FDA is going to hire contract workers to do the job of those laid off

[Anonymous]

And they can work virtually.

The draft documents and emails obtained by CBS News say that the contractors would be given FDA laptops and badges to do their work, which is described as intended "to address the duties that have been performed" by the laid-off staff.

However, the contracting documents also say that the tasks could be completed virtually, suggesting that they would not be subject to the same strict return-to-office requirements that have hamstrung FDA employees for weeks.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fda-replace-laid-off-employees-contractors/

I wonder if other agencies will follow suit.

[Anonymous]

Sounds inefficient and more costly

[Anonymous]

The interesting thing will be seeing who the contract goes to and then connecting the dots back to members of the current regime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds inefficient and more costly

To the contrary. Hiring contractors for non-governmental duties allows for greater flexibility in staffing, accompanied by lower benefits costs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds inefficient and more costly

To the contrary. Hiring contractors for non-governmental duties allows for greater flexibility in staffing, accompanied by lower benefits costs.

It almost never saves money because the overhead is HUGE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds inefficient and more costly

To the contrary. Hiring contractors for non-governmental duties allows for greater flexibility in staffing, accompanied by lower benefits costs.

Yes. And, when contract is up, they don't have to give you another task.

[Anonymous]

And it makes a whole lot more money for company owners and less for workers. Republican win win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds inefficient and more costly

To the contrary. Hiring contractors for non-governmental duties allows for greater flexibility in staffing, accompanied by lower benefits costs.

Absolutely not. As someone who has had to be part of hiring contractors, we pay way more than if we could just hire on the fed scale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds inefficient and more costly

To the contrary. Hiring contractors for non-governmental duties allows for greater flexibility in staffing, accompanied by lower benefits costs.

Lower?

Hourly wage for a direct employee, including benefits - $100
Hourly wage for contractor, including benefits, same work - $300.

Your math is weird. But I am open to learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds inefficient and more costly

To the contrary. Hiring contractors for non-governmental duties allows for greater flexibility in staffing, accompanied by lower benefits costs.

No. You hire the people who were fired for 1.5 x their former salary play 65% over head but the work does not get done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds inefficient and more costly

To the contrary. Hiring contractors for non-governmental duties allows for greater flexibility in staffing, accompanied by lower benefits costs.

Lower?

Hourly wage for a direct employee, including benefits - $100
Hourly wage for contractor, including benefits, same work - $300.

Your math is weird. But I am open to learning.

All these morons chiming in that contractors are cheaper operate in the 1950s when Feds got good pensions. It isn’t like that anymore. The only benefit working for the government is stable (yet expensive) health insurance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And they can work virtually.

The draft documents and emails obtained by CBS News say that the contractors would be given FDA laptops and badges to do their work, which is described as intended "to address the duties that have been performed" by the laid-off staff.

However, the contracting documents also say that the tasks could be completed virtually, suggesting that they would not be subject to the same strict return-to-office requirements that have hamstrung FDA employees for weeks.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fda-replace-laid-off-employees-contractors/

I wonder if other agencies will follow suit.

Contractors are remote in other agencies also. They save a bit on parking and not needing offices. It's brilliant really. Now if we can just get the feds to figure out how to operate the conference video cam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The interesting thing will be seeing who the contract goes to and then connecting the dots back to members of the current regime.

Yes, follow the money. So corrupt!

[Anonymous]

Classic. The company i work for swings from consulting firm to consulting firm where they tell us to outsource to save money, then bring it back in house, also to save money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds inefficient and more costly

To the contrary. Hiring contractors for non-governmental duties allows for greater flexibility in staffing, accompanied by lower benefits costs.

Lower?

Hourly wage for a direct employee, including benefits - $100
Hourly wage for contractor, including benefits, same work - $300.

Your math is weird. But I am open to learning.

All these morons chiming in that contractors are cheaper operate in the 1950s when Feds got good pensions. It isn’t like that anymore. The only benefit working for the government is stable (yet expensive) health insurance.

Yeah. What Reagan did in that regard didn't help. Simply blew up total government expense (with all the overhead of corporate profit, increased contract personnel, adopted the inefficiencies of higher churn in those personnel, required rules that add to contractor overhead which then gets paid for in contracts anyway, etc.) and made accountability nearly impossible.

There are Feds who don't do a great job, just as in any large enterprise. Most do a very good job with the constraints they are given (including having to deal with so many relatively unaccountable contractors), and could do a much better one with fewer rules and more autonomy (and then personal accountability). The idea that these (the ones who do a decent job, especially at senior levels) are overpaid is laughable, given the hourly-LOE-equivalent earning potential in the private sector (in normal market conditions -- not when so many are suddenly dumped) of their typical education-skills-and-experience qualifications.