Impact of past defense cuts should warn of risks

Okay LITS let me get you up and over the fuming part regarding waste. Again, I do agree there is waste, but disagree on some of the places you are targeting.

Bullet is no longer a contractor, but now an AF GS.

1. Due to his AF career, he now gets @ 40 days+ of leave a yr as a GS right out the door, plus comp time...contractor he got 23 days. Now because Obama's administration is reducing contractors and converting them to GS position, our taxpayer dollars are paying for our(Bullet and mine) bennies. I must say that I told Bullet if he ever uses up his 40+ days of leave and comp time expect a divorce, because I may love him, just not enough to have him home with me full time 3 months out of the yr. If you work in the Pentagon, the duty day is 8-4, but everyone knows you actually work at least 7 to 4:30-5:00...comp time tallies quickly. In one week you basically could earn 1 day of comp time....multiply it out, and you could have 90 days off within a yr when you include the original 40.

2. His pay is less when you look at taxable salary, but he now has COLA again, and that is not taxable, which means for us the salary is more since 24% is not taxable. GS 14-15 positions are in the 6 figures, base, and then they get their COLA.

He also gets METRO commuting stipends again, even though he slugs in to the Pentagon...ready for this...we still have his monthly Metro cards from our 1st time here 02-05 that we are using. That is true waste and abuse, because he is not unique, just look at the slug lines at the Pentagon, and you can quickly tally, that they never use their Metro allowance, but just keep getting it because the way the system works. We are talking thousands of dollars per member per yr that goes to what? Keeping the Metro alive because they buy Metro tickets for the military embers while they slug to work which costs nothing? I might be wrong, but if I recall correctly it is @1300 a yr.

3. GS jobs are as close to lifetime positions as you can get, once he passes his probationary point, he is safe, unless he goes off and kills someone:rolleyes: they can't get rid of him.

4. You will love this one...Bullet on the DOD dime attended a conference for 4 days in Annapolis MD. They paid for his hotel, transit and food (per diem). Here's where I see the waste...tell me how far is Annapolis from the Pentagon? I would love anyone who is familiar to the distance between Annapolis and the Pentagon, explain why it could not have been done in Crystal City. Remember this was a joint conference between the military and the contractors, but I would think the Pentagon has enough leverage to say "we want the conference, but our budget won't cover the costs for TDY, thus, let's do it in Crystal City". They didn't, instead they paid out the wazoo.

Interesting article about GS and state/city workers. Something to add to the discussion.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinio...ic_workers_you_support_S4qBz7VBAMgbzaJ4klsIhO

Now before many of you have a coronary over this, a point is made by this quote:


"Meanwhile, these scary statistics also show that a shrinking group of private workers -- now numbering 107 million -- is paying the salaries and benefits of more than 22 million government workers. Thus, every five private-sector workers chip in to cover the costs of one government worker. (Maybe taxpayers should get cards with the name and picture of the government worker they're sponsoring.)

Fact is, private workers are being taxed to death so they can pay their federal counterparts more than twice what they themselves earn.



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinio..._support_S4qBz7VBAMgbzaJ4klsIhO#ixzz0xfy1iHTV
"
 
Uh, Hornet...check Hulu or someplace...

That actually would be James Tiberius Kirk...Picard came MUCH later.

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83

Oh these young kids. Though before my time originally, in the mid '80s Star Trek was replayed in the afternoon on the fledgling Nickelodeon. These young pups weren't even around yet ;)

Also, since he didn't technically use the infinitive form, I don't think that counts as a split infinitive, does it? I think the "be" was actually conjugated with "they" and didn't exist in the infinitive "to be" form there. But I could be wrong.
 
Oh man...

"Old fart?!" :eek:

Well if JTK was "before your time" then I'm certain you wouldn't understand...

1. Fireball XL5!
2. SIG sir!
3. "Where is the Tardis?"
4. Where is Destiny Angel?
5. "Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!"
6. "I zee NOTHINK, NOTHINK!"

And I grew up in the UK, I was watching "re-runs" before there were re-runs!

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
 
Recruiting has been given as a reason to retain both airshows and military bands. Usually, during times of austere budgets, downsizing is taking effect and recruiting is not an issue. The Navy did away with airshows post-Vietnam due to this very reason.

Probably the reason that the airshow aircrews at Andrews were berthed on the local economy is that the BOQs have been closed for renovation/replacement the past three years. The first of the two new ones just opened last month.
 
Max, I saw that article a week or so ago. A couple of things to place into that equation which are getting lost in the mix:

1. The federal employee typically is a sr mgmt position, thus, it is not comparing apples to apples when they discuss the benefits/pay issue. You don't have the traditional mix of pay grades...mainly because the low end paying jobs are contracted out to the private sector. The guards at the Pentagon are not DOD employees, they are contracted employees who work for a private company. The suits are being converted to DOD employees. These are employees with Masters degrees and yrs of knowledge and experience in a unqiue aspect that is needed by the DOD.

Additionally, DC where many of the federal employees work is a high COL area, where the avg home is 200K+ compared to other parts of the country where the avg home could be 100K. For example, in Goldsboro NC, you an buy a new 3000 sqft home in a pool community for 200K, in NoVA, you would be lucky to buy a 40 yr old 1500 sqft TOWNHOME in the worst school district.

2. The increase in federal jobs came about due to the reversal of the Clinton administration's position under President Obama. President Obama decided that he would convert these contracting jobs over to government positions. This, of course is actually skewing the picture because in that article it makes people think that federal employees don't pay taxes like the private employee.


Personally, I disagree with the conversion, because I believe that in the long term tax payers will pay more in this method, than if they had kept it from a contracting standpoint. As a contractor L-3 Comm, paid for our bennies, including health insurance and retirement, now the govt will be picking up the tab. However, right now in the short term they are saving money just from a DOD bottom line aspect. Traditionally the govt pays about twice the amount for the contractor than they would if they are a govt employee.

Obviously, the conversion also hurts the defense contracting world because as these employees convert, the firm will need less support in house (i.e. HR, administrators, mgmt, etc), thus, what are they going to do? They are going to start cutting back on their costs by laying people off, creating more unemployment and closing facilities, which creates a commercial real estate void. People believe as homeowners that they are the big chunk of RE tax revenue, when in reality it is the commercial sector that contributes a higher amount to the revenues. Close enough commercial buildings and the town will increase personal RE taxes, which now causes a new problem ... FORECLOSURES because tax increases may push them out of their home, or consider to walk away because they are already upside down in their home. Lower home sales, now impacts a whole new field...if you can't afford your home, it is highly unlikely you are spending money at Lowe's to renovate it, thus, the retail industry is now taking the hit. Additionally, as foreclosures rise, RE revenues will decline, which means the burden has to be spread across those still in their homes, and now their taxes rise again to try to keep the budget aligned. This is also why Obama had to push that money through for govt jobs, such as teachers, because if they didn't the county would be forced to lay off teachers, fire fighters, police, etc, AND the cycle continues in a negative economic cycle.

Now to me, what I just laid out from the indirect reactions of converting the positions to govt has a far reaching more dramatic impact on the economy than had they continued the contractor way of life. I don't believe that this administration actually did follow the trail when they took this route. I think they saw the bottom line from a defense budget position, without placing a value on the economic impact that this would have from a wholistic standpoint regarding the entire economy.
 
Max, I saw that article a week or so ago. A couple of things to place into that equation which are getting lost in the mix:

1. The federal employee typically is a sr mgmt position, thus, it is not comparing apples to apples when they discuss the benefits/pay issue. You don't have the traditional mix of pay grades...mainly because the low end paying jobs are contracted out to the private sector. The guards at the Pentagon are not DOD employees, they are contracted employees who work for a private company. The suits are being converted to DOD employees. These are employees with Masters degrees and yrs of knowledge and experience in a unique aspect that is needed by the DOD.

How is it not apples to apples, that article is not about the low level jobs. Taking these contracting jobs away from the private sector [like Haliburton et al], has been job one of this administration. It's the GS10-15 (BTW, I'm not up on my GS acronyms so please bear with me) plum jobs. To just claim they are only farming out the low level work is the straw man argument. It's the same argument Unions make against non union companies. Their people are better and therefore deserve more pay. They are not, they are the same people only working for the higher overhead organization.


Additionally, DC where many of the federal employees work is a high COL area, where the avg home is 200K+ compared to other parts of the country where the avg home could be 100K. For example, in Goldsboro NC, you an buy a new 3000 sqft home in a pool community for 200K, in NoVA, you would be lucky to buy a 40 yr old 1500 sqft TOWNHOME in the worst school district.

I think your numbers are a little low, I'd at least double that number but again, the free market is where these people should be hired and not the Government. The taxpayers free market pool will shrink, and ultimately, we all know it will cost us more with the Government running things. Is it a great deal for retired military, obviously yes it is but, it's not a sustainable system, especially with a major economic recession going on. You've also candidly pointed out some of the "perks" offered that cost more and are example of waste.

2. The increase in federal jobs came about due to the reversal of the Clinton administration's position under President Obama. President Obama decided that he would convert these contracting jobs over to government positions. This, of course is actually skewing the picture because in that article it makes people think that federal employees don't pay taxes like the private employee.

Clinton shrunk the Government? Clinton downsized the Military and grew the Government. GS rose at a healthy pace during the Clinton years.

This is not skewing the picture, most people know all Government Workers pay taxes. The only thing the article skews is it makes people think only the Government can pay wages and benefits, and when all the low level jobs get farmed out, the Government will have to swoop in and pay their health coverage just because a private contractor will hire minimum wage guards for the pentagon, because they can. Those same "Master Degree and years of knowledge and experience" employees would [in the free market] demand high wages and benefits, and the Government wouldn't be maxing out pay on all it's top management pay. Why? We all know that the jobs will be filled with retired military with their converted military pay to GS pay will max out near the top levels. I think they have this system back wards, have the Government hire guards, janitors and food service people. I can just hear the argument now "These poor pentagon guards are trying to live off minimum wage and have no health care, we need to take them over now" and whala!!! more Government employees.


Personally, I disagree with the conversion, because I believe that in the long term tax payers will pay more in this method, than if they had kept it from a contracting standpoint. As a contractor L-3 Comm, paid for our bennies, including health insurance and retirement, now the govt will be picking up the tab.

We agree, I just included it above.

However, right now in the short term they are saving money just from a DOD bottom line aspect. Traditionally the govt pays about twice the amount for the contractor than they would if they are a govt employee.

I disagree, can you post some supporting info on this? I think if you factor everything in, the Government only pays more because of benefits and maxing out pay. We could go into a productivity thing but I don't want to start a firestorm...

Obviously, the conversion also hurts the defense contracting world because as these employees convert, the firm will need less support in house (i.e. HR, administrators, mgmt, etc), thus, what are they going to do? They are going to start cutting back on their costs by laying people off, creating more unemployment and closing facilities, which creates a commercial real estate void. People believe as homeowners that they are the big chunk of RE tax revenue, when in reality it is the commercial sector that contributes a higher amount to the revenues. Close enough commercial buildings and the town will increase personal RE taxes, which now causes a new problem ... FORECLOSURES because tax increases may push them out of their home, or consider to walk away because they are already upside down in their home. Lower home sales, now impacts a whole new field...if you can't afford your home, it is highly unlikely you are spending money at Lowe's to renovate it, thus, the retail industry is now taking the hit. Additionally, as foreclosures rise, RE revenues will decline, which means the burden has to be spread across those still in their homes, and now their taxes rise again to try to keep the budget aligned. This is also why Obama had to push that money through for govt jobs, such as teachers, because if they didn't the county would be forced to lay off teachers, fire fighters, police, etc, AND the cycle continues in a negative economic cycle.

Some good points but I disagree with "that push through for govt jobs",
you say that last "vacation postponing" bail-out show last week was to keep teachers from being laid off? On the contrary, that money was to shore up the unfunded union NEA pensions and payback to Unions. Plain and simple, teachers were still laid off.

Now to me, what I just laid out from the indirect reactions of converting the positions to govt has a far reaching more dramatic impact on the economy than had they continued the contractor way of life. I don't believe that this administration actually did follow the trail when they took this route. I think they saw the bottom line from a defense budget position, without placing a value on the economic impact that this would have from a wholistic standpoint regarding the entire economy.


This was in one fell swoop, a growing of the Government and more of a reason for downsizing the military budget. JMHO
 
How is it not apples to apples, that article is not about the low level jobs. Taking these contracting jobs away from the private sector [like Haliburton et al], has been job one of this administration. It's the GS10-15 (BTW, I'm not up on my GS acronyms so please bear with me) plum jobs. To just claim they are only farming out the low level work is the straw man argument. It's the same argument Unions make against non union companies. Their people are better and therefore deserve more pay. They are not, they are the same people only working for the higher overhead organization.

To argue in favor of civilian contractors in lieu of government employees from their salary standpoint is a falacy. A government employee will have 30% or so overhead attributed to his position. A civilian contractor not only has this directo overhead but also the infrastructure support to hire, train, support, and keep that individual in place. This is where the inefficiencies are. I cannot remember exactly but I have seen numbers in the past which indicate that it costs the goverment three times or so the salary of an individual to keep him in place. It is also why Halaburton et al is recording such huge profits.
 
It's the GS10-15 (BTW, I'm not up on my GS acronyms so please bear with me) plum jobs. To just claim they are only farming out the low level work is the straw man argument

First off GS 15 is the top of the GS scale before they step over into the SES. Typically, a GS 10 would be comparative to an O3 in the military and GS 14-15 to Lt. Col. Within these GS numbers are a second factor deciding pay, and that is the step factor. There are 10 steps within each GS scale. I have sold homes to GS7's and to GS 15's, their pay scale ranges widely...@70k+. many of the GS7's are recent college grads and they make only in the 40K range. The GS 15 people, are in their 40's and have spent 20+ yrs in their career field PLUS they traditionally hold at least a Master's degree. A GS 15 makes about 135K in the DC area. The SES level is @145k+. Making 135K sounds great if you live in Iowa, but if you live in DC making 135K is not the same.

This of course also brings me back to the apples to apples if you are comparing salaries because it is not only the job type, but where the employee is employed. Nobody thinks twice about teachers making more in NJ than NC, because COL is dramatically different, and that is taken into account.

For GS positions, the majority of them are centered in metropolitan areas, thus the salaries will mimic the areas. There are few GS positions in the mid-west, i.e. Idaho, Wyoming, N Dak., S. D., etc where the median salaries are lower, but were taken in account with this study due to it being from a national standpoint. This skews the pay scales for each part.

I am not a union supporter because I disagree with their theory that they have better people...last time I checked the guy in Ohio that builds a Honda, is non-unionized, and I highly doubt any consumer would say Honda builds a poor quality vehicle.

The difference in this scenario, is that the GS positions are being offered for the high majority to educated white collar employees. They are viewed as management. This skews the system, because we are talking about comparing a system that is mostly white collared against a system that has both white and blue collared workers. I would prefer if they did a study, where they said let's compare x educated w/ x experience in govt to private.

Now let's also address the irony of this article. As I pointed out earlier, a GS position is truly comparable to the military system. When you retire out of the military, and take a job in the govt, you traditionally slide straight over into a system that is equivalent pay wise to what you made as a military member. The irony is, yr after yr, studies prove that military members make less than their civilian counterparts. However, in this situation, they are saying that now they make more, even though they are making almost an identical salary as they did prior to retiring.

As for fed. employees. their pay raises for yrs have been held to 0.5% below COL increase, which means every yr they stay they are losing money. The military's pay raise is 1.0% above COL.

Clinton shrunk the Government?
Actually Clinton decided to convert these GS jobs that I am speaking of from Govt to contractor. Obama has decided to reverse this situation.
Don't you remember how people balked when he said he reduced the size of the federal govt? Yep, he did, he did it by playing the musical chairs game. He took them off of the federal payrolls and put them into the private sector.

Clinton, did not shrink the military. The RIFS began in 1991 under Bush 41 and ended in 93. Clinton was the guy who gave the military big time pay increases, probably the biggest in history. I remember that for a couple of yrs. targeted yr groups/ranks got @10% increases.

In full disclosure, I did not vote for Clinton. I saw the RIFs and the pay raises, like I see them now, more of an action of the MOCs because they hold the purse strings for DOD.

You've also candidly pointed out some of the "perks" offered that cost more and are example of waste.

No argument, and I believe it is waste that they can easily get rid of, if they used common sense. Hey, I'll be honest another waste in the fed program is the credit card situation...yr after yr we hear about the waste because some dishonest employees abuse the system. When the credit card program started yrs ago in the military, it was horrendous, but at least in all of the squadrons that Bullet worked in, they got smart. They took your govt issued credit card and locked it in a vault until you were going TDY and when you returned it was collected again. In the govt it sits in your wallet 24/7/365 regardless if you even have a job that requires you to go TDY. Then, they sit in shock and go OMG, people are using the credit card for their personal trips!

I disagree, can you post some supporting info on this? I think if you factor everything in, the Government only pays more because of benefits and maxing out pay

I can only state from anecdotal information within our social circle, that I know the contract is usually 2x the amount. For example, our DD's best friends father is the Executive VP for a defense contracting company. He has told us that the avg contract is about 250K per yr that the govt pays for that position, and the avg salary is @ 130K per yr. Another client of mine works as the HR director for a different defense contractor and she has said the exact same thing. 3 of our friends who worked for various contractors (RAND, SAIC and Booze Allen) left these companies to open their own firms. Why? Because they saw the exact same thing occur and decided that they would rather be the one keeping the money and filling the position with someone else, than being the person that filled the job.

I can't say that this occurs across the nation, but it does here.

On the contrary, that money was to shore up the unfunded union NEA pensions and payback to Unions. Plain and simple, teachers were still laid off
This maybe true for your area, but in NoVA, and our county, it was announced that because of this bail out, it allowed the county to keep teachers afterall since it reduced the deficit in their budget.

I am not a fan of the NEA. IMHO, what they recently did in NJ made me repulsed. The long and the short of it is Christie told them we are asking you to not take a pay raise this yr because the budget deficit, and if they demand it, the students are the ones that will pay for it. NEA told him to shove it, and that they would pay the raise.
Here's a link to some of it
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2010/06/gov-christie-unions-vs-education/

Here's a video clip that to me really shows the greed within the NEA.
http://www.thefoxnation.com/health-care/2010/07/29/watch-chris-christie-tells-truth-nbc-news-shocked

This was in one fell swoop, a growing of the Government and more of a reason for downsizing the military budget. JMHO

Again, I am not disagreeing at all. I have said multiple times I oppose this, but my reasons for opposing this differ from yours. I don't see that the GS system is out of line with the "real" world in pay scale or the majority of their benefits.

Here is the GS scale. If you take the time to look at it, I highly doubt you would disagree with me
http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/pdf/gs.pdf (before placing in locality pay) In DC, that is about 24% of the salary base.

I have also linked an open job from USAjobs.gov. http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.a...b&FedEmp=N&FedPub=Y&AVSDM=2010-07-28+00:03:00 This is a starting GS 11 position. Note under the requirements you must have a bachelor's degree AND at least 24 hours toward a higher degree. All for the salary range of 85-115K. For the non-college grad with work experience or recent college grad here is an employment opportunity http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.a...b&FedEmp=N&FedPub=Y&AVSDM=2010-08-19+00:03:00 Salary is between 34 -44 K a yr. I just don't see that is insane or out of balance for Washington DC.

I can tell you that at Bullet's office they are doing the conversion right now, the majority of the contractors are being cut by more than 25K to go to the GS position. Will they take it? Yes, because the economy stinks right now, but that doesn't mean they won't be looking for a new job somewhere else. The reason for them taking such a drastic cut is some of them have been with their contracting company for 15+ yrs, in essence the govt can reduce their costs by cutting the most experienced employees and bringing in new blood that will work for less...something that is very commonplace in the civilian world.
 
Last edited:
SES?

Apologies for off-topic. What is SES? I have a retired military friend who has worked for a defense contractor for years and is thinking of relocating to MD/DC area for a SES position in the Pentagon. I would imagine going from the private sector into the Pentagon, in a civilian position, would be the worst of both worlds. I can see the advantages of being in uniform and of working in the private sector but working in the big building without a uniform sounds like the definition of frustration. Is SES that appealing?
 
Apologies for off-topic. What is SES? I have a retired military friend who has worked for a defense contractor for years and is thinking of relocating to MD/DC area for a SES position in the Pentagon. I would imagine going from the private sector into the Pentagon, in a civilian position, would be the worst of both worlds. I can see the advantages of being in uniform and of working in the private sector but working in the big building without a uniform sounds like the definition of frustration. Is SES that appealing?

The "SES" is the Senior Executive Service. The SHORT explanation: when appointed to the SES you basically assume the equivalent position of a "flag" officer (general/admiral).

There's a LOT more to it, but that's the SHORT version.

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
 
Fleiger is spot on. SES is a Flag officer equivalent from a military standpoint. These positions are rare, and not common place.

SES positions are usually by name requests. Our friends and family members that are SES, never searched out the position, they were recruited for the position. On Friday they retired, and on Monday they walked in as an SES. Those facts alone should tell you how appealing it is from an employment standpoint.

Just like any GS position, but even more so for SES, this is not an interview, and you are at work a week later situation, it could take 3-6 months to get the job. The process is long and detailed, including a deep security clearance. A little known fact about the higher GS/SES positions, by federal law they must post the opening and interview candidates, but typically the candidate has already been selected and this process only occurs to follow federal guidelines. Bullet was offered a GS position @ 15 months ago. He was by name selected. He submitted his paperwork for the position, and even given a start date. He tentatively accepted, but eventually rejected it due to pay, HOWEVER, meanwhile, they advertised the position knowing they were in compensation negotiations and the job was already filled. In other words, for many applying GS/SES it could be a goat rope since they are just going through the steps, the applicant who is not recruited by name has little to no chance of getting the job. I myself, have been on these goat ropes, called in for an interview, to find out with the Dear Jane letter, that they had selected to promote from within the dept. Two weeks later, there is an opening for the lower tier position. That is how the system works. I do not hold a grudge about promoting from within. I hold a grudge that they should not be able to promote from within and forced to do the dog and pony show. Acknowledge that employee as being deserving and qualified, cut to the chase like civilian counterparts.Interview for the vacancy they will leave behind. Don't run multiple interviews because you already know you are going to promote them, and now you need to do 2 positions(regs) instead of one...again that is a waste of time, money and energy.


As for working in the Pentagon, yes, it is a large military installation, but honestly, you'd be amazed how many suits work there. It is not as if they are the red headed cousin...honestly, show up around 4:30, and you will see, it is probably a 50-50 ratio. Yrs ago, the premise of being the red-headed cousin would have been correct, but not now. Additionally, many of the GS suits are ex-military, thus there is a relationship that is born out of "I get it because I was military...and they respect you because you were military". Bullet is not known in the Pentagon by his given birth name, he is known by his given military name.

It could be frustrating if you never spent a day with the military, but then again, if you are being offered an SES at the Pentagon, my guess is they have spent yrs with the military, and this is not an issue. It is rare to hire an SES without experience dealing with the military. Even a Lockheed executive who converts over to SES, has spent yrs dealing with the military. Highly unlikely that they would do this, because private companies traditionally have better perks than the govt, esp. when it comes to their 401Ks, profit sharing and health insurance.
 
Last edited:
What I have to resort to? HAHAHA. It was meant to be humorous, but since you are all bent up about my disagreement on executions, so be it. Really though, it will be more impressive to admissions and ALOs if you use proper English. I've only seen one example of a split infinitive where no one minds - "to boldly go where no....." Thanks Picard! :D

Whatever. Let's just worry about the subject of the conversation.
 
Fleiger is spot on. SES is a Flag officer equivalent from a military standpoint. These positions are rare, and not common place.

SES positions are usually by name requests. Our friends and family members that are SES, never searched out the position, they were recruited for the position. On Friday they retired, and on Monday they walked in as an SES. Those facts alone should tell you how appealing it is from an employment standpoint.

Just like any GS position, but even more so for SES, this is not an interview, and you are at work a week later situation, it could take 3-6 months to get the job. The process is long and detailed, including a deep security clearance. A little known fact about the higher GS/SES positions, by federal law they must post the opening and interview candidates, but typically the candidate has already been selected and this process only occurs to follow federal guidelines. Bullet was offered a GS position @ 15 months ago. He was by name selected. He submitted his paperwork for the position, and even given a start date. He tentatively accepted, but eventually rejected it due to pay, HOWEVER, meanwhile, they advertised the position knowing they were in compensation negotiations and the job was already filled. In other words, for many applying GS/SES it could be a goat rope since they are just going through the steps, the applicant who is not recruited by name has little to no chance of getting the job. I myself, have been on these goat ropes, called in for an interview, to find out with the Dear Jane letter, that they had selected to promote from within the dept. Two weeks later, there is an opening for the lower tier position. That is how the system works. I do not hold a grudge about promoting from within. I hold a grudge that they should not be able to promote from within and forced to do the dog and pony show. Acknowledge that employee as being deserving and qualified, cut to the chase like civilian counterparts.Interview for the vacancy they will leave behind. Don't run multiple interviews because you already know you are going to promote them, and now you need to do 2 positions(regs) instead of one...again that is a waste of time, money and energy.


As for working in the Pentagon, yes, it is a large military installation, but honestly, you'd be amazed how many suits work there. It is not as if they are the red headed cousin...honestly, show up around 4:30, and you will see, it is probably a 50-50 ratio. Yrs ago, the premise of being the red-headed cousin would have been correct, but not now. Additionally, many of the GS suits are ex-military, thus there is a relationship that is born out of "I get it because I was military...and they respect you because you were military". Bullet is not known in the Pentagon by his given birth name, he is known by his given military name.

It could be frustrating if you never spent a day with the military, but then again, if you are being offered an SES at the Pentagon, my guess is they have spent yrs with the military, and this is not an issue. It is rare to hire an SES without experience dealing with the military. Even a Lockheed executive who converts over to SES, has spent yrs dealing with the military. Highly unlikely that they would do this, because private companies traditionally have better perks than the govt, esp. when it comes to their 401Ks, profit sharing and health insurance.

The reason rank and file folks like me respond to this article with some disappointment is this: I'm only a guy that stayed in the Military for the minimum time of my enlistment. When I read about this new conversion plan and see what they are paying, and what benefits they are giving, it drives me nuts! As it does to most taxpayers.
A little about myself as I think I'm typical of people that read this article and look at the current situation.

When I joined the Marines at 18, there was about the same conditions as now, Jimmy Carter was President and we had a Misery Index! We had a crisis in Iran and me and my buddies joined to go kill Iranians. Yes, I recruited 2 other guys and picked up a meritorious "big" PFC" outta boot camp :thumb: Big deal, it was easy, everyone hated the military in the late 1970's

Through some enlistment problems, some of them mine like: being forced out of a guaranteed program that required 5 years of minimum enlistment, I left when I was done with my required time bitter...last minute shuffle after boot camp from Avionics school to grunt due to signing off with the recruiter after one of the guys I was leaving with on the buddy plan, failed his BP test...he got really drunk the night before his physical...!!!!
I do occasionally look back and wish I stayed but, I have no regrets other than I might have been TPG with his distinguished career :smile: :thumb:

I moved on and got married and had two kids. My wife had a great job with Sharp Electronics and I was working the trades doing an apprenticeship. When our daughter was born we both decided it would be better to have her home to raise our children, as a two parent family with a mom at home. We had that luxury as I was making good money in my chosen career. Fast forward to today, both kids are gone and I'm only 50. My business has shrunk down to me and one guy doing what we can to stay afloat. My wife has worked for me for 20 years. We've saved and now there is no way we need her answering my phone. DD is a hot shot Vet Surgical Tech living on her own and DS is at an Academy. DW wants to work and we need affordable insurance. She's scanned the local market and her 2 year business degree and 20 years of experience as a Customer Service professional/contracting professional can't even get her foot in the door at Petsmart as a casher. Do we need the money? I guess the two of us can survive on what we put away over the years and I'll just keep working. We have a great home, we have horses and property. I'll survive but to hear people talk about the benefits being bandied about make me sick! My wife laughs at the resume and on line applications she's filled out for Wal*Mart and Target!

Please realize, there are many like us out there that don't see the argument of retired Military Officer complaining about not being able to convert over to a maxed out GS $150,000 a year job overnight, when they are receiving a pension now, that has full health care, and at least $50,000-$70,000 in yearly cash income.

I realize much time and effort has gone into the decision of a military career and that is honorable, make no mistake. I'm not complaining but in my world (and I have it good compared to most) it doesn't resonate well.

JMHO.
 
I'm still waiting for the source of his expertise on DoD financial accounting.

I know high school classes have high standards of rigor for DoD acquisitions oversight. ;)

On a side note, I'm getting my own crash course through a RAND assignment I'm doing. Looking at all the DoD programs with systems integrators and seeing how they did. Things like the USCG Deepwater, Army FCS, Navy LCS, and several AF programs. Really is enlightening to look at the info and to see the government oversight part (GAO).

So far -- not pretty on good oversight. :thumbdown:
 
^^^^

Great to see you getting knee deep in the heavy thinking, Hornet!

Better to see this thread get back on topic (although, as a ex-military guy who transferred to the "dark side" of contracting, then the even darker side of GS, I did get a chuckle).

So, what have you learned about the acquisition fiascoes of the past 30 years from the 40 pound brains at Rand? Heaven knows I could use the help where I'm at!

But allow me to add some other insight from my own experiences and from what I've seen as the pitfalls from previous programs. Granted, this will come from a guy at the pointy end of the acquisition knife fight, and my perspective may be a little jaded...

It all starts with each service determining what they will be required to do over the next 10 - 30 years in their part of the defense of the country. Several big documents like the National Security Strategy and the Defense Planning Guide, which gives some general outlines about what is expected from our military in the current and future world environment. Taking these guides, the military staffs in that 5-sided wind tunnel propose and plan on what they need to do in order to meet those objectives (things like: "Win Decisively", "Protect the Homeland", etc.) Pretty vague and overarching objectives lead to pretty wide open interpretations on what is needed to achieve them. We (the military) tend to look at what we will have to face (the threats involved) and what we are required to do, and usually tend to the overly pessimistic side of overmatch, trying to achieve the perfect solution, in all cases. This tends for us to ask for the "big-ticket" items to accomplish the mission.

Another part of the friction (and in my opinion, the largest part), comes from the fact that while the Pentagon tends to think long term (I'll need 8-10 years to develop and initially field this new piece of equipment), we have a building full of folks looking at the short term just about 2 miles away as the crow flies across the river, our Congress. While the military is always looking at funding the full pie for the long term, our Congress is always looking at the military budget as a piggy bank that can be raided for the short term. Many programs also face added pressure as the Congress and OSD asks each program to add on or include a special pet project or capability (usually built or overseen in their particular district). So, with budgets cut and requirements added, what was planned for an 8 year development program starts turning into a 12 year program. More cuts, more add ons, and the program gets farther and farther behind. Until suddenly, the questions start getting asked from the oversight councils on "why the delays?", and "Why the cost growth?". Next thing you know, the program is canceled or curtailed (see: F-22, FCS, Littoral Combat Ship, etc.)

Don't get me wrong, I think that oversight is good. Keeps us honest and on our toes. I do get frustrated with the madness sometimes, however.

But to also add to the OP's intent, new acquisition is actually around only 35-40% of the current defense budget. The real train wreck in the making IS pay and benefits (which accounts for about half of our current defense budget, when you don't include the supplemental funding of the current conflicts), and I do agree that some draconian measures will need to be taken, and soon. Means testing for retiree benefits, transfer to a similar retirement system as the Government service system (mix of pension reduction (or complete removal) and a transfer to 401K-like retirement plan, i.e. the Govt's Thrift Savings Plan), reduction in health benefits, etc. ALL need to be looked at, especially when most military retires in their 40 or early 50s, and life expectancy continues to move to the right.

I would, however, also like our government to look at similar cost reduction proposals for other Non-Discretionary Government programs we taxpayers pay for. While many are based on very nice sentiments, I don;t think we can afford to continue this road of generosity without bankrupting our future.

Just some rambling, early Saturday morning thoughts....
 
Max,

Some of your stats are off.

An O5 with 20 yrs+ AD, will retire with @43K in pay. Federal taxes apply, and in some states, such as VA, State taxes, apply. Traditionally, they will be hit because of their GS level at the 20%. That means, their walk away is about 25K net annually. Nowhere near your 50-70K when push comes to shove. It is not like they could afford to live out their life on 25K a yr. The retirement pay system is 50% of base pay at 20, for every yr after it is 2.5% more, capping out at 75%. An O6 with 25 yrs, would make 70k+, but then again the O6 would not be a GS, but an SES position in most probability. An O4 would not get GS 14, but most likely 13. Look at the chart for GS 13. A GS 13 starts at 71 and tops at 93K, again, I think that for someone who has 15-20 yrs of experience in a unique field this is not insane, especially since MD/DC/VA has such a high cost of living. The key word is unique...they are not being hired from a general mgmt position, they are being hired for in depth experience regarding specific needs. Not a lot of people out there who have war experience in combat regarding specific military issues...how many people do you know that understand the intricacies of the computer program for the UAVs? FEW...and that is why they get paid the bucks. Supply and demand.

I get where you are coming from, but as I showed you from the pay charts in my previous post, only the senior execs in unique fields get the GS 15, you appear to be assuming that every retired military member expects GS 15. They don't. Many of the retired military that are beltway bandits retire here, what they expect is that their AD pay as a military member will translate over to the GS system. The reason they get it is because if the govt is not willing to pay, another organization (SAIC, RAND, Lockheed, Raytheon) will pay. The govt knows that, and to attract the best candidates they have decided to say, your retirement pay is your gravy and we will pay you what you made as AD.

It is all about supply and demand, and in the DC/Pentagon arena, the demand is high and the supply is low.
 
Last edited:
Max,

Some of your stats are off.

An O5 with 20 yrs+ AD, will retire with @43K in pay. Federal taxes apply, and in some states, such as VA, State taxes, apply. Traditionally, they will be hit because of their GS level at the 20%. That means, their walk away is about 25K net annually. Nowhere near your 50-70K when push comes to shove. It is not like they could afford to live out their life on 25K a yr. The retirement pay system is 50% of base pay at 20, for every yr after it is 2.5% more, capping out at 75%. An O6 with 25 yrs, would make 70k+, but then again the O6 would not be a GS, but an SES position in most probability. An O4 would not get GS 14, but most likely 13. Look at the chart for GS 13. A GS 13 starts at 71 and tops at 93K, again, I think that for someone who has 15-20 yrs of experience in a unique field this is not insane, especially since MD/DC/VA has such a high cost of living. The key word is unique...they are not being hired from a general mgmt position, they are being hired for in depth experience regarding specific needs. Not a lot of people out there who have war experience in combat regarding specific military issues...how many people do you know that understand the intricacies of the computer program for the UAVs? FEW...and that is why they get paid the bucks. Supply and demand.

I get where you are coming from, but as I showed you from the pay charts in my previous post, only the senior execs in unique fields get the GS 15, you appear to be assuming that every retired military member expects GS 15. They don't. Many of the retired military that are beltway bandits retire here, what they expect is that their AD pay as a military member will translate over to the GS system. The reason they get it is because if the govt is not willing to pay, another organization (SAIC, RAND, Lockheed, Raytheon) will pay. The govt knows that, and to attract the best candidates they have decided to say, your retirement pay is your gravy and we will pay you what you made as AD.

It is all about supply and demand, and in the DC/Pentagon arena, the demand is high and the supply is low.
WHOA?! :wow:

An O-6 in Sodom-on-Potomac "...most probably" gets hired as an SES-1?

Hmm...maybe I should consider a move...I'd heard GS15 was the "norm."

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
 
Back
Top