A new coalition, Movers for America, contests the U.S. Department of Defense’s plan to centralise military relocations under one contractor, arguing it may compromise quality and fairness.
In a bold challenge to the U.S. Department of Defense’s recent strategic shift in managing military relocations, a significant new coalition named Movers for America has stepped forward. This group, comprising around 200 moving professionals with extensive experience in military moves, has voiced strong concerns over the potentially drastic changes proposed under the new Global Household Goods contract (GHC).
Under the GHC, all military personnel’s Permanent Change of Station (PCS) moves would be managed by a single private contractor. This marks a significant transition from the current system, where multiple experienced agencies handle approximately 300,000 relocations each year. Movers for America argues that concentrating all military moves under one umbrella will not only create a monopoly but will also lead to underfunded services and diminish competition, ultimately harming the quality of service provided to service members and their families.
The group comprises agency owners, company employees, labor contractors, and independent owner-operators. They have united in their stance that the GHC, awarded to an entity reportedly lacking in military relocation experience, sets unrealistic standards and compensation structures for those in the moving industry. One major sticking point, as highlighted by the coalition, is the requirement for independent owner-operators to act as employees when transporting military shipments, potentially altering the business landscape in ways that could disadvantage experienced professionals.
The agitation stems partly from dissatisfaction metrics cited by TRANSCOM, the command responsible for awarding the GHC. TRANSCOM has indicated a revamp was necessary due to low satisfaction ratings with PCS moves; however, Movers for America counters this claim with an independent survey, suggesting a much higher satisfaction level among military families under the current system than TRANSCOM’s data suggests. According to the coalition, about 12% of military moves lead to a completed satisfaction survey, and claims that these do not accurately reflect the quality of service provided.
This move by Movers for America highlights a crucial debate about the efficacy and fairness of federal contracting and the critical importance of maintaining a high service standard for military families regularly on the move. The coalition aims not just to oppose the GHC but to ensure that any changes enhance, rather than undermine, the moving experiences of America’s servicemembers.
With Movers for America now pushing for a reevaluation of the GHC, the future of military relocations could hang in the balance, likely prompting significant discussions among stakeholders in the military community and the moving industry. The coalition advocates for a system that supports competitive practices and upholds the high standards that military families deserve. Whether this advocacy will result in modifications to the GHC remains to be seen, but it is clear that the debate around it is far from over.
