The recruiting office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Oklahoma City is where a new, highly politicized recruiting office has been set up.
The Corps of Engineering is part of the Army Corps, which oversees many of the Corps’ civilian agencies.
Its leadership is comprised of a senior official who oversees all of the federal agencies and the secretaries of the military services.
The new office, called the “Recruiting Support Office,” was created on July 1 by former Republican Army Lt.
Gen. David C. O’Neill.
The office is headed by Lt.
Col. Chris O’Leary, a former Army lieutenant general who has spent his career overseeing recruiting and military affairs at the Corps.
O’Leary’s appointment was welcomed by a number of Army Corps officials, including the former chief of staff to the Army General Counsel and the former general counsel to the Chief of Staff of the US Army.
But O’Reilly’s nomination has been met with criticism from the Army, which has spent years trying to rein in recruiting efforts.
Critics say the office lacks the independence necessary to conduct a nonpartisan, objective evaluation of recruiters and the Corps itself.
Oriental Institute of Technology professor Michael O. Pendergast, who has written extensively on the recruitment process, called O’Loyson’s hiring an example of the new “bully pulpit” that he has envisioned.
“The leadership in the Corps has become a bully pulpit, and this is one of many examples of that,” Pendergarth said.
“I don’t know that we’re going to see a lot of changes, but I do know that the leadership of the corps has gotten out of hand in a number.
In a number areas.
They’re trying to do this and they’re trying not to do it.
They want to make this a top-down process, but they’re not doing it.
The Corps leadership is not taking any responsibility for what’s happening in recruiting.
The leadership in recruiting is trying to control the process, to control what recruits say, what recruiters do, what corps officers do.”
The recruitment office has not responded to requests for comment.
O-Leary was recently promoted to deputy chief of the Office of Recruiting.
Pendergarh says O’Connor’s nomination was an attempt to control recruiting in an increasingly politicized environment, but he said he believes O’ Learys role was much more limited than what the office of recruitment had envisioned.
Penders comments echo those of former Army General William McRaven, who served in the recruiting office from 2004-07.
He told the Associated Press that while he admired O’Olesons work, he believed the office was more focused on recruiting than actually helping recruiters.
“My concern is with the people who were appointed by the president,” McRaven said.
“What are they going to do about it?
What is going to happen to these guys, because these are people who are there to make sure the corps keeps growing and the corps continues to get better and the president continues to grow as well?”
The recruiting office’s hiring, however, is a sign that the political battle over the corps’ recruitment efforts is far from over.
A recent poll conducted by the Army’s Institute for Personnel and Readiness showed that 70 percent of its personnel supported the hiring of O’ Loyson.
“It’s not going to end,” Penders said.
But if the recruiting process continues to go awry, O’Learys office will be a stark reminder of just how far the corps is willing to go to recruit, whether it’s at the state or federal level.