1:48 am, May 27, 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.

  • 6

  • USACE worriers about shrinking pool of talent
    I think there are many reasons for why it's hard to keep talent. Here are few: Working for the government is looked at very poorly by the public and tax payers. Pay freeze for 3 years and counting is not enticing. Freeze on monetary awards makes it even worse. Opening positions mostly to status candidates and veterans narrows the recruitment pool.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Diversity
    Seems the article deteriorated from lack of talent to a diversity issue and lack of minorities. I briefly researched articles on engineering graduates and find results that differ from what the General states regarding overall availability of engineer graduates. In addition, with the poor economy, I would suggest there is a dirth of engineers available for work. In talking with friends they advise they know a lot of kids who are engineers out of jobs. From recently retired HR folks, I am hearing they have not heard of an issue with engineers. So, the General obviously is getting bad info from his SES'ers (which is part of the problem) or he just is focused on the diversity aspect. With this economy, certainly, private industry is not pull;ing engineers out of the system.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Not all engineers are the same
    My office has spent as much as 2 years to get an electrical engineer. Any engineer in my office GS-13 and above, (GS-12 for supervisors) must have a PE. Civil engineers are not very tough to get because construction nationwide is still slow. Geotechnical engineers are a bit of a specialty and generally hard to find on a good day, as are chemical and nuclear engineers. The Army Corp is big into dredging and that requires specialized training. They also do a lot of construction that while slow now will not be for long. Then they will be bleeding many different types of engineers to the private sector. A steady drop in STEM students now will hurt the Army Corp in the not too distant future. They are thinking more than 2 or 3 years into the future, as they should.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Demonization, frozen pay, furloughed - Guess why no big rush to join Govt
    Honest Broker
    I agree with Mohammed I that the politicians want to drive people out of the Govt. My office rewarded engineers for being good contract pushers rather than being technical, so many took graduate courses in business and dropped the idea of designing and building anything. Others that wanted to be engineers left if they did not have too much time in. I started in the 1980's when Govt engineers were required to do all the design work, so I was stuck waiting for my retirement date. POGO.ORG found on average, contractor rates 2 to 5 times more than a fully burdened rate of Govt employee yet there was a trend for outsourcing. The politicians decided to drop hiring Govt employees restrictions, so retiring influential supervisors rewarded those that helped get contracts to the company of their future employment. Now the politicians demonize Govt employees and freeze their pay, so they can keep up this outsourcing trend. Gosh, I wonder why they cannot get true engineers?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Lack of Leadership
    The Corps not only has a problem with recruitment, but a problem with retention. As a Corps Employee for 23 years, I have seen a drastic change in leadership over the past 7 years. We've gone from an organization that could "Just Do It" to having to jump through so many hoops just for the simplest decisions that we've become ineffective. We spend 2.00 dollars to save 0.50 cents. The younger folks in my agency are fed up with it and moving on to work in startup firms or smaller engineering firms.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Consolidation a potential solution too?
    The article doesn't mention the possibility of potentially consolidating the existing available engineering talent of USACE, NAVFAC, and Air Force Civil Engineering (maybe Coast Guard Civil Engineering too?) into a single joint command and potentially reducing redundant overheads and differing processes. Should it?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }