example.
Not now. It has been broadened. 25X1A9A
MR. HOUSTON: On the other hand, they have one benefit pcople abroad are
not entitled to that comes up in flying on the regular flights. In this country
there might be some entitlement in certain circumstances, to a claim which might
not arise overseas.
25X1A9A
The Insurance Task Force is going to take up that whole
problem of non-scheduled flights and handle it from an insurance point of view.
MR. WEILL: It seems that Shef's paper hinges around whether you want to
consider a liberalized retirement system and hazardous duty in the same package
or whether you are going to treat them differently. What he is talking about, really,
is hazardous duty. If we are going to treat them separately I think that is the
answer to the problem. I am certainly sympathetic to the problem. I think it is
perfectly ridiculous that they are asked to take the risk they do under conditions
which wipe out V* thousand dollars worth of insurance to their families if they
get knocked off. I think it's a serious problem. 25X1A9A
But I do think, as you do, Red, the question of hazardous
duty should be regarded in and of itself, but I don't think we should confuse it
with retirement, which is a quite different thing. Granted that in weighing your
retirement benefits there may be certain things that should be put in the hopper
on one side or the other, but the issue itself, that the retirement ought to be
liberalized, shouldn't be tied down to where a guy serves or anything else, I think,
because if we hang it on hazardous duty it is only going to apply, really, to a
small segment of the Organization.
MR. BAIRD: That is the reason I did not dissent from this. My under-
standing was that career-wise the hazardous duty aspects of the state-side assign-
ments would be covered by some other facet of career benefit than career retirement.
That is the way we are proceeding at the moment. 25X1A9A
MR. BAIRD: If that should not take place then I would dissent from
this paper on this basis.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I think we all recognize the practical aspect of the
timing of when it should be put up.
MR. WHITE: Then if the Board feels that this paper is alright, before
- 11 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/M131M0,80-01826R000500110001-8
Security Informaticiff
Approved?EforRelease2002/ftft-RDP80-01166R004400110001-8
Security Information
final approval of the Director is asked, isn't it reasonable to say let's look at
this and our hazardous duty proposal at the same time?
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I think that is perfectly acceptable. I think the
question now is whether to accept this as the liberalized retirement paper, with
the assumption that hazardous duty, wherever performed, will be considered later.
MR. BAIRD: You don't feel that it is the nature of the assignment over-
seas? I just wondered. I might phrase it a little differently by saying we lose
a number of clerical employees because they say they have been recruited to go
overseas. I wonder whether their retirement benefit based on the type of assign-
ment they have overseas, is the sane or should be the same as a man or a girl whose
duties are quite different. That brings you back to the description of the duties
rather than blanket overseas duty. 25X1A9A
The blanket overseas retirement benefit in the Foreign
Service is based on duty overseas, and it doesn't matter whether a man is living
at an unhealthful post or living in London.
MR. BAIRD: I am assuming the Task Force took that into consideration.25X1A9A
You can make all the vases you want for a guy serving in
25X1A6A
having it a lot more uncomfortable but haw do you work this out in degree or
formulas. You just plain can't.
: We gave up on that and used some yardstick actually far 25X1A9A
less liberal than the Foreign Service approach. Again, we say ours is good and
we take a less liberal approach than they do.
Isn't it about half way between Civil Service and the 25X1A9A
Foreign Service? 25X1A9A
If a man serves half his time abroad it would work out that
way. We took a combination of a man in career service where one man might be im
25X1A6A
and he might be in but over his career it will evAlize, the good with
25X1A6A
the bad.
MR. SHELDON: Why did you elect to vary from the Foreign Service program?
What is the matter with the Foreign Service program?
25X1A9A
It was too liberal.
MR. SHELDON: If they got it why wouldn't it be feasible for us to get it?
That was our approach. 25X1A9A
The history of the past several years has indicated that
- 12 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/09 ? - 80-01826R000500110001-8
Security informatroN
Approveclor ReIsta,se 2002/01/041666401M0-01166R00000110001-8
Security Information
if either the FBI or the Foreign Service tried to get what they now have, they would
get turned down flat without even a full hearing; in other words, they are lucky to
have what they have. This has been going on for a long time and the opinion is that
- no one could possibly get what the FBI and the Foreign Service have now. That is
, my interpretation. 25X1A9A
There is one other important thing in here, too, that had a
bearing on this thing, and that is the question that Foreign Service people who get
ithis liberalized retirement don't get post differentials while abroad, and we don't
, want to get that same benefit. We felt it was more desirable to keep this post
differential.
MR. HOUSTON: It's the old problem, you can't equalize in all respects
what you think you can justify.
25X1A9A
I wondered if it makes much sense to lean heavily on the at-
mosphere in Congress these days. It's like the young Lieutenant was told: "The
Colonel is in a bad mood this morning so don't talk to him on an important matter."
It seems to me we all ought to address ourselves to what we think is right. 25X1A9A
Obviously we are all influenced by our opinions of what might
happen, but we tried conscientiously to do what is desirable here rather than think-
ing of what we might get hit over the head on. 25X1A9A
I think the best answer you made, John, was that the differ-
ential does provide some part of this--that the post differential does provide some
part of the monetary recompense.
MR. SHELDON: I think that is the pertinent facet.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Dick, to carry further what you said, I think our
assumption must be that we are going to present this to the Congress at the earliest
opportunity, and we can examine that system very practically when the moment arises
by seeing whether the influential Senators and Members of the House give us an in-
dication we will get it through, because we need this and if we want to establish
a career service I have every indication that our people feel they must have a
reasonable assurance from this Board that we are making an effort to get them the
benefits to that career.
25X1A9A
And what is much worse is to go back to Congress to get it
liberalized once it has been firmed up. That is the tough one.
MR. SHELDON: May I address myself to what I consider the nub of this
-13-
Approved For Release 2002/01/0480-01826R000500110001-8
Security Informatiort
Approved.PorReleue2002/01/0~5P80-045NR000400110001-8
Security Information
whole problem? AS I see it, it is this: We have talked about trying to find a
definition of career service which would fit anybody in the Agency regardless of
where they are allocated. To buy any of those definitions which are sound is going
to require a certain obligation. That is inherent. When any individual buys an
obligation he expects, in some instances, at least, in some measure a quid pro quo.
Now as I have read through all of these tabs and looked at the problem--I trust,
lobjectively--the only place largely speaking, where a DD/I individual might expect
Ito have some kind of balance and benefit would be with respect to retirement. As
read the proposals with respect to retirement they do not, since they deal largely
'with overseas service, meet what I think would be a fair plus on the part of a DD/I
individual in terns of what is now proposed as the obligations which he would be
,asked to meet in signing up with the career service program. For my money, that is
,the nub of the problem.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: What would you recommend as being required to satisfy
DD/I employees?
MR. SHELDON: We were thinking in terms of the Foreign Service program.
There is a provision in there, if I understand it correctly, where at the age of 501
under certain circumstances, after 20 years' service you can cash in your suit and
get, I think it's two per cent per year, and you go on from there. Now that type
of thing would, I think, be attractive and acceptable. Whereas under these circum-
stances here, since practically no overseas duty, on the average, is going to be
available to DD/I people, you in effect stand pat on the Civil Service rights. That
is the way I see this whole problem.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: What are your views on this, John? 25X1A9A
I can answer that in one way, for the moment, Kirk. Be
brought in the question of obligations so I assume he is referring to those in
addition to the one about overseas service. It seemed to some of us that in connection
with retirement that is true and if he accepts that obligation he should get a
quid pro quo. Well, he gets that benefit when the obligation is taken up and he
has been asked to go overseas, so when he has served then he gets the benefit, not
just for taking the obligation but he gets it when he performs.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: What you are saying there is that the fact that probably
the majority of DD/I employees will never get requested to go overseas, that would
in effect penalize them ultimately on their retirement.
- 14 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/09 igitilliW0-01826R000500110001-8
Security Information'
Approved,g.or Re!Nue 2002/01/09 atilig 80-0141/6R000?90110001-8
Security Informatiott
MR. HOUSTON: If you are equating to Foreign Service, to qualify for
Foreign Service they have to take overseas tours of duty.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: We are very apt to get a rider put in this particular
Bill that nobody will serve more than four years in the United States.
25X1A9A
You have this mandatory provision in the Foreign Service
:which I don't think we want to touch.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I think we have to look at this from the practical stand-
point that if we go to Congress for all icing, and the cake, we are going to get a
few nuts put into the cake, too. We are going to get restrictions on this as well
as benefits.
MR. SHELDON: What I am trying to do is find some pattern throughout here--
and it may be possible to do--that has equal rights and the opposite of rights for
an over-all intelligence service. Since the DD/P and the DD/I are quite different
in their duties and functions, I'm not sure that it is going to be feasible, but I
think it would be most undesirable to have one set up for certain people and another
set up for others.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I don't think you would get legislation on that basis.
I think the Congress would insist that CIA employees be treated as a whole. 25X1A9A
That, again, was our approach in here. While we recognized
the practical distinctions between DD/I and DD/P, nevertheless this applied equally
to all CIA employees, including the DD/A. They get the benefits for what they serve,
although as a group there may be some differences.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: DD/A from that point of view is sort of the middle man
in this.
MR. BAIRD: What you are worried about is that DD/I employees get very
little more than say the Department of Agriculture employees, but that we do accept
more obligations than the Department of Agriculture people.
MR. SHELDON: It's reconcilable to some point. I'm simply trying to see
if we can come down to a pitch here where there is a little give and take on the
paper so that it's palatable to everybody concerned.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Could you recommend some specific changes on this
particular proposal?
MR. SHELDON: I haven't reached that point yet. I wish I had. 25X1A9A
Is there a provision for temporary duty? What periods of
-15-
Approved For Release 2002/01/00(61WP80-01826R000500110001-8
Security Information'
25X1A9A
ApprovedZorRelease2002/01/0ftl*NP80-0/1166R00861130110001-8
Security Information
foreign duty are contemplated?
We haven't gone into those details yet.
25X1A9A
: Therefore, anybody on temporary duty a month or three months
would get a certain amount of credit. 25X1A9A
At the end of 20 years you total it up and it's cimnilative.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: It would affect some of DD/I's employees but a large
percentage would not be affected.
: It seems to me the difficulty in providing for equal
benefits hinges around the justification for this early retirement. Presumably the
justification is that you suffer by being uprooted and sent overseas and away from
your American community and your children, and don't have quite the opportunities
that you do have here; and therefore you have some wear and tear which justifies an
earlier retirement. Presumably you have suffered to get this. If you don't suffer
it by staying here, presumably you haven't had the wear and tear and are not entitled
to it.
MR. SHELDON: Records indicate there is a terrific demand to serve overseas
and I think the records will show it is not considered a liability.
25X1A9A MR If that is the case then the justification for early re-
tirement won't stand up.
MR. SHELDON: Do we have any facts on that?
MR. BAIRD: I don't know whether it's the point. It seems to me we are
trying to give benefits commensurate with the obligations. You wouldn't quarrel
with the benefits that overseas people get. What you are concerned about is that
the Obligations that the DD/I people give up are or are assumed to be not compensated
. for by benefits.
MR. SHELDON: That is correct.
There is something parallel in the military, at least in
25X1A9A
the Navy. They have an early retirement. An enlisted man can retire at the end of
20 years, and that is an inducement for them to come in because they know they can
come in at a certain age and then they can retire and run a filling station at an
early age. It's an inducement. However, this is an inducement and/or reward for
taking a beating in being out of the country.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Isn't it a practical fact that the Foreign Service and
the CIA both attract people to certain parts of their areas who are interested in
- 16 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/080-01826R000500110001-8
Security Informatroll
lc
Approved1gorRelease2002/01/0M*P80-06R0080e0110001-8
Security Informatiori
serving overseas, and just because they are interested in serving overseas and like
to and want to, should that be a factor in not considering a liberalized retirement
system for them?
. There's another factor, too. 25X1A9A
. . Off the record . . .
25X1A9A
There is no such thing as perfect justice but we want to
approach it with the idea of making it as perfect as we can.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Ting, would you be willing to accept this particular
recommendation on its present basis, with the privilege of recalling it later for
emendation after we get through the entire program?
MR. SHELDON: We have to get on with this business, that is the whole
point, and while I'm not prepared today to try to offer some sort of mitigating com-
promise here, I am perfectly willing to buy it subject to its not being finally
binding.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Is that acceptable to everybody else?
MR. BAIRD: Yes.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Any specific changes recommended in this paper? Is it
the view of the Board to approve this paper as submitted, for presentation to the
, Director?
Hear, hear.
25X1A9A
MR. KIRKPATRICK: The last item on the agenda is the new business. Mt.
25X1A9A
suggests that the two subjects to be taken up next week are Tabs A and B,
because Medical Benefits and Death Gratuity seem to go together; then the following
week Tabs F and 0, Restrictions and Obligations, and Tenure, job Security and Re-
duction in Force; then the week after that, Tab E, Personnel Reserve for CIA.
You will send out a Notice to that effect?
Yes.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Any other new business?
I should report to you that both the Director and General Smith have
approved the design of the National Security Medal, and it should be recorded that
General Smith said he thought an excellent job had been done, and that it was a
very good-looking Medal. The design for the Medal has now been taken to the
25X1A9A
-17-
Approved For Release 2002/01/Q9 : 80-01826R000500110001-8
Decurity In ormatiott
Approved.foor Release 2002/01 . DP80-011,NR000?110110001-8
Security Information'
-C-NrEttr711\-r.
Executive Secretary of the National Security Council, which is required in the
Executive Order.
Item 2 is the fact that, as directed by the Board, I raised with the
Director and his Deputies last week the question of the DCI's authority to award
the Medal of Freedom, and whether the Director approved of the system that the
Board had gone over, of the National Security Medal as the top medal, and the Medal
of Freedom as the second, and the silver and bronze medals as two internal CIA
medals. The Director expressed his view as being in favor of that, and particularly
being interested in the ability to award the Medal of Freedom, because it was a Medal
that could be awarded to foreigners, whereas the National Security Medal could not
be awarded to them; and, consequently, it was a valuable Medal for the Director to
have the authority to award. I also raised with him the question of whether he de-
sired to obtain that authority by delegation from one of the Service Secretaries or
whether he preferred the matter be raised once again with the Bureau of the Budget
to get an Executive Order for him to award it directly. He expressed himself as
favoring the latter method. Inquiry was made of General Smith as to Idly he had
specifically asked not to have the Medal of Freedom awarded. We didn't get an answer
to his reasons but we did get his concurrence in the Director's views that he should
get that authority to award it. So I presume that is now in the mill to get the
authority for the Director.
25X1A9A
Mr. Houston is working on it.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: And the Honor Awards Board can be advised the Director
has approved of that system of the National Security Medal, the Medal of Freedom,
and the two internal Medals.
25X1A9A
There is nothing in the Executive Order for the National
Security Medal that prohibits its award to foreigners; in other words, it is per-
missive.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: The view expressed in the Director's meeting was to the
effect that here was the top intelligence Medal, and generally speaking we would
not award it to foreigners but would save it for top level American performance.
MR. HOUSTON: Although General Smith specifically wanted it available
to foreigners.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: General Cdbell raised the point that he would like to
see one Medal restricted exclusively for valorous service, and it was generally
Approved For Release 2002/01/OVAIRIgir
8?-?TniVrer OrNTIAr
Security Information
Approved4orReleove 2002/01/0
eciirity In ormat 01-OINKS ROO 4001 1 0001 -8
..00CAIFFF1 1-4[44+100...
agreed that the internal silver medal would be more or less considered as the
medal for valor in action, and the bronze medal for meritorious service.
MR. SHELDON: May I raise two questions, Kirk? The first one is that
the last paper I read from the Honor Awards Board was to the effect that the Medal
of Freedom was equivalent to a Bronze Star. Now can one change that simply by
the Director's dictum?
25X1A9A MR. Not the Medal of Freedom. You can't change the relation-
ship of the Medal of Freedom to the Bronze Star.
MR. SHELDON: It's in the National ladder. The question is whether you
want to put your internal medals on a different level or not, and it seems to me
that is an unresolved point.
25X1A9A
The Honor Awards Board recommended that the sequence or
) hierarchy of medals be that the National Security Medal be the equivalent of the
DSM; that the No. 1 CIA Medal, whether silver or what have you, be the equivalent
of the Silver Star for gallantry or meritorious service--I don't remember exactly
'what it's for; and the No. 3 in the hierarchy being the second CIA Medal, presumably
the bronze one, which would be the equivalent of the Bronze Star and the equivalent
of the Medal of Freedom when that was awarded to foreigners. In other words, at
the lowest level are three that are all the same, the CIA Medal, the Medal of Free-
dom and the Bronze Star, and those all rank together but they are awarded in
different circumstances. I don't think we have much choice with respect to the
Medal of Freedom.
MR. SHELDON: That is what I mean. In other words, if it was in the mind
of the Director that he wanted to award the Medal of Freedom to an individual he
would be giving him, in effect, in the National range, the Bronze Star rather than
something which he thought might be ranked higher.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I gather he thought it would rank with something like
the Legion of Merit. He can't decide the hierarchy. 25X1A9A
When the Medal of Freedom is awarded to Americans it is on
a level with the Bronze Star.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: Don't you think the Honor Awards Board should be more
or less advised to stick to the hierarchy that has already been established, rather
than trying to change it?
25X1A9A
Very definitely. That is the way their Staff Study is
- 19 -
Approved For Release 2002/01/090161011K
elit++1161191E6PKI44?
Security Informatiai
ApprovedorRelew 2002/01
Security Information
0-01V6R0004D0110001-8
C NTIDENTIAL
written.
MR. SHELDON: The other question I wanted to raise is that if you allo-
cate any one Medal to valorous duty alone, the individual probably could never
display it. You may be making a decision which is no decision.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I don't say they would definitely never enjoy display-
ing it but they might be prevented from doing so for a few years until the incident
became historical, and in certain instances there might be a permanent enjoiner.
MR. SHELDON: And as it was written by the Honor Awards Board the Silver
Award could be awarded either for valor in the field or for the equivalent of what
one normally would be given for a Legion of Merit job in the Services. If you do
it differently I think you are going to complicate the situation rather than other-
wise, and make your awards problem more difficult than as already arranged by your
Honor Awards Board. 25X1A9A
Could we solve the problem perhaps this way, which is the
way General Smith decided we should solve the National Security Medal, and that is
when the National Security Medal is awarded for valor it will have what is technical-
ly called an "appurtenance", a little "v" or a palm on it, and when it is awarded
for merit it would not. Now the CIA Medals could have the same thing.
MR. SHELDON: That doesn't get away from General Cabell's thesis that
it should be an exclusive award for valor. I simply suggest that it might be review-
ed in the light of practicalities.
MR. KIRKPATRICK: I think the next step is for the Honor Awards Board to
come up with criteria for awarding these Medals.
Is there any further new business? If not, the meeting stands adjourned.
. . . The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p m
20
Approved For Release 2002/01/09 P80-0
Security Information