Booz Allen/SAIC/L3/WarPigs Versus Gov't Intel Agency Career...Your Opinions (Herndon: employment, transfer)

[still_waiting]

An acquaintance of mine works for Booz Allen in Herndon, and I am starting a job as a Gov't employee specifically an Intel analyst at one of the agencies. My "friend" and I were talking and she was saying how Booz is always getting Gov't workers to come to them and that overall they are a better and more flexible career option that Gov't.

To that I said that I think that Gov't is more flexible because you can get cross trained and start a entirely new career path within the same agency, or even transfer agencies. Also Gov't is more likely to provide the extra training needed whereas the private entities expect you to be on the ground and running. Not to mention full tuition reimbursement UP FRONT.

What are some of you guys opinions...I am interested to know.

BTW by WarPigs I mean Northrop, Boeing, Lockheed etc.

[pcgeller]

I'm a recent college grad ('09) and have a job with the government. I'm on a career path to be at GS-13 in 4 years as an Operations Research analyst. My agency is also paying for my masters degree in Systems Engineering.

Kinda hard to beat that. At the end of 4 years I'll be making a pretty penny. If I decide I don't want to stay with the Govt then I'll have a strong negotiating position.

Plus, with Secty Gate's recent comments about contractors.....

[ChristineVA]

I spent 18 years working for a few "warpigs" including NG. I am now working for the government. I mainly left for two things: continued medical coverage into retirement (even though I'll be paying for it) and a somewhat small pension paid by the government on top of my TSP (401K). The leave is much better also over time. I happen to be in one of those fields where I was able to make the transition and get a small raise. I have also done very well under NSPS although that is ending. I was getting annual 2-4% raises with the warpigs but got a better raise here. Again, that's all ending. I also really enjoy being the one "responsible" and calling the shots on how a project gets done and not having to keep my mouth shut working for someone's policies that I believe are inefficient. So I really enjoy the independence and autonomy I have as a civil servant.

I realize not all projects run this way and different government agencies could be HORRIBLE as compared to their contractor counterparts. Mine just wasn't.

[katyusha25]

Originally Posted by still_waiting

An acquaintance of mine works for Booz Allen in Herndon, and I am starting a job as a Gov't employee specifically an Intel analyst at one of the agencies. My "friend" and I were talking and she was saying how Booz is always getting Gov't workers to come to them and that overall they are a better and more flexible career option that Gov't.

To that I said that I think that Gov't is more flexible because you can get cross trained and start a entirely new career path within the same agency, or even transfer agencies. Also Gov't is more likely to provide the extra training needed whereas the private entities expect you to be on the ground and running. Not to mention full tuition reimbursement UP FRONT.

What are some of you guys opinions...I am interested to know.

BTW by WarPigs I mean Northrop, Boeing, Lockheed etc.

Thanks for asking this question. There may be a time that I have to make this same decision, as I currently work for a defense contractor but have an interview with a federal agency next month; I was wondering this same thing.

Originally Posted by pcgeller

Plus, with Secty Gate's recent comments about contractors.....

I missed the recent comments - what were they? Do you have a link?

[pcgeller]

@ katyusha

Secty Gates is planning on cutting contractors by 10% for the three years. He's also targeting some DoD agencies like the Joint Forces Command.

This article talks about the contractors:
washingtonpost.com

[katyusha25]

Originally Posted by pcgeller

@ katyusha

Secty Gates is planning on cutting contractors by 10% for the three years. He's also targeting some DoD agencies like the Joint Forces Command.

This article talks about the contractors:
washingtonpost.com

Thanks for the article...that's kinda scary

[scottfs]

Both options are pretty good and a lot of those contractors’ employees work on government sites right alongside the government guys. I personally think the government is good to start out with, but I’d probably move to the private sector after 5 years or so. But it depends. If you think you can write a proposal, or be a bit of a salesman, you might consider working for a contractor as your will have more upward mobility. The government on the other hand, offers lots of fantastic training and technical development opportunities, especially in your field.

[scottfs]

Originally Posted by katyusha25

Thanks for the article...that's kinda scary

Incidentally, the CIA budget it classified and Gates doesn't control it. Still a bit scary for contractors, though I heard they also kinda gave up on in-sourcing, so govt' jobs probably aren't much safer.

[The Dissenter]

Originally Posted by still_waiting

An acquaintance of mine works for Booz Allen in Herndon, and I am starting a job as a Gov't employee specifically an Intel analyst at one of the agencies. My "friend" and I were talking and she was saying how Booz is always getting Gov't workers to come to them and that overall they are a better and more flexible career option that Gov't.

To that I said that I think that Gov't is more flexible because you can get cross trained and start a entirely new career path within the same agency, or even transfer agencies. Also Gov't is more likely to provide the extra training needed whereas the private entities expect you to be on the ground and running. Not to mention full tuition reimbursement UP FRONT.

What are some of you guys opinions...I am interested to know.

BTW by WarPigs I mean Northrop, Boeing, Lockheed etc.

I have a friend who held a senior position with L-3. When he left they were doing a lot of layoffs.

[statecollege]

I had a 40-yr career with an intel agency. In my experience, many of my peers that crossed over to a contractor were those who were eligible for retirement buy-outs or straight retirement. They increased their income substantially, a primary motivation. I found that the vast majority of contractors working side-by-side with we government employees were excellent. But the agency was paying dearly for them in the short term. Purportedly, however, in the long term it was cheaper At contract termination they could be released for budgetary concerns, no retirement benefits to be paid, etc. The ability of a government agency to reduce near-term budgets by slashing contracts is becoming the current situation in the economic downturn. Curiously, several of our contractors--mostly young professionals--eventually gained employment with our agency. Here's my main point: I believe the latter group realized that over the long term the government position was more likely to be stable, and many of the benefits important for those with families was better. I found my government position an honorable career and one that gave my a sense of accomplishment. Most of my peers were good, hard workers, contrary to the stereotype perpetuated by some. I'm on your side in this debate with your friend.