Unintended Consequences Of Laying Off A Security Guard
NASA Langley gate access change hurts Poquoson businesses, Daily Press
“A change to employee access at NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton is having a negative impact on Poquoson businesses, and doesn’t appear to be resolved. NASA Langley’s back gate on Wythe Creek Road used to be open to both incoming and outgoing traffic from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. In October incoming access was changed to 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. only because budget cuts eliminated the gate guard, said NASA Langley spokesman Rob Wyman. The new traffic pattern added an additional two-mile drive for employees to get back into work via the front gate. Since then Poquoson businesses, and particularly restaurants, have seen a drop in lunchtime business.”
A NASA Watch reader notes: “Other questions and problems to consider: Large pavilions supported by reinforced concrete pillars have been erected in the last 12 to 15 months over the Wythe Creek (back) gate and the front gate. (There were seemingly endless traffic disruptions at both gates to accommodate pavilion construction.) How much did construction of these two pavilions cost? If the back gate is going to be unoccupied for 9 out of 12 normal hours, why was money wasted and traffic disrupted to construct a back-gate pavilion? Would the money have been better spent to pay guards and keep the gate open?
If one could add up all the extra two-mile trips employees are now making, how much gasoline and time is being wasted by employees, in total? How much pollution is added to the atmosphere as a result of these detours? How does this affect traffic congestion on Wythe Creek and Armistead Ave? Although inbound traffic is not allowed at the back gate from 9 am to 6 pm, outbound traffic is permitted. A system of traffic spikes (tire shredders) such as what is placed at rental car lots is supposed to keep vehicles from entering via the outbound lanes. Someone with bad intent can walk over these spikes on foot, and it probably would not be very difficult to figure out how to depress the shredders and drive a vehicle through. If someone is determined to enter illegally, how long will it take security officers to realize there is a problem and respond? Will an individual or group of people up to no good be apprehended before they can wreak havoc? The facilities and employees are placed at additional risk because the outbound lanes are unattended for 9 hours; how much value does NASA place on the safety and security of its employees when they trade it off to save money by not paying security guard salaries?”
Typical NASA. I wonder how long it will be before the security guard’s salary cost is exceeded by lost employee time spent driving extra miles and lost tax revenue from decreased local sales at lunch time.
Keith, I’m sure that the “lost employee time” is minimal – unless Langley employees get to do lunch on the clock.
People’s time has value. The cost of gasoline is real. 2 miles, twice a day, 5 days a week over a year is 1,040 miles. Assuming 30 mpg at $3.50/gallon that is $121.34. Multiply that by 100 employees and that’s $12,133.00. Then calculate the cost of a lunch every day, tax on lunch … these are real costs that someone has to bear.
It isn’t just Langley, of course. More than the usual number of restaurants near JSC have closed in the last year, including some old favorites. It is very fortunate for the Clear Lake City area that a large number of residents are non-aerospace types that commute to other parts of the city.
Not knowing the topography of Langley and the surrounding area, I wonder if there was a corresponding increase in business for those establishments located out the front gate.
While I understand the message being communicated if you want see the real impact of NASA’s budget cuts and seeming lack of direction, check out the devastation being experienced in the Clear Lake area.
I’m not saying that JSC was entitled to “replacement” programs, just that if you want to experience the impact of NASA’s restructuring first hand then the economic ecosystem surrounding JSC is a better example.
And I’m sure that the KSC area is even greater.
Dude, the cost impact is equally real in all locations. Not sure what point you are trying to make. One security guard has been laid off. He/she is now unemployed and as a result hundreds (thousands) of people have to drive a longer distance – 1,040 additional miles per year per person. These are real costs.
No one has mentioned the fleet of new security cars. The security force had relatively new, small SUVs that seemed to be adequate. Come the new year, and they have all been replaced with shiny new sedans with fancy paint jobs.
and how many million dollars did we spend for a pool, and we have been trying to get the bollards to work for over a DECADE… that’s well into the quater million mark for sure,,, and have you seen the new four wheel drive luxury extended cab fire trucks
Keith, lets clarify the pool issue. It is not a human swimming pool but rather a human space flight article test pool for testing the next generation capsule.
The bollards issue is another post 9-11 mandated issue driven by headquarters. Headquarters want bollards on the taxiways and chain link fencing to protect us from the Air Force, thank you very much.
The premise that there exists some kind of dead weight loss for the local economy is stupid. Employees are still buying lunch, somewhere else. Either they are brown bagging, helping their local grocer or they are eating at a different restaurant. The money get’s spent either way, somewhere else. One business’s gain is another business’s loss.
How is the cost of lunch, gas and their associated local tax revenues relevant to NASA’s evaluation of whether to close the gate? Even if a true deadweight loss, which Jardinero1 doubts above, NASA does not have an obligation to incorporate such into its cost-benefit analyses. As for the pavilion construction at the back gate, those are sunk costs and also not relevant in deciding the guard’s fate.
Lets get real about all the hype of closing the back gate. Many establishments are closing in this area and they are 35 miles from the Center. Can we blame the closing of the back gate for closures everywhere. Of course not; as the saying goes, “Its the economy stupid”. Employees have 30 minutes for lunch. Driving an extra 4 miles does not alter a person’s attitudes of where they eat or how long they spend away from the field. I know Mr. C’s and with the gate open or not, it takes more than 30 minutes to get there, order, eat and return. I hope they use flex time for these long lunch times, if not, the extra drive does not matter. Now for the new gate cover. LaRC has been around longer than any other Center. There has never been a cover at either gate. The weather in VA can be great to lousy. Thus the guards have stood in the rain, snow, blazing sun, and nice weather far too long. It is nice that when you drive up to the gate, roll down the window for those 100% ID checks, you no longer get wet or short out your door window motor/locks. I wonder if the sick days of the guards have gone down since they now have cover. Many government facilities in this area have a covered entrance. Now to address the ever changing budget cuts. Planning for capitol upgrades takes many years to gain budgets, planning, and contracts. I don’t know about you, but my crystal ball quit working a long time ago. Hindsight is 20/20. This is a case of an over active writer that spends his time writing about NASA LaRC, mostly derogatory.
Are all of these NASA employees earning enough that they can afford to go off-site and eat lunch at a restaurant every day? It must be nice.
Steve
There are about 4,000 employees at LaRC and no they do not all go out for lunch everyday. The cost of going to Mr. C’s is just slightly more than eating in the on-center cafe. There are maybe a hand full of restaurants close to either gate and those are shared by the AF personnel too. BTW, for the most part, AF personnel by far out numbered NASA personnel using the back gate as a short cut to the AF “Golf Course” gate.