« Markey Introduces Aptly Named SANE Act to Curtail Wasteful Nuke Spending | Main | Morning Smoke: IG Scrutinizes Air Force Report that Faulted Pilot in F-22 Crash »

Feb 08, 2012

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c68bf53ef016761fcaa29970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Contracting Time Out for Booz Allen Hamilton:

Comments

Mike Black

With personal knowledge, BAH has always hired folks strategically. In other words, if you had the right contacts you were always an attractive hire for BAH. I've seen this first hand. The BAH San Antonio office has some SIGNIFICANT ETHICAL issues especially on the IT team. It doesn't come as a shock that this happened. It is a shame that as usual, so many pay for the selfish acts of a few.

C

The current debarment proposal isn't over hiring Heddell. The proposed debarment is over hiring LTC (Ret.) Meneses, who is alleged to have brought contract-sensitive material with him to BAH San Antonio, and then using that material in a bid.

That's a big no-no, and it's a shame that the rest of the SA office could potentially suffer for it, but that's the way the system is supposed to work.

Kudos go to BAH Corporate, though, for reacting properly when the SA office failed. IMHO BAH is likely to get the proposal denied on review because no contract was awarded, and the responsible individuals were terminated.

The irony, for those that missed it, is getting a debarment *after* hiring a former IG. :)

Keep People Employeed

Does our government even consider the hundreds of hardworking employees who are now in jeapordy due to the actions of a few. There will be many layoffs and an ongoing trickle down effect on thousands due to this disbarment.

If the government proved that Booz/Allen/Hamilton leadership had knowledge or participated in the alleged offense, punish them, not those who are honest and work hard to put food on the table.

Marvin

I don't get it, Neil. What if BA hired the guy to help it better comply with requirements and to advise on how to stay out of trouble, upgrade training in this regard, and, say, spot check some cases? Is that OK? Or, would you want a contractor to stumble along with no strong insight re how to comply?? What do you think the company or its advisor, the ex IG, are going to cook up now that he is available to advise?

The comments to this entry are closed.