Government Shutdown - September, 2025 Editiion

[Anonymous]

“RIF UPDATE:

We @standupforscience.bsky.social are in communication with our network. So far, we have not heard of any actual RIFs, only Russ’ tweet.

To press—we will send a release and facilitate interviews if we do hear abt them taking place.”

They’ve been planning this for months. It’s just a silly game to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Trump was concerned he wasn't taking enough blame for the shutdown apparently.

lol
This is such a screwup. The GOP has so missed the fact that saying you don’t want a shutdown and then RIFing however many more people this represents is at fundamental odds. Vought and Miller and Trump are birds of a feather: little boys being spiteful and destructive without any strategy whatsoever.

Can’t wait for the chickens to come home to roost.

And they're doing it just as things are starting to get bad at airports. I assume they aren't firing any ATCs or TSA, but the general public will just hear that lots of feds are getting fired and then see the delayed flights and packed airports and assume they are connected.

Duffy has said that he will be firing ATC who call out sick, which so far is about 10% of them. Making the current delays at airports permanent.

It's a great plan.

So much for assuming this regime wouldn't do the stupidest possible thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did he need the excuse of a shutdown to layoff?
Couldn't he do the same layoffs when there was no shutdown?

Yes, but he has to follow the procedures of 'Reduction in Force' and show these jobs are not needed.
That is easy to do when they are deemed non-essential as part of a shutdown.

Most people who know the law believe this is untrue. I’ve had the same job and been declared both essential and nonessential in shutdowns. And have had a couple where I wasn’t essential the first flew days and then became essential as it dragged on. My job is required to be performed under a statute. But there’s been a backlog in processing along s I’ve been there, because it’s complicatted specialized work, and they can never find enough people who know what they are doing to hire. So adding a few days to a 4 month backlog is okay. Just not processing the work? That’s illegal.

But more to the point. If you are a Fed in a RIF, you get severance pay based on age+ years in. At my level, I’d get a full year of severance. The anti-deficiency act likely prohibits RIFs because the government cannot obligate the severance funds paid to employees. And the severance formula is legally required. They can’t RIF and not pay severance. And during a shutdown, they also cant RIF and obligate the severance funds. That’s the issue. If you care, which MAGA does not n

[Anonymous]

IRS received the rif notices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Even if you agreed with cuts to the government (and I don’t), this tweet is just gross. If this were a private sector CEO so callously talking about layoffs, he/she would rightfully get skewered.

The guy is a mutant. So bizarre how he has villified federal employees, as though civil servants are criminals. I'd love to know why he is so full of hate and evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Even if you agreed with cuts to the government (and I don’t), this tweet is just gross. If this were a private sector CEO so callously talking about layoffs, he/she would rightfully get skewered.

The guy is a mutant. So bizarre how he has villified federal employees, as though civil servants are criminals. I'd love to know why he is so full of hate and evil.

He clearly hasn't gotten the therapy he desperately needs for his inferiority complex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Even if you agreed with cuts to the government (and I don’t), this tweet is just gross. If this were a private sector CEO so callously talking about layoffs, he/she would rightfully get skewered.

Exactly. He should consider what would happen to him when his “side” is no longer in power.

[Anonymous]

Meanwhile, Mike Johnson is keeping the House closed next week. The earliest they can be in session is now October 20.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why did he need the excuse of a shutdown to layoff?
Couldn't he do the same layoffs when there was no shutdown?

Trump and Vought think the entire federal workforce is part of the Democrats party. They figured they might as well threaten to fire hundred of thousands of fed workers during the shutdown but now are completely baffled as to why the Democrats didn't cave. There are a ton of MAGA federal employees who either are working without pay or being threatened with job loss but Trump is oblivious. Oh, they also threatened to fire all the air traffic controllers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meanwhile, Mike Johnson is keeping the House closed next week. The earliest they can be in session is now October 20.

So even with a CR, in theory, the House and senate are supposed to be working on a budget bill. Yet, the House has done ZERO work on this at all and will somehow expect the democrats to bail them out on that as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did he need the excuse of a shutdown to layoff?
Couldn't he do the same layoffs when there was no shutdown?

Yes, but he has to follow the procedures of 'Reduction in Force' and show these jobs are not needed.
That is easy to do when they are deemed non-essential as part of a shutdown.

That's not what "non-essential" means for purposes of a shutdown. It has a specific definition that makes it very limited who qualifies to keep working. It doesn't mean people not working aren't essential to the mission. Furthermore, and I speak from personal experience as someone who has liaisoned with OMB in prior shutdowns, they sometimes use their executive authority to cast the net wider than it needs to be to prove a point or for political reasons. I'd say that happens quite a lot, actually.

I wish people would understand that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did he need the excuse of a shutdown to layoff?
Couldn't he do the same layoffs when there was no shutdown?

Yes, but he has to follow the procedures of 'Reduction in Force' and show these jobs are not needed.
That is easy to do when they are deemed non-essential as part of a shutdown.

That's not what "non-essential" means for purposes of a shutdown. It has a specific definition that makes it very limited who qualifies to keep working. It doesn't mean people not working aren't essential to the mission. Furthermore, and I speak from personal experience as someone who has liaisoned with OMB in prior shutdowns, they sometimes use their executive authority to cast the net wider than it needs to be to prove a point or for political reasons. I'd say that happens quite a lot, actually.

I wish people would understand that.

Correct. Contracting officers or HR, for example, might be deemed “nonessential” during a shutdown; however, they certainly become essential once the government re-opens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did he need the excuse of a shutdown to layoff?
Couldn't he do the same layoffs when there was no shutdown?

Yes, but he has to follow the procedures of 'Reduction in Force' and show these jobs are not needed.
That is easy to do when they are deemed non-essential as part of a shutdown.

That's not what "non-essential" means for purposes of a shutdown. It has a specific definition that makes it very limited who qualifies to keep working. It doesn't mean people not working aren't essential to the mission. Furthermore, and I speak from personal experience as someone who has liaisoned with OMB in prior shutdowns, they sometimes use their executive authority to cast the net wider than it needs to be to prove a point or for political reasons. I'd say that happens quite a lot, actually.

I wish people would understand that.

Correct. Contracting officers or HR, for example, might be deemed “nonessential” during a shutdown; however, they certainly become essential once the government re-opens.

We will have to see. It doesn’t matter what the law says if the Supreme Court is willing to interpret it the way you want. Calvinball.

[Anonymous]

Trump wanted the shutdown so he could blame Democrats for RIF which he had already planned. He is an evil man with no conscience and empathy only for himself.

I am not a federal employee but I hope he pays big time for his depraved and rotten to the core soul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IRS received the rif notices.

Yay, more cheating for the billionaires.