DEI RIFs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's not what a RIF is, OP.

The OPM memo calls it a RIF.

Holy shit, the OPM memo is a bloodbath. Wow. The EO stopped short of this, this is absolutely nuts.

https://chcoc.gov/sites/default/files/OPM%20Memo%20Initial%20Guidance%20Regarding%20DEIA%20Executive%20Orders.pdf

I wonder how many acting heads are going to quit rather than send out those memos.
I honestly can’t see the person acting at my agency sending that out - she’s just the last one standing and as far as I can tell totally non-political.

That memo is just...another level. I will be very interested to see if our acting sends it out. It's one thing to say, hey, we've decided to eliminate all these programs. It's something totally different to say they resulted in "shameful discrimination" and then threaten the workforce if they don't report "coded language." But nothing to see here! It's all good and totally normal governing.

+1. These people didn't create the DEI offices and in most cases didn't create the policies people are complaining about. They were assigned to do a job. It's fine to decide that job is unwanted now, but making the employees into villains should worry everybody. Every fed will at some point work on something the other side doesn't like.

They weren't assigned to these offices, they applied to work in them, presumably because they wanted to advance that mission. The mission has been discredited, the consequences follow.

Where is the compassion for these workers and their families?
Is this all bc of some crazy idea that they are taking jobs from white Christian men? Or bc they are more educated than white Christian men?
I don’t understand the hate and desire for revenge. And frankly, I don’t want to. Don’t you understand that this mass layoff will affect us all? Unemployed, instability, lost income, etc

It is ironic that you spend your entire post defending diversity by slamming Christians, an entire race, and half the genders in this country.

+1. And this is the thought process that resulted in so many people resenting DEI initiatives. It’s okay to discriminate as long as we’re discriminating against someone who is white, male, straight, Christian. Now I’m afraid we have taken a huge step back wrt race relations. It’s a shame that DEI went so far that it’s brought us to where we are now.

Absolutely. DEI created more racists than there would have otherwise been.

With all due respect, you have no idea how DEI works. There was no discrimination as that is not the point of those offices. And, lbh, America has been chock full of racists since it was settled. So spare me that last sentence.

I know of many instances of discrimination that has occurred in the workplace due to DEI, including several people who have actually been told they were passed over for a job or promotion because they had to give it to the diverse candidate.

Cool story bro. And I know several people passed over because of a good old boy system. I also know people who were passed over because there was “no way you didn’t get here by anything other than affirmative action” even though their qualifications exceeded what was necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's not what a RIF is, OP.

The OPM memo calls it a RIF.

Holy shit, the OPM memo is a bloodbath. Wow. The EO stopped short of this, this is absolutely nuts.

https://chcoc.gov/sites/default/files/OPM%20Memo%20Initial%20Guidance%20Regarding%20DEIA%20Executive%20Orders.pdf

I wonder how many acting heads are going to quit rather than send out those memos.
I honestly can’t see the person acting at my agency sending that out - she’s just the last one standing and as far as I can tell totally non-political.

That memo is just...another level. I will be very interested to see if our acting sends it out. It's one thing to say, hey, we've decided to eliminate all these programs. It's something totally different to say they resulted in "shameful discrimination" and then threaten the workforce if they don't report "coded language." But nothing to see here! It's all good and totally normal governing.

+1. These people didn't create the DEI offices and in most cases didn't create the policies people are complaining about. They were assigned to do a job. It's fine to decide that job is unwanted now, but making the employees into villains should worry everybody. Every fed will at some point work on something the other side doesn't like.

They weren't assigned to these offices, they applied to work in them, presumably because they wanted to advance that mission. The mission has been discredited, the consequences follow.

Where is the compassion for these workers and their families?
Is this all bc of some crazy idea that they are taking jobs from white Christian men? Or bc they are more educated than white Christian men?
I don’t understand the hate and desire for revenge. And frankly, I don’t want to. Don’t you understand that this mass layoff will affect us all? Unemployed, instability, lost income, etc

It is ironic that you spend your entire post defending diversity by slamming Christians, an entire race, and half the genders in this country.

+1. And this is the thought process that resulted in so many people resenting DEI initiatives. It’s okay to discriminate as long as we’re discriminating against someone who is white, male, straight, Christian. Now I’m afraid we have taken a huge step back wrt race relations. It’s a shame that DEI went so far that it’s brought us to where we are now.

Absolutely. DEI created more racists than there would have otherwise been.

With all due respect, you have no idea how DEI works. There was no discrimination as that is not the point of those offices. And, lbh, America has been chock full of racists since it was settled. So spare me that last sentence.

You don’t think an office with the purpose of hiring and supporting only non-white people is racist?

First of all, as you phrase it, you’re lying. These offices were not set up to “support only nonwhites.” You are lying. I work with these offices so I know you’re lying.

Second of all, “hiring” is generally not a part of these offices. These are outreach and education offices. They are not setting HR policy. They are not doing the hiring. They just aren’t.

Until you know what the f you are dealing with, maybe stud and stop opining on what’s racist or not.

And lastly, if you think you r been discriminated against for being white you have exactly the same rights to file a complaint as anyone else does. So you are in fact no prejudiced in any way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's not what a RIF is, OP.

The OPM memo calls it a RIF.

Holy shit, the OPM memo is a bloodbath. Wow. The EO stopped short of this, this is absolutely nuts.

https://chcoc.gov/sites/default/files/OPM%20Memo%20Initial%20Guidance%20Regarding%20DEIA%20Executive%20Orders.pdf

I wonder how many acting heads are going to quit rather than send out those memos.
I honestly can’t see the person acting at my agency sending that out - she’s just the last one standing and as far as I can tell totally non-political.

That memo is just...another level. I will be very interested to see if our acting sends it out. It's one thing to say, hey, we've decided to eliminate all these programs. It's something totally different to say they resulted in "shameful discrimination" and then threaten the workforce if they don't report "coded language." But nothing to see here! It's all good and totally normal governing.

+1. These people didn't create the DEI offices and in most cases didn't create the policies people are complaining about. They were assigned to do a job. It's fine to decide that job is unwanted now, but making the employees into villains should worry everybody. Every fed will at some point work on something the other side doesn't like.

They weren't assigned to these offices, they applied to work in them, presumably because they wanted to advance that mission. The mission has been discredited, the consequences follow.

Where is the compassion for these workers and their families?
Is this all bc of some crazy idea that they are taking jobs from white Christian men? Or bc they are more educated than white Christian men?
I don’t understand the hate and desire for revenge. And frankly, I don’t want to. Don’t you understand that this mass layoff will affect us all? Unemployed, instability, lost income, etc

It is ironic that you spend your entire post defending diversity by slamming Christians, an entire race, and half the genders in this country.

+1. And this is the thought process that resulted in so many people resenting DEI initiatives. It’s okay to discriminate as long as we’re discriminating against someone who is white, male, straight, Christian. Now I’m afraid we have taken a huge step back wrt race relations. It’s a shame that DEI went so far that it’s brought us to where we are now.

Absolutely. DEI created more racists than there would have otherwise been.

With all due respect, you have no idea how DEI works. There was no discrimination as that is not the point of those offices. And, lbh, America has been chock full of racists since it was settled. So spare me that last sentence.

I know of many instances of discrimination that has occurred in the workplace due to DEI, including several people who have actually been told they were passed over for a job or promotion because they had to give it to the diverse candidate.

Cool story bro. And I know several people passed over because of a good old boy system. I also know people who were passed over because there was “no way you didn’t get here by anything other than affirmative action” even though their qualifications exceeded what was necessary.

OK? all this does is show that nobody likes to be overtly discriminated against based on their race or gender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's not what a RIF is, OP.

The OPM memo calls it a RIF.

Holy shit, the OPM memo is a bloodbath. Wow. The EO stopped short of this, this is absolutely nuts.

https://chcoc.gov/sites/default/files/OPM%20Memo%20Initial%20Guidance%20Regarding%20DEIA%20Executive%20Orders.pdf

I wonder how many acting heads are going to quit rather than send out those memos.
I honestly can’t see the person acting at my agency sending that out - she’s just the last one standing and as far as I can tell totally non-political.

That memo is just...another level. I will be very interested to see if our acting sends it out. It's one thing to say, hey, we've decided to eliminate all these programs. It's something totally different to say they resulted in "shameful discrimination" and then threaten the workforce if they don't report "coded language." But nothing to see here! It's all good and totally normal governing.

+1. These people didn't create the DEI offices and in most cases didn't create the policies people are complaining about. They were assigned to do a job. It's fine to decide that job is unwanted now, but making the employees into villains should worry everybody. Every fed will at some point work on something the other side doesn't like.

They weren't assigned to these offices, they applied to work in them, presumably because they wanted to advance that mission. The mission has been discredited, the consequences follow.

Where is the compassion for these workers and their families?
Is this all bc of some crazy idea that they are taking jobs from white Christian men? Or bc they are more educated than white Christian men?
I don’t understand the hate and desire for revenge. And frankly, I don’t want to. Don’t you understand that this mass layoff will affect us all? Unemployed, instability, lost income, etc

It is ironic that you spend your entire post defending diversity by slamming Christians, an entire race, and half the genders in this country.

+1. And this is the thought process that resulted in so many people resenting DEI initiatives. It’s okay to discriminate as long as we’re discriminating against someone who is white, male, straight, Christian. Now I’m afraid we have taken a huge step back wrt race relations. It’s a shame that DEI went so far that it’s brought us to where we are now.

Absolutely. DEI created more racists than there would have otherwise been.

With all due respect, you have no idea how DEI works. There was no discrimination as that is not the point of those offices. And, lbh, America has been chock full of racists since it was settled. So spare me that last sentence.

You don’t think an office with the purpose of hiring and supporting only non-white people is racist?

First of all, as you phrase it, you’re lying. These offices were not set up to “support only nonwhites.” You are lying. I work with these offices so I know you’re lying.

Second of all, “hiring” is generally not a part of these offices. These are outreach and education offices. They are not setting HR policy. They are not doing the hiring. They just aren’t.

Until you know what the f you are dealing with, maybe stud and stop opining on what’s racist or not.

And lastly, if you think you r been discriminated against for being white you have exactly the same rights to file a complaint as anyone else does. So you are in fact no prejudiced in any way.

+1,000,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's not what a RIF is, OP.

The OPM memo calls it a RIF.

Holy shit, the OPM memo is a bloodbath. Wow. The EO stopped short of this, this is absolutely nuts.

https://chcoc.gov/sites/default/files/OPM%20Memo%20Initial%20Guidance%20Regarding%20DEIA%20Executive%20Orders.pdf

I wonder how many acting heads are going to quit rather than send out those memos.
I honestly can’t see the person acting at my agency sending that out - she’s just the last one standing and as far as I can tell totally non-political.

That memo is just...another level. I will be very interested to see if our acting sends it out. It's one thing to say, hey, we've decided to eliminate all these programs. It's something totally different to say they resulted in "shameful discrimination" and then threaten the workforce if they don't report "coded language." But nothing to see here! It's all good and totally normal governing.

+1. These people didn't create the DEI offices and in most cases didn't create the policies people are complaining about. They were assigned to do a job. It's fine to decide that job is unwanted now, but making the employees into villains should worry everybody. Every fed will at some point work on something the other side doesn't like.

They weren't assigned to these offices, they applied to work in them, presumably because they wanted to advance that mission. The mission has been discredited, the consequences follow.

Where is the compassion for these workers and their families?
Is this all bc of some crazy idea that they are taking jobs from white Christian men? Or bc they are more educated than white Christian men?
I don’t understand the hate and desire for revenge. And frankly, I don’t want to. Don’t you understand that this mass layoff will affect us all? Unemployed, instability, lost income, etc

Why all this racial and anti Christian animosity?

Observing the fact that white Christians have had privileged opportunities (whether they deserved it or not) is not animosity. It is a fact. NP.

This has nothing to do with the DEI RIF, or whatever its category. I’m not a white Christian. I don’t believe that my interests were supported by the DEI office and corresponding trainings. I don’t feel harmed by its removal. I do feel for the people who might lose their jobs, though. It’s a tough job economy.

How so? Exactly, how so? I'm white. Did not bother me either way to hear that my agency was reaching out to make opportunities available to disadvantaged or under-represented groups. Or to hear that there may be systemic biases in employment decisions. I didn't think of it once. It didn't affect me.

I never heard of any reaching out to make opportunities available to disadvantaged or under-represented groups. I also never experienced any bias as a federal employee who is female and a minority. As to systemic bias? I have no experience.

But, that’s neither here nor there because my personal experience doesn’t matter. What matters is whether these positions were effective in a way that did not impose its own racism. Whether biases for or against were reduced. Because that’s the point. “Under-represented” is not the point. We don’t control who applies to any given position.

The job duties that I observed the offices undertaking, no offense to them, amounted largely to webinars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chime in if you report your office for refusing to comply with the directive to take down DEIA junk. Curious to see how many do not comply.

Heil Comrade! Shall I report on my own parents' snide remarks about this administration too? Will that earn me a medal, and then get me thrown into a gulag for being related to them?

It's so sad that our country falls down this hole so easily.

[Anonymous]

Our office has pretty much ONLY hired females of very specific races over the last 3 years. Like it is a grossly outsized amount compared to their percent in the population. Impossible that they are the best candidates. They've promoted ZERO Asians into higher level management, which is again impossible to claim they're not qualified given that Asians have the most education out of any racial group. It is entirely DEI at work. They need racial quotas rather than hiring the best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our office has pretty much ONLY hired females of very specific races over the last 3 years. Like it is a grossly outsized amount compared to their percent in the population. Impossible that they are the best candidates. They've promoted ZERO Asians into higher level management, which is again impossible to claim they're not qualified given that Asians have the most education out of any racial group. It is entirely DEI at work. They need racial quotas rather than hiring the best.

If they had racial quotas, wouldn’t that include Asians in management?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our office has pretty much ONLY hired females of very specific races over the last 3 years. Like it is a grossly outsized amount compared to their percent in the population. Impossible that they are the best candidates. They've promoted ZERO Asians into higher level management, which is again impossible to claim they're not qualified given that Asians have the most education out of any racial group. It is entirely DEI at work. They need racial quotas rather than hiring the best.

If they had racial quotas, wouldn’t that include Asians in management?

You'd have thought. But the left considers Asians to be "white adjacent" and that they're not URMs. I mean it is truly noticeable how badly underrepresented Asians are in management positions in our office, especially considering how many we have with insane pedigrees and years of experience doing the work. Asians just don't have the right skin tone to be promoted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our office has pretty much ONLY hired females of very specific races over the last 3 years. Like it is a grossly outsized amount compared to their percent in the population. Impossible that they are the best candidates. They've promoted ZERO Asians into higher level management, which is again impossible to claim they're not qualified given that Asians have the most education out of any racial group. It is entirely DEI at work. They need racial quotas rather than hiring the best.

If they had racial quotas, wouldn’t that include Asians in management?

You'd have thought. But the left considers Asians to be "white adjacent" and that they're not URMs. I mean it is truly noticeable how badly underrepresented Asians are in management positions in our office, especially considering how many we have with insane pedigrees and years of experience doing the work. Asians just don't have the right skin tone to be promoted.

You are so close to understanding why DEI initiatives are important. It’s kind of hilarious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chime in if you report your office for refusing to comply with the directive to take down DEIA junk. Curious to see how many do not comply.

Heil Comrade! Shall I report on my own parents' snide remarks about this administration too? Will that earn me a medal, and then get me thrown into a gulag for being related to them?

It's so sad that our country falls down this hole so easily.

This is exactly what it feels like. Nazi Germany or a communist state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our office has pretty much ONLY hired females of very specific races over the last 3 years. Like it is a grossly outsized amount compared to their percent in the population. Impossible that they are the best candidates. They've promoted ZERO Asians into higher level management, which is again impossible to claim they're not qualified given that Asians have the most education out of any racial group. It is entirely DEI at work. They need racial quotas rather than hiring the best.

If they had racial quotas, wouldn’t that include Asians in management?

You'd have thought. But the left considers Asians to be "white adjacent" and that they're not URMs. I mean it is truly noticeable how badly underrepresented Asians are in management positions in our office, especially considering how many we have with insane pedigrees and years of experience doing the work. Asians just don't have the right skin tone to be promoted.

You are so close to understanding why DEI initiatives are important. It’s kind of hilarious.

Except DEI as implemented specifically excludes certain groups such as Asians

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our office has pretty much ONLY hired females of very specific races over the last 3 years. Like it is a grossly outsized amount compared to their percent in the population. Impossible that they are the best candidates. They've promoted ZERO Asians into higher level management, which is again impossible to claim they're not qualified given that Asians have the most education out of any racial group. It is entirely DEI at work. They need racial quotas rather than hiring the best.

If they had racial quotas, wouldn’t that include Asians in management?

You'd have thought. But the left considers Asians to be "white adjacent" and that they're not URMs. I mean it is truly noticeable how badly underrepresented Asians are in management positions in our office, especially considering how many we have with insane pedigrees and years of experience doing the work. Asians just don't have the right skin tone to be promoted.

I have worked in government contracting over the years and the majority of people I've worked with across several agencies have been predominantly white. One small office is just not enough to justify to not have diversity programs. It's very white at the higher levels. There is plenty of data that shows that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's not what a RIF is, OP.

The OPM memo calls it a RIF.

Holy shit, the OPM memo is a bloodbath. Wow. The EO stopped short of this, this is absolutely nuts.

https://chcoc.gov/sites/default/files/OPM%20Memo%20Initial%20Guidance%20Regarding%20DEIA%20Executive%20Orders.pdf

I wonder how many acting heads are going to quit rather than send out those memos.
I honestly can’t see the person acting at my agency sending that out - she’s just the last one standing and as far as I can tell totally non-political.

That memo is just...another level. I will be very interested to see if our acting sends it out. It's one thing to say, hey, we've decided to eliminate all these programs. It's something totally different to say they resulted in "shameful discrimination" and then threaten the workforce if they don't report "coded language." But nothing to see here! It's all good and totally normal governing.

+1. These people didn't create the DEI offices and in most cases didn't create the policies people are complaining about. They were assigned to do a job. It's fine to decide that job is unwanted now, but making the employees into villains should worry everybody. Every fed will at some point work on something the other side doesn't like.

They weren't assigned to these offices, they applied to work in them, presumably because they wanted to advance that mission. The mission has been discredited, the consequences follow.

Where is the compassion for these workers and their families?
Is this all bc of some crazy idea that they are taking jobs from white Christian men? Or bc they are more educated than white Christian men?
I don’t understand the hate and desire for revenge. And frankly, I don’t want to. Don’t you understand that this mass layoff will affect us all? Unemployed, instability, lost income, etc

Why all this racial and anti Christian animosity?

Observing the fact that white Christians have had privileged opportunities (whether they deserved it or not) is not animosity. It is a fact. NP.

Educate yourself on Irish, Italians, and Polish Catholic immigrants, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our office has pretty much ONLY hired females of very specific races over the last 3 years. Like it is a grossly outsized amount compared to their percent in the population. Impossible that they are the best candidates. They've promoted ZERO Asians into higher level management, which is again impossible to claim they're not qualified given that Asians have the most education out of any racial group. It is entirely DEI at work. They need racial quotas rather than hiring the best.

If they had racial quotas, wouldn’t that include Asians in management?

You'd have thought. But the left considers Asians to be "white adjacent" and that they're not URMs. I mean it is truly noticeable how badly underrepresented Asians are in management positions in our office, especially considering how many we have with insane pedigrees and years of experience doing the work. Asians just don't have the right skin tone to be promoted.

You are so close to understanding why DEI initiatives are important. It’s kind of hilarious.

Except DEI as implemented specifically excludes certain groups such as Asians

No it doesn’t. There is no such policy in government.