Will SEC escape RIFs due to large number of exits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

[Anonymous]

This isn't worth much but supposedly my division did not recommend RIFs as part of the data call it submitted to the 10th floor. That said, that information isn't worth much because it's not the divisions that will be making the call and it may not even be the 10th floor that makes the call if they abdicate all responsibility for running the agency.

[Anonymous]

It’s up to the agencies to decide their staffing. The latest commentary from Trump made that very clear. There is no reason our leaders should even care about OPM’s feedback.

And regardless, easy enough to pass some assurances along based on tentative plans. IE “hi folks, we deeply care about you and the mission, and are doing everything in our power to fight for you. RTO is going to suck, but it was our effort to save jobs, and we have no plans to cut salaries or any other benefits. The reorg plan we submitted does not anticipate any RIFs because we’ve had enough attrition. BUT this is subject to change and we will let you know as soon as we know more” is better than the nothingsauce coming from them. That’s my point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn't worth much but supposedly my division did not recommend RIFs as part of the data call it submitted to the 10th floor. That said, that information isn't worth much because it's not the divisions that will be making the call and it may not even be the 10th floor that makes the call if they abdicate all responsibility for running the agency.

It’s not up to *anyone* but agency heads on how to staff the agency. Anything else is illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't worth much but supposedly my division did not recommend RIFs as part of the data call it submitted to the 10th floor. That said, that information isn't worth much because it's not the divisions that will be making the call and it may not even be the 10th floor that makes the call if they abdicate all responsibility for running the agency.

It’s not up to *anyone* but agency heads on how to staff the agency. Anything else is illegal.

PP here and you're absolutely right. However, I don't have much confidence that Mark will be anything more than a lapdog to what Trump/Musk want him to do and that's what I meant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

the VERA/VSIP window hasn't closed, and the 45-day acceptance+7-day revocation window for the fork contract hasn't closed either, but current working numbers for both together are over 500.

the new question of whether anyone earning over $204k/salary of EX1 is prevented from a severance in a RIF thanks to OPMs change in wording could push more folks into taking a VSIP and running by the end of next week.

I think 12% reduction to pre-2023 hiring freeze seats is entirely achievable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

Easy, MU wants a bigger role once his term as commissioner ends and he sees this as the means to an end.

FWIW, GG wanted to go to treasury and did the things he did (in particular overhiring) to curry favor with his masters so it's not like this is the first time this is happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

It’s a little much to say RTO will destroy the agency as we know it, particularly when you reference, but then largely brush pass and ignore, the far worse things happening elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.