Pentagon Personnel Chief Investigated for Being Unusually Mean
Monday, August 22, 2011
Critics of Clifford L. Stanley have accused the Department of Defense’s top personnel manager of gross mismanagement and abusing his authority, prompting the Pentagon’s inspector general to launch an investigation.
Stanley was sworn in as the undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness on February 10, 2010. In numerous complaints filed against him, he is portrayed as having fired respected senior staff, ignored programs for wounded troops, and used limited funds on pricey consultants and a swanky new conference room. According to one estimate, each chair in the room cost as much as the annual salary of a lance corporal.
He also spent more than $5 million on a contract with McKinsey & Co. that included an employee survey the results of which he refused to release.
“He has created a dysfunctional command marked by fear and mistrust through a capricious, tyrannical and arbitrary leadership,” reads one complaint, according to National Journal. “Waste, fraud and abuse of power are rampant. Even if he were competent, his destructive leadership would assure ‘P&R’ (personnel and readiness) mission failure.”
A retired two-star general in the U.S. Marine Corps, Stanley has allegedly ignored problems of sexual assault and rising suicide rates among military personnel. Since Stanley took office, the average processing time to evaluate the cases of wounded personnel has increased from 291 days to 404 days.
=Noel Brinkerhoff, David Wallechinsky
Pentagon Personnel Chief Investigated for 'Tyrannical' Leadership (by Megan Scully, National Journal)
- Top Stories
- Unusual News
- Where is the Money Going?
- Controversies
- U.S. and the World
- Appointments and Resignations
- Latest News
- Bashar al-Assad—The Fall of a Rabid AntiSemite
- Trump Announces He Will Switch Support from Russia to Ukraine
- Americans are Unhappy with the Direction of the Country…What’s New?
- Can Biden Murder Trump and Get Away With it?
- Electoral Advice for the Democratic and Republican Parties
Comments