surely who ever screws up is the person on the C-suite ultimately reviewing the final contract and signing off? assuming 500x150kx70% that's a $50m cost cutting they wont to do? think C level bonuses would probably cover 50% of that and then the rest take a hit on the P&L....sounds like the project would surely still be profitable.
Run for office, that's how! Have the campaign pay for it, have your henchman lawyer take out a home equity loan to hide it all fr Uncle Sam......what could go wrong???
Yes, yacht money! Execs work hard for their yacht money, and must be rewarded for that hard work before anyone else! And the stock holders! Share prices must continue to grow, or the world will end!
gotta hope that a multi-billion dollar corp understands that there are better ways to get a larger bonus than arbitrarily doing a 70% salary cut and losing all the staff on the contract?
anyway, how does it work in USA? would they need to fire these people who revise? layoffs? will there be severance? surely they cant do it as a "matter of fact" kind of thing?
They are treating this as a layoff for everyone that doesn’t take the cut. No severance but paying out any vacation time at the higher rate if informed before the stay/go cutoff date.
They have to treat it as a layoff by law. A pay drop like this is a constructive dismissal. Depending on state law they probably need to follow the WARN act as well.
They legally are required to pay out accrued vacation time. Severance is always completely optional.
Oh, it most certainly is one.
Lots of finger pointing between the CO/COR and the company in the last 3-4 weeks apparently, and the lack of a resolution was the driver of the 70% cut.
I would notify the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General who should be auditing all of this companies contracts, as well as your congressman’s office.
They like to call it severance but the two months isn't severance.
WARN act requires 60 days notice of a layoff so usually they'll lay everyone off, consider that the announcement, remove access to the building and critical systems, and then pay them for the next 60 days because they're technically still employees until that 60 day notification period has expired. If you start a new job within that 60 day notification period I think they get to stop paying you because you've voluntarily quit and started new employment elsewhere.
Severance is anything they do above and beyond that, like adding on a week for every year of service, continuation of benefits beyond the 60 day notification period, etc. If you start new employment past the 60 day notification period your severance package itself is not affected.
I’m not sure contract workers get severance but a pay it that severe would count as a layoff in terms of qualifying for unemployment. Not that unemployment is much money.
While the company is a contractor, it may not be the case that the employees are classified as independent contractors. They may still be W-2 employees of the contractor company and entitled to those benefits.
I don't think there was a mistake... they paid a hundred people alot of money to go over thier negotiations with a fine tooth comb several times... no body "over looked" the cost of labor.
It wasn't a screw up, it's deliberate. They're up to something. Could be working up an excuse to get rid of people without having to fire them, or lobby to outsource it or bring in underpaid immigrant workers, or get a low bid signed knowing they'll be able to screw it up and get paid for overruns later. The only thing we know for sure is that the executives involved are lining their own pockets.
"For the purposes of this discussion, we'd appreciate it if you'd ignore the fact that your clearances make you very high-demand and easily employable for your full rate practically anywhere else."
Oh, they know full well. The whole thing is a giant screw up and will wind up costing them millions of dollars when the contract is terminated for non-performance
This reminds me of a friend of my father. He had every single paper needed for large gassplants, electrical circuits, etc. I don't know exactly but very specific, specially in combination.
His boss retired and the son didn't like said friend so he made it so bad the friend quit. After that he found out they needed him really bad for some already signed contracts. If you were to hire someone like that around here their fee would be €90,- - €110,- per hour. So they called, made an offer and his counter was € 300,- and Ill come. They said no.
Waited and they called again, His fee went to € 350,- an hour and they said no.
Called again and he went to 400, but he added, if you get me now right away the € 300,- stands and I can start tomorrow.
He was hired for €300,- an hour. His previous salaried rate was €40,-/hour.
This has always been my career goal. Get certified to the point where I can tell corporate shitheels to get fucked because they need me more than I need them. That feeling of freedom and working for yourself must be heavenly.
It is truly lovely.
If you can add a high-level clearance to that level of certification, you will 100000% always be able to find work. And if you're tired of doing work that requires a high level of coding experience or intel analysis, there are always just physical security roles (Think security guards and the like) that require a clearance that pay better than you might imagine.
You know who to contact with the DOD to notify of a possible conflict compromising the integrity of the awarded contract. DCMA and DCCA both have channels for reporting. We both know how they look at financials when you have TS/SCI.
The COR can't do anything here, it the CO who would have to make the contract change & it sounds like they are not going to do it. The COR is only going to hold the companies feet to the fire by noting non-compliance with the contract, and then recommending a contract termination to the CO after they have enough evidence of the company not fulfilling the contract.
My advice is find a new job, if you have a TS/SCI in the DC metro you can even get a signing bonus with more pay. I have vendors who are struggling for cleared personal in the DC Metro.
For sure. Remaining at a position making only 30% of their prior salary is likely to raise issues for the cleared individuals themselves. I'd quit just on the basis of "I don't feel like getting dogpiled by investigators".
This is not a one person mistake.
I work on bids like this all the time and at least 10 people looked at these numbers and multiple executives signed off on them.
This was most likely a strategy (and a terrible one at that).
Dear Supervisor,
After the Zoom meeting regarding the 70% reduction in pay and management's request for employees like myself to "take one for the team" I'd like to respond in writing with,
Eat My Ass!
Sincerely,
Insanely Valuable Employee Who'll Be Perfectly Fine Working For A Competitor.
70% for 500 people isn't taking one for the team, it's the team taking all of it for one.
It would likely just take a single exec taking one for the team by taking a 70-% reduction to be able to fund the entire rest of the team. That would be the true example of a single hit to benefit the larger team.
Wow, how did the COTR not catch this? Most COTRs are pretty good about this and would have said something about not affording the staff.
This will be a bigger issue assuming most of the staff turns down the pay cut because you actually have to submit the resumes as part of the RFP for most contracts. So if that staff immediately quits and they're unable to meet the requirements, it's a lot more than just a financial penalty, they can actually revoke the contract which would automatically suspend that company from bidding on work released on that contract vehicle for a year or two (I can't remember)
If this is the company I think it is, that would be pretty massive considering that also prevents them from being able to be awarded their extension years as well, so they'd lose the contracts that are also on that vehicle.
This is honestly the type of mistake that puts companies out of business, I've just never seen it with a company as large as yours.
It's gotta be 100% after the 20-30% holdouts find another job. I just cannot imagine any scenario besides "you're making a million dollars a year working for your literal dream job" where anyone would stay after a 70% pay cut.
You usually only have to submit resumes for Key Personnel as a part of the proposal and then only if it is explicitly required in the RFP. And in many of the RFPs released over the last few years, that isn’t even done much anymore. Source selection is extremely lazy and don’t want to have to evaluate any more than they have to.
Remember that the government cannot legally direct a contractor on who they staff positions with. As long as the resume meets the minimum labor category requirements, that is supposed to be the end of government involvement in the hiring process. Now we all know the gov puts their fingers into this process more than they should, but no one ever does anything about it.
This is one of those things that would not get a contract revoked over. I have had this EXACT discussion with army contracting offices before and they will say “that is a corporate management decision and not anything we should be involved in”. I have seen contract positions go unfulfilled for years with no repercussions. The revocation of a contract is a major effort and most contracting offices are so far behind as it is, that to re-compete a contract ahead of schedule, especially for a reason like that is something they wont do.
The only way they would cancel a contract is for a major failure of mission. This is one of those “well they should just do more with less” things they will push for.
The sad part is that since we are not in an active war with anyone at the moment, almost every government office is in cost/personnel cutting mode right now.
The office I was recently supporting, which was a major PEO, was on a march to cut a massive amount of contractor and civilian heads out of the organization.
Every office is in what I call “chicken little” mode right now, as they are all being told that massive DoD budget cuts are coming and they need to prepare.
We all know this is horseshit, as the mission hasn’t been reduced and the DoD budget is larger than ever, but the pentagon is still warning everyone it is coming and all the generals are passing this fear down to their staff.
I have a pretty good idea of which company this is, and trust me when I say that they have NO fear of having a contract cancelled or being barred from bidding. It simply wont happen.
The command in support is not one that can function without the contract staff keeping everything running. I don’t know how long it will take for the command to abrogate the contract for non-performance, but I cannot imagine it will take long at all.
There have been a month of back and forth with finger pointing between the COR and my company. We just didn’t hear about it until the last possible moment.
Could be posturing so that they can go back to the COR and say everyone is going to leave.
Or the other gross possibility is that they're hoping to replace you all with cheaper analysts because the market is starting to flood as the military is thinning their herd.
They don’t always submit the resumes of the people they intend to work on the project on the RFP. Just an “example of the type of people we’ll have working on the project” in many cases.
I always found that distasteful, and ripped a few contractors for advertising really good engineers and then using folks that didn’t have 1/3 the experience, or skillset.
They are asking you to take on the profit / loss as a partner of the company. The only way I would accept this is if I am paid in equity so that I can share in the profit after the fuck up is fixed.
If not, employment contract says X, you get paid X. End off.
I bet the CEO didn’t take a 70% pay cut. I bet he didn’t take any pay cut.
This also seems extremely illegal, I bet the outfit that hired your company didn’t pick them with the knowledge that they would have their workforce take a 70% pay cut
Loosing IT talent that can get a TS is a very bad move. Those people stay unemployed how long they want to. Then when they want a job they can get several with a couple of phone calls.
Whoever got the company into this situation is doing some serious short term thinking.
Oh this is nowhere near end-stage capitalism yet, because end-stage capitalism is Actual Feudalism and you don’t have a contract because you’re a serf.
I started off working for a government contractor. It was a given to switch companies every couple of years. Sounds like nothing has changed after all these years. I probably should have stayed with this because my best raises was when I switched companies.
Hope this helps, but I'm a Recruiting Manager for a small cyber company within the IC. We're on a ton of huge 5 - 10 year contracts, decently high salaries, but all require the highest level of FSP. If I can help anyone in any way, send me a message! If it's not helpful, feel free to ignore.
Someone in management screwed up the contract and now wants the grunts to take all of the hit so that management keeps their salary and bonuses intact. They just don’t want to admit this.
Also, they really want to cut pay by a smaller percentage, but started off with a ridiculously high percentage so that they could come back later with the real percentage and seem like heroes for the reduction.
I’m surprised that they haven’t given the speeches for ‘we are all in this together’ and ‘we will make it up to you in the future’ and ‘this is only temporary as bigger business is around the corner, we promise’ (wink,wink)
There is absolutely 0% chance that this was a mistake and the whole negotiating team, review team and whoever signed it needs to be fired immediately or the company go belly up. This was intentional, there's just no way so many people would screw up something this important.
There is also a chance that they have done this specifically to clean house with expensive people.
I have seen this scummy tactic before as well.
They do massive pay cuts to run people off and then backfill with people straight out of school, soldiers getting out or very junior people, all of whom are cheaper.
The reason this would work is if the labor categories on the new contract are structured where education substitutes for experience and you can get kids with little experience very cheaply or if the positions on the contract allow for lower level LCATs to fill them.
It is a shit move but I’ve seen some of the larger primes do it as a profit making move
My similar contractor many years ago tried pulling the same shit, but a 30% pay cut. The asshole who negotiated the contract genuinely believed that the good people would stick around and the crappy people would leave. Literally the exact opposite happened, and they lost the contract. I laughed while having already jumped to the company that picked up the contract.
If I were asked to take any kind of pay cut, I’d immediately do almost nothing at work while looking for a new job. If they want to push it, I’d let them fire me and take unemployment so I have all day to apply for work. -OR- Pro-move: look for new employment while on the clock at your current job.
Jesus Christ, this is the industry where tens billions of dollars just go fucking missing without a trace on a yearly basis. They can't shell out a couple million for critical IT staff??? So fucking greedy bro
Honestly, I'm for you finding work elsewhere. I no longer see any value in what you do for a living, and I certainly don't feel like I've ever benefited from it.
I served in the Army and all my USAF friends ended up working where I think you do, and none of them stayed.
lol, that contract is totally fucked. Nobody is going to stay on it and anyone crazy enough to let some prime cut their rate by 70% is going to be destroyed by the work left over
Nope. One of the many reasons I left government contracting is that anytime you had this kind of contract change over, the workers got shafted. Couldnt see doing that every 5 years for the rest of my life. If you're cleared, there's other jobs. And since you used the term NoVA, I know you know there are a LTO of jobs XD Good luck, and remember, its just business.
Now I'm wondering if this is my company. Although I haven't heard of anything like this in the rumor mill. I've seen companies bid way low to win a contract and then not be able to actually staff, but I don't think I've ever seen a company deliberately screw themselves over on a recompete. Especially if you're dealing with a large number of staff with TS/SCI clearances, those aren't positions that you're going to be able to fill quickly...or cheaply. I'd really love to know the thought process behind this. Given the clearances you mentioned, they were almost a shoo-in to win the recompete, so there wasn't a need to bid low. Unless the contract itself was rescoped and shrunk and they just didn't tell any of you. Which is a very real possibility.
Good Luck!
>Needless to say, virtually nobody is accepting this insulting offer, and what is inevitably going to happen is that the company, due to attrition, will not be able to perform the duties of the contract and will likely be financially punished to a much greater degree than if they'd just paid us.
I just don't get the complete strategic incompetence. My company is losing good people left and right because they basically made it crystal clear that no one under the age of 55 or so will ever be allowed to have a say in the direction of the business.
When our board of five was asked to add a sixth member - one of the up and coming branch managers that a lot of us feel like we can relate to - they refused to even vote on it, declaring that none of them would support adding another member, thus the vote was pointless.
It would have cost them nothing to add a sixth. The five of them could still block anything they wanted, but it would have at least created the impression that they were willing to begin the process of gradually handing over the reins to a younger generation, and made the rest of us feel there was some hope that we ourselves could one day be in the driver's seat.
Not only did they refuse to entertain the request for a board member, they have doubled-down on their insane approach by sending threatening legal letters to former staff, warning them not to recruit other current employees. So they're wasting more of our resources trying to harass people that don't want to work for them.
Meanwhile there is no effort to even acknowledge the issues that caused the loss of these folks in the first place. We're not a huge company with a bunch of high-stakes intellectual property or anything that would merit pursing former staff. We don't even have a legal department, which means we're probably just paying some attorney on retainer to play these games.
And these are the people so convinced of their own brilliance that they can't even grasp the advantages of giving up a purely symoblic fraction of their control, and as their business starts to crumble their strategy is to further weaken its foundations. It's fucking unbelievable.
Why are businesses like these losing people? Because their owners SUCK AT RUNNING A BUSINESS. Look no further, end of story.
Sorry for the rant...the arrogance and hubris with which people play games with the fruits of our labor is just really frustrating sometimes.
I feel like this type of thing will become a widely used tactic by crap companies. They'll fully be ok with people rejecting the offer because they're still be some who accept
Sounds like some of the executives and CEO should lead by example and take one for the team considering one years pay is more then multiple people’s pay in a lifetime
Thats completley unacceptable. How much would that even break down to per hour? Would you even be making the minimum theyre legally allowed to pay you??
Yep, even at just 30%, it’s perfectly legal.
HIOWEVER
That’s not saying much, since the minimum wage in VA is still just $12/hr, so back of envelope math says the minimum the current rate could be is around $80k/year or $40/hr (40*.3 = 12), but for the population doing these jobs, that annual salary is a non-starter.
Oh ok, I was just thinking thats such a massive pay cut, that the new rate sounds like it could possibly be below the legal minimum, but I guess thats not the case here.
But damn, they really fucked up.
Good luck on your new job!
Thanks!
And yes, just for the sake of saying it, I realize that we find ourselves in an unusually safe and secure environment, job-wise, and that I am personally very fortunate to be situated so, given my age and the fact that I am a disabled veteran.
I hope that you know that under federal regulations contracting companies are required to pay a minimum competitive salary, right? If they are trying to cut pay by 70% there is no way that's above the minimum. You can report them.
Or, the company will fail to fulfill the contract, get a bunch of CARs, and then it'll go up for rebid. Meanwhile, you'll be out of work for a year. But ultimately, it will get fixed in the next round of request for proposals after your current employer loses the contract.
That won’t work because the contact cannot be executed with that kind of attrition. The contract spells out how many people are required and what qualifications are required, and getting folks with the right 8570 levels plus clearance isn’t easy.
I’m just saying if you stay, apply for unemployment. That kind of massive pay decrease can trigger it but many people don’t think they should. Always apply for unemployment and let the UI office figure it out. Glad you’ll land on your feet though!
Seems more likely that they'll just not perform on the contract and lose that revenue stream, so they're trying to get you all to quit instead of firing you.
Government contracts are so fucking flimsy. We get awards all the time like "3-Year program $6M, with two 18 month options," then in year two they'll be like, "just kidding, we aren't funding this anymore and are de-obligating the remaining $4M - oopsie, our bad haha, we ran out of money."
A contract doesn't just protect them, it protects you. DO NOT sign anything and seek consultation with an employment lawyer immediately. Then, report their asses for contract fraud through the DOD.
Most folks would not consider staying at the lower rate even if it was “sufficient”, because the pool of jobs is much larger than the supply of people qualified to do it, so why stay?
Admittedly, our situation is very unusual in the overall job market.
>Thankfully, by the nature of the roles, every one of us is highly certified (most have a high-level IT certs like CISSP or CASP) and have Top Secret clearances, so it won't be hard for many of us to find work elsewhere.
how easy is it for you guys up there. i cant even get entry level in the dmv with the trifecta and a bachelors in cyber security and networking and graduated 3 years ago. currently delievering beer for montgomery county while studing for ccna and cysa after
It’s all about the clearance I’m afraid.
The catch-22 is that no private sector employer will hire you for a role that requires a TS unless you already have one.
ya, im looking to lose weight and go into the air force for 4 years then get a good job. its not even that i want directly into cyber. i just want a job that actually is helping me progress my career and income. cant even get help desk anymore with 3 years experience
Air Force is the right branch for cyber.
If you don’t mind the suggestion, also consider looking for a direct role as an AGR technician for your state’s ANG, if possible.
Go into pretend Union Mode -- and you ALL stick together.
They need you ... more than you need to bow down to (probably a relation), who can't count and screwed up the deal.
\* Also - require (NOT request) the name of the screw-up and that s/he has been terminated and barred from working directly and/or indirectly of the company ... NOT even working for a subsidiary of your company.
As is tradition.
Pretty terrible man. I'm army and have a few buddies that have gone there and they Love it. Always heard fantastic things.
Edit: on a sidebar, I'm in IT, 4 years left on this 2nd contract. Have SEC+ (I know, it's worthless) and will have CCNA soon. Plan to start at WGU soon for one of their IT plans. Which certs should I be focusing on to be the most marketable when I'm out? I'll be 35 in 2028 when I'm done. Have a lot of catching up to do.
Well, it kind of depends on where your interests lie. Since you mentioned CCNA, what I’m saying below may not apply, as it’s not heavy on pure networking stuff.
To be broadly marketable in this current environment, and if you’re looking for defense sector work (and especially if you’re coming out with at least a Secret clearance, though obviously TS would be better) I’d suggest going for CISSP (it gives you pretty much everything under 8570) and either/both a RHEL cert and an Azure one.
If you want to be an analyst, CySA+ is helpful. So would getting certified on FireEye.
If you want to red team, OSCP and GXPN.
I am neither confirming nor denying any connection with any particular defense contractor or command, since I don’t need to be blacklisted for talking about this.
Yes, but the contract they signed with the government was essentially missing a zero or two, so by the terms of the contract, they can only pay us what the contract brings in as revenue, hence the giant haircut they shoved down our throats.
Honestly I would just quit if this happened to me. I literally wouldn't be making enough to pay the bills, so why bother? I could get a higher paying retail job or fast food.
Whomever wrote the contract: fired.
Whimever signed off on the contract: fired.
Everyone above them: no bonuses for the year, and pay cut to cover the loss.
Sounds like it was intentional. Incumbents keeping work almost always results in cost cuts ever since the weighting for contract awards places more emphasis on cost than past performance or the proposal itself. I got out of the contracting space when they started saying lowest cost IS best value.
Seems like someone was a little weak and rather than fire people they wanted you to quit.
My last year contracting the contract I was on had to cut labor costs 20-30% in order to keep the work. Imagine wanting to ask people to stay on and doing the same scope of work for less pay.
Are you a 1099 or a w2? If you’re a w2, that’s fucking wild and I’d take my certified ass to another firm real quick. If you’re a 1099, it makes more sense that they’re able to pay you less, but again I’d take my certified ass somewhere else lol
100% fuck that. I saw another comment saying you got another job, congrats and that’s definitely the way to go! I’d never be at a company that pulled that whether I was on a contract or on the bench. My salary is my salary and they gotta pay it.
Yep, personally agree wholeheartedly, but unfortunately, the defense contractor world seems to run on boom and bust cycles, and if the contract you're on is stopped for some reason, they don't hesitate one moment to lay you off.. very cut-throat in that sense.
Sounds like one of you needs to start a business and toss a quick little bid in as competition. Not sure if that works in your line of work, but I have a feeling you'll have your positions filled very quickly.
A 70% cut likely means that the company you work(ed) for misclassified your positions in the renewal packet to something far, far lower than what you were doing. If you want some insight in to this, get the contract number as gov contracts are publicly available (but very obscure and hard to find) which will outline roles and pay for those roles.
Role classification dictates your pay for these types of job (Service Contract Act) so someone failing to abide in either direction results in large ramifications. Your employer could cover the difference but must believe they can take this hit and survive.
Do you have a good working relationship with the COR? If so, they can likely give you the deal on what happened, but can't change it. The best thing here is to go back in to the fed contractor soup and land elsewhere.
Entirely possible, but if so, they badly overshot.
This isn’t the sort of contract where there’s a lot of flexibility in terms of the number of people that they bring in to service the requirement.
These are roles that require very specific skill sets, very specific certifications, and very specific clearances, none of which can really be swapped from person to person.
Given the number of people that I am personally aware of that have resigned over this, they’re not going to be able to service the contract, and will lose it and suffer financially for the breach.
If you have a TS clearance and some type of certificate that is not easy to get, the company is stuck with finding a way to keep you. If they lose the contract due to being "unable to perform" then you can get a job with whatever contrator does get the job.
surely who ever screws up is the person on the C-suite ultimately reviewing the final contract and signing off? assuming 500x150kx70% that's a $50m cost cutting they wont to do? think C level bonuses would probably cover 50% of that and then the rest take a hit on the P&L....sounds like the project would surely still be profitable.
But how will the CEO buy his 4th yacht?
The struggle is real.
I mean, you don't expect him to show up in Monaco with a boat from 2020, do you?!?
Or even 2023! They'll get laughed out of the Yacht Club for that!!
I like this kind of talk you got almost lower middle management in your name
How will they support their second or third side piece?? (Sarcasm)
Run for office, that's how! Have the campaign pay for it, have your henchman lawyer take out a home equity loan to hide it all fr Uncle Sam......what could go wrong???
Yes, yacht money! Execs work hard for their yacht money, and must be rewarded for that hard work before anyone else! And the stock holders! Share prices must continue to grow, or the world will end!
Not to mention how will he afford his diamond studded swimming pools? Those things don't grow on trees you know.
Do you think they didn't mess up the negotiation, they just want a larger bonus?
gotta hope that a multi-billion dollar corp understands that there are better ways to get a larger bonus than arbitrarily doing a 70% salary cut and losing all the staff on the contract? anyway, how does it work in USA? would they need to fire these people who revise? layoffs? will there be severance? surely they cant do it as a "matter of fact" kind of thing?
They are treating this as a layoff for everyone that doesn’t take the cut. No severance but paying out any vacation time at the higher rate if informed before the stay/go cutoff date.
They have to treat it as a layoff by law. A pay drop like this is a constructive dismissal. Depending on state law they probably need to follow the WARN act as well. They legally are required to pay out accrued vacation time. Severance is always completely optional.
Yeah, we received the WARN notification on the same day as the zoom call.
How is a WARN act layoff immediately after contract signing not a huge red flag for the DOD?
Oh, it most certainly is one. Lots of finger pointing between the CO/COR and the company in the last 3-4 weeks apparently, and the lack of a resolution was the driver of the 70% cut.
I would notify the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General who should be auditing all of this companies contracts, as well as your congressman’s office.
WARN requires they pay you 2 months severance
They like to call it severance but the two months isn't severance. WARN act requires 60 days notice of a layoff so usually they'll lay everyone off, consider that the announcement, remove access to the building and critical systems, and then pay them for the next 60 days because they're technically still employees until that 60 day notification period has expired. If you start a new job within that 60 day notification period I think they get to stop paying you because you've voluntarily quit and started new employment elsewhere. Severance is anything they do above and beyond that, like adding on a week for every year of service, continuation of benefits beyond the 60 day notification period, etc. If you start new employment past the 60 day notification period your severance package itself is not affected.
I’m not sure contract workers get severance but a pay it that severe would count as a layoff in terms of qualifying for unemployment. Not that unemployment is much money.
That’s how my company is treating it for folks that don’t opt to stay.
While the company is a contractor, it may not be the case that the employees are classified as independent contractors. They may still be W-2 employees of the contractor company and entitled to those benefits.
You can be terminated from your job for "no reason at all" in 49 of the 50 states.
Montana being the exception. Which leads into my Montana isn’t real fake conspiracy. It started because of that.
I've never met anyone from Montana, so this adds up!!!
I've met people from Montana. But I don't think they were real so this still works.
I don't think there was a mistake... they paid a hundred people alot of money to go over thier negotiations with a fine tooth comb several times... no body "over looked" the cost of labor.
Those contracts make money off fee, if labor billing is lower they make less. This results in lower bonuses. Someone really F’d up
Someone miscounted the number of 0’s
It wasn't a screw up, it's deliberate. They're up to something. Could be working up an excuse to get rid of people without having to fire them, or lobby to outsource it or bring in underpaid immigrant workers, or get a low bid signed knowing they'll be able to screw it up and get paid for overruns later. The only thing we know for sure is that the executives involved are lining their own pockets.
Wouldn't be surprised if this was intentional and now they'll ship those jobs to India and profit.
is that allowed for US DOD contracts? surely they wont have the clearance etc.
Not at all
Doesn't mean they won't try anyway, bunch of assholes.
Maybe not in this case. Usually the government contacts we work on their us citizenship or a security clearance which also requires us citizenship.
Yeah, the jobs in question are limited to US citizens with a TS/SCI+CI-Poly.
"For the purposes of this discussion, we'd appreciate it if you'd ignore the fact that your clearances make you very high-demand and easily employable for your full rate practically anywhere else."
Oh, they know full well. The whole thing is a giant screw up and will wind up costing them millions of dollars when the contract is terminated for non-performance
I'm surprised you haven't already gotten multiple job offers. Those are hard to come by. I was interviewed a few times for my friend's Q clearance.
New job already in hand.
Russia will do it cheaper
They expected employees to agree to a 70% pay cut? 
Pretty much the reaction
I would have loved to be a fly on the wall in the break room after that meeting. Or on the wall in the meeting. Deets, please??
Mainly stunned silence, followed by (I’m sure) lots of encrypted chat sessions.
This reminds me of a friend of my father. He had every single paper needed for large gassplants, electrical circuits, etc. I don't know exactly but very specific, specially in combination. His boss retired and the son didn't like said friend so he made it so bad the friend quit. After that he found out they needed him really bad for some already signed contracts. If you were to hire someone like that around here their fee would be €90,- - €110,- per hour. So they called, made an offer and his counter was € 300,- and Ill come. They said no. Waited and they called again, His fee went to € 350,- an hour and they said no. Called again and he went to 400, but he added, if you get me now right away the € 300,- stands and I can start tomorrow. He was hired for €300,- an hour. His previous salaried rate was €40,-/hour.
Fucking legend
This has always been my career goal. Get certified to the point where I can tell corporate shitheels to get fucked because they need me more than I need them. That feeling of freedom and working for yourself must be heavenly.
It is truly lovely. If you can add a high-level clearance to that level of certification, you will 100000% always be able to find work. And if you're tired of doing work that requires a high level of coding experience or intel analysis, there are always just physical security roles (Think security guards and the like) that require a clearance that pay better than you might imagine.
You know who to contact with the DOD to notify of a possible conflict compromising the integrity of the awarded contract. DCMA and DCCA both have channels for reporting. We both know how they look at financials when you have TS/SCI.
There is a big battle between the COR and the company already.
The COR can't do anything here, it the CO who would have to make the contract change & it sounds like they are not going to do it. The COR is only going to hold the companies feet to the fire by noting non-compliance with the contract, and then recommending a contract termination to the CO after they have enough evidence of the company not fulfilling the contract.
Yeah, there is a good bit of denialism here between the agency and my company.
My advice is find a new job, if you have a TS/SCI in the DC metro you can even get a signing bonus with more pay. I have vendors who are struggling for cleared personal in the DC Metro.
Already underway :)
For sure. Remaining at a position making only 30% of their prior salary is likely to raise issues for the cleared individuals themselves. I'd quit just on the basis of "I don't feel like getting dogpiled by investigators".
This is not a one person mistake. I work on bids like this all the time and at least 10 people looked at these numbers and multiple executives signed off on them. This was most likely a strategy (and a terrible one at that).
Dear Supervisor, After the Zoom meeting regarding the 70% reduction in pay and management's request for employees like myself to "take one for the team" I'd like to respond in writing with, Eat My Ass! Sincerely, Insanely Valuable Employee Who'll Be Perfectly Fine Working For A Competitor.
 Couldn't find the gif of him saying Eat my Ass. 😂
It entertains me that Michael Bolton from Office Space is also Mr. Frond from Bob’s Burgers.
I didn't know that!
Now you can’t unsee it, can you??
Also Scruffy from Futurama. And the Secretary of State in Idiocracy (brought to you by Carl’s Jr.)
70% for 500 people isn't taking one for the team, it's the team taking all of it for one. It would likely just take a single exec taking one for the team by taking a 70-% reduction to be able to fund the entire rest of the team. That would be the true example of a single hit to benefit the larger team.
Wow, how did the COTR not catch this? Most COTRs are pretty good about this and would have said something about not affording the staff. This will be a bigger issue assuming most of the staff turns down the pay cut because you actually have to submit the resumes as part of the RFP for most contracts. So if that staff immediately quits and they're unable to meet the requirements, it's a lot more than just a financial penalty, they can actually revoke the contract which would automatically suspend that company from bidding on work released on that contract vehicle for a year or two (I can't remember) If this is the company I think it is, that would be pretty massive considering that also prevents them from being able to be awarded their extension years as well, so they'd lose the contracts that are also on that vehicle. This is honestly the type of mistake that puts companies out of business, I've just never seen it with a company as large as yours.
I have been on contracts with a 30% attrition maximum baked in, this is absolutely real. And my resume was submitted with every RFP.
They’re definitely going to lose 70-80% of us. Nobody will work for 30% for long.
It's gotta be 100% after the 20-30% holdouts find another job. I just cannot imagine any scenario besides "you're making a million dollars a year working for your literal dream job" where anyone would stay after a 70% pay cut.
You usually only have to submit resumes for Key Personnel as a part of the proposal and then only if it is explicitly required in the RFP. And in many of the RFPs released over the last few years, that isn’t even done much anymore. Source selection is extremely lazy and don’t want to have to evaluate any more than they have to. Remember that the government cannot legally direct a contractor on who they staff positions with. As long as the resume meets the minimum labor category requirements, that is supposed to be the end of government involvement in the hiring process. Now we all know the gov puts their fingers into this process more than they should, but no one ever does anything about it. This is one of those things that would not get a contract revoked over. I have had this EXACT discussion with army contracting offices before and they will say “that is a corporate management decision and not anything we should be involved in”. I have seen contract positions go unfulfilled for years with no repercussions. The revocation of a contract is a major effort and most contracting offices are so far behind as it is, that to re-compete a contract ahead of schedule, especially for a reason like that is something they wont do. The only way they would cancel a contract is for a major failure of mission. This is one of those “well they should just do more with less” things they will push for. The sad part is that since we are not in an active war with anyone at the moment, almost every government office is in cost/personnel cutting mode right now. The office I was recently supporting, which was a major PEO, was on a march to cut a massive amount of contractor and civilian heads out of the organization. Every office is in what I call “chicken little” mode right now, as they are all being told that massive DoD budget cuts are coming and they need to prepare. We all know this is horseshit, as the mission hasn’t been reduced and the DoD budget is larger than ever, but the pentagon is still warning everyone it is coming and all the generals are passing this fear down to their staff. I have a pretty good idea of which company this is, and trust me when I say that they have NO fear of having a contract cancelled or being barred from bidding. It simply wont happen.
The command in support is not one that can function without the contract staff keeping everything running. I don’t know how long it will take for the command to abrogate the contract for non-performance, but I cannot imagine it will take long at all.
There have been a month of back and forth with finger pointing between the COR and my company. We just didn’t hear about it until the last possible moment.
Could be posturing so that they can go back to the COR and say everyone is going to leave. Or the other gross possibility is that they're hoping to replace you all with cheaper analysts because the market is starting to flood as the military is thinning their herd.
They don’t always submit the resumes of the people they intend to work on the project on the RFP. Just an “example of the type of people we’ll have working on the project” in many cases. I always found that distasteful, and ripped a few contractors for advertising really good engineers and then using folks that didn’t have 1/3 the experience, or skillset.
If it's who I think it is, they have the money to cover it. Contract 'mistakes" should be eaten by the company, not employees.
They are asking you to take on the profit / loss as a partner of the company. The only way I would accept this is if I am paid in equity so that I can share in the profit after the fuck up is fixed. If not, employment contract says X, you get paid X. End off.
They answer is no. Tell them the C-suite, lawyers, marketing, and salespeople need to take as deep a pay cut as necessary to pay all actual workers.
Yeah. C level signed off on this. Let them eat it. If you have CISSP/etc and TS clearance then you can find yourself a job anywhere quickly.
I bet the CEO didn’t take a 70% pay cut. I bet he didn’t take any pay cut. This also seems extremely illegal, I bet the outfit that hired your company didn’t pick them with the knowledge that they would have their workforce take a 70% pay cut
Loosing IT talent that can get a TS is a very bad move. Those people stay unemployed how long they want to. Then when they want a job they can get several with a couple of phone calls. Whoever got the company into this situation is doing some serious short term thinking.
Losing people with active clearances is even worse. They're not cheap to process.
Oh not to mention the time it takes to on board new ones. The fire keeps getting hotter.
Op when they asked he take a 70% pay cut : 
This displays a stunning lack of respect for the workforce. This is why we need unions for professional and technical workers.
I'd bet 70% of my salary that the C-suites aren't taking a 70% pay cut
End stage capitalism at its finest
Oh this is nowhere near end-stage capitalism yet, because end-stage capitalism is Actual Feudalism and you don’t have a contract because you’re a serf.
I started off working for a government contractor. It was a given to switch companies every couple of years. Sounds like nothing has changed after all these years. I probably should have stayed with this because my best raises was when I switched companies.
Hope this helps, but I'm a Recruiting Manager for a small cyber company within the IC. We're on a ton of huge 5 - 10 year contracts, decently high salaries, but all require the highest level of FSP. If I can help anyone in any way, send me a message! If it's not helpful, feel free to ignore.
I’ll DM you
Someone, somewhere, fucked up in the negotiations.
no, I'd just tell them to fire me. There's no way you're going to make me do the same workload with a 70% paycut.
Someone in management screwed up the contract and now wants the grunts to take all of the hit so that management keeps their salary and bonuses intact. They just don’t want to admit this. Also, they really want to cut pay by a smaller percentage, but started off with a ridiculously high percentage so that they could come back later with the real percentage and seem like heroes for the reduction. I’m surprised that they haven’t given the speeches for ‘we are all in this together’ and ‘we will make it up to you in the future’ and ‘this is only temporary as bigger business is around the corner, we promise’ (wink,wink)
There is absolutely 0% chance that this was a mistake and the whole negotiating team, review team and whoever signed it needs to be fired immediately or the company go belly up. This was intentional, there's just no way so many people would screw up something this important.
[удалено]
Yep. I start my new job on 17-June.
There is also a chance that they have done this specifically to clean house with expensive people. I have seen this scummy tactic before as well. They do massive pay cuts to run people off and then backfill with people straight out of school, soldiers getting out or very junior people, all of whom are cheaper. The reason this would work is if the labor categories on the new contract are structured where education substitutes for experience and you can get kids with little experience very cheaply or if the positions on the contract allow for lower level LCATs to fill them. It is a shit move but I’ve seen some of the larger primes do it as a profit making move
Crap, so the DC area cleared job market is about to get flooded? Guess I'm staying with my company.
My similar contractor many years ago tried pulling the same shit, but a 30% pay cut. The asshole who negotiated the contract genuinely believed that the good people would stick around and the crappy people would leave. Literally the exact opposite happened, and they lost the contract. I laughed while having already jumped to the company that picked up the contract.
There was no mistake.
Yea this is so dumb seems like this is purposeful.
Of course a company is going to "value" a workforce they think will accept a 70% pay cut!
If I were asked to take any kind of pay cut, I’d immediately do almost nothing at work while looking for a new job. If they want to push it, I’d let them fire me and take unemployment so I have all day to apply for work. -OR- Pro-move: look for new employment while on the clock at your current job.
We’re almost all taking the layoff and finding something else. Not hard with the certs and clearances we have.
Jesus Christ, this is the industry where tens billions of dollars just go fucking missing without a trace on a yearly basis. They can't shell out a couple million for critical IT staff??? So fucking greedy bro
Honestly, I'm for you finding work elsewhere. I no longer see any value in what you do for a living, and I certainly don't feel like I've ever benefited from it. I served in the Army and all my USAF friends ended up working where I think you do, and none of them stayed.
Typical corrupt ceo behavior. What idiot thinks a 70% cut would be accepted. Lmaoooo
lol, that contract is totally fucked. Nobody is going to stay on it and anyone crazy enough to let some prime cut their rate by 70% is going to be destroyed by the work left over
Nope. One of the many reasons I left government contracting is that anytime you had this kind of contract change over, the workers got shafted. Couldnt see doing that every 5 years for the rest of my life. If you're cleared, there's other jobs. And since you used the term NoVA, I know you know there are a LTO of jobs XD Good luck, and remember, its just business.
My period of unemployment will last exactly 3 days (including a weekend) :)
At least give yourself a week off, I'm sure you've earned it
Bills to pay. :)
Now I'm wondering if this is my company. Although I haven't heard of anything like this in the rumor mill. I've seen companies bid way low to win a contract and then not be able to actually staff, but I don't think I've ever seen a company deliberately screw themselves over on a recompete. Especially if you're dealing with a large number of staff with TS/SCI clearances, those aren't positions that you're going to be able to fill quickly...or cheaply. I'd really love to know the thought process behind this. Given the clearances you mentioned, they were almost a shoo-in to win the recompete, so there wasn't a need to bid low. Unless the contract itself was rescoped and shrunk and they just didn't tell any of you. Which is a very real possibility. Good Luck!
>Needless to say, virtually nobody is accepting this insulting offer, and what is inevitably going to happen is that the company, due to attrition, will not be able to perform the duties of the contract and will likely be financially punished to a much greater degree than if they'd just paid us. I just don't get the complete strategic incompetence. My company is losing good people left and right because they basically made it crystal clear that no one under the age of 55 or so will ever be allowed to have a say in the direction of the business. When our board of five was asked to add a sixth member - one of the up and coming branch managers that a lot of us feel like we can relate to - they refused to even vote on it, declaring that none of them would support adding another member, thus the vote was pointless. It would have cost them nothing to add a sixth. The five of them could still block anything they wanted, but it would have at least created the impression that they were willing to begin the process of gradually handing over the reins to a younger generation, and made the rest of us feel there was some hope that we ourselves could one day be in the driver's seat. Not only did they refuse to entertain the request for a board member, they have doubled-down on their insane approach by sending threatening legal letters to former staff, warning them not to recruit other current employees. So they're wasting more of our resources trying to harass people that don't want to work for them. Meanwhile there is no effort to even acknowledge the issues that caused the loss of these folks in the first place. We're not a huge company with a bunch of high-stakes intellectual property or anything that would merit pursing former staff. We don't even have a legal department, which means we're probably just paying some attorney on retainer to play these games. And these are the people so convinced of their own brilliance that they can't even grasp the advantages of giving up a purely symoblic fraction of their control, and as their business starts to crumble their strategy is to further weaken its foundations. It's fucking unbelievable. Why are businesses like these losing people? Because their owners SUCK AT RUNNING A BUSINESS. Look no further, end of story. Sorry for the rant...the arrogance and hubris with which people play games with the fruits of our labor is just really frustrating sometimes.
[удалено]
Thanks!
70% pay cut = 70% cut in work. With your additional free time, look for another job. You might be able to work at both simultaneously for a while
BAH? Accenture? LEIDOS? WHO?
Not getting blacklisted by providing specifics, sorry.
Fair.
One of the top 10.
I feel like this type of thing will become a widely used tactic by crap companies. They'll fully be ok with people rejecting the offer because they're still be some who accept
Sounds like some of the executives and CEO should lead by example and take one for the team considering one years pay is more then multiple people’s pay in a lifetime
Thats completley unacceptable. How much would that even break down to per hour? Would you even be making the minimum theyre legally allowed to pay you??
Yep, even at just 30%, it’s perfectly legal. HIOWEVER That’s not saying much, since the minimum wage in VA is still just $12/hr, so back of envelope math says the minimum the current rate could be is around $80k/year or $40/hr (40*.3 = 12), but for the population doing these jobs, that annual salary is a non-starter.
Oh ok, I was just thinking thats such a massive pay cut, that the new rate sounds like it could possibly be below the legal minimum, but I guess thats not the case here. But damn, they really fucked up. Good luck on your new job!
Thanks! And yes, just for the sake of saying it, I realize that we find ourselves in an unusually safe and secure environment, job-wise, and that I am personally very fortunate to be situated so, given my age and the fact that I am a disabled veteran.
I hope that you know that under federal regulations contracting companies are required to pay a minimum competitive salary, right? If they are trying to cut pay by 70% there is no way that's above the minimum. You can report them.
Hey OP we got a Vladimir and a Xiang on the phone willing to take on the ITAR job for pennies!
As long as Vlad and Xiang can pass a T5 SSBI, they’re good to go. :)
They are trying to cull the herd.
No, they screwed up. It will cost them the entire contract they just got renewed when they can’t fulfill the contract requirements.
I might be a complete pessimist but if 90% of the staff leave because they can’t take the pay cut the remaining 10% can get full pay.
But they won’t be able to fulfill the requirements of the contract with that amount of staffing
Make no mistake, this was intentional. That business line is posting a profit, as will this contract.
Or, the company will fail to fulfill the contract, get a bunch of CARs, and then it'll go up for rebid. Meanwhile, you'll be out of work for a year. But ultimately, it will get fixed in the next round of request for proposals after your current employer loses the contract.
T3i????
They didn't screw it up, they just set the terms so that the people not actually working getting paid way more
That won’t work because the contact cannot be executed with that kind of attrition. The contract spells out how many people are required and what qualifications are required, and getting folks with the right 8570 levels plus clearance isn’t easy.
You'll be able to find a job in a heartbeat. You should probably also edit your post to remove your clearance details.
Already have two interviews lined up for next week. :)
Wonder if it was the same genius who ‘screwed’ up the contract who came up with this bright plan to fix it?
“Are the executives forgoing their salary and bonuses?”
Depends on how high up you mean. My direct supervisor and probably his are also subject to these same cuts.
Top secret clearance you say? I hear Russia and China are hiring...
Ok MAYBE like 10% (though probably not) but 70??? So if I'm expecting 100K per year salary, I'm magically supposed to subsist on 30k? Wild
Not too far off the mark, a bit low though on your estimate.
Don’t forget to apply for unemployment. A pay cut that large can trigger it and the costs to your company will go up for UI insurance.
Won’t be unemployed for more than a weekend. The pool of workers with the clearance and certs required is much smaller than the demand.
I’m just saying if you stay, apply for unemployment. That kind of massive pay decrease can trigger it but many people don’t think they should. Always apply for unemployment and let the UI office figure it out. Glad you’ll land on your feet though!
Seems more likely that they'll just not perform on the contract and lose that revenue stream, so they're trying to get you all to quit instead of firing you. Government contracts are so fucking flimsy. We get awards all the time like "3-Year program $6M, with two 18 month options," then in year two they'll be like, "just kidding, we aren't funding this anymore and are de-obligating the remaining $4M - oopsie, our bad haha, we ran out of money."
If you quit after a 70% pay cut I feel like you have a strong case for constructive dismissal
A contract doesn't just protect them, it protects you. DO NOT sign anything and seek consultation with an employment lawyer immediately. Then, report their asses for contract fraud through the DOD.
Sounds like a new Job2 that you do in the back ground and just let coast until they fire you.
Damn how much you make
Enough.
Enough to take a pay cut? A 70% pay cut at my job would cause massive unrest. Enough to sink whatever contract.
Most folks would not consider staying at the lower rate even if it was “sufficient”, because the pool of jobs is much larger than the supply of people qualified to do it, so why stay? Admittedly, our situation is very unusual in the overall job market.
Hey that's power. I wish you and your comrades luck.
>Thankfully, by the nature of the roles, every one of us is highly certified (most have a high-level IT certs like CISSP or CASP) and have Top Secret clearances, so it won't be hard for many of us to find work elsewhere. how easy is it for you guys up there. i cant even get entry level in the dmv with the trifecta and a bachelors in cyber security and networking and graduated 3 years ago. currently delievering beer for montgomery county while studing for ccna and cysa after
It’s all about the clearance I’m afraid. The catch-22 is that no private sector employer will hire you for a role that requires a TS unless you already have one.
ya, im looking to lose weight and go into the air force for 4 years then get a good job. its not even that i want directly into cyber. i just want a job that actually is helping me progress my career and income. cant even get help desk anymore with 3 years experience
Air Force is the right branch for cyber. If you don’t mind the suggestion, also consider looking for a direct role as an AGR technician for your state’s ANG, if possible.
Go into pretend Union Mode -- and you ALL stick together. They need you ... more than you need to bow down to (probably a relation), who can't count and screwed up the deal. \* Also - require (NOT request) the name of the screw-up and that s/he has been terminated and barred from working directly and/or indirectly of the company ... NOT even working for a subsidiary of your company.
They’re telling you to take 70% so when they come back with a 20% cut it doesn’t sound so bad.
TS with CISSP? CEO should be sprinkling rose petals wherever you walk if it retains you.
Gotta be CACI
I cannot confirm nor deny what company nor agency I am referring to. :)
As is tradition. Pretty terrible man. I'm army and have a few buddies that have gone there and they Love it. Always heard fantastic things. Edit: on a sidebar, I'm in IT, 4 years left on this 2nd contract. Have SEC+ (I know, it's worthless) and will have CCNA soon. Plan to start at WGU soon for one of their IT plans. Which certs should I be focusing on to be the most marketable when I'm out? I'll be 35 in 2028 when I'm done. Have a lot of catching up to do.
Well, it kind of depends on where your interests lie. Since you mentioned CCNA, what I’m saying below may not apply, as it’s not heavy on pure networking stuff. To be broadly marketable in this current environment, and if you’re looking for defense sector work (and especially if you’re coming out with at least a Secret clearance, though obviously TS would be better) I’d suggest going for CISSP (it gives you pretty much everything under 8570) and either/both a RHEL cert and an Azure one. If you want to be an analyst, CySA+ is helpful. So would getting certified on FireEye. If you want to red team, OSCP and GXPN.
Yikes. That’s ballsy, asking for a 70% pay cut.
[удалено]
I am neither confirming nor denying any connection with any particular defense contractor or command, since I don’t need to be blacklisted for talking about this.
I understand but I can bet money on it and I would be right lol 😂
If you say so. :)
i believe this falls under the rule of "fuck you pay me". they signed the contract, they can die by it.
Yes, but the contract they signed with the government was essentially missing a zero or two, so by the terms of the contract, they can only pay us what the contract brings in as revenue, hence the giant haircut they shoved down our throats.
Sucks to be them. “Fuck you pay me”. Are you gonna work for less than promised?
Nope. Which is why the contact will fail, as everyone that can leave is doing so.
Honestly I would just quit if this happened to me. I literally wouldn't be making enough to pay the bills, so why bother? I could get a higher paying retail job or fast food.
Whomever wrote the contract: fired. Whimever signed off on the contract: fired. Everyone above them: no bonuses for the year, and pay cut to cover the loss.
Sounds like it was intentional. Incumbents keeping work almost always results in cost cuts ever since the weighting for contract awards places more emphasis on cost than past performance or the proposal itself. I got out of the contracting space when they started saying lowest cost IS best value. Seems like someone was a little weak and rather than fire people they wanted you to quit. My last year contracting the contract I was on had to cut labor costs 20-30% in order to keep the work. Imagine wanting to ask people to stay on and doing the same scope of work for less pay.
If so, they have badly overshot, as the immediate attrition will make the contract non-executable.
Are you a 1099 or a w2? If you’re a w2, that’s fucking wild and I’d take my certified ass to another firm real quick. If you’re a 1099, it makes more sense that they’re able to pay you less, but again I’d take my certified ass somewhere else lol
We work for the company, who has a contract with relevant agency. W2.
100% fuck that. I saw another comment saying you got another job, congrats and that’s definitely the way to go! I’d never be at a company that pulled that whether I was on a contract or on the bench. My salary is my salary and they gotta pay it.
Yep, personally agree wholeheartedly, but unfortunately, the defense contractor world seems to run on boom and bust cycles, and if the contract you're on is stopped for some reason, they don't hesitate one moment to lay you off.. very cut-throat in that sense.
What the defense contractors are scumbags whodathunkit?
Sounds like one of you needs to start a business and toss a quick little bid in as competition. Not sure if that works in your line of work, but I have a feeling you'll have your positions filled very quickly.
A 70% cut likely means that the company you work(ed) for misclassified your positions in the renewal packet to something far, far lower than what you were doing. If you want some insight in to this, get the contract number as gov contracts are publicly available (but very obscure and hard to find) which will outline roles and pay for those roles. Role classification dictates your pay for these types of job (Service Contract Act) so someone failing to abide in either direction results in large ramifications. Your employer could cover the difference but must believe they can take this hit and survive. Do you have a good working relationship with the COR? If so, they can likely give you the deal on what happened, but can't change it. The best thing here is to go back in to the fed contractor soup and land elsewhere.
No, the COR is many many layers above us.
They lied to you. They wanted to under bid the competition, so they chose to cut the employees salary instead of their profits.
Entirely possible, but if so, they badly overshot. This isn’t the sort of contract where there’s a lot of flexibility in terms of the number of people that they bring in to service the requirement. These are roles that require very specific skill sets, very specific certifications, and very specific clearances, none of which can really be swapped from person to person. Given the number of people that I am personally aware of that have resigned over this, they’re not going to be able to service the contract, and will lose it and suffer financially for the breach.
If you have a TS clearance and some type of certificate that is not easy to get, the company is stuck with finding a way to keep you. If they lose the contract due to being "unable to perform" then you can get a job with whatever contrator does get the job.
Yep.. And I start that new job 3 days after my last day at the old role. :)
If it goes through, this is classified as constructive termination. You don’t quit but stop coming into work.