Federal Employment - Post DOGE Era

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you environmental woke science or pesticide approving biddness science?

lol but this. I do think the days of mass layoffs are over but I also think you are safer if you are in a less policy focused area. I don’t think EPA will be eliminated but some programs could be.

I’m in an operations role where I coordinate sample collection and monitoring. I think there is a push to privatize and AI do the work (like every job). How much time do I have?

I honestly believe you're fine. They may not like your mission but they have a lot of fish to fry and are finding out right now how hard it is to create solutions to the things they've enjoyed complaining about.

But, the smart move is to use this time to develop a parallel skill set that would let you more easily move to another agency - maybe coordinating drug tests for human employees, or something in supply chain management; I don't know your skills but my point is to start building a landing pad that isn't EPA-specific while still staying in your EPA job.

They have already told all our support technicians that they will be gone.

I don't know what you want from this thread. You know more about your own job situation than anybody on DCUM. People have told you what they're seeing generally (which is hiring, or at least not firing) but if you think you're in specific danger then we are not equipped to tell you otherwise.

Just worried that I’m sitting complacent while larger forces work to unravel my life when I should be switching to an ageny that is hiring.

don't worry, the larger forces working to unravel lives are also at agencies that are hiring or about to hire. remember, switching agencies frequently means a new probationary period where they can just fire you. doge may be nominally gone but there are plenty of folks still working to burn things down from the inside.

basically, keep working, keep upskilling, keep looking for and applying to outside jobs —and be thankful if you are still eligible for a severance in the event of a RIF (i am not.)

FWIW I was not considered probationary after moving agencies as a lawyer. I also don’t think my agency fired people who had been recently promoted and were technically probationary. But I know some agencies were much harsher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you environmental woke science or pesticide approving biddness science?

lol but this. I do think the days of mass layoffs are over but I also think you are safer if you are in a less policy focused area. I don’t think EPA will be eliminated but some programs could be.

I’m in an operations role where I coordinate sample collection and monitoring. I think there is a push to privatize and AI do the work (like every job). How much time do I have?

I honestly believe you're fine. They may not like your mission but they have a lot of fish to fry and are finding out right now how hard it is to create solutions to the things they've enjoyed complaining about.

But, the smart move is to use this time to develop a parallel skill set that would let you more easily move to another agency - maybe coordinating drug tests for human employees, or something in supply chain management; I don't know your skills but my point is to start building a landing pad that isn't EPA-specific while still staying in your EPA job.

They have already told all our support technicians that they will be gone.

I don't know what you want from this thread. You know more about your own job situation than anybody on DCUM. People have told you what they're seeing generally (which is hiring, or at least not firing) but if you think you're in specific danger then we are not equipped to tell you otherwise.

Just worried that I’m sitting complacent while larger forces work to unravel my life when I should be switching to an ageny that is hiring.

don't worry, the larger forces working to unravel lives are also at agencies that are hiring or about to hire. remember, switching agencies frequently means a new probationary period where they can just fire you. doge may be nominally gone but there are plenty of folks still working to burn things down from the inside.

basically, keep working, keep upskilling, keep looking for and applying to outside jobs —and be thankful if you are still eligible for a severance in the event of a RIF (i am not.)

FWIW I was not considered probationary after moving agencies as a lawyer. I also don’t think my agency fired people who had been recently promoted and were technically probationary. But I know some agencies were much harsher.

i said frequently, not always. OP needs to be aware of the risks. my agency did not let anyone go who was probationary, but my agency also forced me into a probationary year because i was hired on a direct hire authority.

OTOH, friend at commerce was fired as a result of an internal promotion probationary period. They may get reinstated in a few years when the lawsuits settle out but for now they are just up a creek without a paddle.

[Anonymous]

Attorney and policy analyst positions are dangerous because of the Schedule F mess. This administration views OCC pointing out litigation risks or illegality as obstruction. They also want to fire policy people who suggest ideas the administration doesn't like.

[Anonymous]

Changing jobs when you are a middle aged parent is very precarious. You probably have way more doctor’s appointments for yourself and your kids than most jobs will tolerate. Working parents should not change jobs it’s unrealistic to expect a new employer to give you the same arrangements as a job where you have already proven yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Changing jobs when you are a middle aged parent is very precarious. You probably have way more doctor’s appointments for yourself and your kids than most jobs will tolerate. Working parents should not change jobs it’s unrealistic to expect a new employer to give you the same arrangements as a job where you have already proven yourself.

People post things sometimes that it's hard to not read as "my employer has all of the leverage because I wouldn't be able to find a new job, and I assume it's like that for everyone." I'm sorry if your reality is one where you need to prove yourself before taking time off for kids' doctors appointments, but I've changed jobs as a working parent, I earn a lot more as a result, and I've never run into this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing jobs when you are a middle aged parent is very precarious. You probably have way more doctor’s appointments for yourself and your kids than most jobs will tolerate. Working parents should not change jobs it’s unrealistic to expect a new employer to give you the same arrangements as a job where you have already proven yourself.

People post things sometimes that it's hard to not read as "my employer has all of the leverage because I wouldn't be able to find a new job, and I assume it's like that for everyone." I'm sorry if your reality is one where you need to prove yourself before taking time off for kids' doctors appointments, but I've changed jobs as a working parent, I earn a lot more as a result, and I've never run into this.

Are you out several times a month for doctors appointments or sick kids in your first 6 months of working? Or did your spouse take care of kid stuff? If you are unusually healthy that’s fine, but in your 40s you are likely seeing specialists, probably have a colonoscopy once, it’s just not the typical work is life dedication that employers expect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Changing jobs when you are a middle aged parent is very precarious. You probably have way more doctor’s appointments for yourself and your kids than most jobs will tolerate. Working parents should not change jobs it’s unrealistic to expect a new employer to give you the same arrangements as a job where you have already proven yourself.

It is definitely harder in the first year when you need to prove yourself and accrue leave, sometimes longer if the new employer has bad PTO. If it's possible to rely on the other parent for kids' stuff for a while, that helps. But it's not so much of an issue that it's impossible. Most people can't stay in the same job for 30 years anymore, not even feds these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing jobs when you are a middle aged parent is very precarious. You probably have way more doctor’s appointments for yourself and your kids than most jobs will tolerate. Working parents should not change jobs it’s unrealistic to expect a new employer to give you the same arrangements as a job where you have already proven yourself.

People post things sometimes that it's hard to not read as "my employer has all of the leverage because I wouldn't be able to find a new job, and I assume it's like that for everyone." I'm sorry if your reality is one where you need to prove yourself before taking time off for kids' doctors appointments, but I've changed jobs as a working parent, I earn a lot more as a result, and I've never run into this.

I agree with PP, a lot of employers are not that flexible, especially now in an employers job market. I switched from being a federal contractor (so not even a fed) to a new private sector job because of a layoff, and my new job is not flexible at all. When I was interviewing last year, it was clear employers were not as flexible as they were a few years ago. OP, I would stay in your current job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing jobs when you are a middle aged parent is very precarious. You probably have way more doctor’s appointments for yourself and your kids than most jobs will tolerate. Working parents should not change jobs it’s unrealistic to expect a new employer to give you the same arrangements as a job where you have already proven yourself.

People post things sometimes that it's hard to not read as "my employer has all of the leverage because I wouldn't be able to find a new job, and I assume it's like that for everyone." I'm sorry if your reality is one where you need to prove yourself before taking time off for kids' doctors appointments, but I've changed jobs as a working parent, I earn a lot more as a result, and I've never run into this.

I agree with PP, a lot of employers are not that flexible, especially now in an employers job market. I switched from being a federal contractor (so not even a fed) to a new private sector job because of a layoff, and my new job is not flexible at all. When I was interviewing last year, it was clear employers were not as flexible as they were a few years ago. OP, I would stay in your current job.

So hang on as long as I can and hope I survive the coming layoffs? Best course? I always thought it was best to find job when you had a job…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing jobs when you are a middle aged parent is very precarious. You probably have way more doctor’s appointments for yourself and your kids than most jobs will tolerate. Working parents should not change jobs it’s unrealistic to expect a new employer to give you the same arrangements as a job where you have already proven yourself.

People post things sometimes that it's hard to not read as "my employer has all of the leverage because I wouldn't be able to find a new job, and I assume it's like that for everyone." I'm sorry if your reality is one where you need to prove yourself before taking time off for kids' doctors appointments, but I've changed jobs as a working parent, I earn a lot more as a result, and I've never run into this.

I agree with PP, a lot of employers are not that flexible, especially now in an employers job market. I switched from being a federal contractor (so not even a fed) to a new private sector job because of a layoff, and my new job is not flexible at all. When I was interviewing last year, it was clear employers were not as flexible as they were a few years ago. OP, I would stay in your current job.

So hang on as long as I can and hope I survive the coming layoffs? Best course? I always thought it was best to find job when you had a job…

You'll just have to weigh the risks and figure out which ones you're willing to take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you environmental woke science or pesticide approving biddness science?

lol but this. I do think the days of mass layoffs are over but I also think you are safer if you are in a less policy focused area. I don’t think EPA will be eliminated but some programs could be.

I’m in an operations role where I coordinate sample collection and monitoring. I think there is a push to privatize and AI do the work (like every job). How much time do I have?

I honestly believe you're fine. They may not like your mission but they have a lot of fish to fry and are finding out right now how hard it is to create solutions to the things they've enjoyed complaining about.

But, the smart move is to use this time to develop a parallel skill set that would let you more easily move to another agency - maybe coordinating drug tests for human employees, or something in supply chain management; I don't know your skills but my point is to start building a landing pad that isn't EPA-specific while still staying in your EPA job.

They have already told all our support technicians that they will be gone.

I don't know what you want from this thread. You know more about your own job situation than anybody on DCUM. People have told you what they're seeing generally (which is hiring, or at least not firing) but if you think you're in specific danger then we are not equipped to tell you otherwise.

Just worried that I’m sitting complacent while larger forces work to unravel my life when I should be switching to an ageny that is hiring.

don't worry, the larger forces working to unravel lives are also at agencies that are hiring or about to hire. remember, switching agencies frequently means a new probationary period where they can just fire you. doge may be nominally gone but there are plenty of folks still working to burn things down from the inside.

basically, keep working, keep upskilling, keep looking for and applying to outside jobs —and be thankful if you are still eligible for a severance in the event of a RIF (i am not.)

FWIW I was not considered probationary after moving agencies as a lawyer. I also don’t think my agency fired people who had been recently promoted and were technically probationary. But I know some agencies were much harsher.

i said frequently, not always. OP needs to be aware of the risks. my agency did not let anyone go who was probationary, but my agency also forced me into a probationary year because i was hired on a direct hire authority.

OTOH, friend at commerce was fired as a result of an internal promotion probationary period. They may get reinstated in a few years when the lawsuits settle out but for now they are just up a creek without a paddle.

So wild to me that they actually fired people who had been promoted after presumably years and years as a fed. My agency engaged in some really bad behavior in the past year but at the time of the first round of DOGE firings, it seems like they were able to exercise some discretion instead of being total Trump/Elon d*ck suckers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Changing jobs when you are a middle aged parent is very precarious. You probably have way more doctor’s appointments for yourself and your kids than most jobs will tolerate. Working parents should not change jobs it’s unrealistic to expect a new employer to give you the same arrangements as a job where you have already proven yourself.

Meh. This is pure age discrimination. I have at least a decade more of employment and I have no little kid issues to deal with. I am much more focused on my job than I was at 30.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Changing jobs when you are a middle aged parent is very precarious. You probably have way more doctor’s appointments for yourself and your kids than most jobs will tolerate. Working parents should not change jobs it’s unrealistic to expect a new employer to give you the same arrangements as a job where you have already proven yourself.

People post things sometimes that it's hard to not read as "my employer has all of the leverage because I wouldn't be able to find a new job, and I assume it's like that for everyone." I'm sorry if your reality is one where you need to prove yourself before taking time off for kids' doctors appointments, but I've changed jobs as a working parent, I earn a lot more as a result, and I've never run into this.

Are you out several times a month for doctors appointments or sick kids in your first 6 months of working? Or did your spouse take care of kid stuff? If you are unusually healthy that’s fine, but in your 40s you are likely seeing specialists, probably have a colonoscopy once, it’s just not the typical work is life dedication that employers expect.

A colonoscopy is one day every 10 years, I really don't think that merits a mention. People of all ages have lives, take vacations, get sick - and in my experience employers handle that just fine. If you're not finding thst to be the case maybe it is time for a new job.

OP, I posted upthread that you should stay put, but what really means (in any job) is that you continually look, you apply to anything that looks good, and you consider very carefully once you receive an offer. There's nothing wrong with turning down an offer because they can't meet your flexibility needs.

[Anonymous]

Different employers are different.

Some employers I recently worked for had a total of 10 days PTO per year, no sick leave, most Federal holidays but not all Federal holidays. I don't get more than those 10 PTO days until after my 5 year anniversary, when it goes to 12 PTO days/year.

With kids in child care and in FCPS, I used all 10 days off in <7 months between little kids out sick, "teacher work days", "half day school days", a few hours off to take kids to routine MD, a few hours for my annual physical, and such. FCPS being closed for snow plus random stuff for a whole week was a problem in Feb.

And my kids and I were not more sick than average for elementary or being pre-K in child care.

If PP has an employer with lots of PTO or PTO plus sick leave, that is great. Many many employers are just not like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you environmental woke science or pesticide approving biddness science?

lol but this. I do think the days of mass layoffs are over but I also think you are safer if you are in a less policy focused area. I don’t think EPA will be eliminated but some programs could be.

I’m in an operations role where I coordinate sample collection and monitoring. I think there is a push to privatize and AI do the work (like every job). How much time do I have?

I honestly believe you're fine. They may not like your mission but they have a lot of fish to fry and are finding out right now how hard it is to create solutions to the things they've enjoyed complaining about.

But, the smart move is to use this time to develop a parallel skill set that would let you more easily move to another agency - maybe coordinating drug tests for human employees, or something in supply chain management; I don't know your skills but my point is to start building a landing pad that isn't EPA-specific while still staying in your EPA job.

They have already told all our support technicians that they will be gone.

I don't know what you want from this thread. You know more about your own job situation than anybody on DCUM. People have told you what they're seeing generally (which is hiring, or at least not firing) but if you think you're in specific danger then we are not equipped to tell you otherwise.

Just worried that I’m sitting complacent while larger forces work to unravel my life when I should be switching to an ageny that is hiring.

don't worry, the larger forces working to unravel lives are also at agencies that are hiring or about to hire. remember, switching agencies frequently means a new probationary period where they can just fire you. doge may be nominally gone but there are plenty of folks still working to burn things down from the inside.

basically, keep working, keep upskilling, keep looking for and applying to outside jobs —and be thankful if you are still eligible for a severance in the event of a RIF (i am not.)

FWIW I was not considered probationary after moving agencies as a lawyer. I also don’t think my agency fired people who had been recently promoted and were technically probationary. But I know some agencies were much harsher.

i said frequently, not always. OP needs to be aware of the risks. my agency did not let anyone go who was probationary, but my agency also forced me into a probationary year because i was hired on a direct hire authority.

OTOH, friend at commerce was fired as a result of an internal promotion probationary period. They may get reinstated in a few years when the lawsuits settle out but for now they are just up a creek without a paddle.

So wild to me that they actually fired people who had been promoted after presumably years and years as a fed. My agency engaged in some really bad behavior in the past year but at the time of the first round of DOGE firings, it seems like they were able to exercise some discretion instead of being total Trump/Elon d*ck suckers.

My agency didn’t have any say in this. It was all coming from DOGE at the time without any warning even to management. Afterwards they hired many people back, but weren’t able to bring back everyone.