Realignment for SEC

[Anonymous]

At this point having worthless ME offices is the least of the problems. I feel like I’m watching a train wreck in slow motion. But it is like a dream. I’m trying to scream for someone to see it but no sound will come out.

[Anonymous]

What is ME.

[Anonymous]

NP. ME = Managing Executive et al.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At this point having worthless ME offices is the least of the problems. I feel like I’m watching a train wreck in slow motion. But it is like a dream. I’m trying to scream for someone to see it but no sound will come out.

It is not in slow motion anymore. It is off the cliff. The once great SEC has been reduced to rubble.

As for the ME discussion, as well as any other non-mission function, I don’t know why they are the size they are, and why they are paid on the SK scale. Is being a business manager or an HR person at SEC any different than the SSA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree 2x/week would make a huge difference. Even 1x/week and a more liberal ad hoc policy.

Personally, 5x/week would be a touch less exhausting if we still had an on site gym. I'm guessing I'm in the minority on this but that little thing would make a world of difference for me.

I agree. With the gym, I could use my lunch to get in a workout. It still sucks to have the commute time but it didn’t preclude getting exercise. Now it’s hard to fit that in after or before the commute given kid obligations.

+1, the gym would help a lot.

Heard they were looking into it but we are losing floors in SP2 to the CFTC. With that loss of space and people all being doubled up, off the table.

They should look at all the deadweight in DERA. All those economists (and lawyers) that barely do any work. Of course they are over staffed with managers who contribute even less.

Just on the numbers, DERA’s manager to staff ratio is one of the lowest in the Commission. For the true craziness in the number of managers you need to go to exams.

Exams has a totally different thing going on because their exam managers are not supervisors so they don’t could in the ratios. And they are the workhorses of the division. It is entirely unclear what DERA does and why it needs hundreds of people. Every time we ask it something they tell us it is impossible for them to do because everyone is so busy.

.

Are exam managers SK-15s? They are. That means they are managers for the purposes of ratios. You can’t have it both ways - have the perks of being an SK-15 supervisor but then say you are not a managers. Unless we now have dozens of non-supervisory SK-15s. If so, how can we SK-14s get that promotion without being called a manager?

They do not supervise people.

Those exam managers who are SK-15s should be supervising people, even if they don’t have direct reports. I know some people in exams and they have branch chiefs in some groups, exam managers in others. If the exam managers aren’t performing supervisory functions then they should be demoted and serious questions should be asked about why they were receiving supervisory pay for doing no supervisory work.

The most recent GAO report shows that the ratio is something like 3 staff to every 1 manager in exams. This and many other offices are at all time lows for staff to managers. How is it that less than five month ago the agency had a VERA-VSIP directed at reducing the number of managers and now they are backfilling manager slots??? Who is running this agency???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree 2x/week would make a huge difference. Even 1x/week and a more liberal ad hoc policy.

Personally, 5x/week would be a touch less exhausting if we still had an on site gym. I'm guessing I'm in the minority on this but that little thing would make a world of difference for me.

I agree. With the gym, I could use my lunch to get in a workout. It still sucks to have the commute time but it didn’t preclude getting exercise. Now it’s hard to fit that in after or before the commute given kid obligations.

+1, the gym would help a lot.

Heard they were looking into it but we are losing floors in SP2 to the CFTC. With that loss of space and people all being doubled up, off the table.

They should look at all the deadweight in DERA. All those economists (and lawyers) that barely do any work. Of course they are over staffed with managers who contribute even less.

Just on the numbers, DERA’s manager to staff ratio is one of the lowest in the Commission. For the true craziness in the number of managers you need to go to exams.

Exams has a totally different thing going on because their exam managers are not supervisors so they don’t could in the ratios. And they are the workhorses of the division. It is entirely unclear what DERA does and why it needs hundreds of people. Every time we ask it something they tell us it is impossible for them to do because everyone is so busy.

.

Are exam managers SK-15s? They are. That means they are managers for the purposes of ratios. You can’t have it both ways - have the perks of being an SK-15 supervisor but then say you are not a managers. Unless we now have dozens of non-supervisory SK-15s. If so, how can we SK-14s get that promotion without being called a manager?

They do not supervise people.

Those exam managers who are SK-15s should be supervising people, even if they don’t have direct reports. I know some people in exams and they have branch chiefs in some groups, exam managers in others. If the exam managers aren’t performing supervisory functions then they should be demoted and serious questions should be asked about why they were receiving supervisory pay for doing no supervisory work.

The most recent GAO report shows that the ratio is something like 3 staff to every 1 manager in exams. This and many other offices are at all time lows for staff to managers. How is it that less than five month ago the agency had a VERA-VSIP directed at reducing the number of managers and now they are backfilling manager slots??? Who is running this agency???

The incompetent exams leadership doing incompetent things right under the chairman’s nose. The inmates running the asylum. Especially the Megamind napoleon in exams.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know if the voluntary reassignment program is still a thing? I saw an email about it a little while back, but is there actually anywhere to be reassigned to (doesn't there have to be an open slot)?

Stuck under an awful manager, but no point making it worse by having them find out and then being stuck anyway because there's actually nowhere to be reassigned to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if the voluntary reassignment program is still a thing? I saw an email about it a little while back, but is there actually anywhere to be reassigned to (doesn't there have to be an open slot)?

Stuck under an awful manager, but no point making it worse by having them find out and then being stuck anyway because there's actually nowhere to be reassigned to.

It is a thing on paper only. It has not really worked for a very long time, pre-Atkins.

[Anonymous]

👆 This is misinformed, which puts it in great company on this thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if the voluntary reassignment program is still a thing? I saw an email about it a little while back, but is there actually anywhere to be reassigned to (doesn't there have to be an open slot)?

Stuck under an awful manager, but no point making it worse by having them find out and then being stuck anyway because there's actually nowhere to be reassigned to.

It is a thing on paper only. It has not really worked for a very long time, pre-Atkins.

I cannot recall many people using voluntary reassignment as a way to move around in recent years.

Maybe just apply for the open senior officer or assistant director jobs? Not saying you are in this category, but it seems like there are a number of incompetent, lazy, non-experienced people at the moment applying for jobs they have no business trying for. If you think morale is bad now, imagine having to work under these people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if the voluntary reassignment program is still a thing? I saw an email about it a little while back, but is there actually anywhere to be reassigned to (doesn't there have to be an open slot)?

Stuck under an awful manager, but no point making it worse by having them find out and then being stuck anyway because there's actually nowhere to be reassigned to.

It is a thing on paper only. It has not really worked for a very long time, pre-Atkins.

I cannot recall many people using voluntary reassignment as a way to move around in recent years.

Maybe just apply for the open senior officer or assistant director jobs? Not saying you are in this category, but it seems like there are a number of incompetent, lazy, non-experienced people at the moment applying for jobs they have no business trying for. If you think morale is bad now, imagine having to work under these people.

senior officers have to be approved by the whitehouse. i don't think you can get away with not answering the loyalty tests.

ADs and below might be able to squeak by.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if the voluntary reassignment program is still a thing? I saw an email about it a little while back, but is there actually anywhere to be reassigned to (doesn't there have to be an open slot)?

Stuck under an awful manager, but no point making it worse by having them find out and then being stuck anyway because there's actually nowhere to be reassigned to.

It is a thing on paper only. It has not really worked for a very long time, pre-Atkins.

I cannot recall many people using voluntary reassignment as a way to move around in recent years.

Maybe just apply for the open senior officer or assistant director jobs? Not saying you are in this category, but it seems like there are a number of incompetent, lazy, non-experienced people at the moment applying for jobs they have no business trying for. If you think morale is bad now, imagine having to work under these people.

senior officers have to be approved by the whitehouse. i don't think you can get away with not answering the loyalty tests.

ADs and below might be able to squeak by.

I think that’s correct. We will see who we end up getting stuck with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if the voluntary reassignment program is still a thing? I saw an email about it a little while back, but is there actually anywhere to be reassigned to (doesn't there have to be an open slot)?

Stuck under an awful manager, but no point making it worse by having them find out and then being stuck anyway because there's actually nowhere to be reassigned to.

It is a thing on paper only. It has not really worked for a very long time, pre-Atkins.

It has always been around, but many who get hired off these list (including myself) have made connections where they want to go and when a spot opens make arrangements hop on the list for that specific office. Using it as an open expression of interest isn't as effective, but during hiring freezes some managers do look at the lists that are directed to their specific offices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if the voluntary reassignment program is still a thing? I saw an email about it a little while back, but is there actually anywhere to be reassigned to (doesn't there have to be an open slot)?

Stuck under an awful manager, but no point making it worse by having them find out and then being stuck anyway because there's actually nowhere to be reassigned to.

It is a thing on paper only. It has not really worked for a very long time, pre-Atkins.

It has always been around, but many who get hired off these list (including myself) have made connections where they want to go and when a spot opens make arrangements hop on the list for that specific office. Using it as an open expression of interest isn't as effective, but during hiring freezes some managers do look at the lists that are directed to their specific offices.

Agreed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree 2x/week would make a huge difference. Even 1x/week and a more liberal ad hoc policy.

Personally, 5x/week would be a touch less exhausting if we still had an on site gym. I'm guessing I'm in the minority on this but that little thing would make a world of difference for me.

I agree. With the gym, I could use my lunch to get in a workout. It still sucks to have the commute time but it didn’t preclude getting exercise. Now it’s hard to fit that in after or before the commute given kid obligations.

+1, the gym would help a lot.

Heard they were looking into it but we are losing floors in SP2 to the CFTC. With that loss of space and people all being doubled up, off the table.

Wait, what????

The CFTC, or parts of the CFTC, are coming the Station Place?

How is that going to work?

How do you think? Everyone doubled up.


Anyone terrified about what we are missing in the markets and with investors between the loss of staff and demoralization of who is left? The next big crisis has gotten closer because of all this. When they write the report, what PA did kissing up to Trump instead of focusing on the agency and his utter disregard of staff will be in the “why did the SEC miss it” chapter.

Supposedly we are going to be hiring a bunch of people too in the next few months. VERA and Fork last year, hiring more people this year.

Lots of hiring these days, and sneaky ways of doing it like using a single posting for multiple positions.

Doubt telework is coming back any time soon.