Furlough letter - Explicit

[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'

If the situation were different, yes, he would be put on the bench and another position found. But if the majority of their contracts are cut, there will be no place to replace him, so no bench. They have been a great company but there is only so much they can do. Yes, they are charging the gov't a fortune between the prime's and subcontractors to the primes, but that is how the contracts are set up. It makes no sense but it is what it is.

[Anonymous]

My agency/dept is not having furloughs, and we don't have any contractors--we got rid of them last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My agency/dept is not having furloughs, and we don't have any contractors--we got rid of them last year.

CIA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Or my deceased husband left me and ur toddler with a crap load a debt. Judge much?

[Anonymous]

I feel you, OP. My husband and I are both Feds, and both of our agencies are furloughing. That means a 20% pay cut.

[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 have to say that I agree and I'm in a position that benefits from Fed spending (not contractor) and my DH is a contractor.

You have to become numb and indifferent to the waste you see on a daily basis or else it will drive you crazy. The spending and the whole antiquated process in how contracts are bid and awarded is just waiting to implode. I personally think implosion (Greek Style) is still a few years away, but surely the pain will be long and slow leading up to it. I think the party is winding down. We've all be living off the fat here in the land of milk and honey, but like all good things, it has to come to an end.

Sequestration is just another stupid idea, it is a shame that they could not have implemented something thoughtful and approached spending and savings in a more thoughful manner.

On a good note, for those of you looking for housing, it is probably going to get a lot cheaper over the next few years. If you have a stable job there might be some good homes you can get for a steal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
On a good note, for those of you looking for housing, it is probably going to get a lot cheaper over the next few years. If you have a stable job there might be some good homes you can get for a steal.

This is what I am hoping for! DH is a Fed but considered "essential."

I was let go from a defense subcontracting company. Talk about waste and stupidity. Seriously, there are some very fat cats that made shitloads off of worthless "prototypes." Defense contracting is a haven for dirty old political cronies.

[Anonymous]

Not to sound ignorant - which is so easy to do on DCUM - but how is it possible that what's been said on these 5 pages cannot effect the DC economy/housing?

It seems that everyone believes our economy is untouchable...even in the face of sequestration. If anyone can explain to me how this WILL NOT negatively effect our economy, that would be appreciated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, sorry for what you're going through! We were afraid this would happen to my spouse as well. Fortunately, my spouse's office got this notice today, instead, which is still bad, but still better than what you're facing.

At this point, we expect that every one of us would take no more than one furlough day per pay period, beginning sometime in the summer [...], and possibly through the remainder of the fiscal year, for a total of between five to seven furlough days. We will provide you with at least 30 days’ notice prior to starting furlough.

Hmmmm, I know where your spouse works and why you didn't name the 3-letter agency. Interesting that you had the actual language of letter within hours to post here. Could have just said that it would be 5 - 7 furlough days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not to sound ignorant - which is so easy to do on DCUM - but how is it possible that what's been said on these 5 pages cannot effect the DC economy/housing?

It seems that everyone believes our economy is untouchable...even in the face of sequestration. If anyone can explain to me how this WILL NOT negatively effect our economy, that would be appreciated.

It will. It's just that most DCUMers don't want to think about it.

[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 have to say that I agree and I'm in a position that benefits from Fed spending (not contractor) and my DH is a contractor.

You have to become numb and indifferent to the waste you see on a daily basis or else it will drive you crazy. The spending and the whole antiquated process in how contracts are bid and awarded is just waiting to implode. I personally think implosion (Greek Style) is still a few years away, but surely the pain will be long and slow leading up to it. I think the party is winding down. We've all be living off the fat here in the land of milk and honey, but like all good things, it has to come to an end.

Sequestration is just another stupid idea, it is a shame that they could not have implemented something thoughtful and approached spending and savings in a more thoughful manner.

On a good note, for those of you looking for housing, it is probably going to get a lot cheaper over the next few years. If you have a stable job there might be some good homes you can get for a steal.

+1000 the bubble is popping

[Anonymous]

I am really interested in the $763K claim that a contractor was being paid.... can someone link that story? I googled for it but couldnt find it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I am really interested in the $763K claim that a contractor was being paid.... can someone link that story? I googled for it but couldnt find it.

I think that is the maximum payrate for an executive that a contractor could charge the federal govt-- so if Boeing is building a tanker for the army and they need to charge a senior executive's time to that contract, that is the rate of pay they could collect for that time. I don't know that many (any?) execs are going to charge 100% of their time to govt contracts, but it is a lot more than anyone in govt gets paid.

http://www.govexec.com/federal-news/2011/05/union-wants-to-lower-cap-on-executive-pay-in-federal-contracts/33963/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am really interested in the $763K claim that a contractor was being paid.... can someone link that story? I googled for it but couldnt find it.

I think that is the maximum payrate for an executive that a contractor could charge the federal govt-- so if Boeing is building a tanker for the army and they need to charge a senior executive's time to that contract, that is the rate of pay they could collect for that time. I don't know that many (any?) execs are going to charge 100% of their time to govt contracts, but it is a lot more than anyone in govt gets paid.

http://www.govexec.com/federal-news/2011/05/union-wants-to-lower-cap-on-executive-pay-in-federal-contracts/33963/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to sound ignorant - which is so easy to do on DCUM - but how is it possible that what's been said on these 5 pages cannot effect the DC economy/housing?

It seems that everyone believes our economy is untouchable...even in the face of sequestration. If anyone can explain to me how this WILL NOT negatively effect our economy, that would be appreciated.

It will. It's just that most DCUMers don't want to think about it.

Why should I think about it? There's not a single thing I can do, other than save, save, save.