-----Original Message-----
From: Cathy Spude [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 1:45 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Agency Archaeologists Job Cuts


HISTARCHers:

Well, as an NPS archeologist who has received a letter informing me that
the "outsourcing" process will begin soon for my job and those of my
colleaques in the office, I must say this outpouring of interest from all
of you is heartwarming. We've been mildly nervous about it for the last
couple of years, and perhaps longer. As one of you pointed out, any
government archeologist who didn't see this coming a long time ago had
his/her head buried in the sand.

However, I refuse to believe that the picture is quite as bleak as is being
painted. While it is perhaps very well to keep in mind that what Congress
giveth, Congress can taketh away, it often takes quite a long time for
stuff like that to happen. Hopefully, if everyone is well informed of
possible consequences, then the worst won't happen.

Some facts as we in NPS understand them:

NPS did and still does some archeological project work in-house. Much of
this work is done by hiring people who are not permanent, full-time
employees (although there are certainly exceptions). Some of this work is
even done by volunteers who are supervised by professional archeologists.
The permanent, full time people tend to serve as program managers, project
managers, and as support personnel for the projects (e.g. database
managers). We in NPS have found, by experience, that this can result in
cost savings to the American taxpayer (which we feds are also).

When the President asked ALL federal agencies to identify those positions
that were NOT inherently governmental in nature, NPS identified its
archeological positions as ones that could be STUDIED as to whether they
could be "outsourced" or better retained as a government function. We have
all assumed, and have been reassured by those on the study teams, that IF
any individual positions (not groups of positions) were "outsourced" to the
private sector, it would be those positions that that were primarily
engaged in project work. In other words, archeologists who ran programs,
who functioned as contracting officers' representatives, and who
essentially functioned in ways that were inherently governmental, would
HAVE to be retained. Short of Congress repealing the NHPA, there will be
some need for government archeologists.

Furthermore, the process under which the studies are to be conducted has
been carefully proscribed. It gives government employees an edge over the
private sector, with which it essentially has to compete. The process
demands that the government must bid against private companies to do the
same work, but allows the government to come in with a higher bid and still
win (I can't tell you what the figures are right off the top of my head...I
think its about 15%). That is because the process recognises that it costs
the government to administer contracts.

And, if I understand what I've read correctly, if a federal employee's
position is eventually "outsourced," that individual ends up with the right
of first refusal. He or she gets to bid on his or her own job, and can
immediately go to work for a private company, or a group of ex-federal
employees can form their own company and continue doing their job without
missing a beat (except to get a bunch of equipment and overhead all of a
sudden). This is to prevent, supposedly, the brain drain that some of you
were concerned about.

Now, I don't want to allay any fears. I am leery enough of today's quickly
changing political scene and the Machiavelian tactics of some managers to
fear that any process can be used against those who are naive enough to
trust them.  What I might suggest is that those who are really concerned
contact someone like David Linsay, who on the Governmental Affairs
Committee for the Society for American Archaeology at [log in to unmask]
to ask him what, if anything, the profession as a whole thinks about the
matter. I've not seen a word about it in his monthly updates. Perhaps some
upswelling concern from people other than those who look like they might be
about to lose their jobs and therefore be biased in the matter would indeed
produce some results.

Again, thank you all for your concern!!

Cathy Spude
National Park Service
Santa Fe, NM

The opinions expressed in this message are not necessarilly those of my
employer!!!!