Something that a lot of people mistake is frictional unemployment. That's the amount of people in a given economy who are between jobs, and represents the normal exchange or flow of labor between sources of production. It indicates that the market for labor is working. It's really a useful concept, and puts unemployment rates into context. 4% unemployment? That's probably really good, based on the actual can't-find-work percentage. It looks like this:
Can't Find Work = Total Unemployment - Frictional Unemployment
So the Can't Find Work percentage might be actually closer to 1-2% overall. Pretty good, eh? A certain amount of frictional unemployment is actually necessary to having a healthy, functioning free-market economy.
That's not what I'm writing about today. Today's topic is more along the lines of Frictional Employment, a term I'm coining to describe what's happening in my office, and which I will extrapolate to the larger Army and government bureaucracies in general to describe the rampant waste that goes on with the military.
So here's an example. In my staff section, we have several civilian contractors. They are very experienced in their fields. They have spent careers in law enforcement, customs, intel, etc., and are incredible assets in those areas. They are being paid considerable amounts of money to come overseas and ply their expertise to help assist the US or Gov't of Iraq (GoI) learn about governance, law enforcement, etc.
And they are completely useless. They are getting paid essentially to sit around because they have been misplaced in my section. Think about this for a second. These contractors are getting paid in the six-figures (from what I gather) to be here. Their contracting company is getting paid some amount that includes profit as well as additional comp packages for the contractors. So in my shop alone, the US government is spending-- I estimate-- Six Hundred Thousand Dollars (could be more, could be less, but let's call it that for a SWAG, shall we?) to have expertise and experience and sit around and read CNN.
It's not the contractors' fault. They are hard-working individuals. They applied for specific jobs, and were accepted, hired, trained, and sent over here. They have notified their superiors and companies about what's going on. The US forces know what's going on. But they stay in this section. Hence, Frictional Employment is folks being employed where they shouldn't be.
I strongly, strongly suspect based on my time in the office as well as a few other places in this country that this is NOT an isolated occurrence. So let's multiply my figure of $600K by the Mystery Multiplier of my observations and experiences--let's assume that the contractor placement process is incredibly efficient all across iraq, and call it "5", for a total of only 15 mis-utilized/overpaid contractors across the country (Stop laughing, we'll get to that in my next point)--and we end up with a total utter wastage of a cool 3 Million Bucks.
At this point, I anticipate several objections.
1) "So what? 3mil is peanuts compared with the overall cost of the war."
Yes, and it's still $3 mil, which is enough to do a whole lot of other things in this country. Like the man said, a million here, a million there, and soon you're talking real money. But this attitude is commonplace. There is almost no incentive for fiscal discipline for the service at war. Expenditures are all based on a budget and pots of money from various places, and while those are drying up (In Iraq), you'd be surprised how adept at finagling money the military is. The usual justification is "Oh, it's for the troops!" which can be very valid, but let's face it-- if we spent more time figuring out what we needed and where to cut money from useless crap (or at least get the value from the money we've spent), then we'd be a lot more cost effective.
This is not an isolated incident. The amount of money that the Army wastes by having the wrong people in the wrong places is amazing. Soldiers, contractors, it doesn't matter: Somewhere, somehow, your dollars are being spent to pay someone in Frictional Employment. Don't blame the soldier: blame the system.
We don't want to skimp to defeat, but right now there's a lot of things to do and we don't need to be paying for mid-eastern vacations for people. If you're going to deploy me, use me. Which brings me to my next point:
2) "It can't be avoided, we just have to live with it."
You're absolutely right. There's no way that the Army can avoid wasting money on things. But somehow, companies across America learn to do it every day. I am not sure what the solution is, except for possibly introducing financial discipline as a criterion pursuant to my first few posts. We needs a total overhaul in accountability and justification, which is something that soldiers aren't good at when it comes to money. The generals have a completely different idea of spending priorities than do the field-grades, and the staff thinks that the operations folks are totally off base, and so forth. It's a giant cluster. But there's a lot of money to go around, everybody takes their piece, and everybody's happy... but the efficiency rates aren't so hot.
For another instance, the ACU/ Multi-Cam fiasco is just winding up. After 5 years of fielding the Generals' Favorite Uniform Evar (the ACU), the Army has decided to listen to the soldiers and 1) get rid of that silly-ass ACU digital pattern, and 2) go back to buttons instead of velcro on the pockets. They are going to switch uniforms for troops in Afghanistan to the Multi-Cam pattern.
Did we really need to purchase 5 years' worth of crap uniforms with all the associated generals doing studies and convening task-forces/working groups, etc., to take care of something that your average infantry Joe could have made a better decision on in five minutes? Apparently, the answer is Yes.
I won't even delve into the opportunity costs that all this has incurred.
Say it with me: Fraud, Waste, and Abuse.
Everything I've said is all anecdotal, which I admit is not quantifiable. But you have to have blinders on to think that the government can spend money responsibly, even in the context of a war.
What can we do about all this?
I am not sure, but it probably has to do with:
1) Figuring out what we need, preferably ahead of when we need it
2) Figuring out how much of what it is that we need
3) Buying it
4) Looking for ways to be efficient
These apply to materiel and personnel.
Army culture, history, and incentives militate against every one of these steps. I don't know how to change those things, other than what I've already written.
No comments:
Post a Comment