TSA versus Booz Allen

by emptywheel

I'd like to use some details from the WaPo's story on Booz Allen's no-bid contract this morning to put some things in perspective. The article cites the SSCI with a price tag for each contract employee:

The average annual cost of a contract employee is $250,000, almost twice that of a federal employee, according to an estimate recently cited by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

I'm guessing that, since so many federal employees are unionized, this is comparing mostly non-union contract employees with a union government employees. And the contract employee is making twice as much as the government union employee.

DHS is paying those obscene rates, they would argue, because those employees provide a crucial service at the front-line of protecting our nation.

So can someone explain to me why it is that Bush is promising to veto the bill finally implementing the changes recommended by the 9/11 Commission because he wants to prevent TSA's workers from getting collective bargaining rights? Bush apparently thinks it is a bigger risk to our country to have airport screeners--our first line of defense against something like 9/11--earn one half of what we pay for contract employees, than to let airplane baggage compartments and shipping containers go uninspected.

But let me go further with the analogy. Bush also wants to veto the Homeland Security funding bill because it requires contractors--those same contractors who are getting paid two times per employee what it takes the federal government to employ the same employee--to pay the prevailing local wage.

Perhaps the most hotly contested part of the bill is a requirement that department contractors pay their employees at least the local prevailing wage. The provision, part of broader Democratic efforts to enact legislation being pushed by unions, would allow the president to waive so-called Davis-Bacon restrictions only in times of national emergency.

The bill doesn't require contractors to pay employees a proportional share of what they're (over)paid by the federal government. It doesn't require contractors to pay employees twice what a government employee would make. It's asking only that contractors pay the prevailing local wage.

Taken together--the stories of the massive abuse of no bid contractors by Bush cronies alongside Bush's promise to veto anything that gives workers a fraction of the money the government is currently paying contractors for their employees work--I can only conclude one thing.

Bush will veto anything that interrupts this system, whereby Bush cronies pocket massive amounts of taxpayer money and then turn around and pay the laboring contractors shit wages in return. Bush is poised to veto anything that might prevent his cronies from massive profiteering in the name of our national security.

Comments

[Neil]

EW, Do you think the analysis you do on issues like this find's it way into the government oversight process and makes a difference, or is your motive and expectation that by educating the politically-minded public, you can empower and motivate them to take back their government from the people who are using it to fleece us?

[CityGirl]

Neil, IMHO, I think EW is doing both. As for us, our part is to make sure we take what she uncovers and we run with it--by sending copies to our own Congress critters, to oversight committees, to "journalists," to friends and family until we break through those walls of resistance.

EW, by the way, did you catch this zinger from Charlton about Abu from inside today's WaPo?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062702310.html

[emptywheel]

CityGirl

Yeah--it's stuff that's been out there for months in the emails. Though if Charlton wants to get chatty, all the better.

[Sojourner]

EW, forgive me, but this is an EPU from the prior thread. Bush, Cheney, and Gonzales are ready to duke it out over executive privilege, and there are some obvious misdoings that could be used for impeachment proceedings against each of them. My questions are as follows (if you have any answers ;-)):

Am I correct in assuming that since Kucinich has filed articles of impeachment against Cheney that those would be taken up before subsequent articles against Bush or Gonzo? (Asked another way, is there any way that Cheney could become President if Bush were impeached?)

At what point would any of them cease to have any authority? (If articles are filed against Bush, does that preclude him from issuing pardons, etc)?

[eyesonthestreet]

Who is Booz-Allen, well apparantly they are "Virtuoso's of Outsourcing,"
http://www.strategy-business.com/resiliencereport/resilience/rr00036?pg=0

I'll say. I hope some of that "annual cost" trickles down here in the US. Or, as I am guessing, it is almost all offshore, like in India, China, and all those cheap labor sites. Stick it to the US taxpayer in US employment wage scales, then turn around and hire cheap labor (with NO labor regulations) and pocket the difference.

[2strange]

I don't know where they got the average federal employee salary from, it must include a lot of management types.
A GS-11 will cost the government about $80,000.00 per year, most of the employees hired by DHS will be at a much lower GS level.

[Neil]

CityGirl. Thanks. Works for me.

[William Ockham]

The costs referred to in the article must include the overhead costs of employees (benefits, retirement, etc.).

[2strange]

No, WO, that is the "cost to government" which included any government contributions to benefits. A cost to Government of $125,000.00 would be for a GS-13 or so. I've taken a look at usajobs.opm.gov and used Department of Homeland Security as a search item. There are lots of jobs being advertised, many of them high GS ranks, but alot of low level ones too.

[AmIDreaming]

"...Bush is poised to veto anything that might prevent his cronies from massive profiteering in the name of our national security."

Given the news yesterday about the investigation of BAE and Prince Bandar, you have to wonder whether the group of cronies doesn't include some prominent Saudis.

[freepatriot]

off topic smiler:

scooter's got a new addition to his title

inmate number 28301-016

now scooter's got something I ain't got

[marjo]

just one point: fed employee unions are very weak unions. No right to strike, for example.

[Palli Davis Holubar]

There is another sad side to all this government contracting and it isn't just crippling unions.. it's also the fact that civil servant jobs are (were) the path into the middleclass for African Americans and other poor, but educated, Americans. Civil service is an important part of civic participation and it shouldn't just be rich people who accept appointments to government agencies or take jobs in government offices while being applauded for their patriotism for sacrificing more lucrative incomes in the private sector. Cheney's not sacrificing any income from Haliburton- it just has another name.

A comment about GS pay scales: Those new religious law graduates are way above their pay rank. Gives a new meaning to the old expression "good enough for government work".

[siosal]

It's an old story. Union busting is expensive, and those who want to bust unions will spare no expense.

[herefast123]

acer 1800 series batecq60 laptop battery

[herefast123]

asus w3a battery

[herefast123]

compaq e500s battery

[herefast123]

hp nc4400 battery