Unions oppose ‘draft’ of federal workers to Iraq

[rainbow4321]

http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2412021

The Iraq Study Group’s recommendation that the Bush administration consider ordering government civilians to Iraq has drawn outrage from federal employees’ unions. Civilian agencies have been seeking volunteers to assist with efforts in Iraq. But the report states that the potential danger of the assignment means few qualified candidates have taken the offer.

Therefore: “In the short term, if not enough civilians volunteer to fill key positions in Iraq, civilian agencies must fill those positions with directed assignments,” the report says. “Steps should be taken to mitigate familial or financial hardships posed by directed assignments, including tax exclusions similar to those authorized for U.S. military personnel serving in Iraq.”

Created to advise Congress, the study group has no formal power. It is not clear what chance the group’s recommendations have of adoption. But
American Federation of Government Employees President John Gage said that while his organization needs more information, “we are alarmed at the idea of directed reassignments of civilian agency employees to a military war zone.”

<snip>

Defense Department officials have recently said they may seek legislation or other measures to reduce institutional barriers to deploying civilians overseas, including to Iraq. The Pentagon is reviewing how it designates emergency essential positions, for instance. But officials have stressed that such deployment would be voluntary.

[lvx35]

1. Ridiculous.

"You've worked here for 20 years? Want your retirement? Then put on this helmet..."

Another move for higher popularity with 27% of population approving.

[izzie]

2. Well that is interesting. And we thought Bush was in to private every thing.

Govt. can not even do a study on his wars, we had to go out side the regular govt. way of doing things but this would be so un-Bush. Just what corp. would make money on it if he sent govt. workers? Hard to think he would even think about this one.

[elehhhhna]

6. Who profits? The temp companies who replace the reassigned workers,

that's who. Long-term big-gouge no-bid assignments.

[izzie]

7. Forgot that.

==

[diane in sf]

3. can't they find mercenaries

for these exciting overseas opportunities???

[rainbow4321]

4. Interesting pay info about current civilian workers

http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2345802

Civilian employees supporting overseas military operations under U.S. Central Command can earn up to $212,100 next year in basic and premium pay, according to the Office of Personnel Management.

Most employees are subject to pay caps that limit their combined basic and overtime pay to either the top GS-15 rate or Level 5 of the Executive Schedule, currently $133,900, whichever is greater. Congress waived this limit for civilian employees supporting overseas military missions in calendar year 2006 and extended the provision for 2007 as part of the Defense Authorization Act, which President Bush signed into law Oct. 17. Congress also raised the total pay cap for these employees from $200,000 in 2006 to $212,100 next year.

The higher pay cap applies only to civilian employees who work at least 42 days in an area overseen by the U.S. Central Command. The head of the agency where the civilian employee works has authority to waive the normal pay caps. OPM Director Linda Springer issued a memo Nov. 3 outlining the policy and listing the countries that apply under the higher pay caps.

[elehhhhna]

8. But CONTRACT SECURITY gets 1,500 a day.

Trouble is, if it sucks too hard, contractors elect to LEAVE--proving that greed and desperation don't always equal reckless stupidity.

[elehhhhna]

9. No, in fact, they cannot. KBR can't recruit anymore. People are waking up.

[Trillo]

5. Hypocrisy

ISG, page 9, says this about the Iraqi Army (reformatted sentences as bullet points):

• Units lack personnel.


• Soldiers are on leave one week a month so that they can visit their families and take them
  their pay.


• Soldiers are paid in cash because there is no banking system.


• Soldiers are given leave liberally and face no penalties for absence without leave.


• Unit readiness rates are low, often at 50 percent or less.

An earlier paragraph in the same section states that Iraqi soldiers are often unwilling to "redeploy to other areas of the country" as well as having refused orders to carry out some missions. Yet, there seem to be plenty of "insurgents" and "militia" that are in some continual state of apparent readiness.

Sounds like a case that it'd be better for U.S. soldiers to come home. Kucinich had or has such a plan.