USDA Scientists refusing to move/relocate to Missouri

[Anonymous]

Big 10 school grad? Hope your new position is a soft landing, good luck to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good way to clear the dead wood, PhD or not PhD.

I think it will be precisely the opposite. The people who feel like they are competitive and can easily find another job will stay in DC and any dead-end lifers will move to keep the gig.

Pretty much. It's a very good way to keep the "dead wood" and get rid of anyone who decides they don't want to move and can get hired somewhere else.

I resigned recently. I have a PhD in Statistics and an undergrad/master's in ag economics. I loved working there and was there for a long time, but honestly they are doing this to essentially shut the office down and wind down the work we have been doing. For pretty terrible reasons:

Fun fact: we help set pricing for goods. Without our data, consumers could be screwed left and right if the government chose to hike prices.

People have no clue what we do, and that's fine, but if you don't know then you definitely will be surprised.

My new job pays 5 times what I was making before. Yes, it's not as fulfilling, but I got kids, a spouse and bills.

I am sorry pp. It's going to eventually hurt everyone, but lots of people don't seem to care.

At least your kids college will be fully funded.
One of my dh's fed co-workers recently resigned. Said he loved his job but could not continue to get paid 50% less than what private industry was paying, when he had kids.

[Anonymous]

The people I know that work there do things like study effectiveness of food stamp and school lunch programs. Since this administration cares nothing for those programs, this doesn’t surprise me at all. I feel terrible for these fed workers who have dedicated their career to trying to make sure our government’s programs make sense and actually help people. who are now being effectively forced out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is ridiculous. It's like the Coast Guard refusing to be based on the freaking coastline.

Coast Guard headquarters is landlocked: it's on a hill in SE DC. It's there because HQ functions are all about talking to the Hill, the president, and department heads of other agencies. Nobody at HQ has a job on a boat. Just like nobody at USDA HQ is doing field office work.

My neighbor works in an affected part of USDA. He does economic forecasting. Putting him in KC accomplishes nothing, and separates him from professional data scientists which are thick on the ground in DC.

Is your neighbor making the move?

No. Job hunting locally.

[Anonymous]

Apparently the agency backed out of a telework and relocation incentive agreement with the union at the last minute. Also no one is sure when is the actual deadline for employee to accept the relocation:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2019/07/usda-employees-who-didnt-already-opt-move-kansas-city-may-be-out-luck/158816/

Further complicating matters, the agency has apparently reneged on a tentative agreement to provide a transition period of telework and relocation incentives to encourage employees currently on the fence to accept the reassignment to Kansas City.

Peter Winch, special assistant to the national vice president of AFGE, who has been in negotiations on behalf of research agency employees since they voted to unionize earlier this year, said that AFGE reached a tentative agreement on July 24 with management, including acting ERS Administrator Ephraim Leibtag, to request the authority to offer a transition period of full-time telework to workers who accept their reassignment orders, as well as provide relocation incentives equivalent to one month’s salary.

But the next day, when the parties were expected to formally sign the agreement, management officials cancelled, saying they had been called into meetings.

“They said they’d do some edits, make some technical changes and run it up the food chain, but since then it’s been radio silence,” Winch said. “The meetings with ERS [negotiators] were very cordial, but I guess the most polite word I can use to describe it now is ‘inconclusive.’ ”

The tentative agreement also included language that would have codified the department’s decision to allow employees until Sept. 30 to make their final decision on whether to relocate.

“Now that Kansas City is the location, although they don’t know whether it will be in Kansas or Missouri, we wanted to reaffirm that [employees] could change their minds,” Winch said. “What we agreed to, especially the one month’s salary bonus for relocation, that might affect people’s decision-making.”

The next meeting between the Agriculture Department and AFGE is scheduled for Aug. 8. But Winch said that even if the department affirms the terms of the tentative agreement at that meeting, it will be a moot point. Employees considering whether to relocate have a July 31 deadline to express their interest in jobs elsewhere in the department under priority hiring, and an Aug. 9 deadline to submit their resume.

“I’ve told them that [regarding the Aug. 6 meeting], at that point it wouldn’t make much difference if we met, because there’s a hard deadline of July 31,” Winch said. “Ephraim Leibtag was there, and he agreed to all the terms. We spent two days bargaining this thing, and they had plenty of time to review our initial proposals. In ordinary circumstances, I’d say this was bad faith bargaining, and it meets the definition of bad faith bargaining. But at this point, my recourse is very limited.”[.QUOTE]

[Anonymous]

School starts on August 12th in Kansas City. People with children would have less than a month and a half to complete the move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the agency backed out of a telework and relocation incentive agreement with the union at the last minute. Also no one is sure when is the actual deadline for employee to accept the relocation:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2019/07/usda-employees-who-didnt-already-opt-move-kansas-city-may-be-out-luck/158816/

Further complicating matters, the agency has apparently reneged on a tentative agreement to provide a transition period of telework and relocation incentives to encourage employees currently on the fence to accept the reassignment to Kansas City.

Peter Winch, special assistant to the national vice president of AFGE, who has been in negotiations on behalf of research agency employees since they voted to unionize earlier this year, said that AFGE reached a tentative agreement on July 24 with management, including acting ERS Administrator Ephraim Leibtag, to request the authority to offer a transition period of full-time telework to workers who accept their reassignment orders, as well as provide relocation incentives equivalent to one month’s salary.

But the next day, when the parties were expected to formally sign the agreement, management officials cancelled, saying they had been called into meetings.

“They said they’d do some edits, make some technical changes and run it up the food chain, but since then it’s been radio silence,” Winch said. “The meetings with ERS [negotiators] were very cordial, but I guess the most polite word I can use to describe it now is ‘inconclusive.’ ”

The tentative agreement also included language that would have codified the department’s decision to allow employees until Sept. 30 to make their final decision on whether to relocate.

“Now that Kansas City is the location, although they don’t know whether it will be in Kansas or Missouri, we wanted to reaffirm that [employees] could change their minds,” Winch said. “What we agreed to, especially the one month’s salary bonus for relocation, that might affect people’s decision-making.”

The next meeting between the Agriculture Department and AFGE is scheduled for Aug. 8. But Winch said that even if the department affirms the terms of the tentative agreement at that meeting, it will be a moot point. Employees considering whether to relocate have a July 31 deadline to express their interest in jobs elsewhere in the department under priority hiring, and an Aug. 9 deadline to submit their resume.

“I’ve told them that [regarding the Aug. 6 meeting], at that point it wouldn’t make much difference if we met, because there’s a hard deadline of July 31,” Winch said. “Ephraim Leibtag was there, and he agreed to all the terms. We spent two days bargaining this thing, and they had plenty of time to review our initial proposals. In ordinary circumstances, I’d say this was bad faith bargaining, and it meets the definition of bad faith bargaining. But at this point, my recourse is very limited.”[.QUOTE]

Maybe because fulltime telework is not relocation...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the agency backed out of a telework and relocation incentive agreement with the union at the last minute. Also no one is sure when is the actual deadline for employee to accept the relocation:

https://www.govexec.com/management/2019/07/usda-employees-who-didnt-already-opt-move-kansas-city-may-be-out-luck/158816/

Further complicating matters, the agency has apparently reneged on a tentative agreement to provide a transition period of telework and relocation incentives to encourage employees currently on the fence to accept the reassignment to Kansas City.

Peter Winch, special assistant to the national vice president of AFGE, who has been in negotiations on behalf of research agency employees since they voted to unionize earlier this year, said that AFGE reached a tentative agreement on July 24 with management, including acting ERS Administrator Ephraim Leibtag, to request the authority to offer a transition period of full-time telework to workers who accept their reassignment orders, as well as provide relocation incentives equivalent to one month’s salary.

But the next day, when the parties were expected to formally sign the agreement, management officials cancelled, saying they had been called into meetings.

“They said they’d do some edits, make some technical changes and run it up the food chain, but since then it’s been radio silence,” Winch said. “The meetings with ERS [negotiators] were very cordial, but I guess the most polite word I can use to describe it now is ‘inconclusive.’ ”

The tentative agreement also included language that would have codified the department’s decision to allow employees until Sept. 30 to make their final decision on whether to relocate.

“Now that Kansas City is the location, although they don’t know whether it will be in Kansas or Missouri, we wanted to reaffirm that [employees] could change their minds,” Winch said. “What we agreed to, especially the one month’s salary bonus for relocation, that might affect people’s decision-making.”

The next meeting between the Agriculture Department and AFGE is scheduled for Aug. 8. But Winch said that even if the department affirms the terms of the tentative agreement at that meeting, it will be a moot point. Employees considering whether to relocate have a July 31 deadline to express their interest in jobs elsewhere in the department under priority hiring, and an Aug. 9 deadline to submit their resume.

“I’ve told them that [regarding the Aug. 6 meeting], at that point it wouldn’t make much difference if we met, because there’s a hard deadline of July 31,” Winch said. “Ephraim Leibtag was there, and he agreed to all the terms. We spent two days bargaining this thing, and they had plenty of time to review our initial proposals. In ordinary circumstances, I’d say this was bad faith bargaining, and it meets the definition of bad faith bargaining. But at this point, my recourse is very limited.”

Maybe because fulltime telework is not relocation...

Don't you get it yet? The purpose of all these bumbling actions is to cause people to quit and gut the agency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Don't you get it yet? The purpose of all these bumbling actions is to cause people to quit and gut the agency.

Mulvaney gave the game away: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/mulvaney-cheers-for-more-federal-workers-to-quit-wonderful-way-to-drain-swamp

[Anonymous]

In order to get a federal job, whether qualified or not in the DMV area, you need to know someone in HR. If you are a part of certain groups like, BIG, you won't have a problem either. Go to federal job fairs & managers will say, "you are very qualified, but it is not up to me. To get interviewed by me, you have to get through HR". Look up surveys of Fed managers; the majority have replied that they feel new hires are not qualified.

BTW, based on personal knowledge, when you do manage to "get through HR", the call for an interview seems to be 4:45 pm or later on a Friday, including holiday weekends. Don't bother calling back or leaving messages, because you will be ignored. Maybe if the Fed govt was more diversified throughout the country, starting with HR personnel, this won't be a problem

As far as spouses, private sector companies relocate and employees either relocate or find another job or get unemployment. Private sector companies do not care what your spouse does or what happens with your kids or your home- unless you are a highly compensated employee. The military doesn't care about your spouse's employment prospects either. So why should the federal government be any different?

And for those of you who keep ripping President Trump, why don't you discuss Obama's political hires and Obama's discriminatory laws?

And if you ACTUALLY look into it, it is NOT uncommon for our planet to undergo warming AND cooling periods. You can verify this with ice core studies and pollen studies. Some parts of the world, including in the US , temperatures are actually MUCH cooler than in past years. Look OUTSIDE of the DMV bubble people

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2019/08/05/usda-science-agencies-relocation-may-have-violated-law-inspector-general-report-says

In the fall, USDA awarded a $340,000 contract to the accounting firm Ernst & Young to assist with the relocation. The 2018 omnibus spending bill required USDA to receive congressional approval before spending this money. “That prior approval did not appear to have been granted,” the inspector general report says.

This expense may have also violated the Antideficiency Act, the report said, which prevents federal employees from involving the government “in a contract or obligation for the payment of money before an appropriation is made.”

Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D. C.), who requested the inspector general’s investigation in September 2018, exhorted USDA to follow the law. “The Secretary must follow the will of Congress and refrain from moving forward with the relocation,” they said in a joint statement Monday, “until Congress approves the use of funds for those purposes as directed by the fiscal year 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act.”

Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.) called the inspector general report “very troubling” said it confirms “suspicions that the secretary does not have the authority to proceed with this relocation.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In order to get a federal job, whether qualified or not in the DMV area, you need to know someone in HR. If you are a part of certain groups like, BIG, you won't have a problem either. Go to federal job fairs & managers will say, "you are very qualified, but it is not up to me. To get interviewed by me, you have to get through HR". Look up surveys of Fed managers; the majority have replied that they feel new hires are not qualified.

BTW, based on personal knowledge, when you do manage to "get through HR", the call for an interview seems to be 4:45 pm or later on a Friday, including holiday weekends. Don't bother calling back or leaving messages, because you will be ignored. Maybe if the Fed govt was more diversified throughout the country, starting with HR personnel, this won't be a problem

This was not my experience.

[Anonymous]

Surprise - the picky scientists who refused $50K relocation incentives packages are unable to find comparable work in DC.

https://beta.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/the-usda-relocation-to-kansas-city-is-ripping-apart-the-lives-of-its-employees-here-are-some-of-their-stories/2019/09/07/9108a3b0-c935-11e9-a1fe-ca46e8d573c0_story.html