GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Administration decries 'insourcing' measure

• 4877
  

  Outsourcing is smoke and mirrors accounting that doesn't save total tax dollars. It does, however, increase the chance of favoritism in contract letting. I smell the odor of "union busting" as the hidden agenda along with increasing the power of the "Good Ol' rich Boys Clique". "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!"

  GovExec.com reader Posted May 28, 2004 1:49 PM
• 4817
  

  I'll just bet they do! They "decry" anything or anyone that questions the way they want to do things - and the way they want to do things is to destroy the advances of the last 100 years, turning the working person into an early-Industrial-Revolution-style slave. Let us "decry" certain persons' behinds with . . . .

  GovExec.com reader Posted May 25, 2004 3:17 PM
• 4811
  

  Let's analyze the numbers: A GS12-13 makes 30-45 dollars per hour, plus benefits. We pay 68-120 dollars per hour to a company for a contractor, who is probably lucky to be making 20-30 dollars per hour. These numbers prove that outsourcing is much cheaper, don't they? If that is the case, give me 80 dollars per hour, and I'll take care of my own benefits!

  GovExec.com reader Posted May 25, 2004 12:20 PM
• 4808
  

  Interesting piece. I'd support it though why only 10%? (If you're going to set an arbitrary number, why not go for broke and negotiate down?)

  I'm also curious who AFGE plans on writing these proposals and how they plan on paying for the effort? In private companies, either the appropriate staff is tasked to write a proposal on non-chargeable hours, or there is an overhead job description that does so with the organization assuming the cost as part of doing business. Are we going to have to create and pay a corps of government 1102s to write government bids for these solicitations? Or will AFGE do it and provide a tangible service/product for the dues-paying workforce they represent? My guess is that AFGE expects the government to give the regular workforce time off from duties with pay to do so. I hope lessons are taken from the A-76/FA programs regarding rank and file support of developing government proposals for competitively bid work.

  GovExec.com reader Posted May 25, 2004 8:52 AM
• 4807
  

  I find it rather amusing that the people who have always pushed arbitary quotas are now against them Ms. Garman, heal thyself!!

  Steve Johnson Posted May 25, 2004 8:51 AM
• 4789
  

  Gee.......ya want to know why our economy is really in the toilet -- outsourcing pretty much everything! Next thing you know, our leaders in DC will try to outsource our military! I can just see it now - calling India or some other "low bidder" to get hold of someone in the Defense Department to get our military rolling. We need the Marines to respond to somewhere in the world (but first, we need to call India to set it up!)... WHAT NEXT?????????? We need a serious reality check at the White House!

  Lawrence R. McKeough Posted May 24, 2004 9:40 AM
• 4771
  

  The Federal Employees' Unions seem to give mixed signals. They want don't want federal jobs contracted out. But, they don't want to admit that the government has serious management problems that waste a lot of resources. There has to be a reduction in force. But, it has to be done smartly. The Unions can't keep protecting non-productive workers. They need to demand accountability.

  But, these Unions also turn their backs on the abuse of federal worker rights. The corruption of the federal workers compensation program is a good example. The Department of Labor has nearly ruined the federal employees workers compensation program. Injured federal workers are being victimized. But, the Unions don't want to make waves. So, who are they really protecting?

  Are Federal Employee Unions representing the workers or are they just well organized lobby groups?

  Rob Murphy Posted May 22, 2004 9:28 PM