Will SEC escape RIFs due to large number of exits?

[Anonymous]

I don't see a RIF as a likely outcome. They may actually expand the SEC by adding Oklahoma State before this administration finishes.

[Anonymous]

I am assuming none of you attended the union meeting today. So many rumors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not buying the reduction in pay rumor. Nobody — not even Doge - has tee’d that up as an option. That would make NOBODY happy. Not even sure it’s legal given that Congress sets pay.

The most likely scenario is a hard hiring freeze for foreseeable future, mass attrition, and probably closing 2-3 regions.

+1. They want to cut staff, period. It's not about reducing operating costs but cutting people.

THIS. I mean at the Cabinet meeting Elon made it super clear that this is about FIRING people. Rubio said something like 1500 people at State had taken early retirement and sarcastically said what do you want me to bring them back so I can fire them? And Elon clarified that yes this was about firing and voluntarily leaving isn't the same. So this isn't about cost, it's about firing, media headlines, humiliating govt workers.

+1 The EO was very clear that they're trying to assert their power over every independent agency, so I imagine that they will come for all with a show of force.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am assuming none of you attended the union meeting today. So many rumors.

I did not. Can you give us an update?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am assuming none of you attended the union meeting today. So many rumors.

I did not. Can you give us an update?

I don't understand why people insist on asking questions like this. If you are not in the union, you are not entitled to the information. If you are in the union, and you did not attend, ask someone you know who did. Don't ask on this anonymous public forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At another FIRREA. I don't know but I really think they want to fire people, across government, and in a substantial amount from every agency. In the blow-up cabinet meeting, when Elon was yelling at Rubio for not firing enough people, Rubio stated that they had already had 1500 people retire. Musk said that he needed to FIRE people-- not just work with more regular/voluntary attrition. Rubio sarcastically asked if he should stop the retirements so that he could fire them instead. And then at least in a few RIF-related leaks, people have reported that retirement-based attrition, people who took the Fork, and so on will NOT be counted towards the total percentage to be fired.

They are obviously doing a great job getting people to leave because of the toxic environment but I do think they want to make a huge spectacle of it. And for that reason, I don't think anyone is safe.

I agree this is the message they are sending. I do however think most financial regulators will be crippled by the voluntary losses. If the SEC loses 1000 people, it will be felt in exams and in those areas that review filings (CF, IM and TM with the SRO filings). The agency, including Atkins, won’t want to lose more. And I think the whole point of Rubio fighting was to make the point that it has to be left to the agencies.

Lmao are you his BFF or something?

The agency heads will all be falling over each other trying to show Elon and Trump how impressively they are cutting their agencies.

There is no other metric, like actually functioning, that matters. These ppl would be fun with no reviews and no enforcement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am assuming none of you attended the union meeting today. So many rumors.

I did not. Can you give us an update?

The meeting was worthless. If the union or its meetings had any value, we’d still have a CBA and telework.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am assuming none of you attended the union meeting today. So many rumors.

I did not. Can you give us an update?

You are going to have to ask someone you know in real life, which is not hard if you are at the SEC. I don't think any of us want the SEC to be discussed in public much at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not buying the reduction in pay rumor. Nobody — not even Doge - has tee’d that up as an option. That would make NOBODY happy. Not even sure it’s legal given that Congress sets pay.

The most likely scenario is a hard hiring freeze for foreseeable future, mass attrition, and probably closing 2-3 regions.

+1. They want to cut staff, period. It's not about reducing operating costs but cutting people.

THIS. I mean at the Cabinet meeting Elon made it super clear that this is about FIRING people. Rubio said something like 1500 people at State had taken early retirement and sarcastically said what do you want me to bring them back so I can fire them? And Elon clarified that yes this was about firing and voluntarily leaving isn't the same. So this isn't about cost, it's about firing, media headlines, humiliating govt workers.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. They don’t care about the people who are doing this for the money. They don’t care about the people who are doing this for the benefits. They want to get rid of the people who care about the mission, and who will hang onto that mission until they’re forced out. That’s the change they want to see, and they will keep going until they achieve it.

What if I promise I'm just here for the money and benefits?

[Anonymous]

The union meeting was likely all bad news. Because whenever there’s good news, they brag about it to EVERYONE to solicit and boost membership. But whenever there’s bad news — ie, anything that makes them look ineffective — not a peep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am assuming none of you attended the union meeting today. So many rumors.

I did not. Can you give us an update?

You are going to have to ask someone you know in real life, which is not hard if you are at the SEC. I don't think any of us want the SEC to be discussed in public much at this point.

+1. Ask a friend or one of your stewards. I have always found the stewards to be very responsive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The union meeting was likely all bad news. Because whenever there’s good news, they brag about it to EVERYONE to solicit and boost membership. But whenever there’s bad news — ie, anything that makes them look ineffective — not a peep.

There was a lot of talk about what the union wanted and what the management wanted and nothing about what DOGE actually approved. PD useless

[Anonymous]

People are conflating DOGE and project2025. The latter is what the SEC is focused on.

Doge, at most, cares only about finding and cancelling any weird or embarrassing contracts and DEI stuff. But sophisticated/subsrantuve reorg. And since sec is budget neutral, doge gets little credit for any cuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am assuming none of you attended the union meeting today. So many rumors.

So many bad words too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are conflating DOGE and project2025. The latter is what the SEC is focused on.

Doge, at most, cares only about finding and cancelling any weird or embarrassing contracts and DEI stuff. But sophisticated/subsrantuve reorg. And since sec is budget neutral, doge gets little credit for any cuts.

Yup. Elon was happy to take credit for cfpb, but he had nothing to do with it. All Heritage/OMB, and laid out in project2025.