GHC was not the first initiative aimed towards improving the PCS moving experience. A long time ago there was a pilot program called FSMC - Full Service Moving Contract. If I recall correctly, this program was cancelled primarily due to high costs. (Please correct me if I'm wrong)
Then came Families First that brought about changes such as the DPS system providing an interface for TSPs and Customers. This program also changed the claims processes from Military Claims Offices to settling claims directly with Primary TSPs via the DPS interface, and brought about Full Replacement Value along with raising limits for liability. Also included was a system of rewarding Primary TSP's with higher quality scores with more shipment awards.
GHC was a dramatic attempt to outsource the Governments role as a primary contact entity for the customer, where all practical aspects of PCS moves would be handled by a commercial company. The main goal was to lower shipping costs to the government, allow USTRANSCOM to reduce personnel and improve service to the Customer. Of course, something was not right with this concept. Not only were the rates for moves reduced considerably (reportedly 25-35%), much of the reduction was to be passed on to Local TSP's packing, trucking and storing and delivering shipments. At the same time, Customers planning Personally Procured Moves also were impacted by the lower rates that were pegged to GHC pricing, often ending up paying out of pocket instead of receiving an incentive payment. Bottom line, HomeSafe believed that with software, no competition, a higher percentage of shipment consolidation and economy of scale they could profit from scraping off a decent percentage of the total rate the government would pay them. What they found, however, is that the rates they were offering Local TSP's were not compensatory for the level of service they required! In fact, Local TSPs were not even asked what their packing and delivery rates would be considering the higher standard of service and new workforce compliance measures. Far too many questions were left unanswered.
So, after all attempts to lower cost and improve services, what were the missing factors in the equation that ended up failing to improve service quality the Customer receives and deserves?
In my opinion, all these efforts were top-down approaches that totally left out the most important customer-facing factor, the Local TSPs! Yes, those who pack, transport and deliver PCS Moves - The only TSP that a Customer meets face to face!
Any future program should address service improvements from the bottom-up instead of top-down that relies on 'squeezing' Local TSPs to perform better at lower rates!
The other main factor is the seasonality of PCS moves. Many local TSPs simply cannot affort to keep a well-trained and qualified workforce all year round waiting to service the summer peak season and have to stretch out their workforce, or hire temporary, untrained workers to keep up with demand.
Is there an optimal solution that will please everyone? Probably not. Are there solutions that can work better than the current system? Surely there are. Let's discuss them here!
