Federal exodus

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blah, Blah, blah. Feds are a timid bunch who thrive on routine.. The pay is ok and the benefits are ok too. Very few will leave.

Unless you're at the very top, the pay is great and the benefits are fantastic. Otherwise, why wouldn't they leave for the private sector?

My DH left the private sector (Big Law) for the Fed. Why? We didn't need the big bucks anymore and he actually wanted to spend time with his children growing up.

As for the OP's original point, in my lefty-Bethesda circles I have not heard one Fed (and I know quite a few) mention plans to leave. Of course, if things started going haywire, that might be different. I have heard that certain specific departments are worried, ones that focus on Civil Rights etc. But the Feds I know are committed to keeping this country going and recognize that staying in government will help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blah, Blah, blah. Feds are a timid bunch who thrive on routine.. The pay is ok and the benefits are ok too. Very few will leave.

Unless you're at the very top, the pay is great and the benefits are fantastic. Otherwise, why wouldn't they leave for the private sector?

Because they can't get a job in the private sector with the same pay and benefits

[Anonymous]

The Feds you know might be wise to ponder their lives without health insurance. If the Feds want to survive, they will have make sure their union isn't dismantled lickety-split. Because they have a template for that, and it's called Wisconsin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Feds you know might be wise to ponder their lives without health insurance. If the Feds want to survive, they will have make sure their union isn't dismantled lickety-split. Because they have a template for that, and it's called Wisconsin.

The Feds don't have better health insurance than private computer. I've worked in both, and it's comparable. Unless we're comparing the health insurance of awful companies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blah, Blah, blah. Feds are a timid bunch who thrive on routine.. The pay is ok and the benefits are ok too. Very few will leave.

Unless you're at the very top, the pay is great and the benefits are fantastic. Otherwise, why wouldn't they leave for the private sector?

I don't leave for the private sector because I do good work that saves lives. I can't do it in the private sector. If Trump makes it so I can't do it here, I will leave and go private, work less and make more money, and donate it to SPLC and Planned Parenthood.

[Anonymous]

Whatever makes you happy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blah, Blah, blah. Feds are a timid bunch who thrive on routine.. The pay is ok and the benefits are ok too. Very few will leave.

Unless you're at the very top, the pay is great and the benefits are fantastic. Otherwise, why wouldn't they leave for the private sector?

My DH left the private sector (Big Law) for the Fed. Why? We didn't need the big bucks anymore and he actually wanted to spend time with his children growing up.

As for the OP's original point, in my lefty-Bethesda circles I have not heard one Fed (and I know quite a few) mention plans to leave. Of course, if things started going haywire, that might be different. I have heard that certain specific departments are worried, ones that focus on Civil Rights etc. But the Feds I know are committed to keeping this country going and recognize that staying in government will help.

I work for a division of HHS and my experience is that these are extraordinarily dedicated people who now think their work is more important than ever. People who were around during the Bush II years talk about a mixed bag: he believed that a free market could only work with a strong safety net, so he pushed for funding for community health centers and a few other programs, but left a whole lot of other programs dying on the vine. Not shut down, just not funded. People didn't leave or get fired, but they could be gagged, tied up and banished to policy Siberia for saying the wrong thing or getting on the wrong side of a political appointee. There was a lot of fear and distrust and the daily stress of that did drive some good people out.

My immediate office has always had to struggle, so no one expects that to change. Our mission is getting access to quality healthcare into under-served areas, mostly rural. It's ironic that members of Congress who speak most vociferously against the Federal government are usually the first ones to issue a press release when a meager amount of federal funds make it to their areas. No one expects there to be an increase in those funds even though these areas are in the greatest need and went decidedly red this election.

The only thing I can say for certain is that the people who currently administer these programs are going to stay for a long as they can and continue to find innovative ways to make meager funding go as far as it can. A few will go ahead and retire, but a lot of young blood came to the mission in these last six years and they're still dedicated despite the election and low morale.

[Anonymous]

The Feds you know might be wise to ponder their lives without health insurance. If the Feds want to survive, they will have make sure their union isn't dismantled lickety-split. Because they have a template for that, and it's called Wisconsin.

This is honestly the biggest concern we have. My husband is a fed and I am not. Insurance under my job is very expensive. We are afraid that the feds might be put on Trumpcare and that would mean our take home pay would go down by many thousands of dollars per year. Not good folks.

And yeah, the federal debt. Inflation is coming, probably sooner rather than later. It's a nasty kind of "tax".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Feds you know might be wise to ponder their lives without health insurance. If the Feds want to survive, they will have make sure their union isn't dismantled lickety-split. Because they have a template for that, and it's called Wisconsin.

The Feds don't have better health insurance than private computer. I've worked in both, and it's comparable. Unless we're comparing the health insurance of awful companies.

Once the consulting firms have a bigger piece of the pie, you won't have a job here. They will not only be outsourced, but totally off-shored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good, lazy assholes... Let them try to make it in the real world.

I used to work in the private sector. I made a couple hundred thousand more each year than I do as a fed. If I go back, my life will be worse, but I'll make a lot more money. It won't be hard to go back. I "made it" in the private sector before I had fed experience, which is valuable. You assume all feds are the same and couldn't hack it in the private sector. You are wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blah, Blah, blah. Feds are a timid bunch who thrive on routine.. The pay is ok and the benefits are ok too. Very few will leave.

Unless you're at the very top, the pay is great and the benefits are fantastic. Otherwise, why wouldn't they leave for the private sector?

My DH left the private sector (Big Law) for the Fed. Why? We didn't need the big bucks anymore and he actually wanted to spend time with his children growing up.

As for the OP's original point, in my lefty-Bethesda circles I have not heard one Fed (and I know quite a few) mention plans to leave. Of course, if things started going haywire, that might be different. I have heard that certain specific departments are worried, ones that focus on Civil Rights etc. But the Feds I know are committed to keeping this country going and recognize that staying in government will help.

I work for a division of HHS and my experience is that these are extraordinarily dedicated people who now think their work is more important than ever. People who were around during the Bush II years talk about a mixed bag: he believed that a free market could only work with a strong safety net, so he pushed for funding for community health centers and a few other programs, but left a whole lot of other programs dying on the vine. Not shut down, just not funded. People didn't leave or get fired, but they could be gagged, tied up and banished to policy Siberia for saying the wrong thing or getting on the wrong side of a political appointee. There was a lot of fear and distrust and the daily stress of that did drive some good people out.

My immediate office has always had to struggle, so no one expects that to change. Our mission is getting access to quality healthcare into under-served areas, mostly rural. It's ironic that members of Congress who speak most vociferously against the Federal government are usually the first ones to issue a press release when a meager amount of federal funds make it to their areas. No one expects there to be an increase in those funds even though these areas are in the greatest need and went decidedly red this election.

The only thing I can say for certain is that the people who currently administer these programs are going to stay for a long as they can and continue to find innovative ways to make meager funding go as far as it can. A few will go ahead and retire, but a lot of young blood came to the mission in these last six years and they're still dedicated despite the election and low morale.

A word about "policy".

When every policy under the sun has been written and we are 100% perfectly regulated, what does a policy maker do?

They write another policy. They don't know how to do anything else, except tell others how to run every aspect of their lives. In their minds, their work is never done. Absolute control freaks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blah, Blah, blah. Feds are a timid bunch who thrive on routine.. The pay is ok and the benefits are ok too. Very few will leave.

Unless you're at the very top, the pay is great and the benefits are fantastic. Otherwise, why wouldn't they leave for the private sector?

My DH left the private sector (Big Law) for the Fed. Why? We didn't need the big bucks anymore and he actually wanted to spend time with his children growing up.

As for the OP's original point, in my lefty-Bethesda circles I have not heard one Fed (and I know quite a few) mention plans to leave. Of course, if things started going haywire, that might be different. I have heard that certain specific departments are worried, ones that focus on Civil Rights etc. But the Feds I know are committed to keeping this country going and recognize that staying in government will help.

I work for a division of HHS and my experience is that these are extraordinarily dedicated people who now think their work is more important than ever. People who were around during the Bush II years talk about a mixed bag: he believed that a free market could only work with a strong safety net, so he pushed for funding for community health centers and a few other programs, but left a whole lot of other programs dying on the vine. Not shut down, just not funded. People didn't leave or get fired, but they could be gagged, tied up and banished to policy Siberia for saying the wrong thing or getting on the wrong side of a political appointee. There was a lot of fear and distrust and the daily stress of that did drive some good people out.

My immediate office has always had to struggle, so no one expects that to change. Our mission is getting access to quality healthcare into under-served areas, mostly rural. It's ironic that members of Congress who speak most vociferously against the Federal government are usually the first ones to issue a press release when a meager amount of federal funds make it to their areas. No one expects there to be an increase in those funds even though these areas are in the greatest need and went decidedly red this election.

The only thing I can say for certain is that the people who currently administer these programs are going to stay for a long as they can and continue to find innovative ways to make meager funding go as far as it can. A few will go ahead and retire, but a lot of young blood came to the mission in these last six years and they're still dedicated despite the election and low morale.

A word about "policy".

When every policy under the sun has been written and we are 100% perfectly regulated, what does a policy maker do?

They write another policy. They don't know how to do anything else, except tell others how to run every aspect of their lives. In their minds, their work is never done. Absolute control freaks.

Honestly, most businesses do not deal with a ton of regulation outside of paying taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The Feds you know might be wise to ponder their lives without health insurance. If the Feds want to survive, they will have make sure their union isn't dismantled lickety-split. Because they have a template for that, and it's called Wisconsin.

This is honestly the biggest concern we have. My husband is a fed and I am not. Insurance under my job is very expensive. We are afraid that the feds might be put on Trumpcare and that would mean our take home pay would go down by many thousands of dollars per year. Not good folks.

And yeah, the federal debt. Inflation is coming, probably sooner rather than later. It's a nasty kind of "tax".

There is no Trumpcare only the Affordable Care Act. The Feds will have to go on these policies soon. They are needed to balance the pool of people who were much more unhealthy than President Obama's experts projected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So if 20-30% retire (and these are the ones who are the agency experts at the 15 and SES levels) and then Trump imposes a freeze on hiring new staff, those of us young GS-13s and 14s will be in hog heaven.

Dream on. We're not going anywhere. I've heard 70-something SES managers talking about their next 20 years at the agency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, most businesses do not deal with a ton of regulation outside of paying taxes.

You don't know what you're talking about.