Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/8/2015 9:41:34 AM EDT
He was contractor guarding a Fed courthouse. What am I missing here...? In what univeverse does this guy rate a fed death benefit? If he works for 20 years as a CTR does he also rate a fed retirement.  I carried a gun for quite a few years in the last decade as a CTR...if I got shot and lived I got an SOS flight to Dubai and then was on my own. If I had been killed my family got to pay for my body to be shipped home.




Link


Feel bad for the guy losing his life but wtf is going on here?

"Just because CSO Cooper was a contract employee does not change the fact that he paid the ultimate price in order to save the lives of others," said a spokesperson for Senator Reid. "His family should be compensated."
View Quote
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 9:54:00 AM EDT
[#1]
Is the government intentionally hiring contractors and deputizing them to create cheap LEO's that they don't have to pay for?  

Cause that's what it looks like.

Working outside the country is not very comparable to working in a federal court house.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 9:57:25 AM EDT
[#2]
Probably in the fine print of his contract
Quoted:
Is the government intentionally hiring contractors and deputizing them to create cheap LEO's that they don't have to pay for?  

Cause that's what it looks like.

Working outside the country is not very comparable to working in a federal court house.
View Quote


No different than the private security that was hired to assist with Air Guard base security after 9/11
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 9:59:53 AM EDT
[#3]
The dangers of being sub contracted labor. Sucks, but I doubt the Feds will budge on this.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:02:32 AM EDT
[#4]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Is the government intentionally hiring contractors and deputizing them to create cheap LEO's that they don't have to pay for?  



Cause that's what it looks like.



Working outside the country is not very comparable to working in a federal court house.
View Quote
Budgets also force .gov to hire as independent contractors.  Likewise independent contractors are often hired at a greater base pay (and allowed to spend that as they see fit, rather than be shoehorned into a federal benefits package).  Most 20-30 year old males care more about base pay than if they get 9 months maternity leave.



 
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:09:11 AM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Is the government intentionally hiring contractors and deputizing them to create cheap LEO's that they don't have to pay for?  

Cause that's what it looks like.

Working outside the country is not very comparable to working in a federal court house.
View Quote


How so? I see no difference whatsoever, particularly if the work overseas is directly associated with the USG. Why does guarding courthouse make you a snowflake?
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:14:17 AM EDT
[#6]
damn guys..

That's what the "independent" in "Independent Contractor" means.


He wasn't a federal employee, he was a subcontractor for the federal government.

...of course the government is hiring contractors to fill "long term contracts" for employment because it's cheaper than hiring them directly as a .gov employee.
One of the reasons it's cheaper is because they dont have to provide the benefits that .gov employees are provided.


IM ALL FOR the government contracting these positions out, and I'm ALL FOR these contract employees providing for their own healthcare/benefits/insurance..

his deal with the PRIVATE CONTRACTOR is where he should look for benefits.
it's no different than working for a Staffing Service, just because you answer the phones or work in a warehouse at UPS, doesn't mean you're a UPS employee.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:25:43 AM EDT
[#7]
Damn...no opinion about this.

I was there a couple weeks prior to the incident assisting in securing the court house for a trial (can't remember maybe some biker gang thingy?) I was actually standing next to Cooper in full uniform to be a presence at the metal detectors.  I asked the CSOs what they would do if someone came in shooting since the area is so wide open. They told me all they could do was shoot back.

Very sad, as I talked with him for a few hours and he told me a bunch of stories from when he was on with metro. Very sad indeed
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:43:56 AM EDT
[#8]
The current batch of agency leaders sleezed their way in, rigged the system in their favor, closed the door behind them, then established laws that made them beyond reproach.

Fuck everybody doing the exact same job for less....ESPECIALLY since they are contractors who aren't part of the "selected few", but who are still employed to do the same job.

The benefits are NOT there for the people doing the work...the benefits are only there for the selected few.

Sure its legal, but just as shady as Trump strategically filing bankruptcy for financial gain...Super fucked up!!
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:49:33 AM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Is the government intentionally hiring contractors and deputizing them to create cheap LEO's that they don't have to pay for?  
View Quote


Yes.

I actually helped write a bid for EPA Security Services a few years back.  The guard force for all of their facilities in the DC area (18 buildings, IIRC) is contract.  A guy I used to know did security surveys & guard force inspections for several fed buildings around the country (primarily subcontracting retired FBI agents to do the leg work and reports).  All contract personnel.

It's waaaay cheaper to pay some schmuck 17 bucks an hour and let someone else deal with the management/HR shit.  It's actually much more cost efficient, though quality seems to suffer...a tad.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:50:03 AM EDT
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


How so? I see no difference whatsoever, particularly if the work overseas is directly associated with the USG. Why does guarding courthouse make you a snowflake?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Is the government intentionally hiring contractors and deputizing them to create cheap LEO's that they don't have to pay for?  

Cause that's what it looks like.

Working outside the country is not very comparable to working in a federal court house.


How so? I see no difference whatsoever, particularly if the work overseas is directly associated with the USG. Why does guarding courthouse make you a snowflake?



Apparently its worth special snowflake police powers.

Should we fire all the cops and rehire them as contractors?
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:52:07 AM EDT
[#11]
The whole purpose of contracting out is to save money through reduced costs and benefits (as well as some insulation from liability).
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:53:13 AM EDT
[#12]
Davy Crockett served four terms in the U.S. Congress from 1827-1835. In 1835 he joined the Whig Party and ran a failed attempt for the Presidency. Immediately thereafter he departed his native Tennessee for Texas to secure the independence of the "Texicans." He lost his life at the battle of the Alamo and forever secured his legendary status in history as "king of the wild frontier." The following story was recounted to Edward Elis by an unnamed Congressman who had served with Colonel Crockett in the U.S. House of Representatives.


...Crockett was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me. I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. It seemed to be that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make a speech in support of the bill. He commenced:

"Mr. Speaker -- I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House; but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into argument to prove that Congress has no power under the Constitution to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. "Mr. Speaker, I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks." He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as no doubt it would, but for that speech, it received but a few votes and was lost. Like many others, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move for a reconsideration the next day.

Previous engagements preventing me from seeing Crockett that night, I went early to his room the next morning and found him franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table.

I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what the devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied: "I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen."

I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:

"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into the hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there, I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way. "The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill.

"The next summer, when it began to be time to think about election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them. "So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddlebags, and put out. I had been out about a week and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow when I said to him: 'Don't be in such a hurry my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted.' He replied: "'I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say.' "I began: 'Well, friend, I am one of those fortunate beings called candidates, and . . . .' "' Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.' "This was a sockdolager .... I begged him to tell me what was the matter. "'Well, Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. ... But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is.' "'I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question.' "'No, Colonel, there's no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?' "'Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with.' "'Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?'

"Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said: "'Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury; and, I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.' "'It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be intrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. "'If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. "'No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in Washington, who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.'

"I have given you," continued Crockett, "an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying: "'So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.' "I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking, he would set others to talking, and in this district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him: "'Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I have ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.'

"The farmer laughingly replied: 'Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than defeating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.' "'If I don't,' said I, 'I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it.' "'No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday seek. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.' "'Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name.' "'My name is Bunce.' "'Not Horatio Bunce?' "'Yes.' "'Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go.' "We shook hands and parted that day in gentlemanly friendship and amity.

"It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met that man. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence, incorruptible integrity, and, for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote. "At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with. In fact I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifest before. "Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached the home of Mr. Bunce, and under ordinary circumstances should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before. "I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before. "I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him -- no, that is not the word -- I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will you sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

"But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand me there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted -- at least, they all knew me. "In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying: "'Fellow-citizens -- I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.' "I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying: "'And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error. "'It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but my friend Horatio Bunce is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.' "He came upon the stand and said: "'Fellow-citizens -- It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.' "He went down, and there went up from the crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before. "I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.

"Now, sir,' concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed, and was directing them to my constituents when you came in. "There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a weeks pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men -- men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased -- a debt which could not be paid by money -- and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. "Yet not one of those Congressmen responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."

View Quote
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:54:32 AM EDT
[#13]
Get it in writing next time.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:55:11 AM EDT
[#14]
When the feds deputized him into the US Marshall service, they began to treat him like a regular employee.  I'd say pay up.

There's plenty of judicial precedence for this, or does it not apply to the feds?
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 10:58:55 AM EDT
[#15]
I have a friend who is a trainer for the Fed security at some buildings in SC he is an occasional poster here . I will get him to chime in.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 11:01:00 AM EDT
[#16]
Why should anyone get a death benefit or retirement or anything for any federal job?  You save your money for retirement and you buy insurance if you want to protect your family.

Fuck the Entitled Class.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 11:09:28 AM EDT
[#17]
I've been an IT contractor for a long time.  I have had no expectation that the company I was placed in would pay me, or my family, employee benefits.



It's too bad this guy died, but he was a retired copper who owned a horse ranch.




It sure doesn't sound like he and his immediate family were scraping by and needed the money.  He wasn't somone in his 20s who left a wife and a couple little children.




The bit about honoring his sacrifice was BS, in my opinion.  This is about the 300k that was not a benefit of his job.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 11:12:22 AM EDT
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

"Now, sir,' concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed, and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.
View Quote


Are any of these" thousands of copies" known to exist that might lend some credence to this account beyond the official record of what is said in the course of government business being documented?
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 11:21:22 AM EDT
[#19]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Davy Crockett served four terms in the U.S. Congress from 1827-1835. In 1835 he joined the Whig Party and ran a failed attempt for the Presidency. Immediately thereafter he departed his native Tennessee for Texas to secure the independence of the "Texicans." He lost his life at the battle of the Alamo and forever secured his legendary status in history as "king of the wild frontier." The following story was recounted to Edward Elis by an unnamed Congressman who had served with Colonel Crockett in the U.S. House of Representatives.


...Crockett was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me. I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. It seemed to be that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make a speech in support of the bill.



Can you please cite this for me?  I love this stuff.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 11:33:51 AM EDT
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Are any of these" thousands of copies" known to exist that might lend some credence to this account beyond the official record of what is said in the course of government business being documented?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

"Now, sir,' concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed, and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.


Are any of these" thousands of copies" known to exist that might lend some credence to this account beyond the official record of what is said in the course of government business being documented?

seeing as he died around the early 1800s, I'd say that the likelihood of there being "thousands of copies" of anything other than a bible are slim to none..
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 11:35:32 AM EDT
[#21]
If he was a rent a cop then nope, but when they deputized him as federal LE they would be on the hook if he screwed up on the job, why should they be off the hook for his death. Also would you rather that 300K go to him or Shamiques section 8 rent and bennys?
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 11:44:29 AM EDT
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

seeing as he died around the early 1800s, I'd say that the likelihood of there being "thousands of copies" of anything other than a bible are slim to none..
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

"Now, sir,' concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed, and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.


Are any of these" thousands of copies" known to exist that might lend some credence to this account beyond the official record of what is said in the course of government business being documented?

seeing as he died around the early 1800s, I'd say that the likelihood of there being "thousands of copies" of anything other than a bible are slim to none..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_Richard's_Almanack#History

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_history_of_the_United_States_Declaration_of_Independence#Other_broadsides
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 11:56:48 AM EDT
[#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Can you please cite this for me?  I love this stuff.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Davy Crockett served four terms in the U.S. Congress from 1827-1835. In 1835 he joined the Whig Party and ran a failed attempt for the Presidency. Immediately thereafter he departed his native Tennessee for Texas to secure the independence of the "Texicans." He lost his life at the battle of the Alamo and forever secured his legendary status in history as "king of the wild frontier." The following story was recounted to Edward Elis by an unnamed Congressman who had served with Colonel Crockett in the U.S. House of Representatives.


...Crockett was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me. I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. It seemed to be that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make a speech in support of the bill.



Can you please cite this for me?  I love this stuff.



This.  That story is SO good, it's too good to be true.....
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 12:10:43 PM EDT
[#24]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


If he was a rent a cop then nope, but when they deputized him as federal LE they would be on the hook if he screwed up on the job, why should they be off the hook for his death. Also would you rather that 300K go to him or Shamiques section 8 rent and bennys?
View Quote




 
She get's them regardless of what happens here.  
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 1:19:35 PM EDT
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

"Now, sir,' concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed, and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.


Are any of these" thousands of copies" known to exist that might lend some credence to this account beyond the official record of what is said in the course of government business being documented?

seeing as he died around the early 1800s, I'd say that the likelihood of there being "thousands of copies" of anything other than a bible are slim to none..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_Richard's_Almanack#History

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_history_of_the_United_States_Declaration_of_Independence#Other_broadsides

I'm just looking at the story and looking for ways it could be verified
Without a doubt thousands of copies could have been printed, but not in the time frame given due to manually setting type and the printing processes of the day
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 1:25:19 PM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I'm just looking at the story and looking for ways it could be verified
Without a doubt thousands of copies could have been printed, but not in the time frame given due to manually setting type and the printing processes of the day
View Quote

agreed.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 1:43:36 PM EDT
[#27]
so if they wont pay the family i suppose the next attack that happens at that courthouse they will need actual hired court officers to respond to it.  the guy hired had a responsibility to his family to bring home the bacon not be a hero, if i worked that job and knew my family wasnt being taken care of i would have been on a break when that happened. you dont get paid enough as a security officer to die for some other sob . rant over
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 3:53:06 PM EDT
[#28]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

....snip....

View Quote



Trying to understand why you chose to post this? It appears to be a troll to disrupt the tread. Was that your intent?  If so perhaps you could illuminate as to why.  To be honest I find it sort insulting and not funny in the least.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 3:57:21 PM EDT
[#29]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
so if they wont pay the family i suppose the next attack that happens at that courthouse they will need actual hired court officers to respond to it.  the guy hired had a responsibility to his family to bring home the bacon not be a hero, if i worked that job and knew my family wasnt being taken care of i would have been on a break when that happened. you dont get paid enough as a security officer to die for some other sob . rant over
View Quote


This guy was a contractor. His agreement was with a company, not the FED GOV.  I know plenty of guys that hung it out there for Uncle Sugar as a CTR, ate an IED or whatever, and didn't even get a thank you. Not sure why anyone would think this guy or anyone else serving in a CTR capacity would rate Fed Life insurance because of circumstances?

Feel bad for him and his family but he shoudl have thought this through.  
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 4:02:06 PM EDT
[#30]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
When the feds deputized him into the US Marshall service, they began to treat him like a regular employee.  I'd say pay up.

There's plenty of judicial precedence for this, or does it not apply to the feds?
View Quote


was he actually Deputized though???
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 4:03:15 PM EDT
[#31]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
damn guys..

That's what the "independent" in "Independent Contractor" means.


He wasn't a federal employee, he was a subcontractor for the federal government.

...of course the government is hiring contractors to fill "long term contracts" for employment because it's cheaper than hiring them directly as a .gov employee.
One of the reasons it's cheaper is because they dont have to provide the benefits that .gov employees are provided.


IM ALL FOR the government contracting these positions out, and I'm ALL FOR these contract employees providing for their own healthcare/benefits/insurance..

his deal with the PRIVATE CONTRACTOR is where he should look for benefits.
it's no different than working for a Staffing Service, just because you answer the phones or work in a warehouse at UPS, doesn't mean you're a UPS employee.
View Quote


Saying he is long term private contractor is bullshit though when the govt. is actively going after businesses for doing the same thing.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 4:10:27 PM EDT
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


was he actually Deputized though???
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
When the feds deputized him into the US Marshall service, they began to treat him like a regular employee.  I'd say pay up.

There's plenty of judicial precedence for this, or does it not apply to the feds?


was he actually Deputized though???


I left a Federal appointment position under an inter-governmental aggrement in 2013. I was, for all practical purposes, a member of the USG Senior Exec Services (SES-2), had full authority of a federal employee and rated 2 .mil O-5s during my tenure in that position. My pay and benifits came from the university that I was affilated with, not the USG. Plain and simple....I had no access whatsoever to Fed retirement, life insurance, etc..

Can't see how deputizing someone would change that.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 4:12:16 PM EDT
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Saying he is long term private contractor is bullshit though when the govt. is actively going after businesses for doing the same thing.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
damn guys..

That's what the "independent" in "Independent Contractor" means.


He wasn't a federal employee, he was a subcontractor for the federal government.

...of course the government is hiring contractors to fill "long term contracts" for employment because it's cheaper than hiring them directly as a .gov employee.
One of the reasons it's cheaper is because they dont have to provide the benefits that .gov employees are provided.


IM ALL FOR the government contracting these positions out, and I'm ALL FOR these contract employees providing for their own healthcare/benefits/insurance..

his deal with the PRIVATE CONTRACTOR is where he should look for benefits.
it's no different than working for a Staffing Service, just because you answer the phones or work in a warehouse at UPS, doesn't mean you're a UPS employee.


Saying he is long term private contractor is bullshit though when the govt. is actively going after businesses for doing the same thing.

maybe you should sit down and let the adults talk..
long term contracts have been used in private business and government for over 50 years, typically for lower paid postions or positions which have so much turnover that the cost of training becomes too great to continuously handle hires from in house.

in this particular case.. the contract for the "security officers" probably went out to a minority/vetran owned business.  the man who died worked for the private security company.
it's not bullshit, and it's certainly not a "new thing".

bottom line, the guy should have carried life insurance with a "violent death" rider that would increase his payout if he died while working in his official capacity.

Quoted:
Quoted:
....snip....

Trying to understand why you chose to post this? It appears to be a troll to disrupt the tread. Was that your intent?  If so perhaps you could illuminate as to why.  To be honest I find it sort insulting and not funny in the least.

you're kidding right? that story is DIRECTLY relevant to the point of all these posts saying that the guy's family should be entitled to the 300K death benefit..
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 4:12:17 PM EDT
[#34]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Trying to understand why you chose to post this? It appears to be a troll to disrupt the tread. Was that your intent?  If so perhaps you could illuminate as to why.  To be honest I find it sort insulting and not funny in the least.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

....snip....




Trying to understand why you chose to post this? It appears to be a troll to disrupt the tread. Was that your intent?  If so perhaps you could illuminate as to why.  To be honest I find it sort insulting and not funny in the least.



Sorry if it insulted you, you must have misunderstood it. I thought it supported your position.

I didn't post it to disrupt your thread.

I think it illustrates well that government should NOT be apportioning the public's monies in sympathy of those in need, no matter how deserving they might be.

Try reading the story over again. Maybe you missed something in it.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 4:37:32 PM EDT
[#35]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Sorry if it insulted you, you must have misunderstood it. I thought it supported your position.

I didn't post it to disrupt your thread.

I think it illustrates well that government should NOT be apportioning the public's monies in sympathy of those in need, no matter how deserving they might be.

Try reading the story over again. Maybe you missed something in it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

....snip....




Trying to understand why you chose to post this? It appears to be a troll to disrupt the tread. Was that your intent?  If so perhaps you could illuminate as to why.  To be honest I find it sort insulting and not funny in the least.



Sorry if it insulted you, you must have misunderstood it. I thought it supported your position.

I didn't post it to disrupt your thread.

I think it illustrates well that government should NOT be apportioning the public's monies in sympathy of those in need, no matter how deserving they might be.

Try reading the story over again. Maybe you missed something in it.



Link Posted: 10/8/2015 4:59:44 PM EDT
[#36]
The feds should pay every bouncer that dies in the "line of duty".



Guy was a doorman, no different that any bouncer at any bar.



That's what life insurance is for.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:03:52 PM EDT
[#37]
He was a private contractor, not a federal employee.  

What part of that is so confusing?

Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:07:41 PM EDT
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I left a Federal appointment position under an inter-governmental aggrement in 2013. I was, for all practical purposes, a member of the USG Senior Exec Services (SES-2), had full authority of a federal employee and rated 2 .mil O-5s during my tenure in that position. My pay and benifits came from the university that I was affilated with, not the USG. Plain and simple....I had no access whatsoever to Fed retirement, life insurance, etc..

Can't see how deputizing someone would change that.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
When the feds deputized him into the US Marshall service, they began to treat him like a regular employee.  I'd say pay up.

There's plenty of judicial precedence for this, or does it not apply to the feds?


was he actually Deputized though???


I left a Federal appointment position under an inter-governmental aggrement in 2013. I was, for all practical purposes, a member of the USG Senior Exec Services (SES-2), had full authority of a federal employee and rated 2 .mil O-5s during my tenure in that position. My pay and benifits came from the university that I was affilated with, not the USG. Plain and simple....I had no access whatsoever to Fed retirement, life insurance, etc..

Can't see how deputizing someone would change that.


Good point, I thought maybe their argument as that by Deputizing him he was now technically a "Federal LEO"  I know when I did a (Very) Short cooperative deal with the Feds we were Deputized as DUSM, but it was Emphasized that it was Limited in Scope, Valid for ONLY the period we were directly involved, and carried no weight outside of the specific circumstances.  If something had happened, My coverage would have been that of my home Dept, not the US Gov.  Even the court guys I knew and had interacted with who were Contract employees of the USM, knew they werent considered full LEO.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:10:14 PM EDT
[#39]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
The whole purpose of contracting out is to save money through reduced costs and benefits (as well as some insulation from liability).
View Quote


Not to mention, NO UNION to deal with (in most cases).

Aloha, Mark
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:11:48 PM EDT
[#40]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I'm just looking at the story and looking for ways it could be verified
Without a doubt thousands of copies could have been printed, but not in the time frame given due to manually setting type and the printing processes of the day
View Quote



The type is only set once, how long does it take to turn the handle to print, and switch out the paper?? say there were 4 bills per page cut later, 250 pages per thousand, certainly not beyond practicality for a larger printing concern, there ere printing companies in pretty much every city by that time.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:19:48 PM EDT
[#41]
Oh, one other thing...relevant or not, Under Current NJ State Law, (And of course before i retired)  If I were working a Security Contract job, as a Security Officer, and NOT Specifically as a Uniformed Police Officer (Paid through the Dept, not Directly) IF I were Injured or Killed, EVEN IF I WERE TAKING POLICE ACTION, I am NOT Legally a Police Officer as long as I am working under the Security Officers Regulatory Act (SORA)  It used to be, if you were working a Side Job if you had to take action, you "Clocked Out" of the Job, and into the PD, then reversed when you finished with the paperwork and went back on the Clock at the Detail, the new state law changed that.  So I could take  Action if I was walking down the street and saw a Bank Robbery Off-Duty, and been covered completely, But if i were working a Non-Uniform side job, and did the same thing, i'd have been SOL.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:26:58 PM EDT
[#42]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Is the government intentionally hiring contractors and deputizing them to create cheap LEO's that they don't have to pay for?  

Cause that's what it looks like.

Working outside the country is not very comparable to working in a federal court house.
View Quote


Pretty much.


Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:31:03 PM EDT
[#43]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Good point, I thought maybe their argument as that by Deputizing him he was now technically a "Federal LEO"  I know when I did a (Very) Short cooperative deal with the Feds we were Deputized as DUSM, but it was Emphasized that it was Limited in Scope, Valid for ONLY the period we were directly involved, and carried no weight outside of the specific circumstances.  If something had happened, My coverage would have been that of my home Dept, not the US Gov.  Even the court guys I knew and had interacted with who were Contract employees of the USM, knew they werent considered full LEO.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
When the feds deputized him into the US Marshall service, they began to treat him like a regular employee.  I'd say pay up.

There's plenty of judicial precedence for this, or does it not apply to the feds?


was he actually Deputized though???


I left a Federal appointment position under an inter-governmental aggrement in 2013. I was, for all practical purposes, a member of the USG Senior Exec Services (SES-2), had full authority of a federal employee and rated 2 .mil O-5s during my tenure in that position. My pay and benifits came from the university that I was affilated with, not the USG. Plain and simple....I had no access whatsoever to Fed retirement, life insurance, etc..

Can't see how deputizing someone would change that.


Good point, I thought maybe their argument as that by Deputizing him he was now technically a "Federal LEO"  I know when I did a (Very) Short cooperative deal with the Feds we were Deputized as DUSM, but it was Emphasized that it was Limited in Scope, Valid for ONLY the period we were directly involved, and carried no weight outside of the specific circumstances.  If something had happened, My coverage would have been that of my home Dept, not the US Gov.  Even the court guys I knew and had interacted with who were Contract employees of the USM, knew they werent considered full LEO.


Same for the JTTFs. The local and state guys doing some of the work are credentialed in terms of Fed authorities but certainly don't reap the fed bennies.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:35:42 PM EDT
[#44]
As an independent contractor...I would have had a death policy, they're cheap.  If I was through another contractor, it would be on the contractor to have, or offer, certain benefits.  He should have had two policies, at that point...his own, and the company he worked for.


Now, that said.  The fact that he was a deputized federal LEO, that opens another can of worms, in my opinion (opinions are like assholes, we all have one).  As was a deputized LEO with arrest powers, he is no longer just a security guard.  He is a de facto LEO, and should receive the benefits (and training).
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:35:43 PM EDT
[#45]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Pretty much.


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Is the government intentionally hiring contractors and deputizing them to create cheap LEO's that they don't have to pay for?  

Cause that's what it looks like.

Working outside the country is not very comparable to working in a federal court house.


Pretty much.





 

I fail to see how geographic location plays a role. There were a number of projects, particularly when Uncle Bill and Uncle Stan was meat grinding, that CTRs fulliled quasi GOV roles.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:36:59 PM EDT
[#46]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
As an independent contractor...I would have had a death policy, they're cheap.  If I was through another contractor, it would be on the contractor to have, or offer, certain benefits.  He should have had two policies, at that point...his own, and the company he worked for.


Now, that said.  The fact that he was a deputized federal LEO, that opens another can of worms, in my opinion (opinions are like assholes, we all have one).  As was a deputized LEO with arrest powers, he is no longer just a security guard.  He is a de facto LEO, and should receive the benefits (and training).
View Quote



My term policy with USAA covers getting head blown off by someone not quite aligned with US national goals and objectives.

Ref him being a defacto LEO...I don't agree. He had limited authority within a certain scope and geographic confine. e.g. I'm sure once he left work he had zero powers of arrest.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 5:42:56 PM EDT
[#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Same for the JTTFs. The local and state guys doing some of the work are credentialed in terms of Fed authorities but certainly don't reap the fed bennies.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
When the feds deputized him into the US Marshall service, they began to treat him like a regular employee.  I'd say pay up.

There's plenty of judicial precedence for this, or does it not apply to the feds?


was he actually Deputized though???


I left a Federal appointment position under an inter-governmental aggrement in 2013. I was, for all practical purposes, a member of the USG Senior Exec Services (SES-2), had full authority of a federal employee and rated 2 .mil O-5s during my tenure in that position. My pay and benifits came from the university that I was affilated with, not the USG. Plain and simple....I had no access whatsoever to Fed retirement, life insurance, etc..

Can't see how deputizing someone would change that.


Good point, I thought maybe their argument as that by Deputizing him he was now technically a "Federal LEO"  I know when I did a (Very) Short cooperative deal with the Feds we were Deputized as DUSM, but it was Emphasized that it was Limited in Scope, Valid for ONLY the period we were directly involved, and carried no weight outside of the specific circumstances.  If something had happened, My coverage would have been that of my home Dept, not the US Gov.  Even the court guys I knew and had interacted with who were Contract employees of the USM, knew they werent considered full LEO.


Same for the JTTFs. The local and state guys doing some of the work are credentialed in terms of Fed authorities but certainly don't reap the fed bennies.

hell they didnt even let us keep the expired creds as souvenirs...even though they had a big "INVALID" red stamp over them as we turned them in
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 6:10:52 PM EDT
[#48]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
....snip....

Trying to understand why you chose to post this? It appears to be a troll to disrupt the tread. Was that your intent?  If so perhaps you could illuminate as to why.  To be honest I find it sort insulting and not funny in the least.

Sorry if it insulted you, you must have misunderstood it. I thought it supported your position.
I didn't post it to disrupt your thread.
I think it illustrates well that government should NOT be apportioning the public's monies in sympathy of those in need, no matter how deserving they might be.
Try reading the story over again. Maybe you missed something in it.



That famous yarn is a tale of how Crockett came to argue against a military officer receiving an additional death benefit by way of bill of congress, because congress has no power to provide charity.  Replace the officer with contractor and you have a direct analog for this situation.  It is directly relevant, and supports the case that there are no federal death benefits for non-federal employees.  No such contract exists, so no such payment may be paid.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 6:35:08 PM EDT
[#49]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

maybe you should sit down and let the adults talk..
long term contracts have been used in private business and government for over 50 years, typically for lower paid postions or positions which have so much turnover that the cost of training becomes too great to continuously handle hires from in house.

in this particular case.. the contract for the "security officers" probably went out to a minority/vetran owned business.  the man who died worked for the private security company.
it's not bullshit, and it's certainly not a "new thing".

bottom line, the guy should have carried life insurance with a "violent death" rider that would increase his payout if he died while working in his official capacity.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
damn guys..

That's what the "independent" in "Independent Contractor" means.


He wasn't a federal employee, he was a subcontractor for the federal government.

...of course the government is hiring contractors to fill "long term contracts" for employment because it's cheaper than hiring them directly as a .gov employee.
One of the reasons it's cheaper is because they dont have to provide the benefits that .gov employees are provided.


IM ALL FOR the government contracting these positions out, and I'm ALL FOR these contract employees providing for their own healthcare/benefits/insurance..

his deal with the PRIVATE CONTRACTOR is where he should look for benefits.
it's no different than working for a Staffing Service, just because you answer the phones or work in a warehouse at UPS, doesn't mean you're a UPS employee.


Saying he is long term private contractor is bullshit though when the govt. is actively going after businesses for doing the same thing.

maybe you should sit down and let the adults talk..
long term contracts have been used in private business and government for over 50 years, typically for lower paid postions or positions which have so much turnover that the cost of training becomes too great to continuously handle hires from in house.

in this particular case.. the contract for the "security officers" probably went out to a minority/vetran owned business.  the man who died worked for the private security company.
it's not bullshit, and it's certainly not a "new thing".

bottom line, the guy should have carried life insurance with a "violent death" rider that would increase his payout if he died while working in his official capacity.



You do know after obamacare passed the IRS started going after companies that used contractors to get around paying benefits? They put out all sorts of rules such as if the business tells them when to show up and leave they aren't contractors. When the govt. is going around telling businesses that their contractors are employees it is ironic the govt. is now trying to argue someone that under their definition is certainly an employee, isn't.
Link Posted: 10/8/2015 7:16:16 PM EDT
[#50]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Snip....

You do know after obamacare passed the IRS started going after companies that used contractors to get around paying benefits? They put out all sorts of rules such as if the business tells them when to show up and leave they aren't contractors. When the govt. is going around telling businesses that their contractors are employees it is ironic the govt. is now trying to argue someone that under their definition is certainly an employee, isn't.
View Quote


There's also a cap on Fed employees. Often you just can't hire a Govie but are forced to bring in CTRs.  Most likely that's the position this guy held. Also the rule of thumb for the life cycle cost of a govie is about 3:1...total cost of yearly benifits over his/her life cycle is about 3 times salary. CTRs are about 2:1.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top