ED 042 873

TITLE

INSTITUTIONPUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FRCM

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

DOCUMENT RESUME

VT 007 815

Transferring Military Experience to Civilian Jobs. AStudy of Selected Air Force Veterans.Manpower/Automation Research Monograph No. 8.Manpower Administration (DOL) , 'Washington, D.C.Oct 6838p.Manpower Administration, U.S. Department of Labor,14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,Washington, D.C. 20210

EDRS Price MF-$0.25 BC-$2.00Career. Planning, *Job Skills, *Military Training,*Occupational Surveys, Professional Occupations,Profile Evaluation, Questionnaires, SemiskilledOccupations, Technical Occupations, *Transfer ofTraining

ABSTRACTWhile most servicemen have no trouble finding

employment in the current booming job market, they often findthemselves taking jobs beneath their highest skill levels, a loss notonly to them but to their employers. Those whose military service wasin non-technical jobs often can find jobs only at the beginners leveland even those may be hard to come by. This doctoral studyinvestigate& the extent to which military experience contributed tothe qualifications of the civilian applicant and helped him get thejob, and the contribution his skills made to the actual performanceof the job once hired. Of the officers questioned, 64 percent saidthat their military service had helped "somewhat" or "a great deal"while 13 percent felt that it had been )f "no help" or a "hindrance."Of the crafts group of enlisted men, 30 percent reported it had"helped a great deal." Approximately 40 percent of both officers andenlisted men said there was no need for the military training andexperiece in the performance of their jobs. Copies of the fulldissertation upon which this report is based are available as PB 177372 from the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and TechnicalEducation, Springfield, Virginia 22151. (CH)

TRANSFERRING MILITARY.FXPERiENCETO CIVILIANJOBS

Study.of.SeleCited, Air Forv Veteran'

00

O 01.

UNITED STATE3 D EPA fiTM E NT OI LA13011 / II pm% vr Ad in n1st rnt ton

NAN /ALITO1\1 ATION - MON.9(411Alli NO.8.kl)'°4f-t)

00

ttN

CO Manpower/Automation ResearchMonograph No. 8October 1868

O

TRANSFERRING MILITARYEXPERIENCE TO CIVILIAN JOBS ,

A Study of Selected Air Force Veterans

Based on "An Examination of the Transferability of Certain MilitarySkills and Experience to Civilian Occupations," A Thesis Presented to theFaculty of ..he Graduate School of Cornell University for the Degree ofDoctor of Philosophy, by Robert Brooks Richardson, September 1967

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABORWillard Wirtz, Secretary

MANPOWER ADMINISYRAT1ONSionky H. Mittenberg, MellpOWt AdMiniftrOtOf

14t0t0Alriwt 41 Of PIA 00t Aff014a prattait

Of Kt Of lint/4110gtwit DOOM, M MAS att4 Of OAKKA.ICIMAMS AS If43110 PO V 1'41 1,4114014 OR0464WAt044 mammas rt Ponta ofinna 04 OP0410144 111 Art b 00 1401 Mtntik144.f 4014114141 Ottltukt MICE 0$ 100EN04 f0141104 04 004,C4

PREFACE

This is the first summary of a dissertation to be published under theDoctoral Dissertation Grants Program of the Manpower Administration.

That program was established under the 1965 amendments to the Man-power Development and Training Act of 1962, which authorized the De-partment of Labor to give grants for the support of manpower research.As an incentive for scholars in the behavioral sciences to specialize inthe manpower field, this program supports doctoral candidates writingtheir dissertations on manpower topics. Since the first grant was awardedin October 1965, more than 90 doctoral candidates have been givensupport, and 14 have completed and submitted their dissertations.

This publication deals with one of these dissertations which wassingled out because the research findings are significant for manpowerprograms or policies. Similar presentations of other dissertations willbe published from time to time, and periodically brief summaries ofother dissertations will be issued.

The full text of all these dissertations may be purchased free.: theClearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information. (Seep. 87 for a list of those now available and directions for ordering.)Microfilms of most of the dissertations may also be obtained throughUniversity Microfilms, Inc., 800 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan48106.

iii

CONTENTS

Pogo

PREFACE iii

INTRODUCTION 1

THE PROBLEM 3

THE NEWLY DISCHARGED VETERAN: A PROFILE 6

MILITARY TRAINING AND JOBS 7

Training for the Men in the Study 7

Job Success 8

THE EX-SERVICEMAN AS A CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE 9

The Hunt for a Job 9

On the Job .. 10

HOW WELL ARE MILITARY SKILLS BEING TRANS-FERRED TO CIVILIAN OCCUPATIONS? 18

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16

DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE COMPLETION OF THESTUDY 17

APPENDIX 21

The Sample Group 28Limitations of the Study 26Questionnaire 27

DISSERTATIONS PREPARED UNDER RESEARCHGRANTS 87

INTRODUCTION

Until World War II, service in the ArmedForces provided little experience and trainingthat could be carried over into civilian employ-ment, but since then t)'-' onrush of technologyhas transformed our fighting force into a mili-tary machine whose mainstay is the skilledtechnician. As a result, for all services com-bined, the enlisted force requires three me-chanics or technicians for every man in groundcombat, and the number of highly skilled elec-tronics repairmen alone exceeds the number ofinfantrymen (as of 1963).

Because of its increasingly technological na-ture, the military finds it necessary to workclosely with civilian industry in the research,development, and production of its hardware.Armed Forces personnel must therefore be-come familiar with the installation, operation,maintenance, and occasionally the actual man-ufacture of complex systems and equipment.Both sectors thus find themselves using manyof the same or related procedures, techniques,and occupational skills, and since a great ma-jority of the men in the Armed Forces returnto civilian employment, the question arises:Can they transfer their military-acquiredskills and experience to civilian job:

Major Robert B. Richardson, a U.S. AirForce officer for 16 years and recently returnedto active duty, tries to answer this question ina doctoral dissertation entitled "An Examina-tion of the Transferability of Certain MilitarySkills and Experience to Civilian Occupa-tions." This study was undertaken on a grantfrom the Manpower Administration, U.S. De-

partnent of Labor, and completed in Septem-ber FM. Major Richardson confined his studyto a group of Air Force men who had left theservice in 1965 and 1966, after meeting theirminimum service obligationusuelly a 4-yearterm. The study group was made up of two cat-egories of officers: one, of men assigned to sci-entific-engineering duties and the other, to ad-ministrative work; (Ind two categories of en-listed ni,?n: a technical-craftsmen group and anontechnical (military services) group. (Seeappendix for explanation of how and why thestudy group was chosen, and a list of the spe-cific occupational specialties included.)

Using an extensive questionnaire (see ap-pendix), Major Richardson surveyed the prob-lems connected with the men's transition frommilitary service to civilian employmentstart-ing with their preservice background and con-tinuing on through their military experience,postilischarge job hunt, and various aspects ofthe jobs they found. Ills chief interest wasthe degree to which they were able totransfer their military skills and experience.

Ills findings are presented here because theyhelp to fill a large gap in our knowledge ofmanpower and contain some clues to improvingthe way in which we use our manpower re-sources. Like the results of any statisticalstudy, his findings need to be examined fromthe perspective of certain limitations on thescope of the data and the methods of collectingand analyzing them. (These limitations are de-sc r tut i in the appendix.) For example, his study

as ;mit-J. to specified occupational specialties

1

in the Air Force, and the experience of themen in these specialties may not represent theexperience either of other Air Force personnelor of men in other branches of the ArmedForces. Moreover, slime the men in his studyleft the Air Force in 1965 and 1966, their expe-rience would not necessarily parallel the expe-rience of men leaving the serviceeven fromcomparable Air Force jobsin 1968. Today's

2

new veterans might encounter somewhat dif-ferent economic conditions in the communitiesto which they return, and they certainly couldcount on more assistance in readjusting to ci-vilian life if they desired it. Developments inthe latter area since the completion of thestudy are outlined in the last chapter of thismonograph.

rtitern

THE PROBLEM

The recent growth of our Armed Forces au-gurs a corresponding rise in the number ofmen leaving the service. At the time Major Ri-chardson made his study, he estimated the dis-charge rate to be at least a half million a year.Defense Department figures indicate that itwill be 830,000 in 1968; 840,000 in 1969; and970,000 in 1970,

Richardson noted that, despite their num-bers, there was little information about, andinterest in, the employment and other transi-tion problems :If newly discharged ex-service-men. For example, in 1964, the Assistant Sec-retary for Defense (Manpower) indicated to aSenate Committee that the Defense Depart-ment had no comprehensive statistics on thenature of civilian employment for men dis-charged from the service. Research had beenfocused on the problems of the much smallergroup of men retiring from the service after 20or more years.

In view of the many programs to better uti-lite our human resources and manpower, theslight attention given such a large body of menprior to enactment of the Veterans' Readjust-ment l3enefits Act of 1966 is surprising. Notonly did such lack of attention give our man -power planners an incomplete picture and di-minish their effectiveness, but it also was dam-

aging to the men themselves. The economy suf-fered, too.

Some parts of the country have criticalshortages of blue-collar workers which techni-cally trained veterans could undoubtedly fill.Jobs in the higher bracketsadministrative,managerial, scientific, or engineeringforwhich numerous officers could qualify, also gobegging. While most servicemen have no trou-ble finding employment in the current boomingjob market, they often find themselves takingjobs beneath their highest skill levels, a loss notonly to them but to their employers. And onesizable group, those whose military servicewas in nontechnical jobs, often can find jobsonly at the beginner's level, and even thosemsy be hard to come by.

This is the problem to which Richardson ad-dresses himselfa problem that should be ofinterest and concern to labor, management,manpower planners, veterans' organizations,and the growing force of discharged service-men. Still another group should be vitally in-terested, too. Unless the present world politicalclimate improves drastically, a term of mili-tary service will probably continue to figure inthe future of most young American males. Willit be a 2-, 3-, or 4-year hiatus in their careerplans? Or can it be made to serve as part ofthose plans?

8

THE NEWLY DISCHARGED VETERAN: A PROFILE

Following is a composite description ofthe men in Richardson's study group.

The typical enlisted man was about 24, hadgraduated from high school, and may havedone some college work. He had served in theAir Force 4 years and was returning to hishometown after discharge. More often thannot, he was unmarried. Most enlisted menplanned to look for a job as soon as they gothome. Nearly half had worked before g ,inginto service and, if they had a skill, would per-haps go back to their former jobs. Most, how-ever, were students prior to entering serviceand would be seeking their first civilian jobs.Their fathers had usually held blue-collar jobsin processing, bench work, and structural tradework.

The typical officer in Richardson's study wasabout 27. He had completed college before en-tering service and may have done some gradu-ate work. He, too, had served 4 years. He wasmarried and had at least one child. He in-tended to live in the part of the country wherehe was born. Two out of three were studentswith no work experknce when they enteredthe Air Force. More than half had been in theAir Force Reserve Officer Training Corps.'those in the scientific- engineering skills clus-ter had usually majored in physical science orengineering; those in managerial-administra-tive assignments had taken their college workin business, social scielice, humanities, or arts.Their fathers were likely to be employed in themanagerial-administrative, professional-techni-cal, and sales fields; were in the middle or

upper socio-economic bracket; and could usu-ally afford to send their children to college.For both groups of men, the data suggest thatthe father's occupation had some influence onthe career chc&e of the son.

There was a small sampling of nonwhites inthe survey-2.5 percent of the officers and 5percent of the enlisted men, compared with areported enrollment of 1.2 percent and 9.1 per-cent, respectively, for the Air Force as awhole. While their patterns were generally thesame as for the whites, the Negroes tended tobe slightly better educated, especially in theenlisted group, and had pursued their postdis-charge education more assiduously than thewhites.

Most of the men in the study group did notintend to make a career of the Air Force. Theofficers in the group had chosen the Air Forcesimply as the preferred way to meet their mili-tary obligation. Only 25 percent were inter-ested in aviation and only 16 percent hadpicked the Air Force because it offered achance for education and training. Almost halfof the enlisted group, on the other hand, se-lected the Air Force because tt ey felt it wouldprovide a good opportunity to learn a ussbleoccupational skill. Indeed, recruiting promo-tion aimed at high school graduates featuresthe job-training and career opportunities ofthe service. Next to avoiding the draft, thiswas probably their strongest reason for join-ing. An examination of how the Armed Forcestrains and assigns its personnel should revealwhether their expectations were realized.

kt 1 5

MILITARY TRAINING AND JOBS

The defense establishment spends about $8billion a year on education and training. One-third of this amount is spent on technicaltraining for enlisted personnel, given in morethan 2,000 different technical courses, fromauto mechanics to aerospace technology, last-ing from 2 weeks to a year. In 1968, more than870,000 men completed such courses. Educa-tors generally agree that the quality of thetraining, as measured by teaching aids, text-books, teacher preparation, educational re-search, and classroom procedures, compares fa-vorably with that of corresponding civilianschools, even though many of the mechanicaland technical courses are more specialized andnarrower in scope. Because of the limitedtraining time available, the theoretical mate-rial may be curtailed in order to concentrate onthe more immediate aspects of job specialty.

Some of the advanced courses, lasting for ayear or more, are on a par with those offeredin many technical institutes and junior col-leges.

Technical training for officers is organizedon an extensive scale, also. Courses are givenin more than 100 broad occupational fields andin as many as 1,000 specialized areas.

On the basis of numbers of men trained,money spent, and scope, the Armed Forces canbe considered the largest training institution inthe country. The Air Force alone runs fivetechnical schoold, offers up to 8,000 coursesworldwide, h.is 180,000 instructors. Forenlisted men, trairii,g is available in 46 majorcareer fields. In its 20 years of operation, theAL Force has conducted courses for over 7million people.

Training for the Men hi the StudyNew Air Force officers and enlisted men are

usually placed in a training course for the oc-cupational &id to which they have been as-signed. Most of the men In the study group, 60percent of the officers and 78 percent of theenlisted men, reported that they had attendedsuch a course--one directly releted to theirsubsequent occupational specialty in the vastmajority of cases. There was some fallout inthe enlisted group, however, probably becauseof voluntary transfer to another field.

Among the officer group, half of the menwith scientific-engineering academic back-grounds were assigned directly to a job with-out attending a training course, probably be-cause their college training wee considered suf-ficient to handle the job. 'Me same was true oftie officers assigned to administrative duties,since their jobs did not require special train-ing. Among The six career fields represented inthe officer group, the proportion receiving re-lated training ranged from about one-third in

the scientific- engineering and administration-information specialties to three-fifths or morein communications-e:earonics and material-finance. For the officers then, usable trainingcame more from on-the-job experience thanfrom formal courses. Much of it was acquiredduring administrative or managerial tours ofduty, on which they had a chance to handle im-portant projects, substantial numbers of men,and much equipment. As comparatively youngmen, they might not have been given such re-sponsibility in civilian jobs.

Of the enlisted men, those assigned to tech-nical occupations generally attended a trainingcourse : 70 percent in the crafts-firemen spe-cialties and about 85 percent in both misolleelectronics and weapons maintenance. No morethan two-fifths of those with nontechnical as-signments, however, received related training,with the exception of those in aircrew protec-tion. Men assigned as transportation workersor cooks were least apt to receive training.They were probably assigned these jobs be-cause they showed the least aptitude and there-fore needed skill training the most. This wasthe group which, upon separation, found diffi-culty in getting satisfactory jobs because theyhad no marketable skill.

Job SuccessFor the most part, the men's training and

experience did not fulfill their expectations.Their disappointment is evident in some oftheir 'replies to questions about what contrib-uted to success on the job. On their Air Forcejobs, here is how the men rated various fac-tors:

Formal schooling was considered very ormost important to performance of the jobby about 4Q permt of both enlisted men

8

and officers. About 21 percent of the en-listed men in the nontechnical militaryservices rated education of no importance,a reply to be expected from those perform-ing semiskilled jobs.Job knowledge was considered absolutelyessential or very necessary by 85 percentof the enlisted group and by 75 percent ofthe officers.Working welt with others was thought tobe more important by 013 officers, par-ticularly the administrative-managerialgroup, than by the enlisted mena natu-ral reflection of the characteristics oftheir respective jobs.Communicative skillsability to speakand write wellgot the expected high rat-ing from officers, who must use theseskills constantly. The enlisted men at-tached some importance to them, too.Knowing the "politics" of the unit was nothighly valued by either group. The repliesseemed to indicate that the men considereddoing a good job more important thanknowing the right people.Utilization of their skills and abilities didnot bring the USAF a high rating from ei-ther group. Only one-third replied thatthe Air Force used their skills "a greatdeal," while one-fifth of the officers andnearly ol.e-third of the enlisted men said"very little" or "not at all."Administrative ability, understandably,was not regarded as highly by the enlistedmen as by the officers, again reflecting thedifferent duties of the two groups.

From these replies, Richardson concludedthat the factors. for job success in the USAFare not too different from those generally con-sidered as contributors to civilian job success.

THE EX-SERVICEMAN AS A CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE

The Hunt for a JobTo have a job waiting when they got out of

service seemed like a good idea to most of themen-but not all. Almost half of the officersstarted their job hunt 6 months or more beforetheir separation date; another one-fifth, 3 to 6months before. Less than half of the enlistedmen made any plans 3 or more months aheadof the date. Another 15 percent were goingback to the jobs they had before entering serv-ice. A good portion, 29 percent, made no plansat all.

A look at table 1 shows how they went about

finding a job. The officers most frequentlymailed résumés to firms they considered aspossible employers, applied personally, or re-lied on friends for leads. Among the enlistedmen, the principal jobseeking methods werepersonal applications, answering "HelpWanted" advertisements, and asking friendsfor job leads. No more than a third-and inmost instances considerably fewer-of eithergroup used the services of employment agen-cies and similar organizations. The agencymost often used by enlisted men was the StateEmployment Service, whereas officers reliedmost heavily on college placement services andprivate employment agencies.

TABLE 1. METHODS OF SEEKING CIVILIAN JOB(Percent distribution)

Job-seekingmethods, agencies

Officers Enlisted Men

TotalUsed

heavily

Usedsome-what

Nouse

Noresponse Total

Usedheavily

Usedsome-what

Nouse

Noresponse

Veterrns' organizations 100.0 0 .2 93.9 5.9 100.0 .2 3.3 92.6 3.8Religious groups 100.0 1.4 .7 92.0 5.9 100.0 0 1.0 95.5 3.6Labor unions 100.0 0 0 93.6 6.4 100.6 1.4 4.8 90.0 3.8Mailing resumes 100.0 44.3 19.1 30.7 5.9 100.0 9.6 12.9 73.4 4.1Military friends 100.0 2.3 15.9 75.7 6.1 100.0 3.8 9.1 83.3 3.8Other friends 100.0 13.0 28.2 62.3 6.6 100.0 12.7 31.8 51.4 4.1Answering ads 100.0 10.9 23.2 0.0 5.9 100.0 20.1 23.9 52.2 3.8Private employment

services 100.0 8.4 14.3 71.1 6.1 100.0 3.3 5.7 86.8 4.1U.S. Employment Service 100.0 1.6 7.5 84.5 6.4 100.0 6.0 17.2 72.7 4.1College placement offices _ 100.0 9.3 18.9 65.5 6.4 100.0 1.9 1.4 92.6 4.1Personal application 100.0 43.4 23.2 27.0 6.4 100.0 47.1 18.7 30.1 4.1

Note: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding

9

The group did not make much use of profes-sional counseling either. Sixty percent of theofficers and 44 percent of the --ilisted mei didnot believe it was needed. Of those who wantedsuch help, 25 percent of the officers and 38 per-cent of the enlisted men did not get any, how-ever. Sixty-five percent of the enlisted groupand 40 percent of the officers thought thatUSAF preseparation counseling sessions wouldhave been a good idea. Both groups would havewelcomed information on job availability;about half said they needed much more infor-mation than they got.

Would postdischarge. vocational traininghave been of any help in getting a job? Morethan three-fourths of the enlisted men but onlythree-tenths of the officers thought so. As itturned out, about one-fourth of each group didtake some training-the officers mainly in pro-fessional, technical, managerial, and salesfields and, the enlisted men in machine trades,bench work, rod structural work. The surpris-ing finding here was the large number of bothofficers and enlisted men in the technicallyskilled groups who took training.

Why did the skilled groups find additionaltraining necessary? For the officers, most of itconsisted of indoctrination to acquaint themwith company equipment and procedures,which may have involved new application ofold skills. New skills were seldom taught. Theenlisted men generally received training in

new but related skills. For example, an AirForce-trained electronics specialist took a. 6-week course to become a production controlspecialist for a company manufacturing electri-cal and electronics prcducts. Without his mili-tary skill, he could not have qualified that fast.

At the time of the study, the unemploymentrate was quite low and jobs were plentiful.Seventy-five percent of both groups said theyexpected to find jobs easily and did. Even thenonskilled enlisted men had little trouble find-ing employment-probably because they tookthe first jobs available. These were usually inlow-paying service occupations, a relativelyeasy field to enter in good times. Only 20 per-cent of each group, officers and enlisted men,reported any difficulty.

On the JohUpon discharge, 85 percent of the group

went to work and only 15 percent to school, ei-ther full or part time. The small number re-turning to school may be due in part to the hia-tus in veterans' educational benefits betweenJanuary 1965, when the program for Koreanveterans expired, and June 1966, when peace-time veterans became eligible for educationalassistance under the Veterans' ReadjustmentBenefits Act of 1966. Moreover, most of the of-ficers in this study had probably received stu-

TABLE ?. EXPANDED PRIMARY Am FORCE SPECIALTY(Percent

Civilianoccupation

Officers---Expanded Primary Air Force Specialty Code'

Scientific-engineer-

ing

Communi-ration-

electronics

Aircraftmainte-nance

Civilengi-

neeringMaterial-finance

Adminis-tration -informa-

tion Total

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Professional, technical - 71.6 63.8 52.2 85.0 21.6 31.6 48.6

11 anagerial, administrative 16.2 23.4 17.4 10,0 55.0 44.9 33.4

Clerical, sates 5.4 6.4 8.7 12.6 15.3 9.3

Service 4.3 1.8 2.0 1.1

Farming, forestry 1.4 1.1 8.7 .9

ProcessingMachine trades 2.6 .2Bench workStructural work 2.5 .9 1.0 .7

Transportation,miscellaneous 6.4 6.3 8.7 8.1 5.2 5.7

The Air Force Sp.c1alty Code s the classification scheme used to designate the skills and skill levels of Air Force personnel. Each mem-ber is assigned one or more of these codes, denoting his primary, secondary, and other skills. The Skill ranking depends on such factors as

10

1011,1110eleor

dent deferments to complete college before en-tering the service.

Of the officer group, engineers, scientists,and others technically trained found jobs inthose fields, as would be expected. However,from 10 to 25 percent accepted managerial andadministrative positions, thus taking advan-tage of their military experience. Of 20 officersqualified as pilots, only seven took such jobswith commercial airlines. While some of theothers may have been effectively barred by se-niority rules, they were probably able to qual-ify for technical, managerial, or administrativepositions because of their military experiencein those fields.

The enlisted men took a wide variety of jobs,with some concentration in the machine trades,bench work, clerical-sales jobs, and structuralwork.

Table 2 compares the study group's occupa-tions at the time of separation with the civilianjobs held when the study was made.

How stable were the ex-servicemen as civil-ian employees? Did they job-hop? Would theirrecords make them good risks for employers?Richardson found that three-quarters of theofficers had held only one job since they hadleft the service. For the enlisted men, the pic-ture was somewhat different. While 60 percentof the technically trained men had also workedon only ore job, 50 percent of the nonskilled

CODE' VS. CURRENT CIVILIAN OCCUPATIONdistribution)

'. *;.(*Jiiirsoi*O

men had had two or more, a few as many asfive. The figures indicated that the higher theskill, the greater the stability, and also thelower the educational level, the more frequentthe job hopping.

Mwe than 80 percent of the men were satis-fied with their current jobs. Of those interestedin making a change, the officers wanted moreresponsibility, a greater challenge, and moremoney. The enlisted men were looking for moremoney, an opportunity to learn a new skill, andgreater security, in that order.

Most of the officers and enlisted men tookjobs with large companies (over 1,000 em-ployees) engaged in manufacturing, sales, orservice. The jobs were on the lower organha-tional levels of their companies-about thelevel of their service jobs and about whereyoung men of their age would be expected toplace. About 1 out of 8 were in governmentcivil service jobs. Only 3 percent were self-em-ployed.

The average annual income of the officerswas about $10,000; of the enlisted men, about$6,600. (See table 3.) Officers with scientific-engineering background were getting $1,300 ayear more than those who had worked in ad-ministrative jobs. Similarly, enlisted men fromcrafts-technical jobs were earning about $650more than those from the nontechnical mili-tary services. Surprisingly, a majority of the

Enlisted Men-Expanded Primary Air Force Specialty CodeCivilian

occupationMissile

electronics

Weaponsmainte-nance

Craf ts-fire

protec-tion

Transpor-tation-cooks

Serviceoccupa-

tions

Air crewprotec-

tion Total

100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Total19.3 21.3 3.3 7.9 15.7 11.8 12.9 Professional, technical6.1 8.2 2,5 10.6 7.8 8.8 6.2 Managerial, admin.8.8 6.6 15.0 23.7 19.6 23.5 14.1 _ _Clerical, sales1.8 _ 10.8 9.8 8.8 5.5 Service

1.6 2.6 2.9 1.2 Farming, forestry.9 1.6 5.8 3.9 2.9 2.9 Processing

17.5 26.2 27.5 21.1 19.6 14.7 22.0 Machine trades28.9 11.5 6.7 7.9 3.9 5.9 13.2 Bench work8.8 9.8 17.5 7.9 3.9 6.9 10.5 Structural work

7.9 13.1 8.3 21.1 16.7 14.7 11.5Transportation,miscellaneous

extent a training, recency of use, and individual preference. A more detailed listing of the codes comprising the "expanded" codes shownhere is given in the appendix. Note: Detail may not add to totals due to rounding.

11

men in all groups were earning as much as, ormore than, they had expected, including thosein the lowest brackets. This may have reflectedthe steady rise in pay in all sectors of the civil-ian market while the men were in service.

Did the group feel that the factors for suc-cess on civilian jobs were different from thosefor the Air Force? The officers, most of whomwere in professional, technical, and managerialjobs, rated ability to communicate, job knowl-edge, and formal education as more essentialon their civilian jobs than in the Air Force. In-terestingly, administrative skills became lessimportwat in civilian life. The enlisted men,

unlike the officers, gave lower ratings to all ofthese elements of success except formal educa-tion when they compared their civilian withtheir military jobs. Both groups thought suc-cess in their civilian jobs was little affected bysocial skills or knowing the politics of the or-ganization.

While the responses differ slightly fromthose previously given for their Air Forcejobs, they seem to indicate that the factors forjob success in both the military and civiliansectors are similar and the experience in thecne should be helpful in making the change-over to the other.

TABLE 8. REPORTED ANNUAL INCOME FROM ALL SOURCES(Number reporting)

Annual income

Officeis Enlisted Men

Scientificengineering

Admin.istrative

managerialCrafts

1Total technicalMilitaryservices Total

Under $3,000 5 2 7 16 11 27$3,000$4,999 6 6 11 28 23 51$5,000$7,499 21 42 63 168 58 226$7,500$9,999 70 91 161 60 17 77$10,000$14,999 93 46 139 9 8 17$15,000 ar.d over 22 10 32 2 0 2No response 15 12 27 12 6 18Average income $10,480 $9,191 $9,864 $6,800 $6,151 $6,433

In response to another question repeated forcomparison purposes, the group said that civil-ian employers were utilizing their skills andabilities to a greater extent than the Air Force

12

did. Over half of both officers and enlisted menthought they were now being utilized "a greatdeal." Only one-third felt that the Air Forcehad done so.

HOW WELL ARE MILITARY SKILLSBEING TRANSFERRED TO CIVILIAN OCCUPATIONS?

A study cited by Major Richardson foundthat 85 percent of all enlisted men's careerjobs have counterparts in civilian occupations,and at least 1,500 different civilian jobs arerepresented in the hundreds of Armed Forcestraining courses examined during the study.As of 1963, the Defense Department reportsthat skilled occupational fieldselectronics,technical, or mechanics skillscomprisednearly 50 percent of all enlisted men's skills.Only 14 percent of the enlisted force were as-signed to combat duties, for which the skillscould not be transferred. In the Air Force, thatfigure dropped to 9 percent. Officer skills, an-other source indicates, closely resemble thoseof executives and administrators at a similarlevel in civilian industry.

If this is true, how well did the study groupbenefit from the similarity between the mili-tary and civilian occupations? Major Richard-son split this question into two parts:

1. How much does military experience con-tribute to the qualifications of the civilian ap-plicant; that is, help him get the job?

2. Once he is hired, what contribution do hisskills make to the actual performance of thejob?

On the first question, 64 percent of theofficers said that their military service hadhelped "somewhat" or "a great deal," while 13percent felt that it had been of "no help" or a"hindrance." (See table 4.) Of the crafts group

of enlisted men, 30 percent reported that it had"helped a great deal," but in the military serv-ices group, only 15 percent thought so. Al-most half of this latter group said that theirmilitary experience had been of "no help" or a"hindrance," as against 28 percent of the menwith technical specialties.

As for the performance of their civilian;ohs, approximately 40 percent of both the of-ficers and enlisted men said there was no needfor their military training and experience. Inthe enlisted group, half of the nontechnicallytrained men, as would be expected, reported noneed.

On the basis of these and other responses,Major Richardson concluded that skill trans-fers do take place, but on a selective basis. En-listed men with certain technical skills weregenerally able to utilize them in civilian jobs.The picture was less clear for officer3. Maw ofthem, it will be recalled, had been assigned di-rectly to jobs related to their major academicfield without further training. Most of theofficers reported that the principal benefit camefrom the managerial and administrative expe-rience they acquired in those assignments. Forthe scientific-engineering officers, such experi-ence was not always immediately benefici91.When they returned to civilian jobs, usually intheir major fields, they found themselves"somewhat rusty" and behind their civilian co-workers. They did expect to benefit later from

13

their experience as executives. The administra- that their skins had been sharpened by theirtive-managerial group, on the other hand, felt military experience.

TABLE 4. USAF EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING AS QUALIFYING FACTORS FOR CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT(Percent distribution)

bfluence of USAFbackground on

qualification forcivilian work

Officers Enlisted Men

Scientific-engineering

Administrative-managerial Total

Crafts-technical

Militaryservices Total

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Helped great deal 33.8 32.1 33.0 30.2 14.6 25.6Helped somewhat 29.4 32.6 C0.9 22.0 20.3 21.5Helped very little 16.5 16.0 16.4 15.9 13.0 16.1No help 10.0 10.5 10.2 27.1 44.7 32.3Hindrance 3.9 2.4 3.2 .7 3.3 1.4

No response 6.5 6.2 6.4 4.1 4.1 4.1

Note: Detailing may not add to totals due to round;ng.

While transferability of military skills andexperience will undoubtedly continue to in-crease, several barriers are tending to block itsprogress:

1. Differences in job titles and descriptions.In some instances, noticeable gaps exist be-tween military and civilian titles, and, quitefrequently, no direct conversion can be madefrom a military to a civiliar job title. For ex-ample, the Air Force spedalty of munitions/weapons maintenance (res4ly a weapons me-chanic) is enough of a title to misleador even scare off any civilian employer. Onthe face of it, the job appears to have no trans-fembility, yet the technical knowledge re-quired to repair intricate weapons mid be ap-plied to many civilian jobs. Apparently, themechanics themselves did not realize this, for,in answer to one of the survey questions, 49percent reported no- need for their militaryskills. Fortunately, most of them did find jobsin bench work and machine trades. A similarproblem may arise with many other militaryoccupations.

With some job titles, the opposite may betrue. The narrow scope of many of the coursesand specialties may leave the veteran with lim-ited background and experience in his occupa-tional field, which may, by its title, appear tobe similar to a job in civilian industry. For ex-ample, the Air Force has nearly 70 "job lad-clars" in electronics maintenance and the train-ing courses may be geared accordingly.

14

2. Educational attainment. As jobs growmore complex, the need for more education be-comes greater. However, many employers spec-ify a certain level of education as a hiringstandard, without considering whether it isnecessary in the performance of the job beingfilled.

3. The current job market. An oversupply inhis field at the time of discharge will naturallylimit an ex-serviceman's chances of finding em-ployment. For exF nple, the number of aircraftmechanics leaving service in the 1957-63 pe-riod was greater than the number already incivilian industry.

4. Seniority, union rules, other restrictions.To illustrate: In one recent study, it was foundthat numbers of ex-military pilots were unem-ployed because of commercial airline seniorityrules. Qualified, highly experienced fliers wererequired to start on a semi-apprentice basis atcomparatively low pay. Or a Navy electrician'smate may not be familiar with the buildingcode requirements for a particular area andmay be required to start as an apprentice, pos-sibly with some allowance for his military ex-perience.

5. Unwillingness to locate in ar,other -part ofthe country. Many veterans return to theirhometowns, although jobs may '..)e more plenti-ful or pay more in other parts of the country.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Briefly, these are the most significant ofMajor Richardson's findings:

1. The men in his study made the transitionto civilian employment rather easily, probablywith the help of a booming job market. Theydid so with comparatively little use of orga-nized employment services, public or private.The officers generally had the least trouble,probably because of good planning and supe-rior qualifications. The technically trained en-listed men did quite well, too, despite the lackof planning. About 15 percent of the enlistedmenthe nontechnically trained group, gener-ally assigned to military occupations with lim-ited carryover valuehad difficulty. Their ci-vilian jobs were usually in low-paying serviceoccupations.

2. A large percentage of the study group wasdissatisfied with both the training and the waytheir skills and abilities were utilized while inservice. Many of the officers were assigned di-rectly to jobs related to their major academicfields or to administrative duties. They didgain experience, which, in some cases, theywere able to use in civilian jobs. The enlistedmen who receive d technical training had anopportunity-to acquire a marketable skill. Butneither the officers nor the enlisted menthought that the Air Force made much use oftheir skills.

3. When they left the service, the technicallytrained enlisted men generally found benchwork, electrician, machinist, and structuralwork jobs; the others worked in sales, service,

and miscellaneous occupations. The scientificand other technically trained officers generallyreturned to their major fields. Transfer frommilitary skills and experience to civilian occu-pations apparently took place on a selectivebasis snd depended on the skills involved. Themen regarded their education level as a morepotent factor in the job hunt than their mili-tary training and experience.

4. Most of the men did as well as they hadexpected, financially. The average pay for en-listed men was about $6,500; for officers,$10,000. Some, including enlisted men, wereearning $15,000 or more.

5. i3oth officers and men found jobs, for themost p Art, with large companies. The majorityof the men had had only one job since theirdischarge and were satisfied with it. Thehigher the skill and the educational level, thegreater the stability and job satisfaction. Mostof the men felt that their civilian employerswere utilizing their skills better than the AirForce had.

Major Richardson suggests to employers twocriteria in judging a veteran's qualifications:If he is an officer, he probably has a good edu-cational background, backed up by 4 years ormore of military experience, which may in-clude skill in administration or management.If he is an Air Force enlisted man with a Pri-mary Air Force Specialty Code in technicalskills or crafts, he can probably qualify as atechnician, mechanic, or machinist with mini-mal training.

15

A number of his recommendations for Gov-ernment actions, in effect, antic!pated the initi-ation of new programs, as will be seen in thefollowing chapter. His recommendations in.elude:

I. The Department of Defense and the De-partment of Labor should work together on anational program of manpower planningwhich takes into account all discharged serv-icemen. In some job categoriesaircraft me-chanic, for exampleex-servicemen may beable to supply the future needs of the civilianeconomy.

2. The two Departments should also cooper-ate in establishing c'. a permanent basis a pro-gram of employment assistance for all menwho are leaving the service. Special attentionshould be given to those who have had no mili-

16

tary skill training and who have been assignedto military occupations that offer limited car-ryover into civilian jobs.

3. Information on employment opportunitiesin all parts of the country should be madeavailable to new veterans. Men of this agegroup usually have few ties to hold them toone part of the country and might be willing tomigrate to take jobs. Mobility by a group ofthis size might be useful in the job market.

4. The Armed Forces should work togetherwith civilian industries in developing and uti-lizing manpower. As technolor' brings the twosectors closer together, such cooperation can gofar in strengthening the transferability pro-cess. The problem of transferability is impor-tant enough to merit the best efforts of thesetwo major forces in our stational economy.

DEVELOPMENTS SINCETHE COMPLETION OF THE STUDY

Beginning in 1966, both military and civilianauthorities have Ob played an increasingawareness of the proUlem of transferability. Ina message to the Congress on servicemen andveterans on January 30, 1968, President John-son summarized what had been done and pro-posed several new pfvgrams. "Our objective,"he said, "is to make sure that every servicemanwho returns to civilian life . . . will have theeducation he wants, the training he needs, andthe opportunities for the job he is best suitedfor."

To this end, the President outlined the fol-lowing 114v measures:

1. Ire announced that he had directed theVeterans' Administration to establish one-stopassistance centers "where a veteran can receivepersonal attention and counsel on all the bene-fits the law provides himfrom housing tohealth, from education to employment." Ac-cordingly, the Veterans' Administration an-nounced during the week of February 19, 1968,that it had opened United States Veterans' As-sistance Centers (USVAC) in 10 large citiesand that centers would be opened in 10 othercities during March. These centers offer coun-seling and other services in employment,health, housing, and education. They arestaffed by full-time representatives of the Vet-erans' Administration, the Department ofLabor, and the Civil Service Commis ion, withstaffing from other agencies as needed. Ti e

President said he would seek and welcome par-ticipation by State and local officials and com-munity groups.

2. The President asked for Congressionalaction on three natters: (a) Legislation to lib-eralize educational and training benefits forex-servicemen who volunteer to help teach thechildren of the poor, help man understaffed po-lice and fire departments, take jobs in short-age-troubled hospitals, or work in variousnew job-training and antipoverty programs;(b) legislation to permit service-disabled veter-ans to take vocational rehabilitation on a part-time basis, as well as the full-time programsalready authorized; and (c) a joint resolutionexpressing the "sense of Congress" that pri-vate employers should give job priority to re-turning servicemen.

3. The President also announced that hewould order Federal agencies to hire veteranswith no more than a high school education on apriority basis, without examination, for jobs inthe first five Civil Service grades, providedthey agree to take part-time education or train-ing under the GI bill of rights. This action wastaken in Executive Order 11397.

In his review of actions already taken, thePresident indicated that nearly 400,000 menand woman were taking advantage of the edu-cational assistance available to them under theVeterans' Readjustment Benefits Act of 1966.More complete data from the Veterans' Admin-

17

.6*

istration show that almost 1 million applica-tions for educational assistance were receivedbetween June 1966, when this provision of theact went into effect, and the end of February1968. Nearly 700,000 had taken training, andthe 400,000 referred to by the President werestill in training.

The President also reported that the ArmedForces had, since Project 100,000 was set upby the Department of Defense in late 1966, ac-cepted and trained about 49,000 young menwho would previously have been rejected be-cause of educational or physical limitations.Ninety-six percent of them successfully com-pleted basic training. In 1968, it is anticipatedthat 100,000 men will be accepted for serviceunder this program.

President Johnson also reported that an-other Department of Defense programPro-ject Transitionwas to be expanded. This pro-gram was initiated in August 1967 to provideeducational and training opportunities forspecified groups of men during their finalmonths of service in order to prepare them forcivilian employment. Building on the experi-ence accumulated in pilot projects at five mili-tary bases during 1967, the program has beenextended to 238 military bases during 1968.The aim is to provide some counseling serviceto 500,000 returning servicemen and to offertraining or education to approximately 150,000each year. Placement help will also be given.

Participation in Project Transition is volun-tary. Priority is given to men disabled in com-bat, those unable to reenlist, those with no ci-vilian work experience, and those who did notacquire any military skills which could be usedon a civilian job. Among the main targets aremen accepted for service in Project 100,000,some of whom will be eligible for discharge in1968, ai.d former residents of slums, wherefew jobs are to be found.

The men who enroll will begin their pro-grams 1 to 6 months before separation. Theywill receive counseling to help them choose themost suitable courses from the wide range tobe offered. Among the offerings will be:

Mechanics and Repairmen OccupationsAircraft MechanicAir Conditioning RepairmanAuto Body Repairman

18

Automotive MechanicElectrical Appliance RepairmanFarm Equipment MechrlicOffice Machine RepairmanRadio and TV Repairman

Clerical and.Sales OccupationsAccounting ClerkAutomatic Data Processing Ma thineOperatorBookkeeperClerk TypistComputer ProgramerPost Office WorkerRetail Salesman

Food OccupationsBakerCookMeat Cutter

Medical OccupationsHospital AttendantPractical NurseMedical Technician

Construction and Structural OccupationsWelderCarpenterConstruction Equipment OperatorElectricianPlumberSheet Metal Worker

Machine Trades OccupationsLathe OperatorMilling Machine OperatorMachinist

Miscellaneous OccupationsElectronics TechnicianDraftsmanLaw Enforcement OfficerPrir.nn. Pressman

The men are allowed time off, consistentwith mission requirements, from regular du-ties to attend the courses, which are given onor off base depending on the facilities availa-ble. The courses may include military on-the-job or formal school training in civilian skills;on- or off-base Manpower Development andTraining Act courses sponsored by the Depart-ment of Labor or the Department of Health,Education, and Welfare; Federal agency train-ing programs; and courses conducted on or off

base to meet specific requirements by privateindustry, unions, or h.rml government agenciessuch as police departments. In addition totraining courses, men ate offered educationalprograms designed to bring them to the equiv-alency of eighth grade or high school comple-tion or to provide individual courses, such asshop math, to enhance their skill training.

When the men complete training, they willreceive placement help. Efforts will be made tosecure employment for them on the base; inlocal, State, or Federal civil service; or in pri-vate industry. The U.S. Employment Servicewill help in placing the men. Plans are beingmade for followup to see what educational oremployment progress the men have made sinceleaving service.

The President also reported progress by theDepartment of Labor in a program set up inAugust 1967 whereby the State EmploymentService takes the initiative in offering employ-ment help to all newly separated veterans. TheLabor Department has arranged with the De-fense Department for the Statl agencies to benotified about veterans who are separated fromservice and are returning to their home States.

Labor Department forms providing informa-tion about the veteran's military skills and oc-cupations as well as other data are sent to theState Employment Service. The State agencythen tries to arrange for a letter from the Gov-ernor welcoming the ex-serviceman home. TheState Administrator also writes him offeringthe services of the local Employment Office insecuring employment, job training, and otherassistance, and staff members follow up by in-viting him to visit the office.

Interviewers study all the military and civil-ian job duties the veteran has performed andtry to classify him according to his highestskills, recognizing that direct conversion ofmilitary job titles to civilian classifications isnot necessarily correct or sufficient. Employerswho are able to hire veterans are canvassed,and every effort is made to find jobs for veter-ans from minority groups.

The Pennsylvania State EmploymentAgency, using these techniques, successfullyconducted a statewide followup of its recentlydischarged servicemen. Followup campaignslike this have made the names and addresses of230,000 veterans available to employment

offices and have achieved good results, thePresident reported.

Special efforts are being made in this pro-gram to enroll veterans with military trainingin health occupations. In addition to contactingthese veterans, the employment offices canvasshospitals to see what jobs they have open andask the hospitals to notify them about new jobopportunities and in-hospital training pro-

ams. In some cases, hospitals may be urgedto restructure their job requirements and pro-vide onthe-job training opportunities for indi-viduals whose skills are less than those neededfor a particular job.

These efforts are supplemented, throughProject Remed, by the activities of severalother agencies. State Offices of Education arecompiling lists of schools and other institu-tions offering training in health occupationsfor State Employment Offices, Veterans' Ad-ministration field offices, and other agencies.New Jersey, for example, listed nearly 100such facilities--high schools and vocationalschools, technical institutes, colleges and uni-versities, hospitals, private schools, and man-power training skill centers. Educational insti-tutions will be encouraged to give as muchcredit as possible for the veteran's militarytraining in considering his eligibility. Eachveteran will also receive a personal letter fromthe U.S. Commissioner of Education urginghim to go into civilian health work.

The U.S. Office of Education has also sug-gested to hospitals that, as they are presentlyorganized, many of their jobs will not attractveterans. The are being urged to improve ca-reer opportunities and take other steps tomake them more desirable.

Special attempts are also underway to inter-est prospective veterans in joining local policedepartments, many of which are either danger-ously undermanned or staffed by men who arenot fully qualified. In some cases (the Districtof Columbia, for example), civilian police re-cruiting officers have been able to sign up andgive preemployment tests to military police-men several months before they were to be dis-charged.

Thus far, however, recruiting efforts havebeen limited, perhaps by several unattractivefeatures of police work. One is the low pay of-fered in many places. Another is a local resi-

19

Bence rule which some communities maintain,despite the difficulty in recruiting candidates.Still another is the slow-moving and inflexiblemachinery of the civil service systems in manyof the large cities. Despite these barriers, ag-gressive recruiting could probably induce many

20

returning servicemen to become civilly' police.As noted earlier in this monograph, trans-

ferability of military skills to civilian jobs isnot always easy, but measures such as thoseoutlined above can do much to improve theirutilization.

APPENDIX

.21

The Sample GroupMajor Richardson used only U.S. Air Force

personnel as his research group for these rea-sons: (1) His 16 years' experience as an AirForce officer permitted him to design the re-search without a preliminary study; (2) theAir Force is considered the most technical ofthe services and would, therefore, be moreclosely oriented to the industrial sector of thecivilian economy; and (3) confining the studyto the one service narrowed its scope to man-ageable proportions.

In order to be able to report on the recentexperience Jf a homogeneous group, he choseonly men who had voluntarily left the AirForce during 1965 and 1966, after satisfyingtheir minimum military obligation (usually 4years' service).

The scope of the study was further limitedto men whose military jobs fell in specified"skill dusters": for officers, scientific-engi-neering and administrative-managerial; andfor enlisted men, crafts-technical and militaryservices. The two-digit Primary Air Force Spe-cialty Codes' encompassed by these skill clus-ters are as follows:

Officers

Scientific-engineering Cluster28--Audio-Visual-Photo26Weather26Scientific28Engineering80Communications81Missiles82 Avionics48Maintenance47Munitions

'The AMC tee oaken k a 114igit *waberi the ant Melt Issaran at ale weal walleatlea Ada. the OW epee's:tr. alt! theNorth sill level (tear levele parable). fa telletell aim It bpbalsa sesebee s the ant bee Make &sett weer aebl. the thirdawes the Weak Aft the fovea keel (Irt temente) gal theRM. the ream] !spa et the *peak Mils.

55Civil Engineering67Cartographic-Geodetic

Administrative-Managerial Cluster60Transportation62Supply Services63Fuels64Supply Operations65Procurement66Logistics67Accounting-Finance68Data Systems70--Administration73Personnel74Manpower76Education-Training79Information

Enlisted Personnel

Technical-Craftsmen Cluster

31Missile Electronics32Armament46- -Munitions Maintenance63Metal WorkingA4Facilities55Construction56Utilities67Fire Protection58Fabric-Leather-Rubber69Marine

Nontechnical (Military Services) Cluster60Transportation62Food Service71Printing74Special Services77Air Police92Aircrew Protection

Some 2,000 officers and 18,000 enlisted menin these skill clusters were estimated to havebeen voluntarily separated from the Air Forcein 1965-66. From Air Force records, a sample

group of about 400 men was picked from eachskill cluster. The size of the groups was chosento limit the maximum standard error of anypercentage in the frequency distributionswhich were to be used in the analysis to 5 per-cent with a 95 percent confidence limit. In sim-pler terms, this means that if 50 percent(where the error based on sample enumera-tions is largest) of the men in any samplegroup reported a certain characteristic, thechances are 95 out of 100 that if all men inthat skill cluster wore surveyed, somewhere

24

between 45 and 55 percent of them would re-port the specified characteristic.

However, since current addresses could notbe obtained for some of the men and others(about 30 percent of those for whom addresseswere correct) failed to respond, the study isbased on information obtained by mail ques-tionnaire (see p. 27) from 440 officers and 418enlisted men. The reliability of the resultingdata is acceptable by prevailing statisticalstandards.

Limitations of the Study1. The Air Force comprises only 27 per-

cent of the Armed Forces enrollment (as ofDecember 31, 1966) and is more technical thanother branches of the service and has higherenlistment standards. Hence, a study of otherservices might have produced different findingsfrom those reported here.

2. Even within the Air Force, the findingsmight have been different for men in otherskill clusters.

3. As with all mail surveys, the higher theeducational level, the greater the response. Theofficers (college graduates) replied at a 79-per-cent rate as against 62 percent for the enlistedmen (high school graduates). In the enlistedgroup, the Air Force Qualifying Test classifi-cation of those responding was higher thanthat of the nonresponders. The percentage of

response from the non-whites was noticeablylower than that of the whole group-33 per-cent against 69 percentwhich might suggestthe possibility of some bias along racial lines.

4. The experiences and opinions of the men,but not of their civilian employers, were stud-ied. The findings on civilian employment expe-riences may therefore be biased.

5. The sample group were in their civilianjobs less than 2 years, a comparatively shortperiod on which to judge employment experi-ences. The findings after a few more years ofcivilian employment might have been more de-finitive.

6. Anonymity was not guaranteed the recip-ients of the questionnaire. Thus, the responsesto some of the questions might have been alongsocially acceptable lines.

25

QuestionnaireINSTRUCTIONS: Place an "X" in the appropriate box or boxes following each question. Thenumbers following each possible answer and those appearing in the right column are for codingpurposes and should be ignored. Please feel free to clarify or qualify any of your answers bywriting in your comments in the margins of the questionnaire. The last page of the questionnairehas been intentionally left blank for your use in nuking any additional comments you !!eel wouldbe useful to our study.

NOTE: If you have served more than one active duty tour in the U.S. Air Force, consider onlyyour most recent tour for the purposes of this questionnaire.

1. Please indicate the highest level of formal schooling you had completed prior to entering theUSAF, upon separation from active military service, and as of today.

Upon At TimeEntry of Exit As of

Education Level (years) USAF from USAF Today

Elementary (1-8) _O _0Some High School (9-11) .___1 ____1High School Graduate or passed GED (12) ____2 _2Some College (18-16) ____3 _8College Graduate or passed GED (16) _4 ______4

Graduate Level Work (17 or more) ____6 6

Answer the following question only if you attended college for at least three years. All othersproceed to question #2.

Ia. If you completed at least three years of college, what was your major field of study?

Agriculture _O Social/Behavioral Sciences __6Business _1 Humanities/Arts _6Education _2 Health/Natural Sciences ____7Engineering _3 Other (specify major field) _ 8Physical Science _4

2. Considering all of your assignments while serving with the USAF, how important was yourformal schooling to the performance of your duties?

Most important _0Very important _1Of some importance _2No importanceHindered me in doing job

27

3. What was your marital status prior to entering USAF, upon separation from active duty, andas of today?

Status EnterUSAF

SeparateUSAF Today

single..._

_O _O _OMarried-0 children _1 _1 _1Married-1 child _2 _2 _2Married-2 or more children _3 _3 ______3

Divorced/Separated _4 ____4 _4Widowed ___5 _6 _6

4. Please indicate the general geographic region associated with each of the six particular pointsin your life shown below.

WhereYour

Region Birth- When Place of First Resi- Current Wife's Homeplace Entered Separation deuce after Rest- at Time of

USAF from USAF Separation dence Marriage

_7 (notmarried)

NORTHEAST _O __O _0 _O _O(Me-NH-Vt-Mass-Conn-Del-RI-NY-NJ-Penn-DC-Md)

SOUTHEAST 1 1 1 I _ I _1_ _ _ _(Va-W. Va-Tenn-NC--SC-Ala-Ga-Fla)

NORTH CENTRAL _2 ._2 ._2 _2 ._2 _2(Ohio-Ill-Ind-Ky-Wis-Mich-Minn-Ia-ND SD -Neb)

SOUTH CENTRAL _8 3 _ 8 _3 _8 8(Ark-Miss -La-Tex-

Ok la-Kans-Mo)

NORTHWEST 4 _4 4 4 _4 _4_ _ _(Ore-Wash-Idaho-Mont-Wyo)

SOUTHWEST b _8 _b _8 _6 _5(NM-Aria-Calif-Nev-Utah-Colo)

OUTSIDE U.S. _6 _6 _6 _6 _6 _6(Ala-Haw-Other)

28

5. At the time you first entered on active duty with the U.S. Air Force, what did you consider tobe your primary civilian occupation?

NoneI was a student or had completed school but was not employed00 before entering the USAF.

(Go on to Question #6)I was a

(Write in your civilian occupation and go on to Queston 5a)

a. What was the primary source for attaining the skills needed for the civilian occupation listedabove?

(01-99)

High School _0 Apprenticeship _4College _A Company Training Course _5Trade, Business, or Learned from friend or

Technical School _2 relative _6On-the-job training _____8 Other (explain) _7

6. What was your father's main occupation when you were 13-18 years old?He was a

(Please write in the specific job he performed)

7. Which one of the following reasons best explains why you initially chose the U.S. Air Forcefor military service?

Interest in aviationTraining and educational opportunities _IAdvice of friends or relativesChance of travel

Preferred it to other services _AOnly service represented at my

high school or collegeOther (explain)

8. How much do you feel the USAF utilized your skills and abilities in your military assign-inents?

A great dealSomewhatVery littleNot at all

9. Please indicate below any formal USAF training courses or military schools (other thanbasic or orientation training) which you completed while on active duty.

Length YearCourse/School (weeks) Completed

111.11.

10. In the duties you performed the most while in the USAF, what kinds of tasks were you re-quired to devote most of your time to? (For example, typing, standing alert, making reports,

29

meetings, etc.) List the three tasks to which you devoted the most time in order of their im-portance.

1

2.3.

11. How important would you rate each of the following to success in the Air Force in terms ofyour experiences while on active duty?

NoNeed

VeryNecessary

AbsolutelyEssential

SomeNeed

Job knowledge _O _1 _2 _3Formal education O

Working well with others _0 _1_1 _2_2 _8_3Ability to speak and write 0 ____2Knowing "politica" of unit ___._0

_ _1_1 _2 _3_3Administrative ability _O ._1 _2 _3

12. Please check the highest level of USAF organization to which you were directly assigned..Mlle on active duty.

Hq. USAF _OJoint /Unified Command _1Major Air Command _2Numbered Air Force _8Air Division _4

WingSquadronSeparate DetachmentOther (State)

_56_7_8

18. Which one of the following reasons best explains why you chose to separate from activeduty with the U.S. Air Force?

Insufficient payLimited pt.( motionsInadequate living conditionsFrequent family separations

O Poor supervision /leadership_1 Dislike military lifeSkills/abilities not fully utilized

8 Other (explain)

_46

_7

14. Are you currently employed for 16 hours a week or more?

YES, and I am not a full time student as well. __O(Please turn page and continue with Question 16)

YES, but 1 am also a full time student. _1(Please turn page and continue with Question 16)

NO (Please continue with Question 16 below) _2Only those who answered "No" to the preceding question should answer the remaining ques-tions on this page; all others turn page and continue with question 16.

16. Have you ever been employed for 16 hours a week or more since your separation fromactive duty?

YES, but I am now a full time student.(Please turn page and continue with Question 16:

80

Answer the questions on the basis of the work you were doing before you becamea full time student.)

YES, but I am now unemployed and not a full time studont. _1(Please turn page and answer Questions 16-22, 28, 32, 36 and 36 only.)

NO (Please answer Question 16a below and disregardthe remainder of the questionnaire.)

a. Please: tell us why you feel that you have been unable to secure satisfactory employmentsince your return to civilian life. Upon completion of this question, we would appreciateyour mailing this questionnaire to us at your earliest convenience using the enclosed pos-tage paid envelope. Thank you for your participation in this survey and good luck to youin your job hunt efforts.

The next nine questions are related to your experiences in seeking satisfactory employment af-ter separation from active duty.

16. In relation to your estimated separation date from active duty. when did you start plan-ning what you would d^ when you returned to civilian life?

Mote than 6 months in advatice3-6 months in advance ____11-3 months in advance _ 2Made no specific plans __3Had always been planning for it _ 4

17. Did you receive any professional counseling help in making your plans for civilian em-ployment?

No and would have liked some _ONo and didn't need any ____1Yesthrough USAF ____2Yesthrough private counseling

service _3Yeathrough State Employment

Service _4Yes--other (specify) 6

18. Please tell us how much you used each of the following in locating your first job after sep-aration. (Please enter check in appropriate column for each item; if no use was made of aparticular group or service, place a check in the right hand column)

UsedHeavily

UsedSomewhat

No UseMade

Veterans' organisations 0 --1 ____2Religious groups ____O _1 2Labor unions _O _A _2Malting resumes to potential employers _O _____1 _2Military or ex-military friends _O _1 ___2Other friends or relatives 0 _1 _____2Advertisements in newspapers 0 ____1 _2Private employment agencies 0 _1 _2State Employment Service ____.0 _1 ____2College placement services _O _1 _2Personal application to employers 2Other (specify)

_O_O

_1_1 _____231

19. 'tow many full-time civilian jobs have you 'field since your separation from the USAF?

OneTwoThreeFourFive or more

_ 3_420. Please indicate whet type of jobs you have held since leaving the USAF.

a. Current jobb, First job after separation

(if different from current)c. Second job after separation

(if different from current)

21. Compared to your expectations at the time of your separation, how easy or difficult -J'r.uiolyou say it was for you to find your current job? (or your first job after separation a, youare now unemployed?)

Much easier than I expected _OIt was fairly easy, and that's what I expected _1It was ;airly difficult, and that's what I expected __2It was much more difficult than I expected. _8

22. What is your average totalUnder $3000$3000-4999$5000-7499$7500-9999

$10000-1499$16000 and over

annual income from all sources at present?O

2

_4a. 1-tow does this income compare with what you thought you would be earning at the time

you separated from the USAF?

Much greater _OSomewhat greater _1About what I expected _2Leas than I expected _3Much less than I expected _4

23. Now satisfied are you with your current job?

Satisfiednot looking for another job (turn pagego to Q. 24)Satisfied, but interested in finding another job (answer Q. 28a)Not satisfiednot looking for another job (turn pagego to Q. 24)Not satisfiedlooking for another job (answer Q. 23a)

32

_2_8a. If you are interested in or are looking for another job, please tell us which one of the fol-

lowing conditions would be most important to you in deciding upon a change.

More money _0 Educational opportunity _4Increased responsibility 1 Chance to travel _to

411114M-

Change of geographical location _2 Learn new skill _6Work for larger company _8 More security __7

Other (explaiD) 8

You are now % the way through the questionnaire. These last 12 quesLions are related to yourcurrent job experiences.

24. How many employees do you have working for you in your current job? (Include all em-ployees for whom you have overall responsibility)

(Number)

26. How important was your formal educational level in getting your current job?

Most important _OVery important _1Of some importance ___2No importance _ 8Don't know 4

26. Compared to other civilians who are doing the same kind of work you are, how qualified doyou think you are?

Much better qualified _OSomewhat better qualifiedAbout the same Qualifications ____2Less qualified _8Much less qualified __4

27. How important would you rate each of the following in successfully performing your pres-ent job?

NoNeed

Very AbsolutelyNecessary Essential

SomeNeed

Formal education _O _1 _2 _8Ability to speak and write _O _1 _2 8Technical (job) knowledge .-0 _1 _2 _8Knowing "politics" of organization _O _1 _2 _8Social skills _0 ._1 _2 _8Managerial ability .__.0 ___1 _2 _8Administrative skills __O _1 _2 __8Ability to work with others __O ___:_l ___2 _8Leadership ability 0 _1 _.2 _8Military training and experience _fl _1 --2 _8

28. Has your USAF background helped qualify you for the work you have done and/or aredoing in civilian life?

Helped a great deal _OHelped somewhat _1Helped very little _2Has not helped at all __8Has hindered me _4

29. How much do you feel your employer is utilizing your skills and abilities in your currentjob?

A great deal _0Somewhat 1

Very littleNot at all 3Nc t applicableself-employed 4

30. Please list the three types of tasks to which you are required to devote most of your time inthe daily performance of your current job (i.e., selling, teaching, correspondence, confer-ences, etc.).

1.2.3.

31. At what level of organization are you currently holding a job?

Not applicableself-employed 0International offices 1

National or Federal headquartersState government or agency 3Corporate or regional headquarters 4Company or plantField office or detachment 6Local business or branch 7Other (explain) 8

32. Since your separation from the USAF, have you taken any vocational or job training?

No (Go on to Q. 23) ____0Yes (Go on to part a below) ____1

a. If "jes" please describe the training in terms of that most recently completed, next mostrecent, etc.

What trained for? Duration Who sponsored the training(weeks)

33. Please check the appropriate type of employer for whom you are now employed.

Not applicableself-employed (Go on to Q. 34) 0Large business (over 1000 employees) _1Medium business (50-1000 employees)Small business (less than 60 employees) _3Government (Federal, State, or local) _4College, university, technical school _5Secondary or elementary school _6Other private or public institution (please specify) 7

34

34. What kind of work does this employer do?your main product or service?)

35. Louking back at your change from militaryassistance in each of the following areas ina satisfactory job?

Please explain briefly. (If self-employed, what is

to civilian life, how would you rate the need fororder to improve a person's chances of securing

NeedSomewhat

More

NeedMuchMore

NoNeed

USAF pre-separation counseling 0Job availability information _0 _1_1 _12_2Professional counseling 0 1 2Employment Service assistance 0Vocational or job training 0

_11

______2

2Formal education 2Other (snecify)

_00

_1__A _______2

36. Please tell us how yon, uilitary service has helped or hindered you in all of your civilianemployment experiences since separation from active duty.

You have completed the questionnaire. If you desire to offer any additional comments, the nextpage has been provided for that purpose. Thank you for your participation in this study. Wewould appreciate your returning this questionnaire to us at your earliest convenience using theenclosed postage paid envelope.

36

DISSERTATIONS PREPARED UNDER RESEARCHGRANTS FROM THE MANPOWER ADMINISTRATION,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, THROUGH MAY 1, 1968

All dissertations prepared under research grants from the Manpower Administration may bepurchased from the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information, Springfield,Virginia 22151, at $3 for each paper copy and 65 cents for each microfiche copy. Send order withremittance (check or Clearinghouse coupon) and specify accession number of the desired report,as shown below.

Doctoral candidate andinstitution awarding Accessiondegree Title of dissertation Grant number number

Gerald Eugene BoggsOklahoma State University

A Comparative Analysis of the Im-pact of Various Types of Curriculaon the Vocational Success of School

91-- 38 -66 -50 PB 177 776

Dropouts

Malcolm S. Cohen The Determinants of the Relative 91-23-66-36 PB 177 554Massachusetts Instituteof Technology

Supply and Demand for UnskilledWorkersStatistical Appendix PB 177 555

James S. CrabtreeUniversity of Wisconsin

The Structure of Related Instructionin Wisconsin Apprenticeship Pro-grams

91-53-66-11 PB 177 567

Richard B. FreemanHarvard University

The Labor Market for College Man-power

91-23-66-15 PB 178 704

Leonard J. Hausman The 100% Welfare Tax Rate: Its 91-53-66-68 PB 177 566University of Wisconsin Incidelce and Effects

36, I 37

Doctoral candidate andinstitution awardingdegree

Leonard Emil KreiderOhio State University

Garland Frank LawlisTexas Technological College

Daniel Quinn Mills.Harvard University

Robert Brooks RichardsonCornell University

Daniel C. RogersYale University

Joan H. RytinaMichigan State University

Jon M. ShepardMichigan State University

Arie ShiromUniversity of Wisconsin

Gaylen R. WallaceOklahoma State University

38

Title of dissertation Grant numberAccessionnumber

The Development and Utilization of 91-37-66-13 PB 178 351Managerial Talent : A Case Study ofManufacturing Managers in Colum-bus, Ohio

Motivational Aspects of the Chron-ically Unemployed

91-46-67-47 PB 178 774

Factors Determining Patterns of 91-23-67-08 PB 177 562Employment and Unemployment inthe Construction Industry of theUnited States

An Examination of the Transfer-ability of Certain Military Skillsand Experience to Civilian Occupa-tions

Pr gate Rates of Return to Educa-tion in the United States: A CaseStudy

The Ideology of American Strati-fication

Man-Machine Relationships, Atti-tudes Toward Work and Meaningsin the Work Role

Industrial Cooperation and Adjust-ment to Technological Change: AStudy of Joint Management-UnionCommittees

An Analysis of Job Satisfaction ofEmployed Youth Involved in an Ex-perimental School Dropout Rehabil-itation Program

91-34-66-47 PB 177 372

91-07-66-06 PB 177 557

91-24-66-45 PB 178 305

91-24-67-03 PB 178 467

91-53-67-20 PB 177 565

91-38-66-12 PB 177 546

* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 19680-317-601

WHERE TO GET MORE INFORMATIONAdditional copies of this publication may be obtained from the U.S.Department of Labor's Manpower Administration in Washington, D.C. orfrom the Department's Regional Information Offices at the addresseslisted below.

John F. Kennedy Federal Building, Boston,Massachusetts 02203

341 Ninth Avenue, New York, New York 100011015 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 191071371 Peachtree Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia 3030951 SW. First Avene, Miami, Florida 33130801 Broad Street, Nashville, Tennessee 372031240 E. Ninth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44199219 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604911 Walnut Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106411. North Akard Street, Dallas, Texas 7520119th and Stout Street, Denver, Colorado 80202300 North Los Angeles Street, Los Angeles, California 90012450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102506 Second Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98104

For more information on manpower programs and services in your area,get in touch with your local Employment Service Office or the nearest Officeof the Regional Manpower Administrator at the address listed below.

Location States Serviced

John F. Kennedy Fed. Bldg. Connecticut Rhode IslandBoston, Mass. 02203 Maine MassachusettsArea Code 617, 223-6726 New Hampshire Vermont

341 Ninth Avenue New York Puerto RicoNew York, N.Y. 10001 New Jersey Virgin IslandsArea Code 212, 971-7564

1111 20th Street, NW. Delaware PennsylvaniaWashington, D.C. 20210 District of Columbia VirginiaArea Code 202, 386-6016 Maryland West Virginia

No. Carolina1371 Peachtree Street, NE. Alabama Mississippi

Atlanta, Ga. 30309 Florida So. CarolinaArea Code 404, 526-3267 Georgia Tennessee

219 So. Dearborn Street Illinois MinnesotaChicago, Ill. 60604 Indiana OhioArea Code 312, 353-4258 Kentucky Wisconsin

Michigan911 Walnut Street Colorado Nebraska

Kansas City, Mo. 64106 Iowa No. DakotaArea Code 816, 374-3796 Kansas So. Dakota

Missouri UtahMontana Wyoming

411 North Akard Street Arkansas OklahomaDallas, Texas 75201 Louisiana TexasArea Code 214, 749-3671 New Mexico

450 Golden Gate Avenue Alaska IdahoSan Francisco, Calif. 94102 Arizona NevadaArea Code 415, 556-7414 California Oregon

Hawaii Washington