A lot of these jobs require clearance. Who can get such clearances? People with less history. So, young college graduates, young army folks, etc. There are tons of people who just have security clearances without competence. There is a huge demand for people who hold clearances. I have no problem with "make work" programs; however, these large companies are grifting 100% on top of what these people get paid.
Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
361–370 of 684 posts
Re: Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
#362This is a big loss for India, it's like 15:1 India- vs. US-based "consultants."
Re: Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
we should also start cutting doctor pay to make sure we get people who are in it to help others.
Do you think the best doctors are the ones who go into the most lucrative paths, like cosmetic surgery in Beverly Hills? You're deliberately strawmanning. The equivalent statement on the other side would be: We should 10x doctor pay so we only get those people who are in it for the money. That's a disingenuous stance as well. Let's not pretend that "slightly below market rate" for specialized fields leaves people in…
Doctor pay is already 10x.
Re: Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
You cannot ultimately chain people to their desks. What you either get is a "soft" withdrawal of labour (people refuse to take the job if they have any other choice available, as we're discussing upthread, so you get dregs), or the whole thing explodes into "illegal" strikes. Which are harder to resolve, because you made sure there's no one organisation to negotiate with.
the US has at-will employment, save it with the hyperbole. There are plenty of non-unionized jobs people would love to have. Collective bargaining against private actors is fine. There should be no collective bargaining against the democratic will of the people, any more than some random group of federal workers has veto power over law passed bu congress. It is simply not how democracy works.
No random federal workers have veto power over the law. Never did.
Having an executive with contempt for the law and the concept of separation of powers and judicial review is a perversion of democracy.
The democratic rule of the people is driven by the law. What laws have the republicans passed authorizing these actions?
Re: Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whether you support it or not, for government, that's really some incredible efficiency. almost 1/3 complete in 100 days
It’s amazing that people so committed to constitutional principles were able to enact the largest tax increase in history without the advice and consent of congress. Impressive even for tax and spend republicans. In democracy loving areas of the British Empire, that type of arbitrary action led to revolutions.
They absolutely have the consent of Congress. Congress can stop this at any time. They elect not to. Their silence is consent in this case. You can attribute that silence to active support or cowardice but either way they can stop it and don't so they approve of it.
"In democracy loving areas of the British Empire, that type of arbitrary action led to revolutions." Not sure if you have taken a look at Britain lately but they absolutely don't care about what the citizens want.
Re: Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the reason the US government needs to use consultants is because they can't actually pay enough to hire senior developers directly due to the constraints imposed by the GS pay scales. Often times the top levels of the pay scale aren't even available because there is some rule about how people can't be paid more than someone else. So instead they pay for consultants and all of their overhead. (Of course there…
They still don't generally need to use consultants. Even at the poor rates of pay in many government teams, there are still some decent technical staff who don't just chase the dollar. Bear in mind the salary standard is normal market, not FAANG/SV. Consultants are nearly always used so that managers can say "we went with BigCo, its their fault" when things go wrong. ie. they are generally a political choice rather t…
> They still don't generally need to use consultants. Even at the poor rates of pay in many government teams, there are still some decent technical staff who don't just chase the dollar. Bear in mind the salary standard is normal market, not FAANG/SV.
The stated policy of the current admin is to "traumatize" federal employees so the number of these people is likely dwindling fast. Burnout was already a problem before the current admin - if your efforts hit a bureaucratic brick wall one too many times that private sector job starts to look a lot more appealing.
Re: Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
#367Now the UK should swiftly follow suit in sacking these cowboys. The taxpayer is being charged extortionate rates in some cases for fresh graduates who know effectively nothing at all about what they talk about. At the same time, we should increase salary banding for technical roles to the market rate. We will get the experience we need for much, much less.
I think consulting companies are outsourcing the work to lower wages countries like India, so it might not cost the taxpayer more.
This is nonsense. The consultants charge above market rates, regardless of their own costs.
Consultancies have never saved the government money.
US governments hire consultants because they have been obligated to do but have not been allowed to actually hire anyone to do , which is a hilariously stupid situation but that's what happens when you are so miserable you micromanage the budget without ever thinking about downstream effects.
The government is obligated to provide it's services, and that doesn't change if the legislature didn't actually give you the OK or budget to hire anyone to do that job.
Instead, governments are forced to solve this stupid problem by paying for consultants out of more discretionary budgets. They pay well above market rates for the position too, which is insane.
Re: Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think the best doctors are the ones who go into the most lucrative paths, like cosmetic surgery in Beverly Hills? You're deliberately strawmanning. The equivalent statement on the other side would be: We should 10x doctor pay so we only get those people who are in it for the money. That's a disingenuous stance as well. Let's not pretend that "slightly below market rate" for specialized fields leaves people in…
Doctor pay is already 10x.
Doctor pay is already 10x doctor pay?
Re: Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of what you said is what I'm saying and you're making all sorts of presumptions about what you think I believe. I think you struggle with civil discourse and doubt this conversation will be productive, so have a nice day.
Cool. Go back to thinking we can only raise taxes on the middle class to pay for medicare and ignoring any taxes on the wealthy like you said in your first post. ( we simply cannot afford to be yeeting historically unheard of levels of money at the elderly without raising taxes significantly on the middle-class, that is the rub of our current fiscal situation ) Your current fiscal situation is only right-wing talking…
the vast majority of economists agree that there is simply not enough income among the wealthy that we can reach a fiscally sustainable path solely by raising taxes on the wealthy. i favor raising taxes on the wealthy significantly, but there are also hard truths about tax receipts and current spending.
https://www.kentclarkcenter.org/surveys/taxes-and-mandatory-...
Re: Pentagon to terminate $5.1B in IT contracts with Accenture, Deloitte
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
The data on hostile takeovers by "corporate raiders" very much does not support the characterization here. The category of PE firms you're talking about buy companies that are deeply troubled. Generally due to the management's unwillingness to accept reality and make change, the company is heading towards oblivion one way or another. Perhaps surprisingly, the vast majority of takeover targets wind up as net job creat…
This deviated from the original topic, and I'm not following your metaphor flows. How does your post relate to consultants specifically? Is there an implication that consultants not part of the 'mess'? You say "No automatic force... whether (the agencies) are achieving any progress)". Don't we have oversight agencies and committees? I'm not following your 'grow and grow'; can you provide evidence that all agencies ju…
> How does your post relate to consultants specifically?
He's not talking about consultants, he's just correcting the pop culture meme that "private equity is evil" which is what the parent comment implied. Everything he describes is correct.