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:

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.

I hear this anecdote a lot, but where are all the lawsuits? Where's the proof?

No lawsuit. That would have been career suicide. When it happened to my friend, he had to suck it up. There was nothing he could do even though it was shockingly blatant. Most people at that his level would never consider filing a suit. It is happening but it’s silent. As with my friend, he is (or at least was) a hardcore Dem. He couldn’t believe it happened to him.

I know two people it happened to. Neither sued because it would have been career suicide and it’s a case that’s difficult to prove.

[Anonymous]

This is impacting private companies too. It’s been ongoing since the Perkins lawsuit, but has accelerated dramatically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our office sent out a really nasty Hitler-like message about how if you are found NOT to have reported a DEI office or information, you will be reprimanded. It's 1930s Germany again, friends.

Everyone should have gotten that email. The templates were within the OPM memo.

If we didn't do you find that bothersome?
My agency didn't send one. Good.

The OPM memo required the fascist email be sent by EOD today. But I’m glad your agency is pushing back even if only by delaying as long as possible.

While the OPM email was a bit much, it was not fascist.

It sure sounded that way - you'll get in trouble if you're aware of something but don't report it? Sounds pretty familiar.

SSS!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would be a shame if everyone emailed [e-mail] with frivolous reporting of unauthorized DEI activities...

Don't forget to include Amanda Scales, the new OPM Chief of Staff that Musk brought in!

You can reach her at [e-mail]!

hopefully Amanda Scales never works again after she’s done with OPM.

She looks like she is 25.

[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:

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.

I hear this anecdote a lot, but where are all the lawsuits? Where's the proof?

No lawsuit. That would have been career suicide. When it happened to my friend, he had to suck it up. There was nothing he could do even though it was shockingly blatant. Most people at that his level would never consider filing a suit. It is happening but it’s silent. As with my friend, he is (or at least was) a hardcore Dem. He couldn’t believe it happened to him.

I know two people it happened to. Neither sued because it would have been career suicide and it’s a case that’s difficult to prove.

Huh. Imagine that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would be a shame if everyone emailed [e-mail] with frivolous reporting of unauthorized DEI activities...

Don't forget to include Amanda Scales, the new OPM Chief of Staff that Musk brought in!

You can reach her at [e-mail]!

hopefully Amanda Scales never works again after she’s done with OPM.

She looks like she is 25.

No. Closer to 35. Graduated from UC-Davis in 2012.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our DEI head resigned before the inauguration. It’s hard to imagine any staying on give how anti-diversity and exclusionary the incoming administration is.

Most of the people knew that DEI jobs within Govt are useless and could be gone any minute.

[Anonymous]

Will this filter down to FCPS/Gatehouse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

Enough with there hate to veterans. You want a leg up in hiring? Then Join the service! Nobody is stopping you and anyone can join. They earned this. It’s the exact opposite of DEI. You clearly don’t respect veterans- but do not drag veterans into this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

Enough with there hate to veterans. You want a leg up in hiring? Then Join the service! Nobody is stopping you and anyone can join. They earned this. It’s the exact opposite of DEI. You clearly don’t respect veterans- but do not drag veterans into this.

So merit is less important than rewarding certain groups of people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Isn’t hiring white male veterans DEI? Please tell me they are included. I’m not anti white male veteran, my dad was one, but if since they also benefit from hiring priority, they should be included in this.

No, veterans preference is a law. My mom is a veteran and so is my dad. While he’s a man, he’s not white. But he’s never benefited from veterans preference so it’s moot.

It’s DEI. It needs to be dismantled if DEI is going away.

Enough with there hate to veterans. You want a leg up in hiring? Then Join the service! Nobody is stopping you and anyone can join. They earned this. It’s the exact opposite of DEI. You clearly don’t respect veterans- but do not drag veterans into this.

So merit is less important than rewarding certain groups of people?

I respect veterans very, much. There are a few in my family. But it is absolutely a “dei hire” to give them preference.

[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:

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.

I hear this anecdote a lot, but where are all the lawsuits? Where's the proof?

It's very difficult to prove discrimination in hiring. If someone is dumb enough to put it in writing, maybe. And that's true for all kinds of discrimination and shady hiring behavior. Think about all the hiring actions in the federal government that are wired for a particular candidate -- but you can't prove it.

So how could there be forced DEI hiring if no one could put in writing that they engaged in it?

How could positions be wired for people if no one puts it in writing? How could anything against the rules be happening? You call someone or meet them in person.

What would be the point of forcing people to hire a black person to meet a quota if the quota can never be discussed? There would be no point.

The point is keeping your org from having the bad optics associated with a perceived lack of demographic diversity.

But there would still be no formal policy demanding quotas in this case, and certainly not one administered by DEIA staff at federal agencies. These people’s jobs were to offer training on inclusivity, etc. Not to count the number of brown people and order managers to hire more.

Still, these jobs are not needed. Move these people around to other jobs, depending on their ability or just sack all of them.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like people are getting DEI and affirmative action and quotas all very much confused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like people are getting DEI and affirmative action and quotas all very much confused.

That’s the point. MAGA spread the lie and is using at as cover to roll back antidiscrimination policies.