By Maybe Gail should talk to someone who has served in the military before she spouts off on a subject she knows so little about.
Do you remember the scandal about the U.S. Embassy guards in Kabul, Afghanistan, who got naked and held wild hazing rituals?
I am bringing this up because I want to talk about government contracting. When you venture into topics like that, it’s always a good idea to try to begin with an orgy.
No, if you don’t want to appear like a dumbass ignorant columnist, educating oneself on the reason civilian contractors are used to do work once done by U.S. military personnel would be a smarter step.
I’ll use this description from a human rights website.
As the United States engages in the “war on terror,” it is outsourcing key security and military support functions, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan, to private companies to carry out the work. The work that is contracted out to the companies ranges from logistical support to security for U.S. government personnel and reconstruction projects, to training military and security personnel, to operating and maintaining weapons systems. But the contracted companies also serve in more sensitive roles, such as interrogation and translating during questioning of alleged terrorist suspects.
I don’t think it needs saying, but all of this essential work is done in dangerous circumstances. Thousands of U.S. military troops have lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. What the death toll is for these civilians, I have no idea but it sure isn’t zero.
The biggest surprise was that the United States did not have its own soldiers guarding its Embassy in a war zone.
It’s no surprise at all, if someone would bother to educate themselves. Look at the levels of U.S. Military personnel in 2000 as compared to 1992.
| Army | 610,450 |
| Navy | 541,883 |
| Marines | 184,529 |
| Air Force | 470,315 |
And in 2000
| Army | 481,669 |
| Navy | 373,692 |
| Marines | 173,371 |
| Air Force | 354,321 |
Just glancing at the totals, U.S. troop levels are down by around 20%. Are the tasks they are being asked to do gone done or has it increased?
It has increased as we fight a war on terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in addition to trying to keep the peace on the Korean peninsula and do other vital tasks. With the U.S. military over stretched, the use of civilian contractors to do work like protecting the embassy in Kabul was inevitable.
The uneducated drivel passing itself off as a newspaper column, should come off as little surprise when Gail Collins is being discussed. A column of hers last February was ignorant when it came to bloggers though I did enjoy her invoking memories of the television series, ‘Kolchak: The Night Stalker’.
Hat tip- Dave Schuler at OTB who wrote- “I have no problem with reducing the size of the military. I think that doing so without re-aligning commitments is irresponsible. I also think that civilian contractors should be held to the same standards of conduct that our soldiers in uniform are.” Dave is correct on both points.
Update- Here is another ridiculous column by Ms. Collins from last November. She then suggested that President Bush should resign in order for Nancy Pelosin to become President. Rather than summarize my takedown of stupidity, I will refer you to my post on the column.
4:46 pm on December 12th, 2009 1
As i understand the debate among some they contend that
‘contractors” are not held accountable for crimes. Is this true?
If a contractor commits a crime against a fellow contractor or a Host Country National are they immune from the law? eh?
7:19 pm on December 12th, 2009 2
It depends on the host nation’s SOFA. For example in Iraq they modified their SOFA to better identify the legal status of DOD contractors:
http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/031231.html
The dirty secret most people don’t realize is that the vast majority of the Blackwater types work for the State Dept. so they don’t fall under SOFA’s that cover DOD. Those security contractors at the Kabul embassy for example are State Dept. hires.
The vast majority of contractors that DOD hires cook in chow halls, clean laundry, check ID cards, etc.
9:14 pm on December 12th, 2009 3
The #1 biggest reason to use contractors over US Military personal is to free up those military types for other assignments / work. There are a few reasons for this, at least from the technical communications point of view.
One is total troop size, in order to “get more troops” you must pull them from somewhere else, either from other units, a different section within the same unit, or from another command entirely. The total size of each component force is set by congress and requires legislation to increase. It’s significantly faster / easier to just hire a contractor to do something vs trying to allocate manpower from within the armed services.
Another reason how to do with skills acquisition. You don’t “hire” SGT, SSG’s, CW2′s or other senior personal. You have to grow them, that requires significant investment of time and money often without the guarantee in how long their going to be around (ETS / retirement). Military personal also must spend large amounts of time acquiring skill sets that are exclusively military in nature. This is prevalent in NTC / JRTC rotations, field problems, and the weekly STT event.
Also the amount of time a military person must spend on “military” events is rather large, I would say in the 30~40 percent range for a non-deployment base. If its a heavy OPTEMPO deployment post then this number is much higher. This means that assuming exact same level of training / competence / efficiency, it takes one contractor to do the work of two military personal.
That number gets even large if you factor in that few military personal have the sheer training / skill sets the contractor personal do. Not as a knock against the military, but rather anyone in the military who had those highly valuable / marketable skills wouldn’t stay in the military for much longer.
As for a pure “how much does it cost” point of view, most people only look at the base pay / benefits of a military vs a single contractor and think the contractors cost too much. What they are failing to recognize is the cost of training the military personal, promoting them over time, and the additional personal required for duty / deployment / rotations / ect. Then factor in stuff like health care, DoDS school for children and various other “family” orientated benefits and it costs 2~3 times more to have a military person to something that a civilian could do. Its that or your working your military person twelve hours a day for five to six days a week to “get the mission done”.
10:01 pm on December 12th, 2009 4
I can’t help but sit back and chuckle when I read these arm chair experts saying that we need to get rid of contractors and the CIA should conduct their own security.
Let’s make a brief comparison…who do you want conducting security?
A. Young, snot nose punk, two years out of college, with little life-experience – not to mention zero experience in a combat zone.
B. Hardened combat vet – SF or Navy Seal qualified – fully trained in all aspects of the type of security required for the kinds of missions the CIA is conducting.
I foresee many of these positions becoming civilianized (civil service) and some of those working for Blackwater will opt to to go civil service. This will partially alleviate the void left when contract security is done away with.
But a lot of these contractors won’t want to work civil service. So the positions will end up being filled by guys who did a tour or two in theater during their four years in the Infantry (and then ETSed). These guys have some good experience – but aren’t nearly of the caliber of what Blackwater provides.
The sh!t will hit the fan in a year or two when an embassy van in Kabul or Baghdad filled with State Dept. employees gets attacked and people realize that if Blackwater had been doing the security – those people would still be alive.
10:14 pm on December 12th, 2009 5
Lets not forget another fact. Soldiers come home in flag draped coffins. Soldiers get included on the daily CNN body count. Contractors don’t register. Contractors don’t get SGLI. Contractors don’t have to worry so much about their next PT test, yadda yadda. Contractors are the easy way out.
10:27 pm on December 12th, 2009 6
Face the basic fact that this woman like many ‘talking heads’ has led a very sheltered life. She grew up in middle America, never served in the military went to collage and got her degree.
She knows about world history and the people who made it from her high school and collage teachers, most who were never in the military or even left their home except to move to Colorado for a few years, or wherever.
Now she got a job with a newspaper, and become a respected colomnist.
Bottom line is she has led a very sheltered life, and understands little of the reality of the world.
10:35 pm on December 12th, 2009 7
The State Dept. already has civil service body guards known as the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and as Leon points out when these folks get killed they get included on the body count stats while a security contractor does not. The US embassies around the world also have US Marines that work at them as well but they are just small detachments. In non-war zone countries the embassies are augmented with private security contractors usually from the host country as well.
12:05 am on December 13th, 2009 8
Yeah- I’D want some of these clowns with drug and non-HS grad waivers guarding the embassy if I was the ambassador….
3:05 am on December 13th, 2009 9
Unfortunately, it’s these writers who get to shape public opinion. When most Americans gear contractors for the military, they think Blackwater or KBR (aka Halliburton); trigger happy mercenaries operating outside of any system of law and control, or companies with political connections that get billion dollar no-bid contracts to do substandard work that results in GIs being electrocuted when they take a shower.
It’s not going to be easy changing that perception. Going home and telling people you are a contractor for the military today is like going home and telling people you are a soldier in the closing years of the Vietnam War. They would more likely want to spit on you than shake your hand.
When people hear that we employ as many contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan as uniformed troops, they don’t hear that most of them are host nation employees or from south Asian countries.
When they are kidnapped or killed, we may never hear of it. They don’t show up on any death tolls. There won’t be any monuments of memorials made for them outside their own families.
When people ask why we need contractors, I cite experience, expertise, and continuity. They are supposed to be ready, able and qualified to do the job on day one. They can be made available for as long as the job is necessary.
They are disposable yet indispensable assets.
6:24 pm on December 13th, 2009 10
Hmm disposable, that really sums it up. Once a contract is completed or no longer needed / funded we’re basically left to fend for ourselves. If we have some years in at our company and have proven to be a valuable asset, they will often find another position somewhere to employ us. But the actual concern from the US Military is near ~zero~. Contract finished, what to do with the personal is up to the contracted companies HR departments. If a unit is disbanded, or a section goes through “transformation” the Military has to figure out what to do with its personal, and it can’t offer them a job at less pay.
6:58 pm on December 13th, 2009 11
I do believe you contractors are paid quite well.
What is it? $80,000.00 minimum to over 100K depending on the skills.
You are well paid when compared to all soldiers, regardless of rank.
By the way, are you hiring?
I don’t care that “the actual concern from the US Military is near zero”.
I felt the same way when I was IN UNIFORM. So it wouldn’t be a big change, except for a HUGE pay increase. I would be happy with that for a year or two.
Where do I send my resume? I’ll be disposable for one year of that pay!
1:40 am on December 14th, 2009 12
Umm what contractors are you talking about? $80K minimum? Do you think we’re the UAW or something?
The amount paid depends on the job required and the supply / demand of the skill sets needed. The companies make money by paying out the least to get the most productivity. After the pay all the expenses whatever is left is the companies profit, some contracts make butt loads of money, some make very little, and some even loose money (but are kept anyway because they have a growth opportunity).
We get paid whatever the market will bear, if there are a thousand guys looking for a job but only 10 jobs available, then the starting pay will be rather low. But if there is a shortage of qualified people (there often is) then the pay will be a bit higher. And companies don’t like loosing their most qualified people, so they tend to pay you more over a period of time and give you more perks.
Technically we’re not “contractors”, as most of us have ~zero~ control of the actual contract. We’re just “at will” employees of a private company. The US Government, and sometimes the host nation governments are our clients.
If you want a job contracting, do you have the skill sets required? The security clearance? The background experience? If you have these things then the job is just as open to you as anyone else. You can drop your resume on the MANY places. Better yet if you would stop the hating on contractors and instead make close friends of a few they can put in character references when vacancies become available. Personal character references are preferred over resume farming whenever possible.
The only place’s where contracting makes an obscene about of money is in the desert. And that is because of the incredible difficulty in finding people willing to go there for six months to a year to perform a job. They have to jack the pay up that high or it would be impossible to fill the man power requirements.
5:33 pm on December 14th, 2009 13
With all due respect to contractors, I particulairly enjoyed it when they would get some excellent cooks for the clubs or mess hall. Made life so much better. I know on several occasions in Vietnam and Taiwan the chefs were superb. Even when I was stationed at ‘Palgongsan’ radar site in 1974, the Korean chefs were excellant.
Some of the guys got permission from the Korean site commander to hunt ‘Pheasant’ on the mountain and came back after a weekend with enough to provide Pheasant with our Turkey dinner at Thanksgiving.
1:56 pm on February 5th, 2010 14
Gerry: I arrived at “Joplin” in December 1974 and stayed until December 1975. Lt. Col. Foster (I believe, have to check my APRs) was the CC. My reporting official was Lt. O’Brien. Housed for a couple of months in the quonsets, then moved to Bayside. Great memories and still plenty of names remembered. Come back. Over.