Discussion:
Letter Carriers vs Private Contractors
(too old to reply)
Paul J. Berg
2007-03-16 00:54:31 UTC
Permalink
`
News article from Northwest Labor Press (Portland, Oregon)

`
A Beaverton (Oregon) postmaster's decision to contract out mail delivery
is producing a major outcry among union letter carriers. National
Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) Branch 82 has filed a complaint
against Postmaster John Lee, and as of press time was planning to picket
outside his office on March 15.

Residents aren't too pleased either. For over a month, homeowners at the
new Arbor Parc Bethany housing development had to drive 10 miles
roundtrip to a postal sorting station to pick up their mail.

The dispute is a local skirmish in a national war of ideology within the
United States Postal Service (USPS). The Bush-appointed majority on the
Postal Board of Governors has been pushing USPS to assign more
deliveries to private contractors. Board Chair James C. Miller III, a
former Reagan budget director, has called for wholesale postal
privatization. NALC has energetically opposed the shift, arguing that
privatization would not only threaten the jobs and incomes of America's
325,000 letter carriers, but would also compromise the security,
efficiency and integrity of the mail, and put the long-term viability of
the Postal Service in jeopardy.

In Beaverton, Willie Higgins just wanted to get his mail. Higgins was
the first person to move into the Arbor Parc development, in the Bethany
neighborhood north of Interstate 26.

Unpacking in his just-finished townhouse, he waited for a mailbox key to
appear under his mat. It never came. Phone calls to Arbor Homes brought
bad news: Delivery service =97 to the community mailboxes at the end of
his street =97 would have to wait until mid-summer, when the development
is half-full, he was told. Until then, he'd have to drive to Hillsboro
to get his mail, a location that closes at 4 p.m.

And yet, all around him and across the street from him, older residences
and businesses were getting regular mail service.

"I don't understand why the guy who delivers mail across the street
couldn't simply add the new boxes to his route," said L.C. Hansen,
president of NALC Branch 82. That's the way USPS normally handles new
deliveries, Hansen said.

Instead, residents had to pick up their own mail while USPS advertised
for a contractor.

USPS area spokesperson Kerry Jeffrey had few answers to Labor Press
questions about the contracting process, but sources in the Beaverton
post office said the Arbor Parc Bethany contract was advertised on
Craigslist, and no qualified contractors stepped forward. When USPS
started getting calls from several newspapers, management asked
supervisors if they knew anyone who could deliver the route. On March 9,
USPS signed a 120-day emergency contract with the son of a Beaverton
postal supervisor, who then subcontracted with his girlfriend to do the
delivery. Service to the development began March 12.

But the inconvenience to Higgins and his neighbors calls into question
the postmaster's assertion =97 in a Jan. 29 letter to Hansen =97 that
contracting out wouldn't harm the public interest. Under its nationwide
labor agreement with NALC, public interest is one of several things USPS
is supposed to consider before contracting out =97 along with cost,
efficiency and qualification of employees.

USPS has had the option to contract out delivery since the Postal
Reorganization Act of 1970, and private contractors already handle 1.9
percent of deliveries nationwide =97 mainly on highway routes in rural
areas.

Arbor Parc is a change in scale. While Hansen was told to expect 374 new
residences at that particular development,
Jeffrey said 12,000 to 15,000 homes are planned for the area. That would
make it the largest private postal delivery contract in Oregon and
Southwest Washington, and could account for as many as a dozen letter
carrier jobs.

Jeffrey stressed that Post Office management isn't converting existing
routes to private carriers, just new routes.

But such assurances aren't much comfort to letter carriers, who see
Arbor Parc as a foot in a door, and worry that the door will soon be
wide open.

Lee, who came to Beaverton after a two-year stint as postmaster in
Tacoma, Washington, initiated a smaller privatization there last year
when a newly built 128-unit condominium =97 a downtown city block
surrounded by existing postal routes =97 was assigned to a contractor.
That's the kind of thing that drives Hansen up the wall. Computerized
route management and automated sorting have made the U.S. Postal Service
the most efficient in the world, but Hansen thinks privatization could
undo that. How could it be efficient to have letter carriers walking all
around a building, but leaving the building itself to a private
contractor who would have to make a special trip?

"Universal delivery is an economic strength of our postal system,"
Hansen said. "I don't think it's possible to lose economy of scale and
not lose economic efficiency also."

Letter carriers are also worried about erosion of public confidence in
the mails.

While the Internet has emerged as a postal service competitor, the
public still views mail as the safest way to pay bills.

But what happens when the public sees contractors in street clothes
driving up in their own personal vehicles and opening mailboxes? And
what will be the impact of higher turnover, diluted accountability,
diminished professionalism? Union letter carriers are long-term, career
employees of USPS, starting at $17 an hour and topping out at $22,
whereas contract employees who clear $10 an hour will jump ship when an
$11-an-hour job comes along.

And, Hansen adds, NALC members are federal employees who take an oath to
uphold the Constitution. They have relationships in the community,
collect food for the needy in annual drives, and serve as neighborhood
eyes and ears.

They are trained and ready to deliver medicine in the event of a
national emergency, and are committed enough that mail service was
uninterrupted in the days following the 2001 anthrax attacks.

Two out of five USPS letter carriers are armed services veterans, owing
to federal hiring rules that give preference to veterans. Contractors
face no such requirement.

USPS is America's second largest employer after Wal-Mart, and as
employers they could hardly be more different.

Jeffrey, the Postal spokesperson, said USPS has worked hard to answer
concerns the public has had about contract employees. Contract letter
carriers will be licensed and bonded, he said, will wear uniforms and a
postal ID, and go through a criminal background check.

In the final analysis, USPS decisions to contract out are supposed to be
justified by cost savings. NALC disputes the notion that contracting
saves money, but that's the rationale offered by Postmaster Lee, who
forecast USPS will save $33,878 a year by assigning Arbor Parc to a
contractor. Lee didn't return calls, and Jeffrey said he didn't know how
the figure was arrived at. Hansen has demanded to know what the figure
is based on, but so far hasn't been given the information.

Stopping privatization is important enough to NALC that the union agreed
in recent contract negotiations to accept a more modest health benefit
in exchange for a pledge not to contract out existing city carrier work.
The postmaster general seemed to agree, but the Board of Governors
rejected the deal, and the two sides then declared impasse. Under the
rules for postal employee contract bargaining, the next phase will be
mediation, followed by binding arbitration if no agreement is reached.

Since then, union leaders say, there's been a ramp-up in contracting out
around the country, with managers trained and given manuals that specify
how to contract out.

"We believe there's pressure being put on Postal Service management by
the Board of Governors, a Board dominated by Bush appointees," said NALC
national spokesperson Drew Von Bergen. "These people are unabashedly for
privatization of the postal service, and if they can't do it in whole,
they'll do it in parts."

In a nutshell, Hansen says, politicians are interfering with effective
postal management. "That's why we're going to the court of public
opinion with a picket. We need the public to know what's going on."

`
Curt
2007-03-16 16:19:53 UTC
Permalink
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.

I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent him a
copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.

I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be gummint
functions -- prisons, armies, postal carriers, police, fire.

Curt
Don Homuth
2007-03-16 16:22:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent him a
copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be gummint
functions -- prisons, armies, postal carriers, police, fire.
There are some conditions under which contracting out works just fine.
Those have been studied to a fare-thee-well over many years, and have
now become an exercise in many MBA programs.

But not All conditions are amenable to contracting out.

The key is to know which is which.
lein
2007-03-16 20:17:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Homuth
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent him a
copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be gummint
functions -- prisons, armies, postal carriers, police, fire.
There are some conditions under which contracting out works just fine.
Those have been studied to a fare-thee-well over many years, and have
now become an exercise in many MBA programs.
But not All conditions are amenable to contracting out.
The key is to know which is which.
yeah, and...
Don Homuth
2007-03-16 20:38:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent him a
copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be gummint
functions -- prisons, armies, postal carriers, police, fire.
There are some conditions under which contracting out works just fine.
Those have been studied to a fare-thee-well over many years, and have
now become an exercise in many MBA programs.
But not All conditions are amenable to contracting out.
The key is to know which is which.
yeah, and...
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
lein
2007-03-16 22:33:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent him a
copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be gummint
functions -- prisons, armies, postal carriers, police, fire.
There are some conditions under which contracting out works just fine.
Those have been studied to a fare-thee-well over many years, and have
now become an exercise in many MBA programs.
But not All conditions are amenable to contracting out.
The key is to know which is which.
yeah, and...
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
Step up to the plate Don, face a pitch, take a swing for a change.
When your wife tells you she wants to do it, do you answer "there are
those who do and those who don't"?

outsourcing delivery in Bethany, yeah or nay?
Don Homuth
2007-03-17 17:06:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
But not All conditions are amenable to contracting out.
The key is to know which is which.
yeah, and...
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
Step up to the plate Don, face a pitch, take a swing for a change.
Pick your specific example and we can surely discuss it.
Post by lein
When your wife tells you she wants to do it, do you answer "there are
those who do and those who don't"?
When you wish to discuss Anything, why is it you Immediately switch to
some sexual metaphor -- which generally fails.

It's a more common Wingnut trait than not.
Post by lein
outsourcing delivery in Bethany, yeah or nay?
What are the specific comparisons to be made? That's how one
discusses outsourcing. What does it cost to deliver via postal
workers, what does it cost to deliver via an outsourced contract, what
are the transaction costs involved in the contract, and what are the
requirements for delivery -- the QC discussion?

Specify which you wish to assume or declare, and we can go from there.
lein
2007-03-18 16:34:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
But not All conditions are amenable to contracting out.
The key is to know which is which.
yeah, and...
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
Step up to the plate Don, face a pitch, take a swing for a change.
Pick your specific example and we can surely discuss it.
Post by lein
When your wife tells you she wants to do it, do you answer "there are
those who do and those who don't"?
When you wish to discuss Anything, why is it you Immediately switch to
some sexual metaphor -- which generally fails.
It's a more common Wingnut trait than not.
Post by lein
outsourcing delivery in Bethany, yeah or nay?
What are the specific comparisons to be made? That's how one
discusses outsourcing. What does it cost to deliver via postal
workers, what does it cost to deliver via an outsourced contract, what
are the transaction costs involved in the contract, and what are the
requirements for delivery -- the QC discussion?
Specify which you wish to assume or declare, and we can go from there.
yes, you might discuss, or you might not discuss it.
Don Homuth
2007-03-18 17:50:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
outsourcing delivery in Bethany, yeah or nay?
What are the specific comparisons to be made? That's how one
discusses outsourcing. What does it cost to deliver via postal
workers, what does it cost to deliver via an outsourced contract, what
are the transaction costs involved in the contract, and what are the
requirements for delivery -- the QC discussion?
Specify which you wish to assume or declare, and we can go from there.
yes, you might discuss, or you might not discuss it.
You have two choices:

* Give it a try, and see where it goes.

* Don't, and continue to duck when challenged.

Either way works for me. How do they work for you?
lein
2007-03-18 21:17:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
outsourcing delivery in Bethany, yeah or nay?
What are the specific comparisons to be made? That's how one
discusses outsourcing. What does it cost to deliver via postal
workers, what does it cost to deliver via an outsourced contract, what
are the transaction costs involved in the contract, and what are the
requirements for delivery -- the QC discussion?
Specify which you wish to assume or declare, and we can go from there.
yes, you might discuss, or you might not discuss it.
* Give it a try, and see where it goes.
* Don't, and continue to duck when challenged.
Either way works for me. How do they work for you?
the answer could be yes, or it could be no.
Don Homuth
2007-03-18 22:23:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
outsourcing delivery in Bethany, yeah or nay?
What are the specific comparisons to be made? That's how one
discusses outsourcing. What does it cost to deliver via postal
workers, what does it cost to deliver via an outsourced contract, what
are the transaction costs involved in the contract, and what are the
requirements for delivery -- the QC discussion?
Specify which you wish to assume or declare, and we can go from there.
yes, you might discuss, or you might not discuss it.
* Give it a try, and see where it goes.
* Don't, and continue to duck when challenged.
Either way works for me. How do they work for you?
the answer could be yes, or it could be no.
Check back in when you decide.
Lobby Dosser
2007-03-16 23:39:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent
him a copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be
gummint functions -- prisons, armies, postal carriers, police,
fire.
There are some conditions under which contracting out works just
fine. Those have been studied to a fare-thee-well over many years,
and have now become an exercise in many MBA programs.
But not All conditions are amenable to contracting out.
The key is to know which is which.
yeah, and...
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
So, we have MBAs to thank for Haliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. There is
virtually nothing that can't be fucked up by an MBA.
autorun
2007-03-16 23:48:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Don Homuth
Post by lein
Post by Don Homuth
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent
him a copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be
gummint functions -- prisons, armies, postal carriers, police,
fire.
There are some conditions under which contracting out works just
fine. Those have been studied to a fare-thee-well over many years,
and have now become an exercise in many MBA programs.
But not All conditions are amenable to contracting out.
The key is to know which is which.
yeah, and...
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
So, we have MBAs to thank for Haliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. There is
virtually nothing that can't be fucked up by an MBA.
have you ever seen one with a soufflé?

Scary stuff that.
WitchDr
2007-03-17 20:25:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Don Homuth
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
So, we have MBAs to thank for Haliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. There is
virtually nothing that can't be fucked up by an MBA.
How has KBR and Blackwater "fucked up"? By providing excellent services to
the USG? I've been a beneficiary of both contractors and the services were
far superior to the broke Army system. Sorry, but if you are going to try to
point out how contracting out doesn't work, Blackwater and KBR aren't what
you want as examples.

FWIW, I'm an advocate of a lot of USG outsourcing but I'm not in favor of
USPS outsourcing mail routes.
Guy
2007-03-17 21:06:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by WitchDr
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Don Homuth
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
So, we have MBAs to thank for Haliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. There is
virtually nothing that can't be fucked up by an MBA.
How has KBR and Blackwater "fucked up"? By providing excellent services to
the USG? I've been a beneficiary of both contractors and the services were
far superior to the broke Army system. Sorry, but if you are going to try
to point out how contracting out doesn't work, Blackwater and KBR aren't
what you want as examples.
So, do you enjoy the sewage water they serve up?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/3780160.html

In the latest broadside against Halliburton and its performance in Iraq,
Senate Democrats produced an e-mail Friday from Capt. A. Michelle Callahan,
a family physician serving at Qayyarah Airfield West, recounting how she
treated six infections over a two-week period in January, at the same time
she was noticing the water in base showers was cloudy and foul-smelling.

Follow-up testing of the water soldiers were using to bathe, shave and even
brush their teeth revealed evidence of coliform and E. coli bacteria,
Callahan wrote in an e-mail to a staffer for the Democratic Policy
Committee, led by Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D.

Halliburton subsidiary KBR was responsible for treating water at that base,
under a contract to provide logistical support to U.S. troops.
Post by WitchDr
FWIW, I'm an advocate of a lot of USG outsourcing but I'm not in favor of
USPS outsourcing mail routes.
Ockham's Razor
2007-03-17 21:44:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by WitchDr
FWIW, I'm an advocate of a lot of USG outsourcing but I'm not in favor of
USPS outsourcing mail routes.
They cannot outsource all mail routes. The hallowed private sector will
never assume delivery to the mail box at the end of the longest dirt
road in Montana. They only want the shortest high volume routes, like
in down town between law offices.
--
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross."
Sinclair Lewis
Bill Shatzer
2007-03-18 04:51:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ockham's Razor
Post by WitchDr
FWIW, I'm an advocate of a lot of USG outsourcing but I'm not in favor of
USPS outsourcing mail routes.
They cannot outsource all mail routes. The hallowed private sector will
never assume delivery to the mail box at the end of the longest dirt
road in Montana.
Sure they will - if they're paid enough to do so.

The old Star Routes were RFD routes served by private contractors.

'Course, the Star Routes had a somewhat spotted history of fraud,
corruption, and cronyism which kinda demonstrates the problems endemic
with outsourcing this sorta thing.
Post by Ockham's Razor
They only want the shortest high volume routes, like
in down town between law offices.
Again, they'll take the contract delivering mail to the mail box at the
end of the Montana dirt road if the price is right.

Peace and justice,
Ockham's Razor
2007-03-18 14:56:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Shatzer
Post by Ockham's Razor
Post by WitchDr
FWIW, I'm an advocate of a lot of USG outsourcing but I'm not in favor of
USPS outsourcing mail routes.
They cannot outsource all mail routes. The hallowed private sector will
never assume delivery to the mail box at the end of the longest dirt
road in Montana.
Sure they will - if they're paid enough to do so.
At 37 cents a letter? Just what postage rate would they want?
--
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross."
Sinclair Lewis
Bill Shatzer
2007-03-18 20:21:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ockham's Razor
Post by Bill Shatzer
Post by Ockham's Razor
Post by WitchDr
FWIW, I'm an advocate of a lot of USG outsourcing but I'm not in favor of
USPS outsourcing mail routes.
They cannot outsource all mail routes. The hallowed private sector will
never assume delivery to the mail box at the end of the longest dirt
road in Montana.
Sure they will - if they're paid enough to do so.
At 37 cents a letter?
Try 39 cents - 37 cents a letter is just so last year.
Post by Ockham's Razor
Just what postage rate would they want?
They don't get paid by the letter. They get paid for providing mail
delivery service to a particular route for a particular period of time.

The postal service kinda -expects- to lose money on delivering mail to
that mail box at the end of the longest dirt road in Montana, quite
regardless of whether they do the delivery with USPS employees and
equipment or whether they contract it out.

If they privatize a delivery route, they're going to do it on a fixed
price bid basis - X thousands of dollars annually to service a
particular route; quite regardless of the actual volume of mail which
might be involved.

And if that X thousands of dollars covers a private contractor's costs
plus the desired profit, any number of private companies would be
delighted to provide the service. If that works out to two bucks a
letter or even ten bucks a letter, so be it.

The cost undoubtably works out to more than 39 cents a letter for the
vast majority of RFD routes currently serviced by USPS employees.

Peace and justice,
WitchDr
2007-03-18 14:00:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Guy
Post by WitchDr
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Don Homuth
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
So, we have MBAs to thank for Haliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. There is
virtually nothing that can't be fucked up by an MBA.
How has KBR and Blackwater "fucked up"? By providing excellent services
to the USG? I've been a beneficiary of both contractors and the services
were far superior to the broke Army system. Sorry, but if you are going
to try to point out how contracting out doesn't work, Blackwater and KBR
aren't what you want as examples.
So, do you enjoy the sewage water they serve up?
Look how well the USG maintains its property (Bldg 18 ring a bell). I can't
say KBR is perfect, but from my experience with them, they offered a far
superior base management than the USG ever provided (especially Army Log).
Need a replacement uniform in June (when it's 95deg)? Sorry, the Army will
only issue winter weight uniforms until the supply is depleted...only then
would they issue summer weight uniforms. Way to support the soldier. Need
concertina wire and other mandated physical security improvements? Don't ask
the USG because with their byzantine regulations, they can't rent a
bulldozer and gravel from a local guy. KBR could. Food? Before KBR, the
Army's answer was the wonderful MRE.

If the USG did such a wonderful job, KBR and others wouldn't be able to
compete.
Bill Shatzer
2007-03-18 03:59:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by WitchDr
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Don Homuth
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
So, we have MBAs to thank for Haliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. There is
virtually nothing that can't be fucked up by an MBA.
How has KBR and Blackwater "fucked up"? By providing excellent services to
the USG?
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/news/audits.html
http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/3940
http://tinyurl.com/v4p7l

Excellent indeed!

Excellent for Halliburton's bottom line certainly.

Less excellent for the US taxpayer.

Peace and justice,
Curt
2007-03-18 17:55:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by WitchDr
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Don Homuth
What did you wish to discuss on the matter, lein? If you comprehend
what was just said, it means that Contracting Out cases must be
examined and analyzed on a case-by-case basis. There is no one size
fits all solution.
So, we have MBAs to thank for Haliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. There is
virtually nothing that can't be fucked up by an MBA.
How has KBR and Blackwater "fucked up"? By providing excellent services to
the USG? I've been a beneficiary of both contractors and the services were
far superior to the broke Army system. Sorry, but if you are going to try to
point out how contracting out doesn't work, Blackwater and KBR aren't what
you want as examples.
The army's "broke" because the weenies broke it. And KBR has been defrauding
the army ever since the vanity war started.

We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and letting
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.

Curt
WitchDr
2007-03-18 23:42:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
How has KBR and Blackwater "fucked up"? By providing excellent services to
the USG? I've been a beneficiary of both contractors and the services were
far superior to the broke Army system. Sorry, but if you are going to try
to
Post by WitchDr
point out how contracting out doesn't work, Blackwater and KBR aren't what
you want as examples.
The army's "broke" because the weenies broke it. And KBR has been defrauding
the army ever since the vanity war started.
When you say "weenies" do you speak of the Clinton administration? Because
my experiences with KBR go as far back as 1996 when Clinton sent the
military into Bosnia....but it was only for a year (we're still there).
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and letting
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have to
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the military
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about contractors is
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the support.
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot of
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Baxter
2007-03-19 01:44:05 UTC
Permalink
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and letting
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have to
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the military
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about contractors is
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the support.
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot of
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Do recall that there's the little matter of several *billion* dollars that
are unaccounted for.
Curt
2007-03-19 16:26:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
How has KBR and Blackwater "fucked up"? By providing excellent services to
the USG? I've been a beneficiary of both contractors and the services were
far superior to the broke Army system. Sorry, but if you are going to try
to
Post by WitchDr
point out how contracting out doesn't work, Blackwater and KBR aren't what
you want as examples.
The army's "broke" because the weenies broke it. And KBR has been defrauding
the army ever since the vanity war started.
When you say "weenies" do you speak of the Clinton administration? Because
my experiences with KBR go as far back as 1996 when Clinton sent the
military into Bosnia....but it was only for a year (we're still there).
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has been to
refer to the Republican leadership in general.

Clinton didn't break the army. He (with very little help from the weenies,
BTW) built our armed forces into the most magnificent fighting force the
world has ever seen. The dumbya, of course, decided to use a FIGHTING force
as an OCCUPYING force..something it was never designed to do. He's broken a
lot of equipment, gotten a lot of service folks killed, and lost (yup, lost.
Just plain unaccounted for) billions of dollars worth of gear and just plain
cash. No, this isn't Clinton's fault.
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and letting
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have to
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the military
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about contractors is
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the support.
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot of
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?

Curt
Bill Shatzer
2007-03-19 19:43:05 UTC
Permalink
Curt wrote:

-snip-
Post by Curt
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
Well, ya' gotta pay folks a lot to drive trucks in a place where the
penalty for pissing off the locals is getting your head cut off rather
than merely an overweight load citation.

Peace and justice,
Curt
2007-03-21 18:20:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Shatzer
-snip-
Post by Curt
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
Well, ya' gotta pay folks a lot to drive trucks in a place where the
penalty for pissing off the locals is getting your head cut off rather
than merely an overweight load citation.
So then, Halliburton ISN'T being efficient with taxpayer dollars by hiring
locals who will work for less than a soldier. Thanks for clarifying that.
Because I think that was what WitchDr was trying to say..

Curt
autorun
2007-03-21 18:53:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Bill Shatzer
-snip-
Post by Curt
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
Well, ya' gotta pay folks a lot to drive trucks in a place where the
penalty for pissing off the locals is getting your head cut off rather
than merely an overweight load citation.
So then, Halliburton ISN'T being efficient with taxpayer dollars by hiring
locals who will work for less than a soldier.
"Locals" don't security screen as well, duh.
Curt
2007-03-22 18:09:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
Post by Bill Shatzer
-snip-
Post by Curt
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
Well, ya' gotta pay folks a lot to drive trucks in a place where the
penalty for pissing off the locals is getting your head cut off rather
than merely an overweight load citation.
So then, Halliburton ISN'T being efficient with taxpayer dollars by hiring
locals who will work for less than a soldier.
"Locals" don't security screen as well, duh.
But they screen well enough to COOK?

Curt
autorun
2007-03-22 23:05:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul J. Berg
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
Post by Bill Shatzer
-snip-
Post by Curt
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
Well, ya' gotta pay folks a lot to drive trucks in a place where the
penalty for pissing off the locals is getting your head cut off rather
than merely an overweight load citation.
So then, Halliburton ISN'T being efficient with taxpayer dollars by
hiring
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
locals who will work for less than a soldier.
"Locals" don't security screen as well, duh.
But they screen well enough to COOK?
You compare cooking in a closed kitchen to driving a gasoline tanker????


I know you're intellectually "challenged" but that's crazy.
Curt
2007-03-23 01:14:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by autorun
Post by Paul J. Berg
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
Post by Bill Shatzer
-snip-
Post by Curt
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
Well, ya' gotta pay folks a lot to drive trucks in a place where the
penalty for pissing off the locals is getting your head cut off rather
than merely an overweight load citation.
So then, Halliburton ISN'T being efficient with taxpayer dollars by
hiring
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
locals who will work for less than a soldier.
"Locals" don't security screen as well, duh.
But they screen well enough to COOK?
You compare cooking in a closed kitchen to driving a gasoline tanker????
No.

Are you aware of what cooks do?

They cook food. For our folks. They could poison hundreds, if they wanted.
Try to kill hundreds with a gasoline tanker.

Cooks can do more damage than truck drivers.

Witchdr claimed that Halliburton was saving me Precious Taxpayer Dollars by
hiring locals. I said, no, they're hiring $80k truck drivers from here --
and that's a lot more than a soldier makes. It's more than two soldiers
make.

Then there was something about how truck drivers needed to be security
screened and so they were expensive, but Halliburton could still hire local
cooks and save money that way.

See what I mean? How is hiring mercenaries doing us Any Goddamn Good at all?

Curt
autorun
2007-03-23 01:12:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Shatzer
Post by autorun
Post by Paul J. Berg
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
Post by Bill Shatzer
-snip-
Post by Curt
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
Well, ya' gotta pay folks a lot to drive trucks in a place where the
penalty for pissing off the locals is getting your head cut off
rather
Post by autorun
Post by Paul J. Berg
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
Post by Bill Shatzer
than merely an overweight load citation.
So then, Halliburton ISN'T being efficient with taxpayer dollars by
hiring
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
locals who will work for less than a soldier.
"Locals" don't security screen as well, duh.
But they screen well enough to COOK?
You compare cooking in a closed kitchen to driving a gasoline tanker????
No.
Are you aware of what cooks do?
They cook food. For our folks. They could poison hundreds, if they wanted.
They work INSIDE under SUPERVISION, learn something fool.
g***@yahoo.com
2007-03-19 23:21:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Clinton didn't break the army. He (with very little help from the weenies,
BTW) built our armed forces into the most magnificent fighting force the
world has ever seen. The dumbya, of course, decided to use a FIGHTING force
as an OCCUPYING force..something it was never designed to do. He's broken a
lot of equipment, gotten a lot of service folks killed, and lost (yup, lost.
Just plain unaccounted for) billions of dollars worth of gear and just plain
cash. No, this isn't Clinton's fault.
Despite pissing off quite a number of people and a few nations in Africa
and southern Asia, Clinton's concept of blasting away at suspected
terrorist targets with cruise missiles sure seemed to make a whole lot
more sense than this mess.
--
-Glennl
The despammed service works OK, but unfortunately
now the spammers grab addresses for use as "from" address too!
e-mail hint: add 1 to quantity after gl to get 4317.
WitchDr
2007-03-20 09:37:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by g***@yahoo.com
Post by Curt
Clinton didn't break the army. He (with very little help from the weenies,
BTW) built our armed forces into the most magnificent fighting force the
world has ever seen. The dumbya, of course, decided to use a FIGHTING force
as an OCCUPYING force..something it was never designed to do. He's broken a
lot of equipment, gotten a lot of service folks killed, and lost (yup, lost.
Just plain unaccounted for) billions of dollars worth of gear and just plain
cash. No, this isn't Clinton's fault.
Despite pissing off quite a number of people and a few nations in Africa
and southern Asia, Clinton's concept of blasting away at suspected
terrorist targets with cruise missiles sure seemed to make a whole lot
more sense than this mess.
And that worked so well didn't it?
WitchDr
2007-03-19 23:53:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
When you say "weenies" do you speak of the Clinton administration? Because
my experiences with KBR go as far back as 1996 when Clinton sent the
military into Bosnia....but it was only for a year (we're still there).
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has been to
refer to the Republican leadership in general.
Clinton didn't break the army. He (with very little help from the weenies,
BTW) built our armed forces into the most magnificent fighting force the
world has ever seen. The dumbya, of course, decided to use a FIGHTING force
as an OCCUPYING force..something it was never designed to do. He's broken a
lot of equipment, gotten a lot of service folks killed, and lost (yup, lost.
Just plain unaccounted for) billions of dollars worth of gear and just plain
cash. No, this isn't Clinton's fault.
Sorry, but half the reason we have such a problem with numbers is because of
the cuts during the 90's and the constant deployments to places like the
Balkans. Perhaps you've forgotten about all of the warnings during the 90's
that our force was getting cut too much and deployed for contingencies. We
(as in our elected officials) decided to cancel things like the up-armored
Hummer because wonderful leaders decided we "didn't need it". We see how
well that worked out. Bush didn't break the military, it started well before
he got in office (and I'm not dumb enough to pin the blame on Clinton
alone).
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and
letting
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have to
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the
military
Post by WitchDr
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about contractors
is
Post by WitchDr
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the
support.
Post by WitchDr
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot of
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
The cooks and others aren't getting $80k.
gatt
2007-03-20 00:39:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
The cooks and others aren't getting $80k.
Neither, apparently, are many of the truck drivers. The money they're being
offered doesn't match up with the money they're being paid. One driver
reported, for example, that he only drew the hazard pay during non-overtime
hours. Otherwise, he was on his own; but they still had truckloads of
sailboat fuel to deliver overtime and plenty of people willing to chop their
heads off for it.

- c
Curt
2007-03-21 18:28:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by gatt
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
The cooks and others aren't getting $80k.
Neither, apparently, are many of the truck drivers. The money they're being
offered doesn't match up with the money they're being paid. One driver
reported, for example, that he only drew the hazard pay during
non-overtime
Post by gatt
hours. Otherwise, he was on his own; but they still had truckloads of
sailboat fuel to deliver overtime and plenty of people willing to chop their
heads off for it.
"During non-overtime hours"? That's weird.

Curt
Curt
2007-03-21 18:28:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
When you say "weenies" do you speak of the Clinton administration? Because
my experiences with KBR go as far back as 1996 when Clinton sent the
military into Bosnia....but it was only for a year (we're still there).
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has been to
refer to the Republican leadership in general.
Clinton didn't break the army. He (with very little help from the weenies,
BTW) built our armed forces into the most magnificent fighting force the
world has ever seen. The dumbya, of course, decided to use a FIGHTING force
as an OCCUPYING force..something it was never designed to do. He's
broken
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
a
lot of equipment, gotten a lot of service folks killed, and lost (yup, lost.
Just plain unaccounted for) billions of dollars worth of gear and just plain
cash. No, this isn't Clinton's fault.
Sorry, but half the reason we have such a problem with numbers is because of
the cuts during the 90's and the constant deployments to places like the
Balkans. Perhaps you've forgotten about all of the warnings during the 90's
that our force was getting cut too much and deployed for contingencies. We
(as in our elected officials) decided to cancel things like the up-armored
Hummer because wonderful leaders decided we "didn't need it". We see how
well that worked out. Bush didn't break the military, it started well before
he got in office (and I'm not dumb enough to pin the blame on Clinton
alone).
Our forces handled the Balkans just fine, thank you. We handled Iraq just
fine, too, even with a few guys still left in the Balkans. (And Germany, and
Alaska).. The weenies just didn't have a clue how to get out once the
military folks had won the war. So they left our guys in, as an Occupying
Force. Which isn't something our guys are supposed to be, and it's not
something we're geared for. Which should be a good thing.

If we weren't trying to act as an Occupying Force -- if the weenies had
figured out A)what we were supposed to be doing there in the first place or
B)how we could tell when we'd done it, we wouldn't need the up armored
Humvees, for example. We'd be driving tanks where there was a war, and
Humvees where we'd won.
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and
letting
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have to
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the
military
Post by WitchDr
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about contractors
is
Post by WitchDr
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the
support.
Post by WitchDr
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot of
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
The cooks and others aren't getting $80k.
Okay. You could be right -- I've never investigated what a Halliburton cook
makes. I wonder if it's more than an Army cook?

But the fact is, there are plenty of Iraqis that drive trucks. And
Halliburton's importing truckers from the States.

Curt
autorun
2007-03-21 18:55:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
When you say "weenies" do you speak of the Clinton administration? Because
my experiences with KBR go as far back as 1996 when Clinton sent the
military into Bosnia....but it was only for a year (we're still there).
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has been to
refer to the Republican leadership in general.
Clinton didn't break the army. He (with very little help from the
weenies,
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
BTW) built our armed forces into the most magnificent fighting force the
world has ever seen. The dumbya, of course, decided to use a FIGHTING force
as an OCCUPYING force..something it was never designed to do. He's
broken
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
a
lot of equipment, gotten a lot of service folks killed, and lost (yup, lost.
Just plain unaccounted for) billions of dollars worth of gear and just plain
cash. No, this isn't Clinton's fault.
Sorry, but half the reason we have such a problem with numbers is because
of
Post by WitchDr
the cuts during the 90's and the constant deployments to places like the
Balkans. Perhaps you've forgotten about all of the warnings during the
90's
Post by WitchDr
that our force was getting cut too much and deployed for contingencies. We
(as in our elected officials) decided to cancel things like the up-armored
Hummer because wonderful leaders decided we "didn't need it". We see how
well that worked out. Bush didn't break the military, it started well
before
Post by WitchDr
he got in office (and I'm not dumb enough to pin the blame on Clinton
alone).
Our forces handled the Balkans just fine, thank you. We handled Iraq just
fine, too, even with a few guys still left in the Balkans. (And Germany, and
Alaska).. The weenies just didn't have a clue how to get out once the
military folks had won the war. So they left our guys in, as an Occupying
Force. Which isn't something our guys are supposed to be, and it's not
something we're geared for. Which should be a good thing.
If we weren't trying to act as an Occupying Force -- if the weenies had
figured out A)what we were supposed to be doing there in the first place or
B)how we could tell when we'd done it, we wouldn't need the up armored
Humvees, for example. We'd be driving tanks where there was a war, and
Humvees where we'd won.
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and
letting
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have
to
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the
military
Post by WitchDr
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about
contractors
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
is
Post by WitchDr
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the
support.
Post by WitchDr
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot
of
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Then what's with these $80k Halliburton truck drivers?
The cooks and others aren't getting $80k.
Okay. You could be right -- I've never investigated what a Halliburton cook
makes. I wonder if it's more than an Army cook?
But the fact is, there are plenty of Iraqis that drive trucks. And
Halliburton's importing truckers from the States.
So you think Iraqis are a GOOD security rick for these jobs?

You want THEM supplying gas tankers to our troops?
Lobby Dosser
2007-03-20 08:53:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has been to
refer to the Republican leadership in general.
Well, No. That's Your use of the word. You have some sort of odd fixation
on weenies.
Curt
2007-03-21 18:30:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has been to
refer to the Republican leadership in general.
Well, No. That's Your use of the word.
Well, I must have got it somewhere. I sure didn't make it up. And I don't do
a lot of web surfing, so it must have been on Usenet..
Post by Lobby Dosser
You have some sort of odd fixation
on weenies.
How so?

Curt
Lobby Dosser
2007-03-22 03:52:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has
been to refer to the Republican leadership in general.
Well, No. That's Your use of the word.
Well, I must have got it somewhere. I sure didn't make it up. And I
don't do a lot of web surfing, so it must have been on Usenet..
You're posts are the only place I've seen that useage.
Post by Curt
Post by Lobby Dosser
You have some sort of odd fixation
on weenies.
How so?
See above.
Post by Curt
Curt
Curt
2007-03-22 18:13:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has
been to refer to the Republican leadership in general.
Well, No. That's Your use of the word.
Well, I must have got it somewhere. I sure didn't make it up. And I
don't do a lot of web surfing, so it must have been on Usenet..
You're posts are the only place I've seen that useage.
I must have picked it up somewhere. I can only assume Usenet. It seemed like
the perfect description of the general run of neocon, so I started using it.

Maybe I just made it up. Anything's possible. But you have to admit -- it's
perfect. A wonderful description of tough talking, yet physically craven
men-- soft pink men with high stuttery voices and fat hands, bleating about
"stay the course" and "bring it on".

Curt
Lobby Dosser
2007-03-22 19:11:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has
been to refer to the Republican leadership in general.
Well, No. That's Your use of the word.
Well, I must have got it somewhere. I sure didn't make it up. And I
don't do a lot of web surfing, so it must have been on Usenet..
You're posts are the only place I've seen that useage.
I must have picked it up somewhere. I can only assume Usenet. It
seemed like the perfect description of the general run of neocon, so I
started using it.
Maybe I just made it up. Anything's possible. But you have to admit --
it's perfect. A wonderful description of tough talking, yet physically
craven men-- soft pink men with high stuttery voices and fat hands,
bleating about "stay the course" and "bring it on".
It might describe Rush & Rove. Other than that, no one.
Curt
2007-03-23 01:15:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
The generally accepted use of the word "weenies" as of late has
been to refer to the Republican leadership in general.
Well, No. That's Your use of the word.
Well, I must have got it somewhere. I sure didn't make it up. And I
don't do a lot of web surfing, so it must have been on Usenet..
You're posts are the only place I've seen that useage.
I must have picked it up somewhere. I can only assume Usenet. It
seemed like the perfect description of the general run of neocon, so I
started using it.
Maybe I just made it up. Anything's possible. But you have to admit --
it's perfect. A wonderful description of tough talking, yet physically
craven men-- soft pink men with high stuttery voices and fat hands,
bleating about "stay the course" and "bring it on".
It might describe Rush & Rove. Other than that, no one.
Oh, come on. It describes almost all of them. Wolfowitz, junior, Tony Snow..
every one of them, Hillary could take in a knife fight.

Curt
autorun
2007-03-23 01:13:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
every one of them, Hillary could take in a knife fight.
Billary couldn't take a foot corn in a "knife fight" you juvenile moron.
Curt
2007-03-19 16:27:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and letting
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have to
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the military
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about contractors is
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the support.
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot of
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Which doesn't really address the problem that there is some company out
there with a Standing Army.

In a more civilized age, we called those people Pirates or Mercenaries and
they were to be killed if caught by Real Soldiers or Real Sailors.

Curt
Steven
2007-03-19 16:29:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and
letting
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have to
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the
military
Post by WitchDr
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about contractors
is
Post by WitchDr
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the
support.
Post by WitchDr
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot of
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Which doesn't really address the problem that there is some company out
there with a Standing Army.
In a more civilized age, we called those people Pirates or Mercenaries and
they were to be killed if caught by Real Soldiers or Real Sailors.
Curt
Aw, gee, can't we just carpetbomb everyone? It worked for Nixon or
something.

Yes I'm just being an ass, but if you want to kill people, don't be a
p---y and do it right. Satan hates morons.
Lobby Dosser
2007-03-19 19:42:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and
letting
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have
to have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply
the
military
Post by WitchDr
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about
contractors
is
Post by WitchDr
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the
support.
Post by WitchDr
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay
those support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with
contractors, a lot of the support personnel are locals and paid a
much lower wage.
Which doesn't really address the problem that there is some company
out there with a Standing Army.
In a more civilized age, we called those people Pirates or Mercenaries
and they were to be killed if caught by Real Soldiers or Real Sailors.
They're Still Mercenaries.

And there are quite a few Real Pirates off the east coast of Africa.
Curt
2007-03-21 18:19:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
Which doesn't really address the problem that there is some company
out there with a Standing Army.
In a more civilized age, we called those people Pirates or Mercenaries
and they were to be killed if caught by Real Soldiers or Real Sailors.
They're Still Mercenaries.
And there are quite a few Real Pirates off the east coast of Africa.
And I think navies have a sort of SOP that you sink pirates where you find
them, yeh? And hang the ones you fish out of the water? I'm pretty sure they
used to, anyway.

Curt
autorun
2007-03-21 18:54:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by Curt
Which doesn't really address the problem that there is some company
out there with a Standing Army.
In a more civilized age, we called those people Pirates or Mercenaries
and they were to be killed if caught by Real Soldiers or Real Sailors.
They're Still Mercenaries.
And there are quite a few Real Pirates off the east coast of Africa.
And I think navies have a sort of SOP that you sink pirates where you find
them, yeh? And hang the ones you fish out of the water? I'm pretty sure they
used to, anyway.
Curt
Been watching those old Erol Flynn flics again have you?
Lobby Dosser
2007-03-22 03:50:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by Lobby Dosser
And there are quite a few Real Pirates off the east coast of Africa.
And I think navies have a sort of SOP that you sink pirates where you
find them, yeh? And hang the ones you fish out of the water? I'm
pretty sure they used to, anyway.
Not much of a naval presence in that area. I think the Brits sunk some a
few months back.
WitchDr
2007-03-19 23:51:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
We'd be better off firing them and taking their weapons away, and
letting
Post by WitchDr
Post by Curt
the army do army stuff. It'd be cheaper and it'd work better.
I doubt it'd be cheaper. If you got rid of KBR and others, you'd have to
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the
military
Post by WitchDr
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about contractors
is
Post by WitchDr
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the
support.
Post by WitchDr
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot of
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Which doesn't really address the problem that there is some company out
there with a Standing Army.
What exactly is the problem? Military contractors also build tanks, planes,
guns, etc. Are you suggesting the USG start manufacturing?
Post by Curt
In a more civilized age, we called those people Pirates or Mercenaries and
they were to be killed if caught by Real Soldiers or Real Sailors.
A more civilized age? The one where we had slavery? Sure thing.
Curt
2007-03-21 18:22:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by WitchDr
Post by WitchDr
Post by WitchDr
have a really big Army with support personnel that could supply the
military
Post by WitchDr
with the myriad of services they need. The nice thing about contractors
is
Post by WitchDr
that when the contingency is done, we're done paying for all of the
support.
Post by WitchDr
If the military did it organically, you'd have to continue to pay those
support soldiers (and their retirements). Plus with contractors, a lot of
the support personnel are locals and paid a much lower wage.
Which doesn't really address the problem that there is some company out
there with a Standing Army.
What exactly is the problem? Military contractors also build tanks, planes,
guns, etc. Are you suggesting the USG start manufacturing?
Of course not. When Lockeed builds an F-16 (or whatever) they turn it over
to the air force. They don't have their own air force. Geez.

Curt
autorun
2007-03-16 17:17:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent him a
copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be gummint
functions -- prisons,
Corrections Corp.

Cornel Corrections
Post by Curt
armies,
Dyncorp, Vinnell, MPRI
Post by Curt
postal carriers,
UPS, FedEx
Post by Curt
police,
Wackenhut, SRC
Post by Curt
fire.
Any rural VFD.
Lobby Dosser
2007-03-16 18:26:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent
him a copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be
gummint functions -- prisons,
Corrections Corp.
Cornel Corrections
Post by Curt
armies,
Dyncorp, Vinnell, MPRI
Blackwater
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
postal carriers,
UPS, FedEx
Typically the USPS is contracted by Them (particularly FedEx) to make
small package home deliveries.
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
police,
Wackenhut, SRC
Post by Curt
fire.
Any rural VFD.
Not contracted out.
autorun
2007-03-16 23:29:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent
him a copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be
gummint functions -- prisons,
Corrections Corp.
Cornel Corrections
Post by Curt
armies,
Dyncorp, Vinnell, MPRI
Blackwater
Yes.
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
postal carriers,
UPS, FedEx
Typically the USPS is contracted by Them (particularly FedEx) to make
small package home deliveries.
And their own letters as well, yes.
Post by Lobby Dosser
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
police,
Wackenhut, SRC
Post by Curt
fire.
Any rural VFD.
Not contracted out.
In certain small priavte communities it can be.

But note that VFDs are typically non-governmental entities.
Curt
2007-03-17 05:21:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent him a
copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be gummint
functions -- prisons,
Corrections Corp.
Cornel Corrections
Post by Curt
armies,
Dyncorp, Vinnell, MPRI
Post by Curt
postal carriers,
UPS, FedEx
Post by Curt
police,
Wackenhut, SRC
Post by Curt
fire.
Any rural VFD.
Yeh, thanks. Generally, you refer to those guys as the "foundation savers".

Curt
Lobby Dosser
2007-03-17 05:46:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Post by autorun
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent
him a copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be
gummint functions -- prisons,
Corrections Corp.
Cornel Corrections
Post by Curt
armies,
Dyncorp, Vinnell, MPRI
Post by Curt
postal carriers,
UPS, FedEx
Post by Curt
police,
Wackenhut, SRC
Post by Curt
fire.
Any rural VFD.
Yeh, thanks. Generally, you refer to those guys as the "foundation savers".
Oh, really?
Sir F. A. Rien
2007-03-17 01:37:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent him a
copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be gummint
functions -- prisons, armies, postal carriers, police, fire.
But, USPS is a "Private Service" no longer a direct 'arm' of the "gummint".
Curt
2007-03-17 05:22:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sir F. A. Rien
Post by Curt
Interesting article, there, Paul. Thanks.
I've got a buddy that just retired from the USPS last year, I sent him a
copy of this. I'm curious what his take on it will be.
I'm not sure I'm good with contracting out things that should be gummint
functions -- prisons, armies, postal carriers, police, fire.
But, USPS is a "Private Service" no longer a direct 'arm' of the "gummint".
Which is kinda too bad in itself.

Curt
babeejm
2007-03-16 18:30:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul J. Berg
`
News article from Northwest Labor Press (Portland, Oregon)
`
A Beaverton (Oregon) postmaster's decision to contract out mail delivery
is producing a major outcry among union letter carriers. National
Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) Branch 82 has filed a complaint
against Postmaster John Lee, and as of press time was planning to picket
outside his office on March 15.
Residents aren't too pleased either. For over a month, homeowners at the
new Arbor Parc Bethany housing development had to drive 10 miles
roundtrip to a postal sorting station to pick up their mail.
The dispute is a local skirmish in a national war of ideology within the
United States Postal Service (USPS). The Bush-appointed majority on the
Postal Board of Governors has been pushing USPS to assign more
deliveries to private contractors. Board Chair James C. Miller III, a
former Reagan budget director, has called for wholesale postal
privatization. NALC has energetically opposed the shift, arguing that
privatization would not only threaten the jobs and incomes of America's
325,000 letter carriers, but would also compromise the security,
efficiency and integrity of the mail, and put the long-term viability of
the Postal Service in jeopardy.
In Beaverton, Willie Higgins just wanted to get his mail. Higgins was
the first person to move into the Arbor Parc development, in the Bethany
neighborhood north of Interstate 26.
Unpacking in his just-finished townhouse, he waited for a mailbox key to
appear under his mat. It never came. Phone calls to Arbor Homes brought
bad news: Delivery service - to the community mailboxes at the end of
his street - would have to wait until mid-summer, when the development
is half-full, he was told. Until then, he'd have to drive to Hillsboro
to get his mail, a location that closes at 4 p.m.
And yet, all around him and across the street from him, older residences
and businesses were getting regular mail service.
"I don't understand why the guy who delivers mail across the street
couldn't simply add the new boxes to his route," said L.C. Hansen,
president of NALC Branch 82. That's the way USPS normally handles new
deliveries, Hansen said.
Instead, residents had to pick up their own mail while USPS advertised
for a contractor.
USPS area spokesperson Kerry Jeffrey had few answers to Labor Press
questions about the contracting process, but sources in the Beaverton
post office said the Arbor Parc Bethany contract was advertised on
Craigslist, and no qualified contractors stepped forward. When USPS
started getting calls from several newspapers, management asked
supervisors if they knew anyone who could deliver the route. On March 9,
USPS signed a 120-day emergency contract with the son of a Beaverton
postal supervisor, who then subcontracted with his girlfriend to do the
delivery. Service to the development began March 12.
But the inconvenience to Higgins and his neighbors calls into question
the postmaster's assertion - in a Jan. 29 letter to Hansen - that
contracting out wouldn't harm the public interest. Under its nationwide
labor agreement with NALC, public interest is one of several things USPS
is supposed to consider before contracting out - along with cost,
efficiency and qualification of employees.
USPS has had the option to contract out delivery since the Postal
Reorganization Act of 1970, and private contractors already handle 1.9
percent of deliveries nationwide - mainly on highway routes in rural
areas.
Arbor Parc is a change in scale. While Hansen was told to expect 374 new
residences at that particular development,
Jeffrey said 12,000 to 15,000 homes are planned for the area. That would
make it the largest private postal delivery contract in Oregon and
Southwest Washington, and could account for as many as a dozen letter
carrier jobs.
Jeffrey stressed that Post Office management isn't converting existing
routes to private carriers, just new routes.
But such assurances aren't much comfort to letter carriers, who see
Arbor Parc as a foot in a door, and worry that the door will soon be
wide open.
Lee, who came to Beaverton after a two-year stint as postmaster in
Tacoma, Washington, initiated a smaller privatization there last year
when a newly built 128-unit condominium - a downtown city block
surrounded by existing postal routes - was assigned to a contractor.
That's the kind of thing that drives Hansen up the wall. Computerized
route management and automated sorting have made the U.S. Postal Service
the most efficient in the world, but Hansen thinks privatization could
undo that. How could it be efficient to have letter carriers walking all
around a building, but leaving the building itself to a private
contractor who would have to make a special trip?
"Universal delivery is an economic strength of our postal system,"
Hansen said. "I don't think it's possible to lose economy of scale and
not lose economic efficiency also."
Letter carriers are also worried about erosion of public confidence in
the mails.
While the Internet has emerged as a postal service competitor, the
public still views mail as the safest way to pay bills.
But what happens when the public sees contractors in street clothes
driving up in their own personal vehicles and opening mailboxes? And
what will be the impact of higher turnover, diluted accountability,
diminished professionalism? Union letter carriers are long-term, career
employees of USPS, starting at $17 an hour and topping out at $22,
whereas contract employees who clear $10 an hour will jump ship when an
$11-an-hour job comes along.
And, Hansen adds, NALC members are federal employees who take an oath to
uphold the Constitution. They have relationships in the community,
collect food for the needy in annual drives, and serve as neighborhood
eyes and ears.
They are trained and ready to deliver medicine in the event of a
national emergency, and are committed enough that mail service was
uninterrupted in the days following the 2001 anthrax attacks.
Two out of five USPS letter carriers are armed services veterans, owing
to federal hiring rules that give preference to veterans. Contractors
face no such requirement.
USPS is America's second largest employer after Wal-Mart, and as
employers they could hardly be more different.
Jeffrey, the Postal spokesperson, said USPS has worked hard to answer
concerns the public has had about contract employees. Contract letter
carriers will be licensed and bonded, he said, will wear uniforms and a
postal ID, and go through a criminal background check.
In the final analysis, USPS decisions to contract out are supposed to be
justified by cost savings. NALC disputes the notion that contracting
saves money, but that's the rationale offered by Postmaster Lee, who
forecast USPS will save $33,878 a year by assigning Arbor Parc to a
contractor. Lee didn't return calls, and Jeffrey said he didn't know how
the figure was arrived at. Hansen has demanded to know what the figure
is based on, but so far hasn't been given the information.
Stopping privatization is important enough to NALC that the union agreed
in recent contract negotiations to accept a more modest health benefit
in exchange for a pledge not to contract out existing city carrier work.
The postmaster general seemed to agree, but the Board of Governors
rejected the deal, and the two sides then declared impasse. Under the
rules for postal employee contract bargaining, the next phase will be
mediation, followed by binding arbitration if no agreement is reached.
Since then, union leaders say, there's been a ramp-up in contracting out
around the country, with managers trained and given manuals that specify
how to contract out.
"We believe there's pressure being put on Postal Service management by
the Board of Governors, a Board dominated by Bush appointees," said NALC
national spokesperson Drew Von Bergen. "These people are unabashedly for
privatization of the postal service, and if they can't do it in whole,
they'll do it in parts."
In a nutshell, Hansen says, politicians are interfering with effective
postal management. "That's why we're going to the court of public
opinion with a picket. We need the public to know what's going on."
`
What a horrible idea..I would have to wait until Saturday to pick up
a week's worth of mail then. I think I would just cancel all my
magazine
subscriptions then and just buy them..and let the
"post office" get rid of my junk mail!
John Taormina
2007-03-23 01:57:18 UTC
Permalink
Gentlemen:
PLEASE - This is a postal history newsgroup. This "debate" has gone on
here for long enough. May I appeal to you to take it elsewhere. Thank you.
Post by Paul J. Berg
`
News article from Northwest Labor Press (Portland, Oregon)
`
A Beaverton (Oregon) postmaster's decision to contract out mail delivery
is producing a major outcry among union letter carriers. National
Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) Branch 82 has filed a complaint
against Postmaster John Lee, and as of press time was planning to picket
outside his office on March 15.
Residents aren't too pleased either. For over a month, homeowners at the
new Arbor Parc Bethany housing development had to drive 10 miles
roundtrip to a postal sorting station to pick up their mail.
The dispute is a local skirmish in a national war of ideology within the
United States Postal Service (USPS). The Bush-appointed majority on the
Postal Board of Governors has been pushing USPS to assign more
deliveries to private contractors. Board Chair James C. Miller III, a
former Reagan budget director, has called for wholesale postal
privatization. NALC has energetically opposed the shift, arguing that
privatization would not only threaten the jobs and incomes of America's
325,000 letter carriers, but would also compromise the security,
efficiency and integrity of the mail, and put the long-term viability of
the Postal Service in jeopardy.
In Beaverton, Willie Higgins just wanted to get his mail. Higgins was
the first person to move into the Arbor Parc development, in the Bethany
neighborhood north of Interstate 26.
Unpacking in his just-finished townhouse, he waited for a mailbox key to
appear under his mat. It never came. Phone calls to Arbor Homes brought
bad news: Delivery service — to the community mailboxes at the end of
his street — would have to wait until mid-summer, when the development
is half-full, he was told. Until then, he'd have to drive to Hillsboro
to get his mail, a location that closes at 4 p.m.
And yet, all around him and across the street from him, older residences
and businesses were getting regular mail service.
"I don't understand why the guy who delivers mail across the street
couldn't simply add the new boxes to his route," said L.C. Hansen,
president of NALC Branch 82. That's the way USPS normally handles new
deliveries, Hansen said.
Instead, residents had to pick up their own mail while USPS advertised
for a contractor.
USPS area spokesperson Kerry Jeffrey had few answers to Labor Press
questions about the contracting process, but sources in the Beaverton
post office said the Arbor Parc Bethany contract was advertised on
Craigslist, and no qualified contractors stepped forward. When USPS
started getting calls from several newspapers, management asked
supervisors if they knew anyone who could deliver the route. On March 9,
USPS signed a 120-day emergency contract with the son of a Beaverton
postal supervisor, who then subcontracted with his girlfriend to do the
delivery. Service to the development began March 12.
But the inconvenience to Higgins and his neighbors calls into question
the postmaster's assertion — in a Jan. 29 letter to Hansen — that
contracting out wouldn't harm the public interest. Under its nationwide
labor agreement with NALC, public interest is one of several things USPS
is supposed to consider before contracting out — along with cost,
efficiency and qualification of employees.
USPS has had the option to contract out delivery since the Postal
Reorganization Act of 1970, and private contractors already handle 1.9
percent of deliveries nationwide — mainly on highway routes in rural
areas.
Arbor Parc is a change in scale. While Hansen was told to expect 374 new
residences at that particular development,
Jeffrey said 12,000 to 15,000 homes are planned for the area. That would
make it the largest private postal delivery contract in Oregon and
Southwest Washington, and could account for as many as a dozen letter
carrier jobs.
Jeffrey stressed that Post Office management isn't converting existing
routes to private carriers, just new routes.
But such assurances aren't much comfort to letter carriers, who see
Arbor Parc as a foot in a door, and worry that the door will soon be
wide open.
Lee, who came to Beaverton after a two-year stint as postmaster in
Tacoma, Washington, initiated a smaller privatization there last year
when a newly built 128-unit condominium — a downtown city block
surrounded by existing postal routes — was assigned to a contractor.
That's the kind of thing that drives Hansen up the wall. Computerized
route management and automated sorting have made the U.S. Postal Service
the most efficient in the world, but Hansen thinks privatization could
undo that. How could it be efficient to have letter carriers walking all
around a building, but leaving the building itself to a private
contractor who would have to make a special trip?
"Universal delivery is an economic strength of our postal system,"
Hansen said. "I don't think it's possible to lose economy of scale and
not lose economic efficiency also."
Letter carriers are also worried about erosion of public confidence in
the mails.
While the Internet has emerged as a postal service competitor, the
public still views mail as the safest way to pay bills.
But what happens when the public sees contractors in street clothes
driving up in their own personal vehicles and opening mailboxes? And
what will be the impact of higher turnover, diluted accountability,
diminished professionalism? Union letter carriers are long-term, career
employees of USPS, starting at $17 an hour and topping out at $22,
whereas contract employees who clear $10 an hour will jump ship when an
$11-an-hour job comes along.
And, Hansen adds, NALC members are federal employees who take an oath to
uphold the Constitution. They have relationships in the community,
collect food for the needy in annual drives, and serve as neighborhood
eyes and ears.
They are trained and ready to deliver medicine in the event of a
national emergency, and are committed enough that mail service was
uninterrupted in the days following the 2001 anthrax attacks.
Two out of five USPS letter carriers are armed services veterans, owing
to federal hiring rules that give preference to veterans. Contractors
face no such requirement.
USPS is America's second largest employer after Wal-Mart, and as
employers they could hardly be more different.
Jeffrey, the Postal spokesperson, said USPS has worked hard to answer
concerns the public has had about contract employees. Contract letter
carriers will be licensed and bonded, he said, will wear uniforms and a
postal ID, and go through a criminal background check.
In the final analysis, USPS decisions to contract out are supposed to be
justified by cost savings. NALC disputes the notion that contracting
saves money, but that's the rationale offered by Postmaster Lee, who
forecast USPS will save $33,878 a year by assigning Arbor Parc to a
contractor. Lee didn't return calls, and Jeffrey said he didn't know how
the figure was arrived at. Hansen has demanded to know what the figure
is based on, but so far hasn't been given the information.
Stopping privatization is important enough to NALC that the union agreed
in recent contract negotiations to accept a more modest health benefit
in exchange for a pledge not to contract out existing city carrier work.
The postmaster general seemed to agree, but the Board of Governors
rejected the deal, and the two sides then declared impasse. Under the
rules for postal employee contract bargaining, the next phase will be
mediation, followed by binding arbitration if no agreement is reached.
Since then, union leaders say, there's been a ramp-up in contracting out
around the country, with managers trained and given manuals that specify
how to contract out.
"We believe there's pressure being put on Postal Service management by
the Board of Governors, a Board dominated by Bush appointees," said NALC
national spokesperson Drew Von Bergen. "These people are unabashedly for
privatization of the postal service, and if they can't do it in whole,
they'll do it in parts."
In a nutshell, Hansen says, politicians are interfering with effective
postal management. "That's why we're going to the court of public
opinion with a picket. We need the public to know what's going on."
`
--
John Taormina The MIDDLE-AGED one in Australia
To email me you must remove "notme" and "jack"
Loading...