CFPB attorney

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are lucky you share offices. Most people are in cubes. Telecommuting is permitted, though no more than once per week. It sucks, but the rest makesdon't np for it. Cordray is really pushing for an open space plan against offices.

I seriously don't understand agencies who think that attorneys, who deal with privileged/confidential information, and who need to have private conversations/phone calls, don't need their own offices. My job at DOJ drives me crazy sometimes, but even our interns have private offices!

+100. I am reading this thread only because my DH is an attorney at a federal agency, and I am curious what it's like at other agencies.

I work in a law department of a large corporation where we have switched recently from having our own offices to an "open collaborative concept." It is horrendous and everyone hates it (except our real estate department which thinks that this move will help to attract millenials, and also save the company money.) The furnishings are really nice and it looks very fancy/cool, but it is a bad environment for actually getting work done. No one can concentrate.

When you're a lawyer, you need your own office.

[Anonymous]

To be clear, I am not floored (or even mildly surprised) by extramarital affairs -- at the Bureau or anywhere else. Its the quid pro quo discrimination that is the concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To be clear, I am not floored (or even mildly surprised) by extramarital affairs -- at the Bureau or anywhere else. Its the quid pro quo discrimination that is the concern.

It shouldn’t be surprising at an agency that has had multiple racial discrimination law suits, countless EEO complaints and union grievances, and has been brought before congress because it’s “plantation” discriminatory culture.

The agency is full of people that have fancy degrees and worked at fancy firms, but lack substance and competence. This is not the OCC, SEC, FED, DOJ, FTC, FinCEN, or FBI. Not even close, no matter how prestigious the agency wants you to believe it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pretty floored to read the quid pro quo sex stuff on this thread! I have been an attorney at the CFPB for almost 5 years and am totally unaware of sex for promotions or other forms of favors/influence that is described in some of these emails. Is anyone willing to share in what shop this is happening? It is virtually impossible for me to imagine it happening in Regulations (where I work), FWIW. But things could obviously be very different in different parts of the Bureau. Disturbing.

For the PP that said that these accounts are fictional because of the anonymous nature of this forum, you can choose to believe that sir/madam, but I know that what I’ve posted is true and what others have posted is 100% believable from what I’ve experienced. You just AREN’T likely aware of what is going on because you aren’t in those circles.

To the person I’m quoting, I’ve been with the agency since early on. I got my position because someone that no longer works here, but had a position of power at the agency at the time, wanted to be in a relationship with me so called in a favor. I had no idea this person was interested in me, he/she told me to apply and then a few months later I got a call. I’m sure this is how LOTS of people got into the agency early on.

Over the last few years, the quid pro quo behavior has become commonplace. Again, I’m not surprised that a lot of CFPB employees are unaware of this. But, the hotbeds of this behavior are all throughout Operations and in Examinations. I’m not sure about the rest of SEFL outside of Examinations. It wouldn’t surprise me if Legal has things going on, but I don’t specifically know of anything.

So actually you have no idea about Legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pretty floored to read the quid pro quo sex stuff on this thread! I have been an attorney at the CFPB for almost 5 years and am totally unaware of sex for promotions or other forms of favors/influence that is described in some of these emails. Is anyone willing to share in what shop this is happening? It is virtually impossible for me to imagine it happening in Regulations (where I work), FWIW. But things could obviously be very different in different parts of the Bureau. Disturbing.

For the PP that said that these accounts are fictional because of the anonymous nature of this forum, you can choose to believe that sir/madam, but I know that what I’ve posted is true and what others have posted is 100% believable from what I’ve experienced. You just AREN’T likely aware of what is going on because you aren’t in those circles.

To the person I’m quoting, I’ve been with the agency since early on. I got my position because someone that no longer works here, but had a position of power at the agency at the time, wanted to be in a relationship with me so called in a favor. I had no idea this person was interested in me, he/she told me to apply and then a few months later I got a call. I’m sure this is how LOTS of people got into the agency early on.

Over the last few years, the quid pro quo behavior has become commonplace. Again, I’m not surprised that a lot of CFPB employees are unaware of this. But, the hotbeds of this behavior are all throughout Operations and in Examinations. I’m not sure about the rest of SEFL outside of Examinations. It wouldn’t surprise me if Legal has things going on, but I don’t specifically know of anything.

So actually you have no idea about Legal.

Also, there is no Office or Division in the CFPB known as "Examinations."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pretty floored to read the quid pro quo sex stuff on this thread! I have been an attorney at the CFPB for almost 5 years and am totally unaware of sex for promotions or other forms of favors/influence that is described in some of these emails. Is anyone willing to share in what shop this is happening? It is virtually impossible for me to imagine it happening in Regulations (where I work), FWIW. But things could obviously be very different in different parts of the Bureau. Disturbing.

It's anonymous people making things up on the internet. I wouldn't put too much credence in it.

This is one or maybe two people writing adult fiction on DCUM. The comments about "THE SEX!" are all written in a similar voice. They also seem intent on outting people. As someone who is familiar with the CFPB, I'm betting this PP or PPs is/are just bored or vindictive. Or both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are lucky you share offices. Most people are in cubes. Telecommuting is permitted, though no more than once per week. It sucks, but the rest makesdon't np for it. Cordray is really pushing for an open space plan against offices.

I seriously don't understand agencies who think that attorneys, who deal with privileged/confidential information, and who need to have private conversations/phone calls, don't need their own offices. My job at DOJ drives me crazy sometimes, but even our interns have private offices!

+100. I am reading this thread only because my DH is an attorney at a federal agency, and I am curious what it's like at other agencies.

I work in a law department of a large corporation where we have switched recently from having our own offices to an "open collaborative concept." It is horrendous and everyone hates it (except our real estate department which thinks that this move will help to attract millenials, and also save the company money.) The furnishings are really nice and it looks very fancy/cool, but it is a bad environment for actually getting work done. No one can concentrate.

When you're a lawyer, you need your own office.

Everyone who is an attorney has their own office now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pretty floored to read the quid pro quo sex stuff on this thread! I have been an attorney at the CFPB for almost 5 years and am totally unaware of sex for promotions or other forms of favors/influence that is described in some of these emails. Is anyone willing to share in what shop this is happening? It is virtually impossible for me to imagine it happening in Regulations (where I work), FWIW. But things could obviously be very different in different parts of the Bureau. Disturbing.

For the PP that said that these accounts are fictional because of the anonymous nature of this forum, you can choose to believe that sir/madam, but I know that what I’ve posted is true and what others have posted is 100% believable from what I’ve experienced. You just AREN’T likely aware of what is going on because you aren’t in those circles.

To the person I’m quoting, I’ve been with the agency since early on. I got my position because someone that no longer works here, but had a position of power at the agency at the time, wanted to be in a relationship with me so called in a favor. I had no idea this person was interested in me, he/she told me to apply and then a few months later I got a call. I’m sure this is how LOTS of people got into the agency early on.

Over the last few years, the quid pro quo behavior has become commonplace. Again, I’m not surprised that a lot of CFPB employees are unaware of this. But, the hotbeds of this behavior are all throughout Operations and in Examinations. I’m not sure about the rest of SEFL outside of Examinations. It wouldn’t surprise me if Legal has things going on, but I don’t specifically know of anything.

So actually you have no idea about Legal.

Also, there is no Office or Division in the CFPB known as "Examinations."

Under Supervision there’s policy and examinations. You’ve never heard of the Office of Supervision Examinations?

[Anonymous]

Welp. It looks like the CFPB is on life support with the resignation of Cordray and Trump appointing a new Director.

Thoughts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Welp. It looks like the CFPB is on life support with the resignation of Cordray and Trump appointing a new Director.

Thoughts?

So is basically every other agency, so I wouldn't make too much of it.

[Anonymous]

I work in OSE. Inappropriate relationships, hostile work environments, and sexual harassment abound from HQ to the field, from the top to the bottom.

[Anonymous]

Pretty sure that some bored Trumpster who hates CFPB is making stuff up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure that some bored Trumpster who hates CFPB is making stuff up.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty sure that some bored Trumpster who hates CFPB is making stuff up.

+1

+100

I guess I could buy that people who travel 100% of the time like examiners have a little more "fun" than desk workers, but this is not accurate.

[Anonymous]

I wish it was made up/inaccurate. People should not be subjected to this.

I'm not a supporter of President Trump, BTW, and strongly believe in the agency's core mission of consumer protection and fair markets. All of this nonsense going on harms our ability to execute that mission.

I do find it ironic that this is occurring at an agency managed, at least at the top, by a group of died-in-the wool Democrats; very hypocritical.