Questions about a RIF and Hiring

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure if anyone here knows...
I work in an organization that is expecting to implement a RIF after this fiscal year - positions have been identified that will be RIFd when the time comes.

However, at the same time, there are job openings and promotions going on within my organization.

My position was slated for a RIF. On the surface, I'm fine with it. But considering how many GS14/15 positions have been filled and how many retiring O5s/O6s (military) convert their positions to 15s since the announcement was made, I'm just confused. Our organization has not answered any questions about this or had a town hall. I am just trying to wrap my head around how they can justify cutting the 9-12 (and some 13) positions while at the same time hiring so many non-supervisory 14s/15s including the conversion of military positions (so many O6s retire and get converted, but more O6s are still brought in to work).

I want to know about the decision process and how our organization can make that justification and/or afford all those high ups. The last time there was a "town hall", they had us submit questions in advance and then cherry picked what got asked.

Is there anything I can do about this? I'm not solely upset about a RIF - that happens. As a Fed, I've gone years without a raise or a bonus, so I know this job isn't for the pay. But I'd like my organization to run in a honorable fashion and at least explain to the people slated for a RIF what is going on. I don't think this is anything the IG can investigate, but on the surface, it looks like old boys club BS. Any advice?

Sorry for the ranty-ness....another coworker just found out their position is going away while that same office posted a job opening for a GS14!

[Anonymous]

But a RIF doesn't necessarily mean that the agency can't hire or has no money to hire. A RIF can also be done for reasons such as reorganization, lack of work for particular positions etc. So they can hire for other jobs, and people can be promoted for other positions.
Have you looked on OPM's site re: RIFs? http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/workforce-restructuring/reductions-in-force/#url=3

[Anonymous]

thanks - I've read that....but one woman has been notified her position is slated to go away. 4 people in her office have retired and she is now the only one doing the work of 5 people. And she is still being RIFd. So what I'm trying to understand is how something like that is justified.

Is money not money? Are they supposed to do desk audits and PD reviews to see if there are savings there?

I'm just trying to understand the whole justification of essentially firing people who aren't bad performers while making sure no colonel is left behind

[Anonymous]

If you are concerned that there is wrongdoing, you should contact the IG's office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:thanks - I've read that....but one woman has been notified her position is slated to go away. 4 people in her office have retired and she is now the only one doing the work of 5 people. And she is still being RIFd. So what I'm trying to understand is how something like that is justified.

Is money not money? Are they supposed to do desk audits and PD reviews to see if there are savings there?

I'm just trying to understand the whole justification of essentially firing people who aren't bad performers while making sure no colonel is left behind

Could be the 9-12 positions are clerical and they intend to hire outside contractors. Alternatively, they could eliminate the support positions entirely and delegate the work to the remaining folks.

[Anonymous]

Is this the DoD?

[Anonymous]

OP here.
Yes DOD - so it's common to RIF lower grades and then hire higher graded positions at the same time?

I guess it just doesn't make sense to me from a budget perspective - if I am cutting my household spending, I don't stop buying generic paper towels but then start buying the most expensive toilet paper or something.

Hopefully there is a dialogue when these are implemented in 2015 that is open and fair, but I highly doubt it. Lots of covering asses and protecting friends, I predict.

I am looking elsewhere but trying to relocate out of the area all together so it just motivates me to hurry up. I'll get severance and unemployment thought which is fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But a RIF doesn't necessarily mean that the agency can't hire or has no money to hire. A RIF can also be done for reasons such as reorganization, lack of work for particular positions etc. So they can hire for other jobs, and people can be promoted for other positions.
Have you looked on OPM's site re: RIFs? http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/workforce-restructuring/reductions-in-force/#url=3

This. Sounds like the functions are no longer necessary and they are eliminating the positions.

[Anonymous]

Yes DOD - so it's common to RIF lower grades and then hire higher graded positions at the same time?

I guess it just doesn't make sense to me from a budget perspective - if I am cutting my household spending, I don't stop buying generic paper towels but then start buying the most expensive toilet paper or something.

I don't know if it is "common," but it is legal if the reason they are doing the RIF in the first place is not that the agency doesn't have enough money overall to keep the workers. The agency has discretion to reorganize. We have no information on the reason that DoD says they are doing the particular RIF that affects you, so it is hard to offer much here.

[Anonymous]

OP, so you happen to work in the MHS. It is so full of these special deals for the retiring O5 and O6's that it's sickening. IDK what you can do, but I've seen all of them "retire" and come back to the same chair on Monday morning as a GS14 or 15 where they often remain as ineffective, if not more so, as they were on active duty. Our MHS is a disaster, I would try to take this as an opportunity to find a better job.

[Anonymous]

OP here - thanks, all. the Department is required to cut 20% of manpower. That's why I would assume they have instituted a RIF. They've offered buyouts, all that. So maybe they are using that as an excuse?

It just seems really shady to me - there are a number of people who are close to retirement or are middle-income and rely on the salaries that are getting screwed while retiring O5s/O6s get cushy jobs. And most people here are hardworking - we aren't a large staff, so everyone is accustomed to diligence and teamwork and all that stuff. Very few lazy logs that I've ever seen (the noticed ones mostly took early retirement buyouts this year)

[Anonymous]

I'm surprised that no one has ever uncovered the officer to GS scam. They spend the last few years of their active duty time lining up the GS gig then double dipping while continuing to hang out with their buddies. The ones that actually have a little ambition sell their Rolodex to a contractor and "consult" with their buddies. It's pretty unbelievable to see in action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised that no one has ever uncovered the officer to GS scam. They spend the last few years of their active duty time lining up the GS gig then double dipping while continuing to hang out with their buddies. The ones that actually have a little ambition sell their Rolodex to a contractor and "consult" with their buddies. It's pretty unbelievable to see in action.

I'll do you one better. Officer to GS (might buy back some of the military time, might not) and then to contractor. We used to call it the triple crown.

[Anonymous]

OP here - we have some of that, but more so the non-supervisory 15/SES level than going in to the contractor sector, which I think is because there's way more work involved in the private sector. But I do kno lots do it.

I wish someone would uncover it - it's ridiculous.

They also spend the last few years documenting "health issues". I was in line for coffee in front of some overweight air force folks talking about the best time to get their back pain documented so they can get medical payments when they retire - nevermind that they were all overweight, which would be contributing to their backs hurting. And the payment for having sleep apnea and needing a c-pap? I have 2 workers with that, one gets $800 for sleep apnea. They spent about 2-3 years while they were here before retirement getting it documented enough to be covered.

I'm a military wife but I'm glad that my husband doesn't act like that. I don't doubt that many veterans have expertise the gov should hold on to. I just doubt that they all happen to be E9s or O5/O6s.