Furlough letter - Explicit

[Anonymous]

Sorry OP. I have not read all the posts but can someone explain exactly what a furlough is - for govt jobs.
My DH was furloughed in 2008 but he was private sector and for us it meant a 10% cut in pay. what exactly does it mean for GSers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry OP. I have not read all the posts but can someone explain exactly what a furlough is - for govt jobs.
My DH was furloughed in 2008 but he was private sector and for us it meant a 10% cut in pay. what exactly does it mean for GSers?

I'm looking at 12%-op

[Anonymous]

I'm a fed too, but let's be real the government couldn't continue functioning at the level it has been. It sucks some of us will be laid off, furloughed, etc, but I don't feel right asking others to get a tax raise so people in DC can keep getting nice paychecks. Not to mention a lot of federal agencies have been abusing the system for years. The money train had to come to an end eventually. Hopefully people stacked some savings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting to see the families that live large on by sucking the Fed's titties in normal times squirming now (like the rest of the US has been for the past ~5 years).

Not good, not bad, not schadenfreunde, just ... interesting.

Thinking of all the NoVa families with one spouse civilian DoD and the other spouse a "defense contractor." When the rest of America was pasting their bumpers back on their rickety cars back in 2009, what about you?

Asshole. I don't know one fed who was delighting in the layoffs of their private sector friends and families. Asshole.

Not PP but tired of federal employees being pawns in the political chess game of shutdowns and deficit fights. And I really don't see fed employees as being overpaid. My husband takes a paycut being a fed and I did too.

You didn't take a paycut, you are being paid market rate for your particular position. Want more money, go become a contractor. There are pro's and con's to each but it really isn't a paycut as if you took less money to go into being a fed, it was a personal choice.

It isn't just federal employees who are impacted. It will be contractors, all the support staff that go along with the feds, and all the service industry/child care and other industries will also be impacted. There does need to be cuts, but there has to be better ways to get rid of the excess spending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We'd be happy with a furlough. We just got the letter that my husband will be terminate as well as everyone on his contract in less they get funded. 14 days off is better than months, if not longer.

I don't care whose fault this is, just fix it.

Then offer to take 14 days off with out pay and see if you can keep the contract.

Right, like even if the entire contract staff agreed to this, this will make so much difference to the agency that funds them. NOT. If the contract is defunded, that will be because it is the best way to save a significant amount of the 10% that agency will need to make the sequestration cuts work for them. There will be a penalty for defunding an existing contract including an early termination clause of payment to the contractor, which may be used, in part, to provide severance to those staff members who are entitled to severance (not all contractor staff will get severances). There will also be a lot of governmental overhead to early termination of a contract. It will probably cost the government a lot more than the overhead for staff taking 14 days unpaid to terminate the contract. If so, they are looking at the long range effect of terminating that contract against whatever else might have to be cut in order to save the 10%.

No severance, just terminated. Companies have to be able to bill to provide severance. If there is no money coming in, there is no severance. Just the possibility of your job back, possibly at a much lower salary when this gets worked out. I'd take the furlough any day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We'd be happy with a furlough. We just got the letter that my husband will be terminate as well as everyone on his contract in less they get funded. 14 days off is better than months, if not longer.

I don't care whose fault this is, just fix it.

Then offer to take 14 days off with out pay and see if you can keep the contract.

I think this poster said 14 days because she was reacting to a PP who just got notice of 14 furlough days, not because her husband was being given the option of taking 14 days furlough.

Contracts do not work like that. It isn't that simple. If it were, the 14 days off would be fine. It would actually be a welcomed break. We do not have that option. My husband is being told to prepare to be terminated/fired/lay off until the project gets refunded. The feds are cutting the contracts to save their furloughs. So, they don't get the 14 days off, but many others will lose their jobs. I would take 14 days off knowing others would be without a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a fed too, but let's be real the government couldn't continue functioning at the level it has been. It sucks some of us will be laid off, furloughed, etc, but I don't feel right asking others to get a tax raise so people in DC can keep getting nice paychecks. Not to mention a lot of federal agencies have been abusing the system for years. The money train had to come to an end eventually. Hopefully people stacked some savings.

I make 30k less than my private sector counterparts. And well after a decade of service where I have been furloughed, threatened with furlough, had my salary frozen, but still worked over night and had holidays canceled for threats I don't give a flying fuck what you think. Op

[Anonymous]

My brother has down syndrome, and lives in a group home. He's almost fifty, and isn't so good with change. He was notified last week that he'll have to cut hours at the job he's gone to for the past 25 years due to "President Obama." It's frustrating that there's no easy way to explain that it's not quite that simple to him. And he's pretty upset.

I'm a fed too, and I think he got some comfort from knowing that my hours were going to be cut too. But I find this really sad and stupid. I can handle it. He can't. Why pick on him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting to see the families that live large on by sucking the Fed's titties in normal times squirming now (like the rest of the US has been for the past ~5 years).

Not good, not bad, not schadenfreunde, just ... interesting.

Thinking of all the NoVa families with one spouse civilian DoD and the other spouse a "defense contractor." When the rest of America was pasting their bumpers back on their rickety cars back in 2009, what about you?

It's called having a job, nitwit. Not a particularly high paying one, not with one of the big guys, but with a 200-person family owned company that could easily go under because of this. Nor do we lead the high life in our small 1940s 1,200 sq. foot home in a crappy school district driving our old generic family cars while helping to care for our aging and ailing blue-collar parents. But we both do important work and believe in the mission we support and are honored to be doing it. So I am so glad you find the impending risk to our family with two small kids, one of them SN and countless other families like ours...what was it?...oh, right. Interesting. Glad to be in this situation for your entertainment.

[Anonymous]

The government is funded until March 27. While all the agencies are sending out 30-day notices now, until Congress passes (or doesn't pass) the budget for the next FY, we really won't know what's happening. If I had to bet money, I'd say the furloughs won't go through (or at least not to the extend that they're planned).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a fed too, but let's be real the government couldn't continue functioning at the level it has been. It sucks some of us will be laid off, furloughed, etc, but I don't feel right asking others to get a tax raise so people in DC can keep getting nice paychecks. Not to mention a lot of federal agencies have been abusing the system for years. The money train had to come to an end eventually. Hopefully people stacked some savings.

I absolutely agree. I have been a contractorer and could not beleive what the gov't was spending money on. I moved myself off of projects b/c I thought what I was being tasked to do was a huge waste fo money.

I can create a huge list of things that can go away. If the gov't actually did their job of spending money wisely, I would have a different response.

I worked at a place where a person's job was to answer calls regarding the status of registrations. Every day she came to work and put her phone on call forward. Everyone knew this and no one did a damm thing.

The FBI did an IT project last year where an administrative position was no longer needed. They did not get rid of this position. Each office had an extra administrativer person. If anyone thought - hmmm maybe we should eliminiate this position - times however many other situations like this there are - maybe every FBI agent would not have to take a 20% paycut right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We'd be happy with a furlough. We just got the letter that my husband will be terminate as well as everyone on his contract in less they get funded. 14 days off is better than months, if not longer.

I don't care whose fault this is, just fix it.

Then offer to take 14 days off with out pay and see if you can keep the contract.

I think this poster said 14 days because she was reacting to a PP who just got notice of 14 furlough days, not because her husband was being given the option of taking 14 days furlough.

Contracts do not work like that. It isn't that simple. If it were, the 14 days off would be fine. It would actually be a welcomed break. We do not have that option. My husband is being told to prepare to be terminated/fired/lay off until the project gets refunded. The feds are cutting the contracts to save their furloughs. So, they don't get the 14 days off, but many others will lose their jobs. I would take 14 days off knowing others would be without a job.

Op here. Hate to be a cynic but the contracting companies charge the go Ernest triple what it would cost for us to just salary them ourselves. Your husband can go on the bench/beach. But your company doesn't want to cover it. Just sayin'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We'd be happy with a furlough. We just got the letter that my husband will be terminate as well as everyone on his contract in less they get funded. 14 days off is better than months, if not longer.

I don't care whose fault this is, just fix it.

Then offer to take 14 days off with out pay and see if you can keep the contract.

I think this poster said 14 days because she was reacting to a PP who just got notice of 14 furlough days, not because her husband was being given the option of taking 14 days furlough.

Contracts do not work like that. It isn't that simple. If it were, the 14 days off would be fine. It would actually be a welcomed break. We do not have that option. My husband is being told to prepare to be terminated/fired/lay off until the project gets refunded. The feds are cutting the contracts to save their furloughs. So, they don't get the 14 days off, but many others will lose their jobs. I would take 14 days off knowing others would be without a job.

Op here. Hate to be a cynic but the contracting companies charge the go Ernest triple what it would cost for us to just salary them ourselves. Your husband can go on the bench/beach. But your company doesn't want to cover it. Just sayin'

Go Ernest = government

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting to see the families that live large on by sucking the Fed's titties in normal times squirming now (like the rest of the US has been for the past ~5 years).

Not good, not bad, not schadenfreunde, just ... interesting.

Thinking of all the NoVa families with one spouse civilian DoD and the other spouse a "defense contractor." When the rest of America was pasting their bumpers back on their rickety cars back in 2009, what about you?

It's called having a job, nitwit. Not a particularly high paying one, not with one of the big guys, but with a 200-person family owned company that could easily go under because of this. Nor do we lead the high life in our small 1940s 1,200 sq. foot home in a crappy school district driving our old generic family cars while helping to care for our aging and ailing blue-collar parents. But we both do important work and believe in the mission we support and are honored to be doing it. So I am so glad you find the impending risk to our family with two small kids, one of them SN and countless other families like ours...what was it?...oh, right. Interesting. Glad to be in this situation for your entertainment.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a fed too, but let's be real the government couldn't continue functioning at the level it has been. It sucks some of us will be laid off, furloughed, etc, but I don't feel right asking others to get a tax raise so people in DC can keep getting nice paychecks. Not to mention a lot of federal agencies have been abusing the system for years. The money train had to come to an end eventually. Hopefully people stacked some savings.

I make 30k less than my private sector counterparts. And well after a decade of service where I have been furloughed, threatened with furlough, had my salary frozen, but still worked over night and had holidays canceled for threats I don't give a flying fuck what you think. Op

What a pansy. Basically you didn't save for a rainy day, so whose fault is that? I've been a fed for over 10 years myself. I also blame contractors there was a recent article in the Washington Post about a single contractor being paid $763k a year. That is just outrageous.