GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: New rules should make competition routine in government, says OMB

• 648
  

  Yes, Mr. Daniels made those remarks essentially saying GS employees provide poor service. Of course, Mr. Rumsfeld made the comment "we have miiltary and contractors in offices because we can't manage the civilians". Those two, plus their bosses, should make those comments on the front steps of the Pentagon before all the civilians who worked there 9/11. Soldiers do poorly in those jobs because of absenteeism (physical training, training holidays, personnel records, PT tests, TDY, family problems, etc) and push offices into turmoil since they turn over every 2-3 years. Contractors are boons in some cases, but mostly suck up scant budgets because the comapny's owner is a buddy of some manager/decisionmaker. I observed competition impacts under A76: the workers there were in turmoil to the point productivity dropped off (an understandable human reaction) plus the time needed to prepare for the competition. Now make them go through the same process repeatedly? Is our administration and leadership that sismpleminded? Or is it just good business sense to sell out your people to business? As my Dad used to say: "If you don't take care of your people, you don't deserve people". Government isn't a profitable business: we consume while providing a service (hence the word 'service' after civil or miiltary). Punish individuals who don't perform well; not the workforce nor the nation.

  GovExec.com reader Posted June 3, 2003 9:34 AM
• 638
  

  I hear the word "competition" and I have to laugh. There is no competition here. The Bush administration has made it very clear they want cheaper, more flexible, government workers replaced with contractors. Don't you dare call it a "public-private competition."

  If it were a real competition, both contractors and federal employees would have to compete for their jobs each year. Unfortunately contractors get 5, 10, and 15-year contracts that protect their jobs for outsourcing.

  If it was a real competition, all contracts would include the phrase "other duties as assigned" to make things equal and comparable. Let the employees form a government corporation like the post office to compete on an equal level.

  I have to laugh at all the "salute and execute" managers in the DoD, not one of them has an ounce of integrity or loyalty. Kowtowing to political whims, the spineless Senior Executive Service has dismantled one of the finest, fairest employers on earth. They have the gall to force feed the rank-and-file their views on ethics. They should be ashamed.

  GovExec.com reader Posted May 30, 2003 4:19 PM
• 637
  

  Did Mitch Daniels slam the civil servants with the comment "Every day that we stay under the old system, taxpayers were paying more for poorer service than they deserved." The people I know are dedicated gov workers that give there all and never stand up for themselves for fear of never being promoted again. There are several bad apples in every bushel and a few old timers that are burnt/worn out. But they are in the minority. We in the Army are always reminded that the soldier in the field can get killed if we don't do our job right. This workforce has produced the wonderful equipment that won us the Iraq freedom and now we are told that in order to be brought into the 21st century we have to lose our soul to the gov so they can play favorits more than they already do. Maybe when they can't get people to apply for these low paying jobs with unstable benifits they will reinvent the whole thing over (usually back to what it was).

  GovExec.com reader Posted May 30, 2003 2:36 PM
• 634
  

  "Best Value" means if we haven't contracted out enough work to keep the administration happy then "presto" despite the costs, the contractor's bid has the best value and wins. What is so wrong with being a career government employee? A few weeks back Kay Coles James stated that we shouldn't be paying someone for just showing up for work. In my 24 years of government employment with the same agency in the same job title (heaven forbid) I've seen my share of flash-in-the-pans. The agency spends lots of money training them and in a couple of years they use the job as a resume builder and move on.

  In this article OMB Director Mitch Daniels is quoted as saying in part that taxpayers were paying more for poorer service than they deserve. Why is it that if the government worker is doing the job or performing the service it is perceived as being poorer?

  GovExec.com reader Posted May 30, 2003 9:36 AM
• 633
  

  Mr. Daniels' comments, "Because of the bulkiness and complexity of the A-76 process as this administration found it, we've had far too few competitions and far too few competitors," he said. "Every day that went by under the old system, taxpayers were paying more for poorer service than they deserved," should serve him well as the future manager of career state employees in the State of Indiana. I've never felt more "incompetent" and "devalued" by any other Administration in my nearly 20 years of Federal service. Good luck Mitch!

  GovExec.com reader Posted May 30, 2003 8:39 AM