March « 2010 « Feral Jundi

Friday, March 12, 2010

Industry Talk: How To Strengthen The Afghan National Police, By DynCorp CEO William Ballhaus

Filed under: Afghanistan,Industry Talk,Law Enforcement — Tags: Afghanistan, DynCorp, Industry Talk, Law Enforcement, private military company, security contracting, sun tzu, Xe — Matt @ 11:32 AM

All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. –Sun Tzu

*****

This battle is getting interesting now. You see, DynCorp realizes that if they can apply more pressure to public opinion about this by engaging with the media, then maybe Congress might step in and halt this action do to the negative attention on all of this.

I also noticed that a few media groups are really pushing congress and the public on the issue of disbarring Xe from the current list do to the latest stuff in Afghanistan. Strategically speaking, DynCorp benefits from this latest media attack on Xe, but you won’t hear DynCorp talking about that.

Now what could possibly be happening though is some low grade corporate espionage and/or smear campaigns. What I mean by that, is that companies can benefit from the downfall of their competition, and they will do what they can to help that process along. To maintain a moral and righteous stance, they would do what they can to feed that process on the sly.

A prime example of this, is when a contractor is fired from one company, and then goes on to work for a competitor of that company. That individual now knows a lot about the inner workings of his former company, and probably knows some dirt as well. The temptation for that individual to feed their current company corporate office with information that could potentially hurt their former company, is great. Then a few anonymous tips to some Juicebox Commandos and bam, you have now just struck a blow against your competitor. This is yet again, another reason to treat your contractors right and not play games with them. The non-disclosure agreement is not a ‘100 percent insurance policy’ solution against that type of thing.

I also would not doubt that there are corporate moles in place at a few of the companies. You see this in other industries, and I could totally see that happening with ours. The competition for these contracts is extreme, and the temptation for companies to do this is great. Plus, most of the companies are filled with guys who specialize in that kind of thing with their prior military, police, private investigator or ‘other’ career. The amount of money on the line with these contracts is huge and everyone is seeking an edge in the market.

And to clarify so I don’t get some corporate lawyer knocking on my door, I am not at all saying that DynCorp or anyone in this industry is participating in this kind of activity. I just bring this stuff up, because the potential is always there. Especially when you see it happening in other high dollar, high stakes industries. –Matt

——————————————————————

How to Strengthen the Afghan National Police

March 11, 2010

To the Editor:

Your March 6 editorial “ ‘If You Bring In the Cops’ ”) rightly makes the case that Afghanistan’s future lies in the ability to successfully connect the Afghan people to their government. To that end, the question of how to strengthen the Afghan National Police is correctly front and center.

As the responsibility for police training transitions to sole Pentagon control, the consequences of the choice of contract to support this effort deserve examination. The proposed Army contracting vehicle, which was originally established for technology procurement, will have the net effect of restricting the potential choice to two, or possibly only one, provider for future training.

As the former commander of the Afghan National Security Forces training mission recently testified, this crucial mission will require experienced government contractors. It is critical that concerns about the current procurement approach, lack of adequate competition and resulting choice of contractor do not undermine confidence in the training.

(more…)

Comments Off

Aviation: Drone Archer Weapons– The Hexacopter

Filed under: Aviation,Cool Stuff — Tags: Aviation, drone archer, drone pilot, drones, hexacopter, private military company, security contracting, UAV — Matt @ 10:32 AM

Comments (2)

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Kaizen: FPS Using Covert/Overt Inspections For Contractor Security Posts

Filed under: Industry Talk,Kaizen,Leadership — Tags: FPS, Industry Talk, Kaizen, Leadership, mystery shoppers, private military companies, private security, security contractors — Matt @ 12:34 PM

FPS officials said in a statement that it has increased both overt and covert inspections of security posts, as well as its oversight of contract guards.

*****

Hmmm, I wonder if FPS is reading Feral Jundi. lol Actually this practice of overt and covert inspections is pretty common in a few agencies out there. The Postal Service even uses mystery shoppers to get a real feel for their customer service and inner workings of offices, so this is nothing new for federal agencies. Mystery shopping is very common in other industries as well, and I have covered that here before.

But what boggles my mind, is why haven’t more private military companies used this concept? If you truly care about what is going on with your company, you should be fully involved with collecting intelligence on the inner workings of your company. That means sending folks out to your sites and talking with the contractor on the ground.

I am not talking about just talking with the managers either. I am talking about getting feedback from the backbone of your company, and that is the contractor doing the work. These are the folks who represent the end result of all of your company policies and training, and a lot depends upon them. These guys and gals are the ones your customer sees on a daily basis, and makes their judgements about your company based on the actions of these contractors. The managers are there to lead and to implement company policy and training, and the best gauge for seeing if they did their job, is to study the contractors they are in charge of.

Also, it is important to note that this is not a witch hunt, or undercover gotcha stuff. It costs money to fire and hire folks, so ideally, this information is used to tweak policies where it makes it easy for contractors to do the right thing. It also helps in identifying inefficiencies or identifying key training points that need to be reworked or re-emphasized in order to get a better outcome. That is what you use this intelligence for. Of course if you catch criminal activity within your company, you should act upon that information pronto. But all in all, the idea behind obtaining feedback is to feed your Kaizen machine and make your company a top performer.

The mystery shopping or covert employee thing is something I have mentioned before, which is just one tool to gain that kind of information about the workings of your company. It is an extra cost, but it is the kind of investment that will pay for itself handily down the line. Because you can ask folks what is going on with your company, and they might give the straight scoop. Or they might not, partly because they don’t think you will do anything about it or they don’t trust the idea of giving you information that may or may not cause reprisals (thats if your company has a culture that does not support feedback, and if that is the case, you need to fix that by actually acting upon feedback and showing you care).

You could also use customer or employee feedback software to mine that information gold. Either way, if you are not doing these things, and actually acting upon that information to make your company better, then you are certainly headed down a road of uncertainty and peril. You are just gambling at that point, with the hopes that nothing bad will happen to your company and that everything is just rosy with your people. pfffft.

I guess my point with all of this, is that don’t be the company where the head does not know what the tail is doing. Seek that feedback gold, and invest in the necessary measures to make that happen. Start by just asking honestly what the issues are (and be responsive to those issues!!!), and if that doesn’t work, do surprise inspections, use software to gain employee and customer feedback, and finally, use mystery employees and get a solid read on what is really going on with your company. –Matt

Edit: Also check out this article about Best Buy and how they used ’employee feedback’ to their advantage.

—————————————————————–

Use of private security guards at government buildings comes under scrutiny

By Ed O’KeefeThursday, March 11, 2010

There’s a saying among some private security guards in the Washington region: “There’s no security in security.”

Poor job security and the potential dangers that come with protecting government buildings make it a risky line of work, said guards interviewed this week.

Unlike officers with the Pentagon Force Protection Agency who gunned down shooter John Patrick Bedell last week, most security guards at federal buildings in the Washington region are employed by private firms that have contracts with the Federal Protective Service.

The FPS, part of the Department of Homeland Security, provides security at more than 9,000 federal buildings across the country and uses about 15,000 contract security guards to support about 1,200 officers, inspectors and administrative staffers, according to agency officials. A House hearing Tuesday will focus on the FPS’s future and its response to a 2009 Government Accountability Office investigation that exposed security gaps at 10 major federal buildings. The GAO report also faulted the FPS for inconsistent training and poor oversight of private guards.

Next month, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) plans to introduce legislation that addresses the agency’s future and broader threats and security measures at all civilian and military facilities, aides said.

(more…)

Comments (1)

War Art: ’Not Responsible’, From LMS Defense-The Comics

Filed under: Funny Stuff,War Art — Tags: comics, Funny Stuff, LMS Defense, private military companies, Righteous Duke Designs, security contracting, War Art — Matt @ 11:52 AM

‘Not Responsible.‘ From LMS Defense-The Comics and Righteous Duke Designs.

Comments Off

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Letter Of Marque: The Constitutional Law And Practice Of Privateering, By Assistant U.S. Attorney Theodore Cooperstein

Filed under: Legal News,Letter Of Marque,Publications — Tags: constitutional law, Legal News, Letter Of Marque, private military companies, privateering, Publications, security contracting, Theodore Cooperstein, war — Matt @ 11:42 PM

So this is interesting. Here is a guy that works for the US Attorneys Office, who is former special forces and a reserve Army Intel guy, that writes this fantastic paper on the subject of Letters of Marque and Reprisal. Does anyone else find that to be cool, or am I the only constitutional law geek that likes this stuff? lol

The thing about it folks, is that I like the LoM, and I think it is just one more tool that can be used in this long and costly war. It gives congress a means to connect with private industry in a way that will be cost effective, and certainly effective if done properly. The one caveat though, is that congress needs to understand the mechanisms at play with this concept, and they must have the tools on how to properly construct a LoM. It would take some modern day modifications to get it just right, but it is certainly not impossible, and all the pieces are there to put it together.

Which leads me to my next point. By far, Feral Jundi is the place with the most comprehensive collection and commentary about the subject of the Letter of Marque and Reprisal. I know, I search this stuff relentlessly, and have collected it all. I invite the readership to explore all of this good stuff, and ‘build a snowmobile’ out of it. Hell, write congress and let them know about the LoM and your thoughts about it. Remind them about Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution and let’s get the word out. –Matt

—————————————————————–

Letters of Marque and Reprisal: The Constitutional Law and Practice of Privateering

Theodore M. Cooperstein, U.S. Attorneys Office (SDFL)

Abstract

The United States Constitution grants to the Congress the power, among others, to issue “Letters of Marque and Reprisal.” Although the practice seems to have fallen into disuse in this century, it was an important tool of national power for the federal government created by the Framers, who placed great import on the federal government’s role in protecting international commerce and in enforcing international law.

Privateering played a significant role before and during the Revolutionary War, and it persisted in American history as an economical way to augment naval forces against an enemy in wartime. A significant outgrowth of the practice of privateering was the body of law resulting from prize court adjudications. United States courts, in deciding title to ships and goods taken prize, determined issues both of domestic and customary international law. In this manner the federal courts significantly shaped the role of international law in the United States jurisprudence as well as assured the role of the United States in the ongoing development of customary international law. Case law concerning prizes and privateering is accordingly a useful vehicle to examine the interplay of U.S. constitutional law and customary international law as they both developed through the Nineteenth Century.

Changes in the methods of warfare during the Twentieth Century diminished the role of privateering. But the Congressional authority to issue Letters of Marque and Reprisal remains. As a means to commission private actors to augment national forces in international crises, the Letter of Marque and Reprisal could yet have modern applications. It remains for innovative executive and legislative experiment to revive the ancient practice in a form befitting modern international problems.

Suggested Citation

Theodore M. Cooperstein, “Letters of Marque and Reprisal: The Constitutional Law and Practice of Privateering,” 40 J. Maritime L. & Comm. 221 (Apr. 2009)