Twitter Facebook Google RSS
 
FEATURE ARTICLE  

Public-Private Ventures Could Ease the Pains of Privatization 

2,001 

by Roxana Tiron 

Competitions between government workers and contractors for Defense Department jobs can bring more efficiency to the public sector, but critics also have complained that the practice may unfairly risk government workers’ jobs.

The difficulties associated with outsourcing, base closures and public-private competitions could be alleviated under an initiative called Transition Benefit Corporation (TBC)—a non-profit umbrella organization that would facilitate the transition of workers and buildings from the public to the private sector. The goal of TBC is to find a “soft landing” for government workers and to create a business environment for “new growth,” said Roger Feldman, an attorney with Bingham Dana, in Washington, D.C.

Working with Feldman on this project is Stephen Sorett, an attorney at ReedSmith, also in Washington. They described the TBC as a vehicle to promote the transfer of under-used government assets, such as real estate, equipment and intellectual property, as well as the transition of government personnel to the private sector.

“The TBCs are merely facilitating entities to move assets/personnel into private-sector situations where they will contribute to economic development and personnel soft landing,” said Feldman. The umbrella organization would include the federal workers whose jobs are in jeopardy, a private firm that would be selected competitively, as well as an “incubator” organization that would receive local grants and pursue new ventures.

Employment Contract
The employees in transition can be part of the non-profit, the for-profit or new start-up companies. They negotiate an employment contract with their new employer that will typically last about one year. “After that, there are no guarantees,” said Sorett. The premise of the TBC model, he noted, is to grow new businesses and create a climate for economic development. The one-year guarantee is based on the fact that, on average, the terminating federal agency has outlays amounting to about one year’s salary for an employee who loses his or her job.

The most attractive benefit of the TBC, according to Sorett, is that the government workers would retain their public employment benefits. “In this sense, the deal looks very much like a merger or acquisition in the classical sense,” he said. A successful example of the TBC concept was the arrangement in Charleston, S.C., where Navy employees were re-trained at public expense and teamed with private companies to provide services to the government.

It is unclear what the future holds for the TBC initiative, since it is only in the early stages of development. Feldman and Sorett unveiled the TBC plan during a recent conference on public-private partnerships sponsored by SMI Ltd.

As with any concept that challenges the status quo, TBC may face significant cultural obstacles.

“Cultural issues are the biggest barriers of all,” said Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, an industry group in Arlington, Va. “The senior work force is trained to do business in a very traditional model, and quite frankly, they don’t really understand the commercial market, the underpinnings of commercial practice. They don’t understand what goes into a good business deal.” Soloway served as the deputy undersecretary of defense for acquisition reform under the Clinton administration.

“Recognize that you have two things that make it an optimal time [for public-private partnerships]. One is that you have a workforce that is close to retirement, so workers won’t necessarily be disadvantaged. Second, a lot of that workforce is valuable in the commercial market fields, because they are technology-skilled, and there’s a shortage of technology workers,” Soloway said.

Many people in the Defense Department—particularly the uniformed military—believe that switching to public-private partnerships means losing control over their operations, said Paul Taibl, vice president of Business Executives for National Security, an advocacy group that supports privatization.

According to the Outsourcing Institute, Fortune 500 companies will spend nearly 25 percent of their budgets on outsourcing—partnering with providers. For example, Taibl said, Nike owns only the advertising and marketing. The company outsources all shoe-manufacturing operations.

A commonly used privatization tool at the Defense Department is the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76, which mandates competitions to determine who should perform a job targeted for outsourcing. The law was designed to provide a level-playing field between public and private-sector competitors.

But A-76 has been criticized as ineffective by both the government and the contractors, said Taibl. It is seen as a “difficult, flawed process, so they look for other ways to achieve their goals,” he said.

“It takes too long. It is too complex. It is implemented on a piecemeal basis. It is disruptive to morale and adversarial—pitting the government against the very contractors we say we want as our partners. And it is so complicated and opaque that both sides of the competitions have come to view it as unfair,” said Denis Bovin in recent testimony to the House Armed Services Committee. Bovin, a vice chairman at the investment banking firm Bear Stearns, is currently working on reforming the A-76.

A-76 Flaws
An A-76 competition takes 12 to 18 months—too long, according to some. “While eager to participate in the competitions, the private companies can’t wait so long for the government to make a decision,” Taibl said. “It’s the old adage that time is money.”

On the government side, there’s a perception that federal jobs are being sacrificed, solely to meet a “budget bogey,” Bovin said. He said that A-76 competitions save 20 percent, even when the function is retained in-house, and more than 30 percent when the private bidder wins.

“Let’s be honest: Whoever wins, public or private, they probably win, because they eliminated excess jobs,” Taibl added. “There’s always some certainty of jobs being lost, but these are taken care of either by attrition or vacant positions in other areas.”

The Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998 documents more than 450,000 civilians performing functions defined as not inherently governmental or commercial. Also, nearly 500,000 military personnel are performing commercial functions. The law requires agencies to review their workforce each year and choose the jobs that could be performed by contractors.

“Yet, for this year, it appears that they are going to compete only 16,170 of those positions. ... That is not a very strong program,” Taibl concluded.

Also, in 1997, the Pentagon said it would evaluate 233,000 positions by 2003. The goal was to save almost $12 billion between 1997 and 2005. Today, the Pentagon estimates it will compete 180,000 jobs and the projected numbers are dropping off sharply in the next several years, according to Bovin.

An OMB directive issued March 19 stipulates that all departments and agencies have to come up with plans to compete at least 5 percent of the workforce each year.

“If you look across the federal government, the Defense Department is probably the only agency that in fact has a very active public-private competition program. And because it has one, of course, [it gets] more criticism—there’s nothing to criticize elsewhere,” Taibl said.

B.P. Clark, Navy assistant deputy commander for industrial operations, cited a program called joint industry-Navy improvements initiative, designed to bring about standardization of business practices. For example, aircraft carriers are maintained at depot level in three locations—Puget Sound (Wash.), Norfolk and Newport News (Va.). “We’ve had engineering, we’ve had planning, we’ve had all those processes done in all three locations,” Clark said. The Navy is considering consolidating operations from the three locations into one.

Clark said the Navy also is looking at ways to get rid of excess buildings. For example, the service leased out a prison for private office space at the Portsmouth naval shipyard. “This is just the tip of the iceberg,” Clark said of privatization initiatives. “We still have a long way to go.”

Clark said that current legislation limits how many partnerships the government can establish with contractors. Title 10 USC 2466 says that no more than 50 percent of maintenance dollars can be spent in the private sector. “Could it change? Without a doubt. It changed from 60-40 in a couple of years,” said Clark. Title 10 USC 2553 prohibits selling public services if they already exist in the private sector, except nuclear submarines.

The abundance of deteriorating excess military buildings presents a serious problem, said Martin Kitterick, a consultant with PricewaterhouseCoopers. “There’s serious over-capacity and [base closure legislation] had really mixed results. In some ways it succeeded, but there have also been a few horror stories [about the fact that it is] costing more to keep bases closed, rather than open.”

Kitterick also mentioned instances in which the private sector bought public property for small sums of money. Within a year, the private sector turned that property around into multi-million dollar developments. “There has been egg on the face,” he said.

“The Defense Department doesn’t need to be in the business of providing housing, of actually building its own buildings; the private companies can do it cheaper and more effectively,” Kitterick added.

John Krajewski, Army assistant chief of staff for installation management, said a “big gap” remains unfilled, because the money is tight. “We have to compete for everything else the Army is doing,” he said. “It’s all one pot of money, and we don’t compete very well [against the need] for tanks, bullets and missiles.”

“We have a $150 billion real-estate inventory, and we don’t know how to take advantage of it. We don’t know how to leverage assets,” Krajewski said. The Army already has privatized utility systems. There have been several successful projects to privatize family housing. At Fort Carson, Colo., private developers invested $200 million, while at Fort Hood, Tex., they invested $300 million.

For morale, welfare and recreation initiatives, the Army has 35 ongoing public-private projects. “Private companies provide the service we need and we provide access to the military market,” Krajewski explained.

  Bookmark and Share