Contracting gov't jobs and services

[task0778]

Back in the 70s and 80s, the military services began an effort to save money by converting certain jobs and career fields from active duty to civil service, because in the long run it was cheaper after you factor in the benefits. Active and retired military around here will probably remember when the gov't used to send out a report to every service member telling them how much compensation they were getting over and above their paycheck, and it was substantial (healthcare, retirement, etc). Which might have been overstated, I thought so at the time but the point is that long term it's cheaper to go civilian for most support type jobs. Warfighters are another story, but you didn't need a military guy to process your paperwork, provide base security, and so many other staff positions.

Then somebody realized that many of those jobs could be contracted out to a civilian company, where a contractor person could do the same job as the civil service person but without the long term benefits. When I retired from the military, I went back to work as a contractor, pretty much doing the same thing I did while wearing the uniform. I got a bigger paycheck, but few other benefits other than what the civilian contracting company offered. But again, it was much cheaper for the gov't, and here's the thing: contractors don't go on strike and they are unaffected by a gov't shutdown. At least we weren't, and that is where the gov't needs to make some changes.

Most of us know about the problems in our airports with the TSA agents calling in sick cuz they ain't getting paid. What I think the gov't should do, once this bullshit shutdown is over, is to convert as many of those jobs and functions over to contractor personnel so the next time we have a shutdown the impact won't be as great. Ideally, we should never have a gov't shutdown in the 1st place, it ought to be automatic that whatever was passed in an appropriations bill or CR automatically raises the gov't debt ceiling. Even if that happens, the gov't ought to contract out as many of these services as possible cuz it's cheaper.

Oh, and one other thing: you can fire a contractor person a heckuva lot easier than you can a civil service person that has a union behind them. The contractor still has laws and regs preventing them from being treated unfairly, but it shouldn't take an act of God to fire you if such action is warranted. You can keep the civil service people or military officers in charge of operations (supervisory roles), but I believe there is a lot of money to be saved. We may not be able to do more with less, but we can do what we're doing now for less.

 

[rightwinger]

Back in the 70s and 80s, the military services began an effort to save money by converting certain jobs and career fields from active duty to civil service, because in the long run it was cheaper after you factor in the benefits. Active and retired military around here will probably remember when the gov't used to send out a report to every service member telling them how much compensation they were getting over and above their paycheck, and it was substantial (healthcare, retirement, etc). Which might have been overstated, I thought so at the time but the point is that long term it's cheaper to go civilian for most support type jobs. Warfighters are another story, but you didn't need a military guy to process your paperwork, provide base security, and so many other staff positions.

Then somebody realized that many of those jobs could be contracted out to a civilian company, where a contractor person could do the same job as the civil service person but without the long term benefits. When I retired from the military, I went back to work as a contractor, pretty much doing the same thing I did while wearing the uniform. I got a bigger paycheck, but few other benefits other than what the civilian contracting company offered. But again, it was much cheaper for the gov't, and here's the thing: contractors don't go on strike and they are unaffected by a gov't shutdown. At least we weren't, and that is where the gov't needs to make some changes.

Most of us know about the problems in our airports with the TSA agents calling in sick cuz they ain't getting paid. What I think the gov't should do, once this bullshit shutdown is over, is to convert as many of those jobs and functions over to contractor personnel so the next time we have a shutdown the impact won't be as great. Ideally, we should never have a gov't shutdown in the 1st place, it ought to be automatic that whatever was passed in an appropriations bill or CR automatically raises the gov't debt ceiling. Even if that happens, the gov't ought to contract out as many of these services as possible cuz it's cheaper.

Oh, and one other thing: you can fire a contractor person a heckuva lot easier than you can a civil service person that has a union behind them. The contractor still has laws and regs preventing them from being treated unfairly, but it shouldn't take an act of God to fire you if such action is warranted. You can keep the civil service people or military officers in charge of operations (supervisory roles), but I believe there is a lot of money to be saved. We may not be able to do more with less, but we can do what we're doing now for less.

I worked 33 years as a DoD civilian and 7 years as a Govt contractor doing essentially the same job

As a contractor, I worked during shutdowns because my company had already been paid for the year. We kept the lights on, but there were many functions that could not be done.

A tremendous number of Govt and Military jobs have already been contracted out.

 

[task0778]

Back in the 70s and 80s, the military services began an effort to save money by converting certain jobs and career fields from active duty to civil service, because in the long run it was cheaper after you factor in the benefits. Active and retired military around here will probably remember when the gov't used to send out a report to every service member telling them how much compensation they were getting over and above their paycheck, and it was substantial (healthcare, retirement, etc). Which might have been overstated, I thought so at the time but the point is that long term it's cheaper to go civilian for most support type jobs. Warfighters are another story, but you didn't need a military guy to process your paperwork, provide base security, and so many other staff positions.

Then somebody realized that many of those jobs could be contracted out to a civilian company, where a contractor person could do the same job as the civil service person but without the long term benefits. When I retired from the military, I went back to work as a contractor, pretty much doing the same thing I did while wearing the uniform. I got a bigger paycheck, but few other benefits other than what the civilian contracting company offered. But again, it was much cheaper for the gov't, and here's the thing: contractors don't go on strike and they are unaffected by a gov't shutdown. At least we weren't, and that is where the gov't needs to make some changes.

Most of us know about the problems in our airports with the TSA agents calling in sick cuz they ain't getting paid. What I think the gov't should do, once this bullshit shutdown is over, is to convert as many of those jobs and functions over to contractor personnel so the next time we have a shutdown the impact won't be as great. Ideally, we should never have a gov't shutdown in the 1st place, it ought to be automatic that whatever was passed in an appropriations bill or CR automatically raises the gov't debt ceiling. Even if that happens, the gov't ought to contract out as many of these services as possible cuz it's cheaper.

Oh, and one other thing: you can fire a contractor person a heckuva lot easier than you can a civil service person that has a union behind them. The contractor still has laws and regs preventing them from being treated unfairly, but it shouldn't take an act of God to fire you if such action is warranted. You can keep the civil service people or military officers in charge of operations (supervisory roles), but I believe there is a lot of money to be saved. We may not be able to do more with less, but we can do what we're doing now for less.

I worked 33 years as a DoD civilian and 7 years as a Govt contractor doing essentially the same job

As a contractor, I worked during shutdowns because my company had already been paid for the year. We kept the lights on, but there were many functions that could not be done.

A tremendous number of Govt and Military jobs have already been contracted out.

True, there are a number of gov't functions that by law cannot or should not be contracted out. BUT - unless prevented for good reasons, every function/job/agency/service ought to be re-evaluated for what it does and if there is a better way to do it. True, a large number of jobs have already been contracted out, but a large number could still be replaced, beginning with the TSA. I'd take a hard look at every job that has been furloughed or unpaid during this shutdown to see if it could be contracted out. It's about damn time our federal gov't got steamlined and more efficient.

 

[rightwinger]

Back in the 70s and 80s, the military services began an effort to save money by converting certain jobs and career fields from active duty to civil service, because in the long run it was cheaper after you factor in the benefits. Active and retired military around here will probably remember when the gov't used to send out a report to every service member telling them how much compensation they were getting over and above their paycheck, and it was substantial (healthcare, retirement, etc). Which might have been overstated, I thought so at the time but the point is that long term it's cheaper to go civilian for most support type jobs. Warfighters are another story, but you didn't need a military guy to process your paperwork, provide base security, and so many other staff positions.

Then somebody realized that many of those jobs could be contracted out to a civilian company, where a contractor person could do the same job as the civil service person but without the long term benefits. When I retired from the military, I went back to work as a contractor, pretty much doing the same thing I did while wearing the uniform. I got a bigger paycheck, but few other benefits other than what the civilian contracting company offered. But again, it was much cheaper for the gov't, and here's the thing: contractors don't go on strike and they are unaffected by a gov't shutdown. At least we weren't, and that is where the gov't needs to make some changes.

Most of us know about the problems in our airports with the TSA agents calling in sick cuz they ain't getting paid. What I think the gov't should do, once this bullshit shutdown is over, is to convert as many of those jobs and functions over to contractor personnel so the next time we have a shutdown the impact won't be as great. Ideally, we should never have a gov't shutdown in the 1st place, it ought to be automatic that whatever was passed in an appropriations bill or CR automatically raises the gov't debt ceiling. Even if that happens, the gov't ought to contract out as many of these services as possible cuz it's cheaper.

Oh, and one other thing: you can fire a contractor person a heckuva lot easier than you can a civil service person that has a union behind them. The contractor still has laws and regs preventing them from being treated unfairly, but it shouldn't take an act of God to fire you if such action is warranted. You can keep the civil service people or military officers in charge of operations (supervisory roles), but I believe there is a lot of money to be saved. We may not be able to do more with less, but we can do what we're doing now for less.

I worked 33 years as a DoD civilian and 7 years as a Govt contractor doing essentially the same job

As a contractor, I worked during shutdowns because my company had already been paid for the year. We kept the lights on, but there were many functions that could not be done.

A tremendous number of Govt and Military jobs have already been contracted out.

True, there are a number of gov't functions that by law cannot or should not be contracted out. BUT - unless prevented for good reasons, every function/job/agency/service ought to be re-evaluated for what it does and if there is a better way to do it. True, a large number of jobs have already been contracted out, but a large number could still be replaced, beginning with the TSA. I'd take a hard look at every job that has been furloughed or unpaid during this shutdown to see if it could be contracted out. It's about damn time our federal gov't got steamlined and more efficient.

To me, TSA is like all those military base security positions that were contracted out. I see no reason they could not be contractors with a government shift supervisor

But the Government should be looking at doing its job without shutdowns and not creating staffing that assumes shutdowns are the norm

There should be a price to pay for shutting down Government and it should not be paid by the employees

 

[Claudette]

Oh for Christs sake.

Those employees will get back pay for every day they are furloughed.

No one in the private sector would get back pay if furloughed.