Industry Tasking of Mil Assets

[Could be the last?]

Gents,

A quick overview:

A 'British' company wants to task a small but extremely busy unit to carryout work on their behalf, the results of which will then be sold to a third party. All profits staying with said company! Note: The tasking would also divert assets from supporting ops.

Q1: Which government/MOD organization is responsible for accepting external tasking of this nature? (It's not within DE&S)

Q2: If mil units provide solutions to industry, outside of a formal contract, how is the issue of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) controlled.

Q3: If a company takes a mil solution and badges it as their own and sells it on, what form of redress does the mil have?

[taxydual]

Hmm

Would the words/terms

BAe
Nimrod
Iraq
Typhoon
KCBE
HM Government
MoD
Oman
House of Lords

fit in any 'slow overview' of your 'quick overview'?

[Grabbers]

You would hope that if this happens then the 'coalface' would be recognised by all parties, not just the Command Guy/Lady.

[Sempre 206]

The way that I read the initial post, it seems that the company has approached the unit directly. Surely any tasking such as this should have come down the command chain?

I remember cases in the past of units being 'asked to help out' that ended in all sorts of unpleasantness after competing civilian companies crying 'foul'.

If I've got the wrong end of the stick, sorry I'll just climb back into my box.:O
S 206

[Could be the last?]

206,

That's the point. I want to fire them off in the correct direction and avoid any subsequent unpleasantness. They came into the equation 'demanding' that they should go to the top of the priority list and were extremely cheesed off when they didn't. However, with many new ac contracts being placed with contractors that do not have the embedded military experience, or SMEs, this situation is increasing in frequency; Hence Q1.

[Jimlad1]

Depending on the nature of the work, if it involves the armed forces contributing to a 3rd party, it could be covered by MACC procedures (JDP2-02 on the Internet applies). Approval for any op would then be granted by D CT UK Ops in London who would have final approval on the issue.

As a rule though, if we provide services, we are expected to raise a bill for our services. A complex area covered by JSP368.

Happy to discuss via PM and provide possible POCs if required.

[Pontius Navigator]

Much lower down the scale, but we were asked to host a visit to show how some new equipment would be used in situ. It was for a foreign sale and we had not bought this equipment although the company hopes to sell it in due course.

They asked the IPT and the IPT cascaded the request. No money we involved. All we got was an exchange of goodwill.

[FantomZorbin]

Suggest you speak to IPT, Commercial section ... they have DEFCONs that cover this sort of thing. Don't know which ones would apply in your case but here's the lot - pick 'n mix, enjoy:bored:
www.aof.mod.uk/aofcontent/tactical/toolkit/content/defcons/defcon.htm (http://www.aof.mod.uk/aofcontent/tactical/toolkit/content/defcons/defcon.htm)

[Wensleydale]

I am sure that the adminers will shoot me down in flames, but is this just the same as the Orderly Officer being called out in the middle of the night to authorise emergency repairs to married quarters? Now I thought that quarters were managed by a civilian company at a profit and therefore the Orderly Officer is being used as free labour for that company and increasing their profits as a result? Surely the said company should employ someone to act as the call out on their behalf?

Bottom Line. We are an easy touch, and will be used as a cheap alternative by all and sundry if they can get away with it.

[tucumseh]

Suggest you speak to IPT, Commercial section ... they have DEFCONs that cover this sort of thing. Don't know which ones would apply in your case but here's the lot - pick 'n mix, enjoyhttp://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/wbored.gif
www.aof.mod.uk/aofcontent/tactical/toolkit/content/defcons/defcon.htm (http://www.aof.mod.uk/aofcontent/tactical/toolkit/content/defcons/defcon.htm)


And there is nothing that illustrates better the difficulty MoD project managers face these days. Many of the DEFCONs listed are at best outdated, some are plain wrong and in many cases completely contradict mandated regs, including airworthiness. In turn, this explains to a large extent why contracts take so long to negotiate. PM states one thing. Commercial insert DEFCON, not realising it is contradictory. Company say you must be joking, make your mind up; and so on. No wonder they try to bypass the system. The ones I always look for are the 112 series. The best tool a project manager ever had. I see they've been deleted. Industry must be laughing up their sleeves and counting the profits.:mad: