Congrats to TC, but I have to say that I am not too interested in promoting their job for this. For the simple reason that the pay is too low and the leave schedule sucks. As it stands now, you have to work 344 days in order to get the bonus. That’s if the contract is still in place after a year. Who knows what will happen in Afghanistan a year out?
The other thing is burn out. Work is nice, but if you are working 12 hour days for 344 days out of the year, then that is a horrible schedule. For that reason, I think TC is going to have a tough time keeping this thing staffed. What I could see happening with this is that guys use this contract as a ‘stepping stone’ contract in order to get into a better paying/better leave schedule job. Especially for those guys that have families.
In my opinion, I think this is a poorly constructed contract if these are the terms. The industry standard (in my opinion) for pay in a war zone like Afghanistan or Iraq should be more in the neighborhood $400 to $600 a day for static, to reflect the various management positions and seniority of contractors within the company. I should also note that such contracts like WPS is an excellent model for an ‘industry standard’ for pay. That is what this contract should have been modeled after, and DoS’s WPS program get’s it right in that department.
The industry standard for leave should be more around 2 to 3 months on, and about 1 month off. That is a great leave schedule, and the contract should allow some flexibility within that leave schedule to allow for emergencies and contractor personal choice. Requiring a contractor to work 344 days in a war zone is a recipe for disaster. Guys will burn out and their families will hate them for being away that long. I doubt that you will even see guys complete the contract to get the bonus, just because they will jump on the first gig that comes up with better pay and a better leave schedule. I know that is what I would do.
Even the hours worked is dumb. In my personal opinion, an 8 hour shift, working 6 days a week with one day ‘off’, is far better than a 12 hour shift 6 days a week. (especially if you are wearing kit all day long and working 344 days a year) I will also say that if this contract does lose guys because they burn out, that those left on the contract will be working a lot of hours without any days off. Just ask the AGNA guys what that is like when contractors bail ship because the company sucks or there are better gigs elsewhere. The guys that are left are the ones having to make up for a lack of manpower.
It is also a threat to the security readiness of a base, and could lead to a default on contract if there is a high attrition rate. Staffing a contract is serious business, and if folks are jumping ship because it sucks, then that has all sorts of consequence. Now imagine low staffing and low morale throughout a guard force because of being over worked, mixed with a high enemy threat or even enemy attacks? We are not talking about security at some mall in Sandusky Ohio, we are talking about the protection of FOB’s filled with military and civilians in an active war zone, all depending upon that contracted guard force and it’s abilities.
In other words, this contract will have issues. That’s too bad, because I thought the Marines would have been smarter about this, and especially when they had more choice in the formation of this ‘best value’ contract. They should have asked this community what an appropriate contract would look like, and it just seems to me like they created another TWISS-like contract. Too bad…
The other thing I was curious about is if Triple Canopy gets paid for every guy they train? Meaning when they train a contractor for this gig, they bill the government all the relevant costs. Why this matters is if the contract sucks and is set up to be a revolving door contract for guys, then TC will have to train up more contractors to keep it staffed. So what is TC’s incentive for training these guys and keeping them on the contract in Afghanistan? If anything, they benefit from a contract where contractors ‘don’t’ stick around so they can keep charging the government for training.
Which brings up another crucial point. When you set up a revolving door contract like this, then you lose something that is absolutely vital to organizations and security in war zones. Unit cohesion. Imagine being on a contract where no one sticks around? Where a new contractor shows up every week, or the management jumps ship every other week? Talk about instability. lol So basically you will have a contract where folks are constantly adjusting to new people, and all along you will have the security of a FOB to focus on. How can you trust the guy to the left and right of you, if A. you don’t know who they are and B.you don’t know if they will be there from week to week.
Unit cohesion is so hard to create in a company anyways, but if the contract itself does not lend itself towards making contractors happy and keeping them on the gig, then you can kiss any kind of unit cohesion good bye. And actually, that will be a cause of internal problems. I dare any military unit to try the same thing in a war zone, and see what the end result becomes. And this is what you want protecting these bases?
I sometimes wonder if the military should be setting up these contracts in the first place. How is it that the federal government understands how to set up these things (like WPS), but the military does not? Could it be that the military purposely constructs poor contracts because contractors are the competition? What incentive do the Marines have in constructing a contract where a company that comes in to replace their Marine force, does a better job than that Marine force– because the contract lends itself to success? Why would they want that company to be successful, and ‘show them up’? Food for thought when it comes to the public versus private discussion about this industry, and when it comes to the principal-agent problem.
Finally, it is very simple to understand the game here. You find the industry standard within that war zone, and you stick to that standard. If you want to lose people and could care less about the quality of the contract/services, then by all means set up your contract below that industry standard. Go cheap, pay peanuts, and get your monkey’s.
On the other hand, if you want to attract the best of the best within an industry, then you need to offer incentives that are ‘better’ than the industry standard. And if you want a best value contract that has some degree of stability, then match what the industry standard is, choose a good reputable company, and manage it well. That is my thoughts on the matter. –Matt
Triple Canopy Awarded $159.9m for Afghanistan Security Services
By DOD
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Triple Canopy, Reston, Va., was awarded a $159,972,048 firm-fixed-price contract. The award will provide for the security services in Afghanistan. Work will be performed in Afghanistan, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 26, 2017. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with eight bids received. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting activity (W560MY-12-C-0002).
Link to news here.
—————————————————————
From thread at SOCNET Forum
@camp leatherneck
$200 daily
6-12 hr days a week with the possibility for more hours
(1) 21 day leave period
12k bonus for contract completion
2 week train up on TC site followed by deployment @camp lejune
—————————————————————
From Triple Canopy’s Career section–Afghan Guard, Afghanistan
Position Responsibilities
-Act as armed security officer
-Responsible for internal security shift
-Perform unarmed screener duties by searching visitors, their vehicles and their belongings. Screeners will be proficient utilizing hand-held metal detectors, walk-through metal detectors and High throughput personnel inspection systems.
-Possess the capacity to acquire a good working knowledge of all aspects of contract security
-Must satisfactorily complete all Government required (and supplied) training and certifications prior to employment
Essential Skills and Experience
-US Citizen
-Must have a valid US Driver’s License and US Tourist Passport
-Honorable discharge from the military (if applicable)
-Able and willing to DEPLOY for one (1) year with one (1) 21-day R&R rotation
-Posses or be able to obtain a DOD Secret Level Clearance.
-Be at least 25 years of age
-Posses one (1) year of Military/ Police experience to include the use of personnel and vehicle security screening devices.
-Preferred security experience in the Middle East region.
-Possess a certificate of successful completion of a basic or advanced security guard training and certification program administered or recognized by the Government or professional organizations
-Must have no felony or domestic violence conviction. Record of recent recurring misdemeanors may adversely impact candidate’s suitability rating
-Employment with Triple Canopy is contingent upon a favorable background check to Include no serious financial problems in the past seven (7) years
Physical Demands and Work Environment
Able to perform internal security guard services, at any potential internal security posting, for 12 hours, while donning all required personal protective gear.
These low-paying jobs attract candidates who need work immediately, and therefore can't be too choosy about the position they take. It quickly becomes a management nightmare because the best performers will leave for higher-paying jobs, and you're only left with the people who can't qualify for better opportunities. I don't know much about TC but it seems like the stress caused by this job and the constant turnover wouldn't be worth the money, especially for Afghanistan.
Comment by James V — Wednesday, February 15, 2012 @ 12:21 PM
Conditions on the ground are pretty sketchy. I have found that the management team is based on former TC team members, WPS club members, and a couple of token E-8s that should know more than they do. There is the usual immaturity, especially from the junior former NCOs that now think they are princes in their own little fiefdoms.
There are a several management and admin pros on the contract, but they have not been tapped to assist. Senior management is groping around blind from lack of experience in corporate contracting. In particular, one individual is completely out of their element, with no knowledge of how to run an operations dept. As I noted, Part of it is a who you know issue, and the other part is the fear to make changes.
For a first timer, this is a bad introduction, but it does open doors.
Other notes: They trained us at the Tier1Group facility. We did not get T1G instruction, just weapons familiarization and quals. 8 hours plus 1 front and back equals a ten hour day, 7 days a week. Yes turnover is already an issue. 15 gone in a three weeks, with several more having turned in notices of varying lengths. No the contract will not fail. The contracting pipeline is flat right now, and a constant stream of new recruits will fill in the slots as more experienced people leave as James V stated.
Spuds Mackenzie
Comment by Spuds Mackenzie — Friday, April 20, 2012 @ 10:15 PM
@Spuds Mackenzie Thanks for the update. That sucks that this thing is turning into that. Sometime I think contracts are purposely set up like this, just so they do fail or do poorly. After all, why would the military want private industry to ‘show them up’? lol Of course they will set it up for failure, despite alllll of the info out there that can help them to properly construct a good contract.
Comment by feraljundi — Friday, April 20, 2012 @ 11:36 PM
Those are horrible conditions. But it's a great start for those trying to get into the business. I've already sent a couple buddies the link.
Comment by Jason A — Wednesday, February 15, 2012 @ 1:14 PM
Contract is doomed to fail, there will be very few Americans working this contract. Within 6 months it will be staffed by Ug’s or Peruvians.
Comment by Dave — Wednesday, February 15, 2012 @ 11:41 PM
That won't happen. The contract specifies FVEY so only nationals of the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zeland, or Canada may be hired on this contract. They very well may have problems but they won't be allowed to solve them by deviating from the contract.
Comment by Ron — Friday, March 9, 2012 @ 10:03 PM
Every point you made Matt is spot on. TC sucked running their Baghdad WPS program. Guys are bailing from that F%c* up gig left & right now. No American is going to AF to work for $16.00 an hour in those conditions. And the two week vetting/training before deploying will be a pencil-whip job of smoke & mirrors at best and nothing I'd want on my resume.
Comment by Rico — Thursday, February 16, 2012 @ 6:26 AM
I'm taking it…and still looking. Gotta pay the bills!
Comment by Deuce — Thursday, February 16, 2012 @ 12:58 PM
Hey, work is work and I don't knock that. But it is also important for folks that take this job to know what they are stepping into.
Comment by Feral Jundi — Thursday, February 16, 2012 @ 1:47 PM
Sounds like another Page Protevtive Securrity fiasco. I just got out of a VERY similiar situation with Page Group out of England and hope and pray I NEVER get back into something like that again. Pay sucked, quality of personell sucked, and turn over was terrible. As stated, all the good people were there till they could find something else and those left were iether stuck trying to get out of financial issues or could do not do any better. I feel sorry for anybody that goes into this with their eyes oipen KNOWING what they are in for, but even more sorry for those that do not know or understand.
Comment by dogrunner — Monday, February 20, 2012 @ 4:01 PM
I am transitioning from the military very soon, believe me I understand paying bills, but for that kind of money I would sooner stay state side and work. TC contacted me for that gig while they were still bidding. I said sure for twice that amount.
Comment by Thane — Monday, February 20, 2012 @ 4:53 PM
I just retired and it will be my first gig as I transition from the military to the contracting world. The people I've talked to in the business have said repeatedly how important it is to get that FIRST job. For me it's a stepping stone. There will be other opportunties and this job will help me get there.
Comment by Ron — Tuesday, February 21, 2012 @ 5:00 PM
Definitely do what you have to do Ron and good luck.
Comment by Feral Jundi — Wednesday, February 22, 2012 @ 11:51 PM
Thanks! I'm in training now. Seems like a good group. Can only hope for the best and wait and see.
Comment by Ron — Friday, March 9, 2012 @ 9:13 PM
how's training ron? i hear they are training at T1G – good outfit from what i hear. let me know the contract goes so i can make my mind up.
Comment by alex — Tuesday, March 20, 2012 @ 7:45 PM
Pretty much key on discussion of this job. DONT TAKE THIS JOB!!! I’ve been on this “joke of a job” with TC for a few months now and … lets just say i will be surprised if the contract in still up after jan 2013. Army is coming to take over camp leatherneck very soon and the contract is up for rebid. Aademi just outbid us for the same work at other FOBS around afghan… they are going against us for leatherneck too when the army takes over. On top of this stupud job, its not a stepping stone, its taking a leap backwards. First off, if you shoot someone….even if you are in the right (defending the base)…. you will be sent HOME WITHOUT PAY, IMMEDIATELY… we have recieved confirmed word on this after a incident. TC said they will send you back home without pay until they can put you somewhere else in the company on a different contract. Secondly, when you take leave…..YOUR TRAVEL DAYS are also counted AS LEAVE DAYS!!!… Yes thats right. Its a fact. And on top of that YOU PAY FOR YOUR OWN TICKETS HOME. We have people leaving here on a constant basis. Whether it will be someone finding a job elswhere or people returning to state side bc this job doesnt pay much. With taxes taken out i get 2100 very two weeks… not bad pay… but shitty for deployment pay. I was making wayyy more when i was in the military deployed to this very same base last year. Training is sorta a joke also. day 2 we jumped right into qualification with M9 and M4 (in country you will be using M16, just to clear that up) and after qual we did lots of powerpoints. training was easy as pie…. nothing high speed so if you think you are ghoing over to be a some merc than looks towards another job. You will be a security guard like the Ugondans in Iraq. Same unform too.
Comment by joe smoe — Saturday, July 14, 2012 @ 2:08 AM
I work in this contract since it’s stand up in March 2012. Within 3 months over 70 personal had quit. We were placed on post with no weapons and no arming authority during our “left seat-right seat” orientation of posts. It took us 30 days to get arming authority. Personnel who processed through Adderbury had been billed extra for services that TC should have taken care of. We found out that the guard towers were alone safety hazards and constructed differently. We (who work midnight shift) work 12 hours and don’t have scheduled days off. Since March 2012, I only had 4 days off. Come to think of it, I have worked 60 days with no day off at all. We had to hand in our passports to get our visas updated. TC management at Leatherneck said that the Kabul office is a little behind with administrative duties. Our passports has been held for the past 3 weeks already. Our shift lead stated,”If you want your passports back, you will have to resign as per Kelly Grundl (Project Manager).” We have a guy (Ron) here who no longer works for TC that is stuck here and not getting paid because management on Leatherneck did not return his passport yet.
Originally we were to be quartered in 2 and 4 man rooms. We have 6 per room right now. Management is trying to push 8 per room. We had a hostile shooter in the work place situation. The hostile shooter (****) already had past company issues and had gone hostile towards roommates when he could not move to a 2 man room and had to live in a room with 6 people. When called out on his belligerent behavior he had attempted to draw his pistol on a fellow room mate and co worker. PMO told TC to remove him from Leatherneck or they will do it. TC management got him out of Leatherneck but all of us on the ground speculate that he did not get fired but moved to another site due to his political friends. In addition to that we have an individual (let’s say his name is Bob) who files false reports to get back at other guards in order to get them in trouble.
Let’s talk about the attack on the Bastion side of Leatherneck. Approximately 20 hours prior to the attack, TC personal on duty called in 5 persons with a donkey cart wearing military uniforms traveling along MSA side towards the airfield on Bastion around 0430. TC management brushed it off as “scrappers stealing something.” The attackers on Bastion Airfield wore a mix of ACU’s, ANA and marine uniforms. Restrictions on MWR activities such as the gym have been placed on Triple Canopy personnel. We have SOGs that are plotting against each other. Management ask guards to spy on other members of management.
When ever we have a new class, management decides to add more posts in lieu of replenishment of loss. This adds to our issue of zero days off. All shifts has their share of time bombs ready to explode in this hostile work environment.
Comment by Nightshift — Thursday, September 27, 2012 @ 4:17 AM
@Nightshift Thanks for the input and I am truly sorry that the contract is not going well. Hopefully others will read this as a fair warning.
Comment by feraljundi — Thursday, September 27, 2012 @ 9:27 AM
Hey gang, if you cannot be civil on this thread, then you do not get the right to voice an opinion.
This is my house and my rules, and I will not tolerate individuals insulting other individuals on this thread. You can still communicate your point here, but do it professionally and with tact.
Comment by feraljundi — Sunday, September 30, 2012 @ 10:17 PM
@feraljundi My apologies. Let me try that again without sounding like a dick.
I’ve been here on this contract since day one, and on night shift as well. I’ve seen and heard it all. This place has it’s problems, rumors, and people who complain about everything just like every job. This is not a comfortable job. This, however, is a super easy job and occasionally quite pleasent. Standing up this contract was hard on every one of us, but things have been slowly getting better. Alot of people did quit. Not a bad thing though. Made room for the guys that wanted to be here. I’d rather have a job than not. It’s not a bad way to get you foot in the door as well. Remember, if it’s too hard or too much to handle, quitting is always an option.
Comment by FoxFire — Monday, October 1, 2012 @ 2:18 AM
Thanks for the input FoxFire. Everyone has their reasons for staying on a contract, and everyone has their reasons for leaving. Especially if it is a poor contract, and I have worked with tons of guys like you that either had a family to feed or had house payments to make or whatever, and were willing to suffer through the contract in order to keep the money flowing. But this is also what falsely leads companies to believe that there are no problems with a contract. They know that a certain percentage of folks like yourself will stay, just because you are either a conformist or have no choice but to stay because of a lack of a background or qualifications, or a lack of other available jobs.
In a situation like this, you will have those that stick around who grunt through it, but are bitter and do not want to be there. Or they stick around long enough to where they get seniority and can place themselves in the best deal and shifts possible, yet could care less about being part of the solution there because they have no love of the company and contract.
Meanwhile, those who do not care to reward a poor company and contract with their services, move on to greener meadows. I personally think this is the better option, just because life is too short and your value as a contractor is too high, to be treated poorly by companies and management that could care less. Leave, and run to those companies who get it and actually take care of their people.
Personally, I think Triple Canopy should thank their lucky stars that there are contractors on the ground willing to step forward with these issues so that the company can make adjustments. But doom on the company if it chooses not to do anything with this feedback, or it ignores it because of ego or whatever reason. I also have more respect for those that actually tried to be part of the solution, and not be part of the problem. That actually said something about problems on the contract, so they could be addressed and fixed. These are the leaders of an organization, and they are the contractors that care–which is what you want and need on these contracts. You also need management that understands the value of this feedback, and actively makes changes because of it.As for the followers or guys that did not say anything, my only advice is that you should take the time to thank those within your contract who actually tried to make things better. Who actually had the courage to do things right and make a better contract. Because if things have changed for the better, it’s because of these folks and not because of your silence or indifference.
Question authority, dare to disagree, and continuously improve–because it shows you actually care…. Don’t be a conformist–or a lemming following the rest of the lemmings off of the cliff.
Comment by feraljundi — Monday, October 1, 2012 @ 11:52 AM
@feraljundi I would assume that by not agreeing with nearly everyone on this feed, and all the whiners here on this contract, qualifies me as not a lemming. A conformist lets others think for them. I think for myself sir. There are alot of things I don’t like about this contract. Because of this I’ve asked questions and talked to people (the right people not smoke pit lawyers) to find out why it is the way it is, and gave alot of thought on each matter on how to make it better. I then brought my thoughts to the right people so they could pass it up. Wether or not anything changed is inconsequencial. I’m doing my part to attemt to make things better. I don’t like the people that sit in their tower, rooms, and smokepits complaining about evrything and everybody but never makeing an attempt to make things better for themselves, or others. They do nothing but create a moral problem and make a bad situation worse.
Unfortunatly, most of the problems with this contract (pay, leave, gym hrs, housing, ect) come directly from the client, the marine corps, and the temp PM was a no spine yes- man (yes-woman). Not much we on the ground could do about that. The new PM is alread changing all that crap and unf^#%ing what got f^#%ed up.
We’ve all put up with alot of crap. It’s true that because I don’t have a spec ops background, only combat arms, I can’t get nearly any of the good contracts out in the past year and that I took this job because I had no other options. I knew this was a crap contract when I took it. But, a guy has to work. I’d say 80% of the guys here are in the same boat as me. I knew exactly what I was getting into when I signed my contract. I wanted and I asked for this. This was my choice and I’m not going to B!#&h and moan just because I think I’m better than this. I’m not, and nether is anybody else here. If they were they would have left for greener pastures already. I’m here to make some money, build my resume, and move on to the next job. But while I’m here, maybe I can make things better for myself and everybody else.
Comment by FoxFire — Monday, October 1, 2012 @ 9:28 PM
@FoxFire Hey man, do whatever you think you have to do. It sounds like you are trying to make things better and be part of the solution–which is great. You should be working with the others on the contract who are doing the same, and maybe you might start calling them comrades as opposed to whiners or whatever other names you have for them? Personally, I have nothing to do with this contract and I have no first hand account of it, or the people working there. All I am going on is what is said here in the comments and on the way this contract is structured. To me, these comments are feedback gold to the management and to those who are thinking about signing this contract. I sincerely hope the contract works out for the better and you guys get the type of management and treatment you deserve. You are protecting lives with your lives, and that has the ultimate price and value. Especially if you lose your life in the defense of others…. All of you are putting a lot on the line, and you deserve better. Also, I know the management at TC is reading this, as well as hundreds of folks since it’s original posting. Maybe even several thousand.
Comment by feraljundi — Monday, October 1, 2012 @ 11:53 PM
Do not give up your US passport if your company (TC with us) says it will put in the new Visas. I remember with SOC they had taken a number of us on a bus to get our new visa done. Note SOC management did not take our passports. They had had taken us to where we needed to go. 186 Triple Canopy personnel in Leatherneck are still waiting for their passport to be returned. It’s been a month already. Some of these guys are waiting to go on leave, some had quit (been stuck here for 2 weeks at least), and one needs to go on emergency leave. Warning to my fellow brethren here.
Comment by Nightshift — Sunday, September 30, 2012 @ 10:57 PM
I worked this contract, like so many others 86 to be exact I quit. I too due to Passport issues, was held over for weeks. Strangely enough Management claimed the collection of our Passports had to do with Visa s‘and what was supposed to be a 48hr turn around became 30 days in the end still no visa’s . An E-mail was intercepted discussing how Management dropped off our passports at the Afghanistan / Pakistan Border police station. It took 30 days to recover all 86 passports. I wonder how Homeland security would view this. Stay away from this contract.
Comment by Worker 123 — Tuesday, December 4, 2012 @ 4:23 AM
[…] peanuts, you will get monkeys’. I have seen multiple complaints from contractors on how the Camp Leatherneck or Camp Dwyer contracts have materialized. If these contracts are poorly structured, poorly […]
Pingback by Industry Talk: FBO–RFI For 500-600 Armed Guards For Kandahar Airfield « Feral Jundi — Saturday, October 18, 2014 @ 10:19 AM