That didn't stop the Secretary of Defense from sending a 23 page letter to the Senate (and a similar letter to the House) objecting to the provision. The Secretary called the provision arbitrary and without justification and would have widespread negative consequences on the Department's mission-critical programs and services. It would demoralize the DoD's civilian workforce when opportunities for promotion to SES are severely eliminated. The Secretary also noted that the Department has already cut the size of its SES workforce by 100 positions since 2010.
So what would a 250 person cut to the Defense's top executive ranks mean to Defense contractors? Well, it means fewer people to handle the same workload. There is nothing in the NDAA that would relieve the Department from some of its existing responsibilities. In the abstract, that means response times will increase. How's the responsiveness of your contracting officers working out for you now? It could get worse, if that's possible. What about the "demoralizing" statement. The opportunities for promotion are strong motivators to perform well. Take those opportunities away and the Secretary is concerned that the Department cannot continue to attract and retain experienced workers.
This provision is more than just an internal cat-fight. It could have a direct impact on the Department's ability to effectively and efficiently award and administer contracts.
No comments:
Post a Comment