Non-Combat Arms jobs. Who should do them, and why?..

[santahog]

I asked a little of this in another thread, but as I thought about it, I do have some pretty strong opinions about it..
Does it matter to you, as a soldier, who does the laundry, mail, food, logistics, vehicle maintenance and so on?
I don't know to what extent that "non-combat arms" jobs are contracted out nowadays, but I don't think Food Service is still done in house..
I believe it should ALL be done "in-house" by soldiers, (sailors, etc.)
Why am I wrong here?
For those who would contract out, what jobs should or shouldn't be contracted, where, and why?..
Stateside Garrison?
Overseas Garrison?
Korea?
Kuwait?
Kansas?
Kandahar?

[MikeBjerum]

There are two reasons these jobs are contracted out:

1.  Contract does not show up the same in accounting as military does.  It is all part of the smoke and mirrors used in all financial areas of our lives these days.

2.  There are some people that are smart enough to know it is better to contract out jobs to companies that will do the job as opposed to meeting the paperwork specifics.  It is one thing to be in a special forces armory and detailing your own weapons or having them customized by a guy you sleep next to.  And it is another to have someone more worried about rules, regulations, and congressional details cranking it out because that is how the book says it's done.

[fightingquaker13]

There are two reasons these jobs are contracted out:

1.  Contract does not show up the same in accounting as military does.  It is all part of the smoke and mirrors used in all financial areas of our lives these days.

2.  There are some people that are smart enough to know it is better to contract out jobs to companies that will do the job as opposed to meeting the paperwork specifics.  It is one thing to be in a special forces armory and detailing your own weapons or having them customized by a guy you sleep next to.  And it is another to have someone more worried about rules, regulations, and congressional details cranking it out because that is how the book says it's done.

But will that guy be there when the lead is flying or will he just quit and run home? I think we're pinching a penny to save a pound here. Contractors are great for some things, but they are unreliable as they aren't oath bound and answerable to the UCMJ. Letting them control our supply train is bad on a number of levels. Our military should never be dependent on "corporate policy".

[tombogan03884]

The cost of training a basic infantry man is very high .
Do you want to spend the hundreds of thousands of $ to completely train a machine gunner, or tank driver just to have him peeling potatoes or dumping garbage for a month at a time ?
Troops assigned to KP or guard duty are pulled out of units, that leaves a hole in a squad, or a platoon.
That makes that entire unit less effective.
Besides that, combat skills are perishable.
If you aren't using them you are losing them , after the investment of his initial training you lose the use of that troop lowering effectiveness, then when you get him back, he has to be retrained to some extent, plus he has not been maintaining his physical fitness so he needs to get back into shape.
Putting one man on KP for one month renders a unit less than 100% for months until he has regained his edge during which time others have been pulled out further degrading the unit.
A final note, contractors are paid to do what they are doing, WHILE they are doing it.
When they are no longer doing that job they are no longer paid .
The troop on the other hand is paid 24/7/365 with full health care housing, clothing etc, those expenses are not incurred with the contractor.

[jnevis]

2.  There are some people that are smart enough to know it is better to contract out jobs to companies that will do the job as opposed to meeting the paperwork specifics.  

Unfortunately that is not how DoD Contract Offices, specifically NAVAIR, sees it.  That is why I'm unemployed as of 28 Feb.  My company has been working on the E-2C/E-2D/C-2A for the last 35 years.  We effectively build the software they use, oversee the logistics, training, and budget for the program.  There are people that have been working on E-2s for 40-45 of the 50 years the plane has exhisted.

This year was a recompete for the contract.  

The proposal from DoD was engineered to make it difficult for incumbant companies to win, and had a lot of small business requirements.  The proposal team did everything they could to "answer the mail" effectively and in the best interest to the government.  
We lost the bid to a company deemed "technically acceptable"; ie the minimum requirements were met with no added "points" for being better than the requirement, and 30% cheaper.  Almost all contracts from now on are the same way.

The outlook is pretty grey for whether the work can get done once the new company takes over.  All of the experts have found other spots.  I currently have a couple positions that should open up but nothing in writing yet, so unemployment looms.  I have not applied to the new company, and they are not interviewing people anyway. The original expectation was that at least 80% of our people will roll over, but that is not happening due to the likelyhood of a 30% pay cut.

So with a good portion of the talent gone, the up front costs may be "cheaper" but the program overall will cost much more since a lot of very important, VERY expensive, projects will fall behind since the new people will have to learn the whole process and project with no help.  People in the program office are alreasy bracing to be called on the carpet for delays.

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

J, I think your reply is only marginally applicable since the OP was in reference to services such as food service and maintenance, while you are involved in manufacturing that is not staffed from the ranks .
Whether the military uses "contractors" such as Halliburton has no effect on your job .
What's screwing you is more purchasing, than contracting.

[Jrlobo]

I think whether or not we use soldiers, marines, airmen or sailors to do the dirty work may depend on where they are. For unit security, I prefer to continue to use our own resources for these duties when our units are deployed overseas. Infiltration and intelligence operations by indigenous personnel is always a danger there. In CONUS, however, where unique training is paramount and rotation rest is desirable, I'd opt to contract out non-combat functions. There is something to be said, however, for preparing the troops for all functions when they are deployed. Having pulled my share of KP, I now feel fully prepared to scrub floors and do the pots and pans! I just don't tell the wife about my skills...

[jnevis]

That was only the response to M58, and "Lowest Cost, Technically Acceptable" contracts is the mandate across all of DoD, for all services.

As for "combat support":

NAVAIR has been pushing to move Sailors back out to the Fleet at the same time drawing down the number of total Sailors.  They have all but eliminated all Navy billets from all of the Test Squadrons here at Pax.  Half the Logistics Squadrons have some level of contract maintenance, all except Carrier Logistics (VRC-30 and 40) are Reserve with Full Time Support.  All of the Training Squadron maintenance departments have contract maintainers.  I see both sides.  The Fleet needs the bodies.  

A Fleet VAW squadron is supposed to have 15 Avionics Techs but are usually around 10, with one or two of those TAD somewhere.  They haven't added contractors to the crew of a carrier and I don't see that coming in the near future so the Galley, Berthing, Laundry, and Security will be siphoning off junior people for the time being.   If a Training Squadron is to have 25 ATs, since they usually have at least double the number of planes a Fleet squadron does, but they can replace 10 billets with 4 contractors to get the same work done, that moves 10 ATs to a Fleet unit.  The reason it isn't one for one is the contractor doesn't stand watches or go TAD anywhere.  

A typical Sailor has duty every four days.  Every duty day, part of the day, say 3 hours, is taken up for mustering and clean-up of the spaces, so instead of a full 8 hour day you only get 4 "production" hours (minus lunch, IF you get an hour).  Every third or fourth duty day you have watch for 8 hours, usually after your normal shift, so you leave work early on that day and come in late on the next one.  All of the Sailors have madatory training for at least two hours a week.  The contractors don't transfer after a couple years and get replaced by a junior guy that has to be trained from the beginning.  Since they are usually senior guys and system experts, one hour of the training a week is given by the contractors who know the system best

On the other hand, that same Tron Shop is hard pressed to keep up with the workload of 18 aircraft.  The few extra bodies would be benificial to keeping the planes working.  Even the most junior kids is good at getting tools and parts   Also as FQ mentioned, there is some monetary incentive to leaving and going contractor, but not as much as a lot of peole believe.  I actually made more money as an E-6 over 12yrs than I did for Grumman as a junior Tech/Field Engineer.  My take home was around $2800 in the Navy but closer to $2000 with Grumman.  Add in what I didn't pay in health care and it's closer to $3500.

The Navy has looked at the costs associated with the VRC squadrons going contract maintenance a couple times.  They are currently only flying strictly from the boat for a very short transit and spend the rest of the time on the beach.  There is a small "catch crew" on the boat for launch and recovery at sea.  The entire detachment is around 50 people.  With a contract team it would be around half that, 10 military flight crew and 10-12 maintainers.  A rotation of four of the maintainer would stay on teh boat to catch and the rest would work from whatever base/airport the planes were flying out of.  If a plane broke on the deck and the catch crew couldn't fix it, they would bring in a few more with the second plane, or borrow a couple people from the Fleet VAW squadron.  They keep revisiting it because they need some of those maintainers in other squadrons, plus they are loosing a lot of billets to drawdown.  

BTW conteractors overseas are required to comply with the same Status of Forces Agreement as Servicemembers, so although not technically under the UCMJ, they still have to follow the rules.  BLackwater got away with it because they were under contract with State, not DoD, but would point the finger at DoD when something went hinky.      

[tombogan03884]

I think whether or not we use soldiers, marines, airmen or sailors to do the dirty work may depend on where they are. For unit security, I prefer to continue to use our own resources for these duties when our units are deployed overseas. Infiltration and intelligence operations by indigenous personnel is always a danger there. In CONUS, however, where unique training is paramount and rotation rest is desirable, I'd opt to contract out non-combat functions. There is something to be said, however, for preparing the troops for all functions when they are deployed. Having pulled my share of KP, I now feel fully prepared to scrub floors and do the pots and pans! I just don't tell the wife about my skills...

I definitely think US troops served by contractors should be served by AMERICAN contractors.