Working with Civilian Workers

2014-02-07T06:16:26-05:00

Should the Military take over functions currently run by Civilians? Considering my recent experience dealing with backstabbing Civilians, I think that they should reduce the Civilian Workforce and turn over certain functions bsck to Military control.

Response by Lt Col Luis A. Rojas made Jan 17 at 2014 9:04 PM

2014-01-17T21:04:58-05:00

I have found that civilians provide good continuity in the workplace, but I agree that some positions should be held by military personnel.

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Jan 24 at 2014 11:59 AM

2014-01-24T11:59:07-05:00

Contractors need to go. We train people in uniforms to do those jobs, and it is a shame that all that training we did is useless when we get out because the civilian world knows the people in uniform don't do "that" job...

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2014 12:30 PM

2014-01-24T12:30:31-05:00

I have had many thoughts on this topic for the last 10 years. As an Engineer, we were able to do projects for tennant units at one time. Build a sidewalk here, throw up some walls in an office there. All that changed around 2003 when contractors started supporting Garrisons while units deployed. Now, if an Engineer squad is caught fixing a sidewalk near a bowling alley on post, the Contractors will file a union grievance against the Army.

Response by SFC Stephen P. made Jan 24 at 2014 5:51 PM

2014-01-24T17:51:01-05:00

Years ago I was an infantryman. I saw myself and members of my unit as trained professionals. The Army had invested a great deal of resources in not only our pay, but training and readiness. Equipment, maintenance, fuel, and ammunition are not cheap.

I see it as a complete waste of talent and money to have soldiers such as these performing tasks such as painting fences, mowing lawns, and collecting garbage.

If we can free up soldiers so that they can focus on the tasks that only soldiers can do, I call it a win.

If we only free them up so that they sit in the CP playing angry birds, that is not a win.

If there is a problem, it is not with the contractors but with our leaders not capitalizing on the opportunity.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2014 6:12 PM

2014-01-24T18:12:30-05:00

Get rid of them. Nothing personal but we are paid to do a job and we have a job code for every possible job that needs to be done. Civilians always want to complain about how "bloated" our defense budget is. Well look at the contractor sector. That will explain a lot on our budget and where all the money goes.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2014 6:47 PM

2014-01-24T18:47:42-05:00

My husband is an infantryman, and he got a contract with DynCorp back in 2011-2012 when they were still in Erbil, doing Diplomat Protections (high risk protections) at the US Consulate. Highly specialized and competitive job, all of his team members were former Rangers, SF, Marine Recon and the like. He felt like the low man on the totem pole, even though he has credentials of his own. I see these particular contracts as a good thing.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 24 at 2014 6:48 PM

2014-01-24T18:48:42-05:00

cut them, the military was just fine many years ago without them and NCO's and officers were FORCED to be more professional, both Tactically and Technically. Now that the military has all of these civilians, people rely on them to do OUR jobs for us. Its great that there are jobs for us when we retire, but Soldiers need to take care of Soldiers. Civilians arent going to deploy with us, and they usually have that asshole attitude thinking we owe them something anyway. Well, we owe you a thank you, but ya know that big check you're taking home when a Soldier can get paid half, yeah, we can cut that...

Response by CMC Robert Young made Jan 24 at 2014 6:49 PM

2014-01-24T18:49:31-05:00

SPC Christie, you raise a solid point. I am the product of a military family, and remember the military of years gone by that was self supporting. I grew up outside Ft Jackson and Shaw AFB with family members at both installations. The gates were staffed by MPs/SPs. When visiting Naval Base Charleston or Naval Weapon Station Charleston, there were Marines at the gate. Dining halls were staffed by active duty personnel, and people maintaining the grounds/facilities/motor pool/admin support were all service members. New recruits arriving at FT Jackson didn't arrive on Greyhound. They arrived in big green US Army buses all picked at a central collecting point in downtown Columbia. The military supported itself. While I don't understand how in my short life we have gone from being self supporting to what we have now, I would offer that it is not just the military, but the entire federal government. Two cases in point are the people who vetted Edward Snowden and the Washington Navy Yard shooter were not federal agents but contractors who are paid based on output not quality of their work. If the goal is do more work instead of better work, then it's easy to see why thing s slip through the cracks. Equally important is commitment. Contractors are dedicated to the contract $$$. Service members are committed to a higher purpose; to an organization; to each other. I would opine that it's all about money being sent to benefactors of congress instead of being used to support the military/federal government internally. An objective review of how much money we spend with contractors would likely reveal that we spend much more money on them than it would cost to simply do it in-house ourselves. Good catch. Thoughtful post.

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 25 at 2014 1:51 AM

2014-01-25T01:51:41-05:00

Tricky question since there are jobs that do require the
latest knowledge and certifications. One example of this is the Signal/
Communications field. There are some networking jobs that require certain level
of expertise, but this is where we should have "only one" SME in that
particular area to complement our ranks. But not to an extent that we take our
service members out of the equation as it is right now. Some jobs have leads
(civilian) and multiple workers (civilians) for jobs that military service
member are or could be qualified to do. If we place more focus on having our
service members trained and qualified and PROVIDE THEM WITH THE TOOLS in those
areas, we should not have to worry about so many civilian contracts.

Response by SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2014 10:40 PM

2014-01-26T22:40:40-05:00

I had a conversation with my 1SG, an he raised some valid point, certain circumstances require us to outsource to save money. But when it comes down to actual work, that is MOS related we should do it. It is what we get paid for, cutting grass and little things like that we can cut cost by outsourcing.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2014 11:16 PM

2014-01-26T23:16:43-05:00

You've hit one of my nerves here…I was a young 88M back in the day…and saw this almost daily. We would go down to the motor pool to PMCS our trucks and lube the same grease points 50 times…while civilian rigs would come load up equipment and take them to the paint shop, other installations, etc. Would always make us wonder why they wouldn't just use the 88Ms and their 915s that were just 'hanging out' in the motor pool.

Although - there are some specialties that the Army does not have enough of…that does require contractors.

Response by SrA Michael Waldo made Jan 30 at 2014 9:40 AM

2014-01-30T09:40:34-05:00

Sorry for the long read everyone but,
Everyone has valid points concerning contractors, but don't forget about the other side of the fence; the majority of combative contractors are veterans. 1. Not only is this one of the few opportunities for veterans once released back into the mundane monotony of the civilian world where their skills actually transfer towards a job that provides a decent pay, 2. they also (or at least used to) have specific expedited missions that entire units can't act quickly enough to accomplish due to the stranglehold of the chain of command/ lack of communication/ failure to reach a logical decision expediently/ etc. 3. They are the only viable scapegoats when the Geneva standards are completely absurd, 4. They're legally allowed to meet potential violence with overwhelming violence. I stumbled across an older contractor in Iraq back in 08 who was originally (incredible random) from Orlando, FL. About a mile and a half from where I grew up. His crew requested departure from Balad (I'm sure they got paid a lot for this) to augment us at Camp Adder when we started getting our asses kicked by the Al Qaeda cell that attended terrorist daycare camp with Iranian Spec Ops. They broughtf five or six Apaches with them. Prior, the attacks started to become more prevalent and more intense. Since we were surrounded by flat land, they just launched katyusha rockets at us. They usually came in volleys of 3-6; and it was more or less a joke to the higher ups. How ever one day we got bombarded by about 20-30 rockets at dawn (during prayer, which is generally unheard of). The rockets never bothered me since the chances of being blasted by a 100 year old black market, unguided katuysha is about the same as being bit by a shark in the middle of the desert while being struck by lightning; how ever, they did manage to take the lives of several poor souls riding through the main gate at the exact wrong place, wrong time. I think war is an absolute necessity for peace to exist because people will fight among themselves if they don't have a common entity to direct their hatred at. Anyway, I digress, the Apaches came in, refueled and took off immediately in absolutely orchestral synchronicity. It looked straight out of a movie. The contractors were the definitive of "SHIT HOT!", and didn't skip a beat. These guys were dedicated ass kickers that came with the soul intent of defending and enacting vengeance for their fellow patriots. I listened all day as the Apaches (from 10 miles away from Nasiriyah) while these guys wrought absolute carnage on all responsible for the attack. A coordinated attack that would have taken weeks for back office to reach a decision on, and receive approval. The way things were in Iraq during my tour in layman terms; the actual military was the foundation for a fortress, the TCNs did the tasks everyone would bitch and complain about (like sweeping rocks, bagging sandbags, and cleaning the "caddilacs" to an absolute immaculate state. And the contractors were the righteous fists of fury ready to deploy within moments notice. Our ROE's were so completely f'd; we were told that we had to not only be fired upon first, but the attack had to be directed at you, personally, and (common sense) you had to be able to readily identify those attacking you. I was an Air Force MP (Security Forces, I know, I know, *farttttttttt*) and one of the only goons qual'd with a 203, tasked to augment the 82nd's MP's because they were stretched too thin. We trained to augment their convoys even though we were as poorly trained as possible, and were outfitted in the finest of Nam' gear. I was issued a ruck that spanned the entire career of defender "Smith" from A1C to his promo to Master Sgt, and our mission was fragged as soon as boots hit the ground from convoy tag-alongs to flightline fobbits. Due to poor/non-existent contact between the UDMs, our two squads relieved four. We were overworked, exhausted, undermanned, and going stir crazy from manning one man posts non-stop without ever being able to return a single round. The helo-contractors were like Valkyries of vengeance. Even though all we could do was listen and occasionally watch the carnage unfold during a clear day sans sandstorm; it was the biggest morale boost knowing that these guys came to rip Nasiriyah asunder; even if we weren't allowed to leave our posts. It was one of the few saving graces that kept my sanity in check while repeating groundhogs day for a mission we never wanted. They were always really nice guys. They would tell you to go ahead of them in the chow hall line, give you the last pack of smokes at the BX, and would literally drop everything if they got called for a mission. I have a devout respect for them. I've heard nightmares of completely incompetent, fat, lazy, contractor slobs; but these guys were the spitting image of what a militant should emulate. Cool, calm, empathetic operators that happened to be straight killers when duty called.
If you trace back far enough, you'll see that contractors used to be the most competent professionals around. Made up of individuals from any NATO nation that could problem solve without the constraint of the chain of command or ROE as expediently as possible in the most dire of circumstances. I was planning on a looking for a private or DV security contract on a 365 to Afghan until the pay for contractors got cut in half and I became absolutely obsessed with the Non-Profit I started. I'm not asking for hand out from anyone, just offering my 2 cents.

Mike (SrA Waldo)
http://www.OperationNewBeginning.com and/or "like" at
http://www.facebook.com/OperationNewBeginning
Of course I could be totally mistaken, but the standard "blitzkrieg" protocol of contractors seems to be a lot more cost effective and efficient than dropping 10,000 angry bullet shields 5,000 miles away from home for 7-12 month stents with nothing to do, and the only freedom being that inside of their own minds.

Operation New Beginning

The mission of "Operation New Beginning" is to renovate local homes and/or commercial buildings...

Operation New Beginning

Transitioning back into civilian life is just as difficult as the transition into military life. Our mission is to renovate local homes and/or commercial buildings and convert them into suitable...

Response by SrA Michael Waldo made Jan 30 at 2014 10:34 AM

2014-01-30T10:34:30-05:00

Food for thought. A sad and gut wrenching truth. suicide FAR outweighs combat related casualties. You stage thousands of people that answered the call to serve and protect their country in a wasteland for months (or years) to work 80-100+ hours a week. Strip them of any semblance of freedom and on top of that, proffer a yearly salary that is laughable at best...Eventually when all shreds of morale are dead and gone; one's own psyche starts to erode and shatter. What returns is hollow shells of the people they once were. PTSD is now prevalent (I don't believe it's PTSD, I think it's boredom induced psychosis + sporadic flaring of , but I don't think anyone can say they left a deployment feeling refreshed and enlightened. I'd say most leave with the same mindset of "Well, at least that shit's over with." Only to find out after their RnR they already have another tasking set for a date sooner than they expected.
That's a complete ass drop for what remnants of morale. remained You tell a 10-20 man team of contractors they're going in to the mouth of the abyss but will be paid $800-$1600 a day for 90 on 21 off cycles and they'll be replaced immediately if they can't hack it. Who's going to bring the most tenacity and controlled chaos to the battlefield?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 30 at 2014 6:24 PM

2014-01-30T18:24:48-05:00

I get tired of seeing school trained Soldiers cutting grass while civilian contractors that are paid 4-10 times as much do the job those Soldiers were trained to do. If a green suiter can do it, toss the blue suiters out.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jan 31 at 2014 9:52 AM

2014-01-31T09:52:23-05:00

I'm inclined to think we have too many civilians in uniform. We do a great job of taking the Soldier out of the streets, but a terrible job of taking the streets out of the Soldier...

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2014 10:17 AM

2014-01-31T10:17:07-05:00

This is a very good question. I am inclined to say yes. If you were to go to Fort Benning you would found that civilians just outnumber soldiers in the services area. I don't like that civilians are taking up billets that can be filled by soldiers. They are afforded pay and benifits thats don't get. When they are found to be violating a policy they will fight it and can easily walk away with no impact on their record or eval. If a soldier were to make the same mistake he would get an ART 15 and have to take it. Civilians should be assigned a status or rank. I know they have the GS system but I can't stand that a civilian can talk to a 1SG or a Maj any way they want.

Response by SSG Kevin McCulley made Jan 31 at 2014 11:26 AM

2014-01-31T11:26:41-05:00

YES! Without question: yes! In my organization we are looked down upon as seasonal labor. You hear the "I'm a GS-10. I outrank you!" When you try and act in accordance with guidance passed by the CSM you hear, "Well I don't work for the CSM do I? And you work for me." Even though none of them have supervisor in their position description. They (not all) treat us with disrespect and contempt. For a long time, when a service member got in a disagreement with a GS, the service member is moved. When a GS got into a disagreement with service member, the service member was moved. I got in a disagreement with a GS, the GS lied and said I threatened his life. They started talking about UCMJ. Lucky for me I had witnesses. What happened to the GS? Not a damned thing. The Civilian deputy has been heard saying the Commandant works for him. Senior NCOs aren't seen as competent enough to lead training teams. WE ONLY TRAIN JR. TROOPS!

We are marginalized and made to do the heavy lifting so to speak and the Command sits passive. It has been this way since before I arrived. It is one of the prime reasons I am ETSing because I started to notice this while working at a DIV headquarters. This is the future of the rest of the civilianized army. I've had conversations with a mentor who is a director of some organization at the pentagon and he has the same issue with his deputy and he is a COL! They know you are only there for a few years and feel they can just ignore you and wait you out.

They are also a major source of indiscipline. I once sternly corrected an airman (no cussing or personal comments) and the airmen went to the GS lead and said I 'hurt her feelings.' The GS accepted it as a valid complaint. My NCOIC told the GS to get bent but the result is, that airman thinks her complaint was valid and they don't have to listen to the NCOs. They interfere in our attempts to counsel students and enforce discipline. It comes down to the NCOs are always wrong. We address the concerns to the command and they just 'don't want to rock the boat.'

As a rule, I don't think any GS should have any direct supervision on anyone below the rank of E7. E7s have the experience, knowledge, and clout to tell a GS to pound sand. When an NCO tells a GS to do something contrary to their duties, they will tell them to push off. Service members, on the other hand, are conditioned to follow orders. I am fully aware of the extreme importance of the long term perspective GS employees provide, however they should NOT be the ones making decisions. If that were the case, let's get rid of NCOs, Warrant, and Commissioned officers and just have Jr Enlisted to 'catch bullets.'

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 5 at 2014 5:37 PM

2014-02-05T17:37:53-05:00

I would have to agree. The DOD employs over 800,000 civilians which amounts to one civilian for every two service members (of all branches). That number is considerably greater that any other federal department. Since the big topic in the news is slashing the DOD's budget, it makes a lot of sense to trim that number down by a few hundred thousand. Especially for positions that were created to give a former Officer/NCO a job when they retire. For instance, there are many Commanding Generals with Deputy Commanders that aren't Army Officers at all, they're DA civilians. This has always puzzled me since AR 600-20 requires a Commander to be a uniform Officer. When that CG is gone, who is in charge? AR 600-20 prohibits that civilian from holding a Command position. Perhaps someone could shed some light on this?

Response by SFC Cornelius Walsh made Feb 5 at 2014 5:44 PM

2014-02-05T17:44:05-05:00

There may be, but the DA Civilians and for that matter, the GS folks I work with bring a lot to the table, and most have quite a bit of green-suit experience. I'm happy to have them here, and they've helped to train and mentor me alongside my other leaders.

Response by SSG Oliver Mathews made Feb 6 at 2014 10:34 PM

2014-02-06T22:34:42-05:00

YES. I work at one of the most overladen Civilian/Contractor environments i have ever seen. What could be done by a Proper Signal Battalion is being done by Civilians and Contractors.

When the Army transitioned from local organizational Email, controlled at the local installation, to the Defense Information and Security Agency (DISA) Enterprise Email (DEE for short) it was noted that there was over 1.2 million email accounts that had to be transitioned or Provisioned, and then Migrated. That's over 1 civilian/contractor for every one Soldier. Now this not taking into account any dual persona's.

During the Recent Furlough my unit was not allowed to take any leaves or passes while the furlough was in effect. Any passes/leave that had been approved was either canceled or scrutinized.

If the Army Cannot maintain normal operations with out Civilians, or contractors at the largest its been in years, why are we making it smaller?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 7 at 2014 7:37 AM

2014-02-07T07:37:25-05:00

SSG Fleming, Based on your experience seems fair for you. I agree with you about the certains functions that could be taking care by service members. But in other hand, I could see more "backstabbing" within the Army compared with civilians based on my experience. In my case, I am Army Reservist and Civilian worker for Coast Guard. I serve both ways. For me it is a pleasure to work in a joint environment. I am very respectful with everybody SM or Civilian Co-Workers. I am so sorry for the negative experience you had. We are not all the same.

Response by 1SG Henry Yates made Feb 7 at 2014 8:01 AM

2014-02-07T08:01:24-05:00

Whewww... That hurts, but you did say backstabbing. Some of us really care, realize who we're here for and value working side by side as a team with Active duty. For me, I'm still a Soldier. I agree in a sense. Some civilian positions were created due to in-consistency in a section/ departments performance due to turn-over. Active duty PCS on a regular basis. GWOT is going away, so you will see a decrease in positions and restoration of duties back to Active and Reserve Service. I've already seen the MP's/ Security assume the gates and end contracts. SSG, I only hope you recover from whatever took place with the backstabbing Civ. I only hope that future encounters you find people out of uniform that emulate Corp/ Core values.

Response by CW2 Kevin Perry made Feb 7 at 2014 8:37 AM

2014-02-07T08:37:00-05:00

SSG Lorenzo, I somewhat agree with you. Although, there are backstabbers everywhere, yours happen to be a civilian. You will always have personality conflicts as it is human nature. People will always have difference in opinions, and differences in how people handle situations.

Here's where I agree. I came in the Army when we were mostly self-sufficiency. We ran our own chow halls, we mowed our own grass, and we maintained our own equipment. Rarely, you would have to run issues up your chain of command, so it would come back down through the issue's chain of command. Although there were civilians on base, there wasn't many. It was a different Army, and things really got done without all the red tape and sensitivity.

Unfortunately; over the years, our elected officials have created an environment in our military that makes us rely on a billion dollar industry that helps their friends get richer and donate hugely to their election funds. These are the same elected officials who scrutinize our pay, and how we do business when they have no idea what it means to serve in uniform.

Response by SSG Therese Mangham made Feb 7 at 2014 6:25 PM

2014-02-07T18:25:24-05:00

I came in the military during the in 1980's and the Army was self contained. There was no such thing as civilians on the gates until OIF. The scope of the military mission changed and the requirements of the force changed. Backstabbing happens in the military also, believe me as female who encountered sexism on every level. I didn't complain because there was no one to complain too at the time. I loved serving the military and did my job to the best of my ablility. In life, you will encounter backstabbing everywhere you go but, you can choose to make the best of your situation or complain and do nothing.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 7 at 2014 9:41 PM

2014-02-07T21:41:41-05:00

SSG,

I completely agree. I'm a "commo" guy, and working with the NEC is a pain and a half. They do what we can do but get paid more. They take forever to finish tickets and its very frustrating getting things moving in a timely manner. I believe that we should keep a minimum of civilians for things such as resets or for warranty reasons. Let the soldiers regain the reigns!

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Feb 7 at 2014 9:44 PM

2014-02-07T21:44:40-05:00

SSG Fleming, I work with federal employees on a daily basis, so I can understand your frustration. I think it's not so much the employees, but rather the federal employment system that we are saddled with. It is hard to get authorizations to hire and almost an act of God to fire. I am dealing with some civilians who, if they pulled the crap they did in a civilian setting, would have been fired on the spot. Challenges for sure.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 7 at 2014 10:02 PM

2014-02-07T22:02:45-05:00

From my experience I have seen good and bad civilians out there that means both DA civilians and contractors. One thing is for sure without our sacrifices and our service those civilians wouldn't have a job

Response by CMSgt Dan Santos made Feb 8 at 2014 1:07 PM

2014-02-08T13:07:23-05:00

Had a 2 star ask me once how we could fix the civil service system and I responded "Have the ability to fire on the spot". He replied "I agree but it will never happen". As long as civil service continues to reward incompetence and laziness, the system will never be fixed. Don't mean to brush stroke all civil servants as there are many hard working, dedicated civil servants but in my 30 plus years of experience working with civilians, have found many who are oxygen thieves. I was impressed with how the civil servants responded during Desert Shield/Storm but as the war dragged along, many returned to pre-war attitude. Sad that it takes a war to energize the workforce.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 8 at 2014 2:22 PM

2014-02-08T14:22:19-05:00

As an Army veteran and current DA civilian, I think the problem is two-pronged. One, no matter where you go, there are horrible people taking advantage of a situation. I knew just as many terrible workers while I was a Soldier than I have since. And two, I agree with other comments above - there needs to be a better way to fire unproductive workers. I've seen and heard about some absolute horror stories. It makes all of us look bad. I work at ACS currently and work to meet the mission, not to schedule. There are many others that do the same.

Response by SPC David Wyckoff made Feb 8 at 2014 2:41 PM

2014-02-08T14:41:41-05:00

I have worked as a DoD civilian for both the Dept. of the Army and the Dept of the Air Force. I would have to say with resounding emphasis that yes, if there is a military MOS for whatever job, it should be done by a SM.

I know there are many economical and political aspects to DoD civilians but I have to believe that the cost would be lower, the work would get done more effeciently and BRAC probably wouldn't have such a political impact if there were less civilians. While I can safely say this from the sidelines now that I work for a non-DoD agency I still believed it when I was taking the DoD's paycheck.

As others have said there are civilians that take their oath seriously and try to do the best they can and there are bad civilian employees. But I have seen a pervasive entitlement attitude on many civilian employees.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 8 at 2014 6:08 PM

2014-02-08T18:08:55-05:00

There I a difference between contractors and civil servants (DA Civilians). My last two jobs my bosses/rater has been a civilian. They have overwhelmingly been dedicated to the army and the Soldiers in it. A lady in my office retired with 40 years of service and she will be missed because of her hard work and dedication.

Contractors are a wild card, they are a for profit worker. Many care and are trying to make a difference.

Remember, we operate under civilian leadership, we work for the American people. The President, SECDEF, SECAR are all civilians.

Response by MSgt Scott Owens made Feb 8 at 2014 7:04 PM

2014-02-08T19:04:43-05:00

wow don't believe this question. As a retiree and a PROUD GS Employee, I consider myself part of the the foundation of the Department of Defense, meaning that regardless of seperation, TDY, PCS and deployment the services I provide remain the same. Working in a career field as a GS that I held as a Military meber is a double edge sword because I know what I know and what service member should know.

I say this because if it was not for our Civil Service Members there would be no consistancy and serveral tasks would NEVER be completed. As for backstabbing "you reap what you sow"

Response by SFC Donald Sweeting made Feb 8 at 2014 8:09 PM

2014-02-08T20:09:43-05:00

As a veteran of the Armed Services and a current Civil Service employee I have been on both sides of the fence. We are all entitled to our own opinion and generally speaking that opinion is usually based on the experiences that you have had, whether good or bad. Not knowing the exact "functions" you speak of it is difficult to say whether they would be better served by the military taking them over. This should be very evident to you in the environment that you are currently in as I assume you are still in Korea. Having served two tours in Korea myself and understanding the constant turnover of Military folks and the impacts that has on day to day operations I would submit to you that there may be validity in leaving some of those functions with the civilian workforce. Continuity or institutional knowledge of an organization can be a great asset when striving to make an organization better than it was previously. Conversely it can be a hindrance as well if that person with the institutional knowledge has a negative impact on the workforce around them when leadership attempts to implement change.

Your narrow minded point of view that all civilians are backstabbers only shows that you may be a part of the problem and not a part of the solution. No matter what organization you are in there is bound to be that one bad apple that just spoils the entire barrel. But to categorize all civilians as the same would be like saying that all soldiers are pompous and self centered and cause trouble when in downtown Seoul. Just simply not a true statement but if you ask those in surrounding communities you might get that type of response from at least a few.

I would be curious to know what those functions are that you speak of as your post is very ambiguous which of course prompts many responses but if you truly want to impact change you need to provide clarity.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2014 2:58 AM

2014-03-10T02:58:43-04:00

I am torn on this one right now as I have 19 that work for me and do a great job. I the OIC of a JRSOI hub and my contractors do all the instructing and scheduling. This allows the Soldiers to do the job that the Army trained them to do.

However you are right that there is an over abundance of them taking away from what we as Soldiers are paid to do.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 27 at 2014 10:39 AM

2014-03-27T10:39:46-04:00

I fully agree. Just take a look at the size of the paychecks some of these guys are getting to do a mundane task a Soldier could easily be trained to do. We've succeeded in downsizing the number of Soldiers on the ground while spending exorbitant amounts of money.

Response by SSgt Nate Huff made Mar 27 at 2014 11:06 AM

2014-03-27T11:06:39-04:00

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/28/one-soldier-one-year-850000-and-rising/

Response by SSgt Nate Huff made Mar 27 at 2014 11:14 AM

2014-03-27T11:14:25-04:00

I am a former USAF SSgt, and now I am one of these "civilian contractors" that you have a problem with. The article that I posted shows that the annual cost for an active duty member in Afghanistan is ~ $815,000 per year, and I can guarantee that the civilian contractors in Afghanistan are not making NEAR that. It's not about having a contractor "to do a mundane task a Soldier could easily be trained to do" it's about how much it cost the US government to do the job.

Also:

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43574

So before you want to hate on contractors so much, you might want to find out why the DoD uses them. I am not saying that there aren't bad apples, but don't hate all of us.

Costs of Military Pay and Benefits in the Defense Budget - CBO

For fiscal year 2013, the Department of Defense (DoD) requested about $150 billion to fund the pay and benefits of current and retired members of the military. That amount is more than one-quarter of ...

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 27 at 2014 11:21 AM

2014-03-27T11:21:08-04:00

I'm of the belief that certain Contracts are necessary to keep costs down. At the base i was located at in my most recent tour, I had a contracted Server Administrator. Yes it may be true that somewhere in the vast Military is a Soldier that could accomplish this task. When asked how long he had been there, he answered 2 years. That's a lot of continuity that may or may not be matched if it were a military role. Basically he build the existing network infrastructure from the ground up. I can't begin to relay the amount of knowledge that was lost when my unit performed their RIP/TOA. Part of this was due to downsizing (I won't bore you with details on this) and/or my unit not having personnel with appropriate skill/training to match what was in place. At the end of this particular Contracted Civilians tour, there was no Server to speak of, we had transitioned those services to a more centralized location.

On a somewhat separate note: Equipment Aquisition is where I see a lot of our Contractor numbers coming from. The Army does not pay the contracted workers individually, but rather pays the company. With Radio's, the aquisition contract includes personnel to repair/train, something that would take much longer and probably cost more in the long run if it were a Soldier specific duty. As far as them not wanting to travel? how is it cost effective for the to receive the lowest priority for travel.

The real issue here is as Garrison Jobs don't necessarily mirror Wartime ones, there is an overabundance of inactivity among Soldiers who literally have not enough money to do more than hip pocket training. At least at my own post I've seen more taskings for replacing the contracted gate guards, even the landscaping contracts. Its a step in the right direction, however it might harm readiness were the unit ramping up to leave again (or currently deployed as the case was sometimes.)

Response by SSG Zachery Mitchell made Mar 27 at 2014 11:52 AM

2014-03-27T11:52:10-04:00

I have been saying this for a few years. Some contractors are obviously needed for certain things. However, we are paying 3+ contractors double to triple the amount we are paying one Soldier in order to perform the same exact job sometimes. Contractors are over paid and more than half of them are not needed. We can get a Soldier to do the same job as most of these contractors and save a lot more money.

Response by SSgt Nate Huff made Mar 27 at 2014 12:53 PM

2014-03-27T12:53:28-04:00

Based on these calculations, the cost of troop support would be $78.4 billion for the 20-year period. LOGCAP support is calculated to cost $41.4 billion for this period. Based upon the CBO calculations, the cost difference over a 20-year period would be $37 billion dollars, in 2005 dollars. The study found that organic support costs approximately 90 percent more than using contractors.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Mar 27 at 2014 2:39 PM

2014-03-27T14:39:30-04:00

Good Damn Question. My main beef is the Shower Electrocutions. When I was in the Navy. For the most part the Seabees built our resources in forward operating theaters and they did a damn good job. Never heard or witnessed any quality problems with their constructions skills. Now we have Haliburton building this stuff and I hear about our troops dying from being electrocuted in the shower. INT WTH?

Response by SSG Michael Briales made Mar 28 at 2014 3:08 PM

2014-03-28T15:08:00-04:00

I think it's a little unfair to say that about contractors. I was active duty for 21 years, 1x tour Desert Storm, 1x tour Iraq, 3x tours Afghanistan and now I am a contractor myself, and trust me, there are some contractors who ARE worthless but not all of them. When I was active duty, I became friends with some of them, and some others I had questions about. So not all contractors are bad, besides when some of you ETS, or retire you might become one of those "contractors"!

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 30 at 2014 2:29 PM

2014-03-30T14:29:31-04:00

I have been fortunate to work with both Civil Service employees and contract employees most of my military career. I say fortunate because I have found both the Civil Service employees and contract employees to bring expertise and continuity to the workplace. There are civilian personnel who are rude or difficult to work with, just as there are military personnel who have those same characteristics.

When we deploy, the posts and bases still have to operate. Our civilian counterparts continue the operations that support our non-deployable personnel, our veterans, and our dependents.

If you have issues with civilian employees on post, you can ask to speak to a supervisor directly or submit an ICE comment. ICE comments are effective, both for substandard service and to recognize individuals for superior service.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 30 at 2014 9:00 PM

2014-03-30T21:00:21-04:00

SSG Fleming,

There are certain functions that most certainly should be controlled by military personnel, but others require the continuity that our civilian counterparts provide. Your post doesn't provide very much background as to your current situation. I see from your profile information that you are stationed at Yongsan Garison, South Korea. I have spent three years of my career in South Korea and have to wonder if your discontent is with Korean national civilians or DOD civilians. Is your discontent based on cultural differences or misunderstandings? Overall I have had positive experiences working with Civil Service employees and contract civilian employees, though I have had a couple of isolated issues.

During my first PCS move, I had an issue with an employee in a post child development center who I felt provided substandard customer service. My wife and I had not utilized the child development center at our previous duty station. We were new to the PCS process and had no knowledge of the services provided by the CDCs. The CDC employee that we dealt with spoke down to us in a very condescending manner. I suppose she answered the same questions day in and day out, thus felt the answers should already be known by everyone seeking service at her facility. That was an isolated incident, certainly not the norm.

I wish you better success in future interaction with our Civilian counterparts.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2014 4:32 PM

2014-04-12T16:32:17-04:00

When in doubt, "Follow the money!" Some military jobs are just too expensive to stay military jobs, when you factor in true mission need vs. military pay and benefits. The trend will probably continue until the point on the X and Y axis when the bean counters finally say "we are efficient". Sorry man, the tax payers are demanding true fiscal accountability and, if you have been in the military long enough, that has not been one of our strong suits.

Response by MSgt Abram Martin made Apr 25 at 2014 8:58 PM

2014-04-25T20:58:13-04:00

I came into the Air Force almost 30 years ago. I retired and now work as an AF civilian. I can tell from experience that it isn’t just the system but the people that exploit it. I have worked with civilians all over the world. Just like on active duty, we have both ends of the scale, stellar performers and dead weight. The main difference is with the active duty personnel sooner or later those folks HAVE to leave. No matter how much they try to hide eventually, they are out.
On the civilian side, they can linger in one place. As long as they stay quiet and do not cause any problems, they become invisible. These few malingerers give the rest of us a bad name.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2014 11:51 PM

2014-04-26T23:51:11-04:00

UPDATE to my previous cooment....I probably overreacted about what I said because of the situation that I dealt with at the time. Throughout my military career, I have worked with great Civilians and now I am working with a wonderful group of Civilian employees who treats me well and I get along with them. Not all Civilians are bad.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2014 11:08 PM

2014-05-14T23:08:00-04:00

I want to clarify my earlier remark...I was upset about the a situation I was dealing with in regards to Civilians. I met and worked with wonderful Civilians that treated me well and I applaud their contributions to the Army.

Response by PO3 David Packham made May 21 at 2014 12:33 PM

2014-05-21T12:33:00-04:00

Many times they *claim* to be saving the government money, but in study after study, they really aren't, after all they're in their businesses to *make* money, and in many instances, the quality of products or services received depreciates.

Response by SFC A.M. Drake made May 22 at 2014 5:51 PM

2014-05-22T17:51:26-04:00

I prefer to have military working with military, with limited civilians.

Response by CPO Bernie Penkin made Jul 5 at 2014 4:18 PM

2014-07-05T16:18:52-04:00

Never liked having civilians do any military job. In some instances it meant that an enlisted shore billet just got removed. The Coast Guard started to pit civilians in operational jobs like search and rescue coordinator. All that did was take away a shore billet for an operations rating and cause problem with the cahin of command, because their watch schedule had to revolve around a 40 hour week with no overtime. I could work my active duty guys as much as necessary, but no OT for the overpaid civilian. I was very vocal about this when the idea was proposed. Too many of the folks in favor of it were looking for a post CG guarenteed job.

Response by SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint made Feb 25 at 2017 10:53 PM

2017-02-25T22:53:53-05:00

While I agree in some aspects about working with civilians....and I got sued by them! There is a need for them while the military has a manpower cap. If we limit the military to a set number, either missions do not get done, or we use some of the hundreds of civilians. I do not know when we did not have civilians. Geo Washington used civilians. There is non-trigger pulling jobs. Those should go to civilians. Non-deployable jobs, why have soldiers doing that? The whole I idea of the military is to deploy and fight. If the position is not doing that, why put a soldier in it. Bde Commander's Garrison Secretary....Does anyone think that position should be a soldier? (How would you like to go to Ranger school and be the BDE Cdr secretary!)

Response by SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint made Feb 25 at 2017 11:11 PM

2017-02-25T23:11:49-05:00

The Army Material Command is a 4 star command, just like FORSCOM and TRADOC. The CIV SES Deputies are normally quite competent and have years in the organization. In AMC most of the 2 star commands had Civ Deputies. In fact, my unit with a 2 star G.O. leading an 11,000 person organization, only had around 300 green suiters. The Chaplin Assistant was probably the junior enlisted. I never saw anyone junior to him. AMC and Research and Development Command have a lot of civil service employees...and contractors. Civil Service takes the leadership positions. In R&D, are you going to find a lot of PhD scientist? How many PhDs in your unit? I have seen some crazy units. I retired military and later retired Civ Service. I was the G-2 of a 2 star command...as a GG-15. I was surprised when I got hired, because I thought I was going to be a deputy.

Remember, the rest of the gov has ALL Civil Service and no Generals, the Directors are all GS and SES. I have worked at DHS and DOE. I worked directly for the Under Secretary, who was also a Civ at DoEnergy. I found out my 21 years of active duty did not teach me much about our Gov. I was amazed how much I learned after the military.