Advertisement

April 16, 2014

New Opportunities for U.S. Defense Contractors as UK Looks to ‘Outsource’ Jobs to Private Sector

Two recent announcements indicate a desire by the UK’s Ministry of Defence (MOD) to rely more heavily on the private sector in the coming years — thus creating potential new markets for U.S. defense contractors.

First, on July 5, 2012, the MOD announced the creation of the “whole force concept” under which it plans to ax a substantial part of the British Army, cutting regular troop numbers from 102,000 to 82,000. In their place, support contractors would be tapped, most likely in the areas of logistics and mechanical engineering, among others. While it remains unclear when this move to incorporate more private sector contractors into the “whole force concept” will occur, major U.S. support providers are already lining up to participate.

Second, the MOD also recently announced that it is considering outsourcing its entire $22 billion annual procurement and support organization, as early as 2013. This effort would, at least, partially privatize the UK’s Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) organization. The MOD has already selected 15 companies for market testing talks to determine the best way to implement this massive privatization. It is unclear what ultimate shape the new organization would take but this is clearly an opportunity for U.S. contractors.

And more is likely to come. These efforts are a part of a comprehensive reform effort within the UK defense sector as all structures — capabilities, personnel, processes and management — are being reviewed and modified in the face of declining defense spending.

©2014 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Chair, Government Contracts Practice

Jacob B. Pankowski is Chair of the firm’s Government Contracts Practice Group. His practice spans nearly 30 years of experience and is focused on representing government contractors and subcontractors of all sizes in their dealings and disputes with federal, state, and local governments. Mr. Pankowski’s government contracts practice covers a broad range of areas and concentrates in contract and subcontract performance issues, claims analysis and preparation, federal supply schedule issues, information technology issues, rights in technical data and intellectual property, and...

202-331-3100

About the Author

Shareholder

Stephen Tupper specialises in EU and competition law. He has been practising law for more than 20 years, including working in New York, Washington, D.C. and in Brussels for 10 years. He has handled a range of significant competition law and merger control cases/filings and has particular expertise in the water, energy, shipping and chemical sectors. Best known, perhaps, for his work with water companies, Stephen has represented three of them before the Competition Appeal Tribunal and, more recently, represented Bristol Water in front of the Competition Commission during a full price...

+44 (0)203 349 8729

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in