On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Deborah Harrell wrote:
> --- The Fool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ---- > > > <<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A21575-2003Oct13?language=printer>> > > > > In Bethesda, Hiring Policy, 'Competitive Sourcing' > > Clash > > Naval Medical Center Considers Replacing Disabled > > Workers > > > > President Bush's efforts to make government run more > > like a business > > collided this month with the reality that, in many > > ways, government is not a business. > > > > For the past two years, the Navy, as part of the > > Bush administration's > > initiative, has been studying whether a private > > contractor should take > > over the custodial and food services provided by 21 > > federal employees at > > the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda... > <snip> > > But in one important way the 21 workers in the > > hospital scullery are > > different: All are mentally retarded, beneficiaries > > of federal policies > > that promote the employment of people with > > disabilities... > <snip> > > So they can either be productively employed by the > government, contributing to society and keeping the > dignity of that contribution, or they can be 'dumped > on the streets.' (There are also private companies > that employ the mentally retarded, but local > communities don't always have these progressive > companies as resources.) Seems a fairly easy decision > to me. I haven't run a cost-analysis or anything, but it seems that it would cost the entire government less to keep these mentally retarded people employed than to give the contract to a lower bidder and take care of the now-unemployed mentally retarded. Saving money in one place might have much more adverse effects elsewhere in the system. Julia _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
