I further assumed the OIC, NCOIC, Shift Supervisors, and Team Leaders were all married; that the Team Members were 50\/50 split married\/single; and that all lived \u201con the economy\u201d (e.g., received housing allowance and separate rations).\u00a0 This was necessary because – unlike civilian industry – military personnel costs vary depending on whether or not an individual is married.<\/p>\n
Military Staffing Costs<\/span><\/p>\n Salary data is easy to obtain.\u00a0 However, that\u2019s only part of the actual cost of military employment.\u00a0 In fact, it\u2019s generally only about 2\/3 the cost, and sometimes far less.<\/p>\n Here are the components of that cost I used.\u00a0 I probably missed a few:<\/p>\n Other than housing and rations, the other benefits total just over 40% of salary.\u00a0 I thus used 40% as an aggregate percentage for the cost of benefits (over and above housing and rations allowances) for military personnel.\u00a0 Housing and rations allowances I included explicitly below.<\/p>\n Doing the math, here\u2019s what I came up with,\u00a0 Sorry for the somewhat smallish print and image; the table’s too large to fit width-wise using the normal font.<\/p>\n Total Annual Cost:\u00a0 $2,557,006<\/p>\n That\u2019s an estimate for the full personnel cost of running the warehouse operation using military staffing.<\/p>\n Contractor Staffing Costs<\/span><\/p>\n So, how does that compare with staffing the same facility with civilian labor?\u00a0 You\u2019re probably going to be surprised.<\/p>\n Case 1:\u00a0 All Full-Time Labor<\/em><\/p>\n Here\u2019s what I used as contractor costs \u2013 the contractor would charge the government the \u201cUnit Cost\u201d line for each individual in that category.\u00a0 I used a benefits “load” of 1\/3 of salary (fairly common, and likely a bit generous; private-sector benefits are in general much less generous than those in the military).\u00a0 And based on limited spot-checking for the Fayetteville, NC, area, at least some of these salaries are rather high – which means the contractor cost would probably be lower<\/em> than I’ve estimated here:<\/p>\n Qty<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Position<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Salary<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Bennies<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Unit Cost<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Line Cost<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Hourly Cost<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 1<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $90,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $29,700<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $119,700<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $119,700<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $47.80<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 1<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $75,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $24,750<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $99,750<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $99,750<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $39.83<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $60,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $19,800<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $79,800<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $159,600<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $31.86<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 6<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $50,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $16,500<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $66,500<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $399,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $26.55<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 36<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $37,566<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $12,397<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $49,963<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $1,798,660<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $23.94<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n Total Annual Cost, Case 1:\u00a0 $2,576,710<\/p>\n Even using these numbers, we save less than 1% by using military labor.\u00a0 And as I’m about to explain, we probably won’t even see that due to (a) lower contractor salaries than used above, and (b) contractor use of part-time labor.<\/p>\n Case 2:\u00a0 Extensive Part-Time Labor<\/em><\/p>\n As noted, the figures above assume the contractor uses 100% full-time staff getting full benefits for all positions.\u00a0 Now, let\u2019s see what happens if the contractor staffs the warehouse floor\u00a0 (the “Workers”) with part-timers at $18\/hour and working part-time (an average of 24hrs\/week) vice full-timers.\u00a0 For part-timers, the benefit load drops to a WAG of about 10% (employer pays FICA plus state unemployment insurance, but no medical\/retirement\/other).\u00a0 Now the contractor cost becomes:<\/p>\n Qty<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Position<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Salary<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Benefits (33%)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Unit Cost<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Line Cost<\/p>\n<\/td>\n Hourly Cost<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 1<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $90,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $29,700<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $119,700<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $119,700<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $47.80<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 1<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $75,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $24,750<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $99,750<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $99,750<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $39.83<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $60,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $19,800<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $79,800<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $159,600<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $31.86<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 6<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $50,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $16,500<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $66,500<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $399,000<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $26.55<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n 60<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $22,540<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $2,254<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $24,794<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $1,487,614<\/p>\n<\/td>\n $19.80<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n With a total annual cost of $2,265,664, Case 2 represents a savings<\/em> to Uncle Sam of a bit over 11% vice using military labor.<\/p>\n Bottom line:\u00a0 military labor ain\u2019t exactly all that cheap any more, folks.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/11\/Mil_Cost_Table.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n\n
\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Warehouse Mgr<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Warehouse Foreman<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Shift Lead<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Team Lead<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Workers<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n
\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Warehouse Mgr<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Warehouse Foreman<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Shift Lead<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Team Lead<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Workers<\/td>\n \n \n \n \n \n