Will FDIC Chair survive this report?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he makes it through. Hardly the first testy, angry principal to yell at staff. He won’t be the last.

If he had any sexual allegations against him, he would be toast.

I vote he will survive, but will have to bring in an outside group to manage the 'change' as I do not really seeing much change going on at the corporation ---same old stuff, just another day. What has really changed since the November reports by the WSJ...nothing. All I see is a lot of talk and no action.

Totally agree; he is feisty but not the root cause of the harassment issues...

And there are tons of people with sexual harassment issues that are still at FDIC so I designee with him being toast for that. Not saying it is right but nothing was done to those people with known validated incidents against them. The law firm did mention 'lack of accountability for the problems at the corporation'--no truer statement has ever been uttered.

I find the focus on sexual
Harassment bizarre. There are SO many other issues there. Overpaid crony managers. Unfair workloads, incorrect job descriptions. Jobs that are not graded fairly. Coworkers who essentially do nothing for years and our excused while their coworkers pick up so much of the slack for nothing extra.


Heck , I worked for years with someone who couldn’t do the job ( protected class). They were afraid and wouldn’t remove or discipline the yelling. Because fdic didn’t want a racial lawsuit. But others were forced to account for work

It’s truly a terrible environment

Are you a man?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he makes it through. Hardly the first testy, angry principal to yell at staff. He won’t be the last.

If he had any sexual allegations against him, he would be toast.

I vote he will survive, but will have to bring in an outside group to manage the 'change' as I do not really seeing much change going on at the corporation ---same old stuff, just another day. What has really changed since the November reports by the WSJ...nothing. All I see is a lot of talk and no action.

Totally agree; he is feisty but not the root cause of the harassment issues...

And there are tons of people with sexual harassment issues that are still at FDIC so I designee with him being toast for that. Not saying it is right but nothing was done to those people with known validated incidents against them. The law firm did mention 'lack of accountability for the problems at the corporation'--no truer statement has ever been uttered.

I find the focus on sexual
Harassment bizarre. There are SO many other issues there. Overpaid crony managers. Unfair workloads, incorrect job descriptions. Jobs that are not graded fairly. Coworkers who essentially do nothing for years and our excused while their coworkers pick up so much of the slack for nothing extra.


Heck , I worked for years with someone who couldn’t do the job ( protected class). They were afraid and wouldn’t remove or discipline the yelling. Because fdic didn’t want a racial lawsuit. But others were forced to account for work

It’s truly a terrible environment

Read the room. Just ignore the sexual harassment so you can complain about URMs in the workplace. Gross. Also, everyone is a protected class. Describing someone as a protected class is a racist dog whistle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he makes it through. Hardly the first testy, angry principal to yell at staff. He won’t be the last.

If he had any sexual allegations against him, he would be toast.

I vote he will survive, but will have to bring in an outside group to manage the 'change' as I do not really seeing much change going on at the corporation ---same old stuff, just another day. What has really changed since the November reports by the WSJ...nothing. All I see is a lot of talk and no action.

Totally agree; he is feisty but not the root cause of the harassment issues...

And there are tons of people with sexual harassment issues that are still at FDIC so I designee with him being toast for that. Not saying it is right but nothing was done to those people with known validated incidents against them. The law firm did mention 'lack of accountability for the problems at the corporation'--no truer statement has ever been uttered.

I find the focus on sexual
Harassment bizarre. There are SO many other issues there. Overpaid crony managers. Unfair workloads, incorrect job descriptions. Jobs that are not graded fairly. Coworkers who essentially do nothing for years and our excused while their coworkers pick up so much of the slack for nothing extra.


Heck , I worked for years with someone who couldn’t do the job ( protected class). They were afraid and wouldn’t remove or discipline the yelling. Because fdic didn’t want a racial lawsuit. But others were forced to account for work

It’s truly a terrible environment

Read the room. Just ignore the sexual harassment so you can complain about URMs in the workplace. Gross. Also, everyone is a protected class. Describing someone as a protected class is a racist dog whistle.

DP. No PP is exactly right. An overall dysfunctional culture will involve much more than sexual harassment yet that’s the focus here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the CFPB's union were at the FDIC, employees would have gotten full telework for the next three years based on this report. The fact that three days per week is still on the table right now shows how weak the FDIC's union is.

I don't work there so I have no idea if their union sucks or not but the union cannot control management's proposals. They can try to negotiate or litigate it before the FSIP and have the FSIP impose better terms but if management is dug in there is nothing any union can do to make them give a better offer.

Look to the CFPB. Their employees recently threw a fit about compensation, including on this forum, and after many months of negotiating, the union basically got everything they wanted -- huge pay increase, an increase in the salary cap (has the FDIC gotten anything besides promises for many years about that?), huge increase in bonuses. So much for the CFPB management proposal. You need to be a squeaky wheel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the CFPB's union were at the FDIC, employees would have gotten full telework for the next three years based on this report. The fact that three days per week is still on the table right now shows how weak the FDIC's union is.

I don't work there so I have no idea if their union sucks or not but the union cannot control management's proposals. They can try to negotiate or litigate it before the FSIP and have the FSIP impose better terms but if management is dug in there is nothing any union can do to make them give a better offer.

Look to the CFPB. Their employees recently threw a fit about compensation, including on this forum, and after many months of negotiating, the union basically got everything they wanted -- huge pay increase, an increase in the salary cap (has the FDIC gotten anything besides promises for many years about that?), huge increase in bonuses. So much for the CFPB management proposal. You need to be a squeaky wheel.

My point is that management has to give in for that to happen. If they don't all you can do is litigate.

[Anonymous]

The FDIC was always ranked so high on the best federal agencies to work for (I think it was #1 or #2 not long ago for mid-sized agencies). Are those surveys just wrong?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The FDIC was always ranked so high on the best federal agencies to work for (I think it was #1 or #2 not long ago for mid-sized agencies). Are those surveys just wrong?

Mayhe you have 1K employees and things are egregiously bad for 50 of them and fine for the other 950. Survey scores could be high overall but you could end up with a report like this from the other 50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the CFPB's union were at the FDIC, employees would have gotten full telework for the next three years based on this report. The fact that three days per week is still on the table right now shows how weak the FDIC's union is.

I don't work there so I have no idea if their union sucks or not but the union cannot control management's proposals. They can try to negotiate or litigate it before the FSIP and have the FSIP impose better terms but if management is dug in there is nothing any union can do to make them give a better offer.

Look to the CFPB. Their employees recently threw a fit about compensation, including on this forum, and after many months of negotiating, the union basically got everything they wanted -- huge pay increase, an increase in the salary cap (has the FDIC gotten anything besides promises for many years about that?), huge increase in bonuses. So much for the CFPB management proposal. You need to be a squeaky wheel.

My point is that management has to give in for that to happen. If they don't all you can do is litigate.

And my point is that you need to be difficult -- present data about management's position is unreasonable, refuse to participate in recruiting new candidates, raise questions at townhalls, demand meetings, wear buttons and post signs on your office doors, constantly send emails to union members telling them why they should be angry, present proposals and demand that management move positions and call them out when they don't, set up a website documenting all of this, be difficult at every turn. If management is stubborn, you can't play nice. The CFPB's union should run a clinic on all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the CFPB's union were at the FDIC, employees would have gotten full telework for the next three years based on this report. The fact that three days per week is still on the table right now shows how weak the FDIC's union is.

I don't work there so I have no idea if their union sucks or not but the union cannot control management's proposals. They can try to negotiate or litigate it before the FSIP and have the FSIP impose better terms but if management is dug in there is nothing any union can do to make them give a better offer.

Look to the CFPB. Their employees recently threw a fit about compensation, including on this forum, and after many months of negotiating, the union basically got everything they wanted -- huge pay increase, an increase in the salary cap (has the FDIC gotten anything besides promises for many years about that?), huge increase in bonuses. So much for the CFPB management proposal. You need to be a squeaky wheel.

My point is that management has to give in for that to happen. If they don't all you can do is litigate.

And my point is that you need to be difficult -- present data about management's position is unreasonable, refuse to participate in recruiting new candidates, raise questions at townhalls, demand meetings, wear buttons and post signs on your office doors, constantly send emails to union members telling them why they should be angry, present proposals and demand that management move positions and call them out when they don't, set up a website documenting all of this, be difficult at every turn. If management is stubborn, you can't play nice. The CFPB's union should run a clinic on all of this.

Exactly. It’s all the little stuff that wins the battles for the union. Was at another finreg and the union constantly blasted the chair and senior management in agency-wide emails all the time when they weren’t negotiating in good faith. And the results always ended up settling somewhere between management’s proposal and union demands. There just has to be constant pressure in the form of public shaming. At the FDIC, it’s like the union asks politely and hopes for the best while sitting on their hands even when they get steamrolled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the CFPB's union were at the FDIC, employees would have gotten full telework for the next three years based on this report. The fact that three days per week is still on the table right now shows how weak the FDIC's union is.

I don't work there so I have no idea if their union sucks or not but the union cannot control management's proposals. They can try to negotiate or litigate it before the FSIP and have the FSIP impose better terms but if management is dug in there is nothing any union can do to make them give a better offer.

Look to the CFPB. Their employees recently threw a fit about compensation, including on this forum, and after many months of negotiating, the union basically got everything they wanted -- huge pay increase, an increase in the salary cap (has the FDIC gotten anything besides promises for many years about that?), huge increase in bonuses. So much for the CFPB management proposal. You need to be a squeaky wheel.

My point is that management has to give in for that to happen. If they don't all you can do is litigate.

And my point is that you need to be difficult -- present data about management's position is unreasonable, refuse to participate in recruiting new candidates, raise questions at townhalls, demand meetings, wear buttons and post signs on your office doors, constantly send emails to union members telling them why they should be angry, present proposals and demand that management move positions and call them out when they don't, set up a website documenting all of this, be difficult at every turn. If management is stubborn, you can't play nice. The CFPB's union should run a clinic on all of this.

Exactly. It’s all the little stuff that wins the battles for the union. Was at another finreg and the union constantly blasted the chair and senior management in agency-wide emails all the time when they weren’t negotiating in good faith. And the results always ended up settling somewhere between management’s proposal and union demands. There just has to be constant pressure in the form of public shaming. At the FDIC, it’s like the union asks politely and hopes for the best while sitting on their hands even when they get steamrolled.

+1. FDIC is about to go back three days/week, which is triple any other finreg, and for months they've also had everyone (including Congress) blasting their workplace as being completely toxic. Maybe they'll win at FSIP, but the fact that they've seemingly done nothing in the interim is pretty shocking. Going to 3 days/week in a toxic environment? How is that even on the table? It's like a sick joke. You really couldn't have a better setup to keep the status quo of 1 day/week, or even go full telework.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he makes it through. Hardly the first testy, angry principal to yell at staff. He won’t be the last.

If he had any sexual allegations against him, he would be toast.

I vote he will survive, but will have to bring in an outside group to manage the 'change' as I do not really seeing much change going on at the corporation ---same old stuff, just another day. What has really changed since the November reports by the WSJ...nothing. All I see is a lot of talk and no action.

Totally agree; he is feisty but not the root cause of the harassment issues...

And there are tons of people with sexual harassment issues that are still at FDIC so I designee with him being toast for that. Not saying it is right but nothing was done to those people with known validated incidents against them. The law firm did mention 'lack of accountability for the problems at the corporation'--no truer statement has ever been uttered.

I find the focus on sexual
Harassment bizarre. There are SO many other issues there. Overpaid crony managers. Unfair workloads, incorrect job descriptions. Jobs that are not graded fairly. Coworkers who essentially do nothing for years and our excused while their coworkers pick up so much of the slack for nothing extra.


Heck , I worked for years with someone who couldn’t do the job ( protected class). They were afraid and wouldn’t remove or discipline the yelling. Because fdic didn’t want a racial lawsuit. But others were forced to account for work

It’s truly a terrible environment

Read the room. Just ignore the sexual harassment so you can complain about URMs in the workplace. Gross. Also, everyone is a protected class. Describing someone as a protected class is a racist dog whistle.

I know of a very specific case where a URM is indeed the issue. Dealt with it for years. Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the CFPB's union were at the FDIC, employees would have gotten full telework for the next three years based on this report. The fact that three days per week is still on the table right now shows how weak the FDIC's union is.

I don't work there so I have no idea if their union sucks or not but the union cannot control management's proposals. They can try to negotiate or litigate it before the FSIP and have the FSIP impose better terms but if management is dug in there is nothing any union can do to make them give a better offer.

Look to the CFPB. Their employees recently threw a fit about compensation, including on this forum, and after many months of negotiating, the union basically got everything they wanted -- huge pay increase, an increase in the salary cap (has the FDIC gotten anything besides promises for many years about that?), huge increase in bonuses. So much for the CFPB management proposal. You need to be a squeaky wheel.

Not to derail this thread, but...

The union did not get the single thing that management had not previously agreed to and the thing that the union held up the agreement for months to try to get. The salary cap was NOT increased.

Management had an amazing deal on the table months ago, the union fought for more, didn't get it, and then claimed victory for getting the deal management had already offered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the CFPB's union were at the FDIC, employees would have gotten full telework for the next three years based on this report. The fact that three days per week is still on the table right now shows how weak the FDIC's union is.

I don't work there so I have no idea if their union sucks or not but the union cannot control management's proposals. They can try to negotiate or litigate it before the FSIP and have the FSIP impose better terms but if management is dug in there is nothing any union can do to make them give a better offer.

Look to the CFPB. Their employees recently threw a fit about compensation, including on this forum, and after many months of negotiating, the union basically got everything they wanted -- huge pay increase, an increase in the salary cap (has the FDIC gotten anything besides promises for many years about that?), huge increase in bonuses. So much for the CFPB management proposal. You need to be a squeaky wheel.

Not to derail this thread, but...

The union did not get the single thing that management had not previously agreed to and the thing that the union held up the agreement for months to try to get. The salary cap was NOT increased.

Management had an amazing deal on the table months ago, the union fought for more, didn't get it, and then claimed victory for getting the deal management had already offered.[/quote

Thank you for clarifying this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yikes, that’s bad.

What is the case for keeping him?

He is a Biden appointee, that is the only thing you need to know.

Biden kept this Secretary of Defense on after he went AWOL, I would not expect him to do anything about this either.

[Anonymous]

The chair has Congressional hearings next week, along with the heads of the other banking agencies, Whether he keeps his job may depend on how he fares at the hearings.