FCW Insider

Blog archive

Does insourcing lead to 'theft' of contractor employees?

All the talk about government insourcing—that is, redirecting contractor work to federal employees—is missing a key issue, according to one reader: Where, exactly, are agencies finding staff to handle all that work?

The anonymous reader, responding to an FCW article about the Army’s plans to insource core functions now being handled by contractors, points out agencies are likely to expand their staffs at the expense of the contractors.

“Whether inherently a governmental-only function or not, what does that say for the contractor that invested time [and] money on that individual, sourced him to fulfill the customers mission, and the customer is now hiring that individual off from the contractor?” the reader commented “And, of course, no finder’s fee [will be paid].”

The theft of talent weakens companies that are already struggling to deal with financial instability, the reader believes, putting the administration’s insourcing policy at odds with its economic policies.

(As an aside: The question of finder’s fees was raised last summer when the administration officials first began talking up insourcing. But numerous government readers noted that agencies never see a dime when contractors hire away government employees.)

What do you say?

Posted by John Stein Monroe on Mar 24, 2010 at 12:18 PM


The Fed 100

Read the profiles of all this year's winners.

Featured

  • Then-presidential candidate Donald Trump at a 2016 campaign event. Image: Shutterstock

    'Buy American' order puts procurement in the spotlight

    Some IT contractors are worried that the "buy American" executive order from President Trump could squeeze key innovators out of the market.

  • OMB chief Mick Mulvaney, shown here in as a member of Congress in 2013. (Photo credit Gage Skidmore/Flickr)

    White House taps old policies for new government makeover

    New guidance from OMB advises agencies to use shared services, GWACs and federal schedules for acquisition, and to leverage IT wherever possible in restructuring plans.

  • Shutterstock image (by Everett Historical): aerial of the Pentagon.

    What DOD's next CIO will have to deal with

    It could be months before the Defense Department has a new CIO, and he or she will face a host of organizational and operational challenges from Day One

  • USAF Gen. John Hyten

    General: Cyber Command needs new platform before NSA split

    U.S. Cyber Command should be elevated to a full combatant command as soon as possible, the head of Strategic Command told Congress, but it cannot be separated from the NSA until it has its own cyber platform.

  • Image from Shutterstock.

    DLA goes virtual

    The Defense Logistics Agency is in the midst of an ambitious campaign to eliminate its IT infrastructure and transition to using exclusively shared, hosted and virtual services.

  • Fed 100 logo

    The 2017 Federal 100

    The women and men who make up this year's Fed 100 are proof positive of what one person can make possibile in federal IT. Read on to learn more about each and every winner's accomplishments.

Reader comments

Thu, Apr 1, 2010

Stealing - Yes. At least in the old days it was bsased on a competiiton. This insourcing movement is all about federal employees building their offices and government jobs. If it were really avout capabilities we would hear more about full cost and qualifications.

Fri, Mar 26, 2010

I think for years, under the last administration, contract companies were making large profits from government contracts and now they want to complain about this. What about losing employees to other contractors?

Thu, Mar 25, 2010

I am a manager for a federal government contractor providing services. I have hired more than 60 employees. I can only present my personal and simple scorecard for the past 8 years: Federal Employees Hired - 2 (their stated reason for accepting offer: they were not being advanced fast enough) Company Employees Hired by Federal Government - 18; of which 15 did not change work desk nor work phone number (their stated reasons for accepting offer: less risk of being laid-off, better benefits, and/or higher pay)

Thu, Mar 25, 2010 tuomoks

As all(?) have already said - what's the fuss? "Investment of Time and Money" - last seen maybe in 90's - since then there has been zero investments on individuals, it's all up to a person today. Please, I'm from time when 2-3 months a year was company paid for further education - not training, totally different thing! - since then it has gone to zero and any further education has to taken on own time, don't waste company time and / or money?

Thu, Mar 25, 2010 William Carter Austin, Texas

The same argument has been made for decades where contractor employees have poached government employees who, obviously, were trained at taxpayer expense. Get over it!

Show All Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group