Navy Approves Revised Officer Promotion Phasing Plan

Story Number: NNS100916-20Release Date: 9/16/2010 6:06:00 PM
A  A  A   Email this story to a friend   Print this story
From Chief of Naval Personnel Public Affairs

WASHINGTON (NNS) -- The Secretary of the Navy has approved a revised phasing plan for active duty officer promotions beginning in fiscal year 2011, as part of the Navy's multiple efforts to achieve fiscal balance.

Effective Oct. 1, active duty officers selected for promotion to the grades of captain, commander and lieutenant commander will be promoted at a three percent per month rate for 11 months, with the remaining officers to be promoted in September 2011.

All officers selected for promotion during fiscal year 2011 will be promoted in that fiscal year. This phasing plan does not affect future selection board promotion rates.

Unrestricted line and human resources officers of the full-time support community will continue to promote at the same rate as their active duty counterparts.

Under previous plans, five percent of officers selected for captain, commander and lieutenant commander were promoted in each of the first eight months of the year, with 15 percent per month during the remaining four months.

Vice Adm. Mark Ferguson, chief of naval personnel, said the plan contributes to keeping the Navy's manpower account in fiscal balance.

"We will continue to fulfill mission requirements for 2011 while controlling growth in manpower costs," Ferguson said. "We will revisit this plan each fiscal year."

For more information on line and staff officer promotion phasing plans, visit

For more news from Chief of Naval Personnel, visit

9/29/2010 7:09:00 PM
LT California, you have been conditioned to believe that being a non-dissenter even in the face of sanctioned wrongdoing is a positive trait. The Navy likes to send out carefully worded surveys to carefully selected people, but nothing beats the value of an unfiltered opinion. There is a link from the BUPERS website to this article; if the topic of us whining excuses for officers comes up at any level responsible for this theft, I will be proud to have been heard. Keep your shame.

9/29/2010 3:11:00 PM
The bottom line is that it was easier to place this burden on the backs of our "you should be grateful you even have a job" selectees than to remove a handful of TOMAHAWK missiles from an existing contract causing a breach, or any one of a thousand ways to cut a tiny 6.4M budget shortfall. Having worked in DON budgeting, this really is a joke of a savings given the long-term impact on morale.

9/29/2010 11:15:00 AM
I was selected for LCDR this year and I'm extremely honored the Navy still wants me around after 22 years. I would have been promoted in July vice September, but not a big deal. Does our Navy save much per promotion? Not really, but we should be grateful for having a job in today's economy. The bickering is pointless. I am shocked by how senior some of you are and the comments you make. What you should be doing is supporting our COC and setting the example for our young Sailors amd officers.

9/29/2010 10:48:00 AM
We were promoting 5% per month for 8 months, then 15% per month in June - Sep. So, why transition to 3% for 11 months with 67% in September? Couldn't we save even more by promoting 0% each month and then promoting 100% in September?

9/29/2010 10:14:00 AM
I really enjoyed the part of the article where VADM Ferguson says, "the plan contributes to keeping the Navy's manpower account in fiscal balance. We will continue to fulfill mission requirements for 2011 while controlling growth in manpower costs." Riding the backs of middle management to do more with less and not paying them their new "earned" wage at the same time. What a nice ancillary benefit for you sir. No "plan" savings amount given in the article. Nice Honor, Courage, Commitment!

9/28/2010 2:30:00 PM
This phasing plan revision feels the same as every other cold "take it or leave it" initiative that is rolled out. My ID card may say "indefinite" on it, but there is a definite timetable in mind that won't be communicated until the request for retirement msg leaves my hands...soon. Sorry for the lack of transparency detailers, but that's the new Navy. I hope big Navy has calculated THAT on behalf of the fleet. A B.S, M.S., MBA, 23 years experience, SOMEONE will value that beyond a bean counter.

9/28/2010 1:28:00 PM
Para 3 of CNP's statement mentions that future selection board promotion rates will not be affected by this revised phasing plan! Unless I have been totally living under a rock for my 22 year navy career, how can this not have a negative impact on the 66% selected for LCDR that will be promoted in Sept 2010. When our time to be in zone for O5 occurs it will be near impossible to compete unless the entire FY is in zone. Looking back over the last few LDO O5 zone lists, this has yet to occur.

9/28/2010 12:56:00 PM
YG88, which promotion was delayed for YG 86 (04,05 or 06)? Do you know the FY, and whether it was for all paygrades that year? It would be interesting to know when the selectees received notification and what the specific justification was at the time.

9/28/2010 11:24:00 AM
Navy wants our endless commitment; won't reciprocate! Big Navy needs to live Honor/Courage/Commitment! If we have to "balance our manpower accounts" it should be on the backs of officers and not sailors. In keeping, it is natural all flag promotions and pay raises be delayed until September. Not mentioned cause it's not happening. NPC/SECNAV demonstrate they do NOT care about career O's. Where's the next O6 retention poll to ignore?? Meaningless explanation and no notice heads upequalstop50 employer, NOT

9/26/2010 7:23:00 PM
For all those "quit your whining" people, do you forget how many have working spouses, and DEPENDED on those incomes too? Mine is now laid off,how's that for 50% less income? House I can't sell in another state(HAP is a P.O.S and not much help BTW). YES, I feel thankful for my share of tax dollars that I COMPLETELY EARNED! BUT, you dont want to load MORE on OUR backs when depending on us to "suck it up for the team" and work harder. Shore duty of 10-12 hours/day nice break b4 sea duty again!

9/26/2010 7:17:00 PM
Bigger picture here, just like FY86 this COULD cause lower retention. Look at the JPMP program for USNA...another way to move O-4's out right at 20. This phasing will only save thousands per officer in the near term, look at all the new or revised programs to get people out earlier O-4 at 20 is FAR cheaper than O-5/6 at 24-30!!!

9/26/2010 6:05:00 AM
STGC (retired) when was the last time you got underway? Did a geographic bachelor tour? Did an IA? I would opt for a pay cut. For that matter, I have repeatedly made the recommendation that our retirement pay shouldn't start until age 50. That notwithstanding, those would be programs that would be vetted and advertised instead of a surprise with no warning. For what it is worth, did six years in FDNF, 2 years geo-bach, and am on an IA.

9/25/2010 1:07:00 PM
Interesting how this only affects O-4 to O-6's; where is the message about not paying the Flags until September. Taking care of the troops I see.

9/25/2010 10:01:00 AM
This will save the Navy approximately $6.4M with the average selectee giving up 1.9 months of their raise ($1.0K to $2.4K) "to the cause." While $6.4M is a drop in the bucket for the Navy as a whole, the resultant impact to the impacted selectees and their families is not. It's unfortunate, that with so many other untapped cost saving opportunities, the first REAL step our "leadership" is taking to balance the budget comes at the expense of their employees. In terms of leadership, we're broken.

9/24/2010 5:56:00 PM
About being grateful: If it's all about money to you, I would suggest that you turn down your selection to CAPT and resign. The Sailors who would be under your leadership in the future would be even more grateful.

9/24/2010 4:36:00 PM
STGC (retired) says "consider yourself lucky you are not out here in the real world." So, all of you supporters of this type of "savings" methodology just keep sitting back and letting civilians like this carry the "military is welfare" sentiment...then see where it ends. I've seen the studies about some of the creative savings they've got cooking for retirees by the way STGC...keep that giving spirit thing'll need it.

9/24/2010 2:19:00 PM
at CAPT, Texas: sir, you sound like a SELRES who just came off of ADSW. I find it hypocritical that you would tell AC folks to "stop whining", isn't that why you got out at 8 yrs? Morale, time away from family, compensation all factored in to that decision, no? This new promotion plan affects morale, plain and simple. To save $, bloated staffs need downsizing, to include ridiculous per diem rates being paid to "IA's" in Germany, Tampa, MD, Bahrain, etc. CDR, USN VA has it right in the 1st post

9/24/2010 12:10:00 PM
A far better way to remain fiscally responsible and be good stewards of the people's money would be to stop recreating the wheel, why design our own NWU's when the USMC and Army already went through the pain and paid for it...use the same design. Same thing with the PT gear, companies such as NIKE, REEBOK and Under Armour research materials and designs already, when will we get smart and utilize our resources. This is a clear cut case of people forgetting where they come from.

9/24/2010 10:54:00 AM
Sometimes, you have to sacrifice more than your time for your nation. If you really cared about the nation you served, you would opt for a pay cut at this time. Consider yourself lucky that you are not out here in the real world where a job, let alone a 3% pay raise every year would be like a gift from god.

9/24/2010 8:53:00 AM
Some of the comments seem to feed into the notion that to be EARNING a military paycheck and compensation is the equivalent of being on public assistance. If we want to compare with costs in the civilian sector, then you can only do so by matching other civilian market structures as well. Man-hours, travel requirements, relocation expectations, behavior standards...we don't need members calculating fairness. Treat people fairly and they'll trust you to do that math. Trust is fading....

9/24/2010 8:44:00 AM
I am grateful. I'm grateful for the opportunities provided by the Navy throughout my career, and am proud to serve. But the "we should be grateful" mindset can be very insidious. This shift to the right will cost me about $4K. That's a decent chunk of change. If the Navy can take $4K, and justify it with the "you should be grateful" answer, then where does it stop? Trust me. With a $13T debt, and leadership unwilling to make hard decisions on entitlement, it is only going to get worse.

9/24/2010 8:39:00 AM
The economy is down, so GDP is down, so the budget is down - got it. But I am surprised this is not a DoD enterprise policy. It would be more equitable if the DoD wide policy was Frock everyone selected on 01 OCT and pay everyone on 30 SEP. That would preserve the 30 SEP "snapshot" of manpower and make the delay-to-pay more palatable.

9/24/2010 8:23:00 AM
This means about a $5K loss in pay to me. How much is the Navy saving?

9/24/2010 8:01:00 AM
I seem to recall something similar to this for YG86 officers, where promotions were delayed for fiscal reasons. My unofficial survey of fellow Submarine officers indicated YG86 had very poor retention. We are already having difficulty keeping the good officers and the will NOT help officer retention. This seems like a decision that was made by our civilian DoD leadership in the beltway without much input from our military leaders or thought of the impact on the deckplate. We need to do better!

9/24/2010 3:50:00 AM
I absolutely appreciate the 21 years of having a paycheck, but I have been taught by my leadership that communication with your crew is essential to making them understand. If you don't tell them the expectation then they formulate their own understanding of the problem and how the chain of command doesn't care. I think this is a classic example of this. 90% of the people would have understood if "we" had been told this. I would be curious of the cost saving numbers, maybe "they" will tell us...

9/24/2010 2:13:00 AM
Enough of comparing mil pay to the civilian sector. Ask yourself, what's the track record for military pay keeping up with civilian pay over the last 50 years, especially at the O-3/4 level? I thought so... And as for collecting that retirement pay at 38 or 42, you bet we've earned it. The civilian sector does not require anyone to spend years away from their family over the course of 20 years. There may be those who do, but they have options.

9/23/2010 11:20:00 PM
In the big picture I don't see this phasing plan as a "big ticket item" - but SELECTION means the payraise is coming. I found out I made Chief in June 1995 and didn't get paid until 16AUG1996, so I understand the wait. Frocking a larger number of officers would definitely let those non-monetary items be enjoyed by the officers that would choose to accept the additional responsibilities without the pay. I see both sides, it isn't worth arguing over or getting upset like some entries.

9/23/2010 8:42:00 PM
In the big picture does a few months matter? If this is the only affect you see, feel fortunate. I heard recently that the military has become a bloated benefits organization that periodically kills people. I recall briefing some intel officers two years ago regarding the national fiscal position and the market meltdown (I work for Treasury). They responded "how is this intel?" I was shocked that they didn't seemingly understand where their paycheck and money for military equipment comes from

9/23/2010 1:17:00 PM
Maybe everyone should just be grateful that they were indeed selected, and have the opportunity to make a difference at a different level than they might have before.

9/23/2010 11:22:00 AM
Enlisted promotions are already spread out over 6 months of being informed of their promotions. I'm guessing most enlisted are thinking that those officers who haven't really been affected by all the downsizing, PTS, Rate mergers are kind of amused at the uproar at these post when something affects the Wardroom.

9/23/2010 7:18:00 AM
Perhaps it is true that we should be grateful. It is hard, however, to not notice that this same "fiscal savings" is not being applied to enlisted promotions, civilian promotions or more senior promotions. In other words, we should be the good stewards of tax dollars (but others are exempt).

9/22/2010 2:54:00 PM
How often have we heard senior leadership say, "People are our most important resource?" The change in the phasing plan shows that quote to be so trite and untrue.

9/22/2010 2:25:00 PM
With all due respect to those threatened by the individual expression on this board, we "have it" the way that it is alloted by Congress for us to have. This revision is a result of mismanagement on some level passed on. Pure and simple. If you think your steady paycheck, retirement, benefits are safe from such calibration, think again. It shouldn't take personal injustice for a grievance to merit validity. Officer CO Calls are pointless for a reason...remember why.

9/22/2010 1:31:00 PM
Most of us, if provided a well reasoned explanation, would have accepted these promotion delays. Unfortunately, that is not what we got. To the Navy Leadership, please explain how this keeps Navy's manpower account in fiscal balance. Why is it different this year? What changed?? Are we treating the root cause or simply applying a band aid? Any Ensign could have torn the reasoning behind this apart. Your people deserve an honest discussion on this, but instead they have gotten silence.

9/22/2010 12:29:00 PM
To my active duty colleagues - you have no idea how good you have it. STOP WHINING. I served 8 yrs active. Until I had spent a few years as a civilian, I had no clue how much I took the steady paycheck and job security for granted. Companies disappear overnight, employees are forced to take unpaid leave or 10-25% pay cuts. Mil pay and benefits have never been better. Those who will be collecting a retirement check at 38 or 42 for the rest of your life get little sympathy for this minor setback.

9/22/2010 12:28:00 PM
LCDR(sel) is not a rank. If you are a LT, then state it as such.

9/22/2010 10:13:00 AM
at PR69 - October 1 is approaching. Across DoD, MILLIONS of dollars are being spent in a mad dash to beat funding expiration. I see more unnecessary new furniture, flight hours, emails for wish lists, etc. Manpower costs have outpaced inflation? Manpower costs driven by manpower reform mis-management at PERS. You're taking away our COLA AND congress raises. I know of a few ways we can show the taxpayers how we can be better stewards of the taxpayers' money, as PERS RADM says in Navy Times.

9/22/2010 9:56:00 AM
I can understand the fiscal constraints - but then why don't they allow frocking? At least give us the rank if not the money.

9/22/2010 8:00:00 AM
I concede points from both sides of the argument about it not being fair to have to wait and that we should be thankful for having employment, albeit this is a slippery slope as our civilian counterparts don't deploy on ships or to war zones. What is driving this? As Einstein stated, "define the problem." We are in a fiscal mess (the country) and we better find officials that can make hard choices. DOD makes up most of the discretionary budget, stand by for more. Don't feel so entitled.

9/21/2010 6:18:00 PM
Ridiculous comments starting to roll in here. Let me get this straight...there's no such thing as expecting fairness because we're in uniform? We can only have a valid grievance if no one else in society has circumstances worse than ours? I'm not a taxpayer? My compensation is in exchange for know, all the words we put on awards. Promotion is not a gift or a favor for those of us who've earned it. Sorry, I won't push EVERY button placed in front of me.

9/21/2010 3:11:00 PM
News flash for the Navy: people get promoted every year, so waiting until the following (end of the FY) September only perpetuates the problem year after to year. So, this is only a "savings" for the first year only. Wonder what slight of hand will be used next year to achieve the required "savings"?

9/21/2010 10:21:00 AM
I have been reading everyone's responses below. My initial thought was much like your own- dismayed, disappointed, frustrated, upset. Then I discussed this topic with another Navy friend. We should all be thankful we have jobs with great benefits. I know far too many successful people struggling without jobs and trying to find ways to provide for their families. While I understand this is a regretful personnel policy action that the Navy is implementing to save money, I am THANKFUL.

9/21/2010 10:00:00 AM
All, remember your pay and benefits are derived from taxes imposed primarily on private sector workers and companies who are struggling financially. Your pay and benefits, including vacation time, exceed on average those in the private sector. Military personnel are rarely laid-off. You have the opportunity for a pension, most in the private sector do not. Quit your belly-aching and think about how well-off you really are. If still not happy, try a private sector job then report back.

9/21/2010 12:27:00 AM
I like that my Army and Air Force friends, selected in the same year as I was for the same rank, will be putting on their new ranks 11 months before me. Apparently this is not a problem for the other services. Classy.

9/20/2010 7:19:00 PM
After 23 years I am now convinced it's time to go once I do my payback. I can only imagine the interesting things that are coming down the road in an effort to be fiscally responsible. I hope the meager contribution on the behalf of my family helps to keep the Navy in the green. I am disgusted.

9/20/2010 3:43:00 PM
How can you take something earned by someone (in my case) over decades of enlisted and officer service and then have the audacity to call it "savings"? It's theft...plain and simple. I bet someone wordsmiths it into a "saving the WORLD" bullet on an MSM citation as well. Wow, this is...pathetic! I think I'll write my Congressman or Commander-in-Chief on this one.

9/20/2010 2:15:00 PM
Amazing that after all these years of cutting budgets and manpower that the best answer for this "Top 50 Employer" is to delay promotion. I wonder how much the Navy paid what I am guessing was a contracted study to find out this is how we should do business. Glad this is the last stop for me. Not sure this Navy will continue to be My Navy.

9/20/2010 11:40:00 AM
Its a shame that the process to select folks for promotion takes about a week, but the routing process for the results and subsequent promotion can take 18-24 months. Am I fortunate to have been promoted, absolutely. Did I earn it, absolutely. Promotion and increased responsibility are primary drivers when deciding whether or not to make this job a career. Maybe frocking would make the delay easier to stomach.

9/20/2010 10:30:00 AM
Well Gentlemen, when large parts of this Country's work force is struggling to survive, you at least have a pay raise coming at some point. Most people in all professions are concerned about layoffs and you are belly aching about having to wait for a promotion that is a least guareenteed. A raise (Promotion) of any type right now is a god send no matter how long you have to wait, the rusults are out, you been selected, sit back and standby. Police and Fire in Public Sector are facing layoffs!

9/20/2010 9:45:00 AM
Well, if they're going to delay the paycheck at least Big Navy could change the mindset about frocking so these selected officers can enjoy some of the other benefits (what few remain) of rank.

9/20/2010 12:46:00 AM
This is truly disheartening. Not only did the majority have to wait over a year to be promoted from the time of the board, but now for many it will be over 19 months to be promoted. It really is a hard blow to the gut! It's just a demoralizing cost-cutting math trick some bean-counter proposed upon the hard-working officers (AND their families!) We get mortared, shot at, deployed endlessly, covered in blood and sand, and NOW THIS? SecNav, if you're listening... PLEASE repeal this decision.

9/19/2010 6:28:00 PM
All I can say is this is quite disturbing and I echo similar responses in that this sends the wrong message. Promotion is something earned and with it an expectation of future leadership; yet our current leadership (SECNAV, CNO, CNP) decide to play the "fiscal responsibility" game at the expense of morale and hence impedes resiliency. In summary: "Pseudo-Fiscal Responsibility" by truly Irresponsible leadership. CAPT (s).

9/19/2010 1:11:00 PM
This is what happens when the President tells the SECDEF to do more with less. Cut F-18/ship/sub production costs...things we don't REALLY need right now. But don't go against the faith of those who serve...and have done so faithfully for many years. Haven't we been trained to "look out for our sailors"? Apparently, BIG NAVY doesn't operate under the same premise. I feel like Clark W. Griswald in "Christmas Vacation" when he finds out he's not getting the Christmas bonus:( GO NAVY!!

9/19/2010 9:28:00 AM
An unfortunate decision by our leadership that sends the wrong signal to its people. Officers already wait 100+ days for promotion results to work their way up the slow chain for release after a board and anywhere from 3 months to a year and a half after notification to actually promote. Now we're going to promote 77% of the list in the final month. Please tell me we have more creative ideas for saving money. This says we're just not excited about promoting you and will wait until we have to.

9/18/2010 9:48:00 PM
All I can say is thank God for getting commissioned before the Naval Academy. There should be a lot of free beer over Labor Day weekend next year though.

9/18/2010 7:18:00 PM
What about the Reserve Force? Same delay? Not much savings to be had, so maybe not.

9/18/2010 10:58:00 AM
I agree, Top 50 Employer indeed. I have never seen promotion then lead to bascially a decline in salary. Any feeling of accomplishment is well replaced by disenchantment.

9/18/2010 3:54:00 AM
I agree with the other LT, this means it is time for me to go. I was so excited about making it and being a very low number, but now I won't be putting it on for another 1/2 year. The Navy should've put this out before the results came out so we knew what to expect.

9/17/2010 5:05:00 PM
"as part of the Navy's multiple efforts to achieve fiscal balance." So, what happens when the Navy CAN'T achieve fiscal balance (has had many problems in the past, remember in the late 90's when our paychecks didn't come due to a fiscal argument?!)...I sure hope I am promoted early in the year, those late in the year might find out that the coffers are empty and they either wait or go home!

9/17/2010 3:20:00 PM
Just means there will be a larger-than-normal glut of wetting down parties in September. Congrats to all those 13-month selectees!

9/17/2010 3:10:00 PM
A sad day for the Navy, I fear this is just the beginning.

9/17/2010 10:53:00 AM
Nothing says "Top 50 Employer" like saving money on the backs of your employees. What a morale booster to find out you were selected, only to not receive the paycheck for another year and a half. Combine that with the recent message about purchasing NWUs that seemed not to realize thousands of Sailors were effectively being forced to pay out of pocket, and its clear the what the Navy says (be a "Top 50 Employer") and what it does are not related in the least.

Comment submission for this story is now closed.
amily members place collar devices and shoulder boards on Cmdr. Allisa Walker during a promotion ceremony.
100401-N-6724S-013 VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. (April 1, 2010) Family members place collar devices and shoulder boards on Cmdr. Allisa Walker during a promotion ceremony. Walker is the Naval Network Warfare Command flag secretary and executive officer of troops. (U.S. Navy photo by Chief Mass Communication Specialist Aaron Strickland/Released)
April 5, 2010
Navy Social Media
Sign up for email updates To sign up for updates or to access your subscriber preferences, please click on the envelope icon in the page header above or click here.