11:13 am, May 22, 2015

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 15

  • They can't cut the contractors
    Who would do all the work while the govt workers read the paper?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Pitting One Group Versus Another
    As a retired Fed and now Fed contractor, I don't think pitting contractors versus Feds as to who gets screwed is the answer to cost savings. If an agency uses a mix of contractors and Feds and either group is cut, the work of that agency will suffer. The cost savings need to be found outside of the Fed and Fed contractor groups.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • really?
    Are they nuts? It costs money to terminate, partially terminate or to so called "pause" a contract. Those contractors are not in the business to do the govt favors. They will get every dime they can out of Uncle Sam and the taxpayers. So the savings are NIL. It will just cost you more later on when all the contractor claims are settled. Again, which idiot came up with this idea?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • What happened to...
    Partnership? This is all about Managing contracts and isn't that an ongoing challenge? You would think both 'sides' could do better.
    Ret. Fed.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Work Smarter
    Not to start this argument, but most of the feds I work with could go home and nothing would miss a beat. My service contract is coming up on 10 years and deals with complying with laws that aren't going anywhere. Other feds contact me before the customer. So why continue to pay a premium to use contractors for this? Stop wasting money on a contractor who costs more, while paying a fed to do nothing but forward emails and approve invoices.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }