Comments on: General Sharp Answers Questions During Teleconference

By: someotherguy

someotherguy — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 18:32:56 +0000

Well depends on the contract we're discussion. Service related jobs and low key stuff sure no problem with hiring spouses. But for anything high end or high demand / visible they actually prefer not to hire military spouses because they don't know how long they will be around. And that is assuming you can even find a spouse who qualifies for those positions. I'm talking positions requiring a US Secret clearance at a minimum (some require a TS SCI) plus several years experience with various DoD systems.

I guess I really hate the term "slots" because it makes people use the military system of thinking where you assign manpower to a "slot" based on MOS or other generic requirements. Slots also represent a hard number / cap for manpower, when in reality that number can change at the stroke of a PM's hand. It takes about two weeks to get authorization from HR to create a new position to hire for, it takes even less to create a temp position. And if they don't need the manpower because the current employees are handling the load fine then they won't hire anyone into that position because it saves the company money. This is why the emphasis on employees with multiple skill sets.

As for the whole customer – client relationship, the customer requests work to be done but can not tell us who we can use to do it. The is actually a federal law somewhere (I wish I could remember it) that states the government can not direct the private contracting entity on hiring practices. All they can do is make requests and state requirements (clearance, SOFA status, ect..).

Hell technically if a company wants they can hire someone without SOFA status, provided that person can obtain a visa on their own. That person would still get a 700-19 with a base pass / ID card but wouldn't be entitled to any logistic support (commissary / PX / medical / dental / ect..). Also that person wouldn't get any of the diplomatic exemptions granted with an A series visa. The company would have to support them 100% on their own, which is often more headache then its worth.

By: Typo

Typo — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:43:35 +0000

I doubt you use that 2cm poke stick very much. You are a loser in any language Tom, must feel bad to know girls will always be telling themselves they can do much better than to be with you.

By: Retired GI

Retired GI — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:34:55 +0000

None

By: Chris In Dallas

Chris In Dallas — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:20:07 +0000

Wow, excellent questions!

By: guitard

guitard — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:46:39 +0000

Don't look now, but Korean kids are headed down the same road as American kids – and are getting fatter by the year. All they want to do is eat junk food and play video games – just like the American kids.

By: Tom

Tom — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:02:37 +0000

Ah.. but I'm OK and feel secure with my 2cm poke stick. If 300 ibs white guy hippo can lose weight, I haven't seen it yet. They get bigger and bigger side ways every year. American teens bulge side ways while shrinking in height every year. Not much dicipline there.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:25:13 +0000

Does anyone else have questions they think should have been asked to General Sharp? Post them in the comments section.

Sir, are the Koreans ready to assume operational control?

Sir, what is the impact of releasing OPLAN 5027 to the North Koreans?

Sir, in light of the influx of command-sponsored families, as well as the explosion of the US and allied expatriate population in South Korea, can USFK still perform a wartime mission with the burden of NEO?

By: JohnT

JohnT — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:58:53 +0000

The 300lbs "white" guy can lose weight. The small endowed Tom and others like him, well…

By: Chris In Dallas

Chris In Dallas — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 07:44:42 +0000

To get on a different track, I will mention I find press briefings by high ranking commanders are almost always profoundly boring. A person like General Sharp is just too constrained to really tell it like it is. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Sharp thought the Korean manpower contributions to Iraq and Afghanistan were pointless. You'll never hear him say such a thing because if he did, he would get the Singlaub treatment. It similar with something like the new 2ID alcohol policy. If he disagrees with it, he won't say so in a forum like this. If he did, those over him who decide his next assignment will likely decide he doesn't need a next assignment for second guessing a subordinate and/or not quashing the policy on his own. The only straight shooting you're likely to get will be on meat and potatoes matters.

I much prefer when the GEN Sharps send out a minion to these conferences. They at least have the luxury of stating they don't have authority to answer hot button questions, thus reducing hot air emissions.

By: GI Korea

GI Korea — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 07:33:03 +0000

Notice I didn't say given to spouses, I said emphasized. I don't expect USFK to try and change any contracts.

If you have a number of people removed due to the visa issue that means those "slots" or jobs or whatever you want to call them have to be filled by someone.

USFK could encourage spouses to submit resumes and emphasize the hiring of these spouses if they meet the qualifications over someone who is not a spouse. A private company is going to want to make the customer happy and if the customer is emphasizing to them they would like to see more spouses hired the company is not obligated contractually to do so, but will probably hire more spouses to keep the customer happy.

As I mentioned AAFES is going to be a tougher nut to crack but a better fight than trying to find non-hagwon type jobs on the Korean economy for spouses.