GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: The Outsourcing Trap

• 18335
  

  Having worked as a government employee on nothing but "Most Efficient Organizations" for more than eight years, the bottom line is that it just isn't cost efficient. This is the consensus of those I work for, with and who regularly attend A-76 training. Even the "contractor" trainers will tell you that, if you ask! If you win in-house, you're really losing (some workforces have shaved more than 60 percent of the employees). Then you have to get creative to get the work done. If you go private sector, the contract is modified and modified and modified, you get it. There are no savings!! Let us do our job. Let us reengineer with what we have left. Contractors -- if we need you, we'll tell you right before you retire from the military!!!!

  MEO MEEEEO Daylight's gone and I want to go home Posted August 18, 2006 11:32 AM
• 18234
  

  I am totally over qualified for my job and those involved cannot even comprehend what I propose to do or what I have done. The Air Force does not know how to use my skills and when I try to use them the Air Force simply ignores them and tells me to stop doing things other ways than they are used to. They do not even know how to keep a checkbook or how to account under an accrual system. The same applies to DoD but they are gods and cannot be told they are wrong! Even when all the services disagree with an outside proposal the DoD concurs and moves ahead as if everything is fine. Also, there is more concern with maintaining low grade levels and low head counts for Air Force civilian employees. No wonder everyone wants to leave!

  Finally, contractors hire retired Air Force personnel and they know who to go after and how to wiggle into contracts to do civilian jobs. We have at least six contractors sitting in our offices doing the work that the civilian and military employees should be doing. The government people are more interested in going TDY for fun and good times and are letting the contractors do the work. Most of the contractors on site are working for a retired Air Force officer who used to be a manager in our division.

  This is a total waste of taxpayer money and should be stopped, but who is going to stop it? Not the guys who want to retire into such positions!

  Taxpayer Posted August 15, 2006 7:30 AM
• 18224
  

  The heart of this problem is basic policy breakdown. Elected officials are afraid to pay themselves salaries equivalent to private sector jobs with similar responsibilities. The same officials then limit salaries of public employees to what themselves make. This results in an artificial cap on the earnings of senior public executives. To gain some measure of competitiveness, public agencies have heavily enriched vacation and retirement benefits, and have tolerated a system in which management authority is severely limited. The combination of worker protection and high benefits overhead means that public workers tend to cost more than the same people in the private sector, even though private sector workers individually make more money.

  Who knows? Given the complete failure of Congress to enact rational public policy, maybe using contractors really is the best solution.

  Bob Schilling Posted August 14, 2006 2:10 PM
• 18220
  

  Wow. I never really thought that our section was that special but this article leads me to that conclusion. I note:

  "Public-private competitions show that even though a contractor might be paid more, the cost to government is less when training and benefits are factored in."

  Our basis for civilian employees GS-11 ranges from $51,972 to $67,567. The average special rate for GS-11-2210's, is $2,911 over the standard rate. Meaning the government pays top computer certified instructional professionals between $54,883 and $70,478 annually. While not knowing the exact annual cost of training and benefits per individual, in today's environment, I honestly do not believe that it equals $20,000 to $30,000 per individual. I am positive that when faced with hiring contractors to teach the same blocks information technology, we are required to use $110,000 per year as our basis of cost, and that rises ever year. Additionally every new instructor, whether they be contractor or civilian, that comes on board must be trained IAW our programs of instruction and the blocks to be taught.

  The author notes that the program under which he was hired was a training program from GS-7 to GS-12. Despite his recitation and recent news that the average GS employee earns $100,000-plus, the average employee is only a GS-9, earning much less.

  Also, in contention to the figures quoted, the trend is not for GS employees to head-hunt for contractors but the opposite. Most of our contractors are begging to get GS jobs. Why? With the contractors receiving approximately 50 percent of the contract cost, most contractor personnel receive less than the civilian employee, but the cost to the government per service is higher. This causes more personnel turnover and more training.

  Lastly, I'd really like to see a study done on the efficiency of contracting. The OPM is constantly deriding other sections for contract mismanagement. With the contracts costing us more money, difficulty in assuring that the government gets what it pays for, and the high rate of contract personnel turnover, perhaps I'm the only one but it seems to me that there could be a great case for waste and fraud in all these contracts.

  Tip off.

  Tip Posted August 14, 2006 11:25 AM
• 18218
  

  If you don't think that IT is a core competency in DoD, try running DoD without IT. DoD would be unable to supply the troops adequately without IT.

  Erich Darr Posted August 14, 2006 10:55 AM
• 18217
  

  We have had contractors in the past and they knew nothing about the programs we deal with, thus they were giving out the wrong information to our contacts. We no longer have contactors for my state.

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 14, 2006 10:46 AM