This is the REAL reason DCUM is in a frenzy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here we go again. The genius Republicans will outsource government work to private contractors who make nearly twice as much to dong the same job. All in the name of saving money and socking it to those lazy government workers.

Yep! Just send us more money, folks. We'll take it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is most federal workers are underpaid and work really hard. Many, if not most, could make more money in the private sector, especially the most highly skilled. The government's draw is public service and decent benefits. Sure, you could outsource the work that needs to get done, but the private sector overcharges the government and has less oversight.

Completely not true in my agency. The direct opposite. And we're one of the few money-cows, fee-for-service type of deals. I can only imagine the dysfunction in the agencies that don't have to answer to public directly and have no measurable goals to achieve.

Exactly! At DOD, we are one of those slacker government agencies that don't charge fees for service and don't "answer to the public directly." We just suckle at the government teat and do crossword puzzles all day long, whilst we wait for something to happen. Very informed comment. No wonder Trump got elected.

So what good do you actually think you do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is most federal workers are underpaid and work really hard. Many, if not most, could make more money in the private sector, especially the most highly skilled. The government's draw is public service and decent benefits. Sure, you could outsource the work that needs to get done, but the private sector overcharges the government and has less oversight.

Completely not true in my agency. The direct opposite. And we're one of the few money-cows, fee-for-service type of deals. I can only imagine the dysfunction in the agencies that don't have to answer to public directly and have no measurable goals to achieve.

Exactly! At DOD, we are one of those slacker government agencies that don't charge fees for service and don't "answer to the public directly." We just suckle at the government teat and do crossword puzzles all day long, whilst we wait for something to happen. Very informed comment. No wonder Trump got elected.

So what good do you actually think you do?

Nobody in America says "whilst". How is the weather in London?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meh. I work in finance and am not a fed. Some people here really have a weird axe to grind. I don't have an issue with Feds getting a decent salary and good benefits. That said, I'm also OK making it easier to fire persistent under-performers if its true that it really is difficult to do that under the current system. Thing is, Trump has said that if anything, he wants to increase the military. The DOD and military dwarf pretty much all the divisions of civil service combined. Even if he just completely wiped out the Dept of Education and EPA, those agencies are pretty small anyway. I don't really see that having much of an impact on net gov't spending (esp. if he embarks on an expansion of the military, border patrol, etc. at the same time). Its not draining the swamp, its just increasing spending on those parts of government that the republican base likes (war economy) and choking funding from the regulatory and watchdog agencies that the base hates.

^^Someone who gets it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is most federal workers are underpaid and work really hard. Many, if not most, could make more money in the private sector, especially the most highly skilled. The government's draw is public service and decent benefits. Sure, you could outsource the work that needs to get done, but the private sector overcharges the government and has less oversight.

Completely not true in my agency. The direct opposite. And we're one of the few money-cows, fee-for-service type of deals. I can only imagine the dysfunction in the agencies that don't have to answer to public directly and have no measurable goals to achieve.

Exactly! At DOD, we are one of those slacker government agencies that don't charge fees for service and don't "answer to the public directly." We just suckle at the government teat and do crossword puzzles all day long, whilst we wait for something to happen. Very informed comment. No wonder Trump got elected.

So what good do you actually think you do?

Nobody in America says "whilst". How is the weather in London?

NP.. maybe that PP grew up in the UK and now is a citizen in the US. DH, is that you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meh. I work in finance and am not a fed. Some people here really have a weird axe to grind. I don't have an issue with Feds getting a decent salary and good benefits. That said, I'm also OK making it easier to fire persistent under-performers if its true that it really is difficult to do that under the current system. Thing is, Trump has said that if anything, he wants to increase the military. The DOD and military dwarf pretty much all the divisions of civil service combined. Even if he just completely wiped out the Dept of Education and EPA, those agencies are pretty small anyway. I don't really see that having much of an impact on net gov't spending (esp. if he embarks on an expansion of the military, border patrol, etc. at the same time). Its not draining the swamp, its just increasing spending on those parts of government that the republican base likes (war economy) and choking funding from the regulatory and watchdog agencies that the base hates.

^^Someone who gets it.

Also agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/21/trump-republicans-plan-to-target-government-workers-benefits-and-job-security/

"President-elect Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress are drawing up plans to take on the government bureaucracy they have long railed against, by eroding job protections and grinding down benefits that federal workers have received for a generation. Hiring freezes, an end to automatic raises, a green light to fire poor performers, a ban on union business on the government’s dime and less generous pensions — these are the contours of the blueprint emerging under Republican control of Washington in January. "


Welcome to the world that the private sector has been living in for years now.

I know this is shocking to you, but most of us don't work for the federal government. What your dumb self fails to realize is that he is increasing spending in areas where people do work - defense contracting, etc. 1 in 23 DC residents is a lawyer. Damn, I think we'll be really busy over the next 4 years. Plenty of work!

We'll be fine. Don't worry your pretty little self about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/21/trump-republicans-plan-to-target-government-workers-benefits-and-job-security/

"President-elect Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress are drawing up plans to take on the government bureaucracy they have long railed against, by eroding job protections and grinding down benefits that federal workers have received for a generation. Hiring freezes, an end to automatic raises, a green light to fire poor performers, a ban on union business on the government’s dime and less generous pensions — these are the contours of the blueprint emerging under Republican control of Washington in January. "


Welcome to the world that the private sector has been living in for years now.

Not a federal worker or contract. I am a human being who respects my fellow human beings and expects the same from our President. This one doesn't and that is why I am freaking out.

How much does a "human being" get paid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/21/trump-republicans-plan-to-target-government-workers-benefits-and-job-security/

"President-elect Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress are drawing up plans to take on the government bureaucracy they have long railed against, by eroding job protections and grinding down benefits that federal workers have received for a generation. Hiring freezes, an end to automatic raises, a green light to fire poor performers, a ban on union business on the government’s dime and less generous pensions — these are the contours of the blueprint emerging under Republican control of Washington in January. "


Welcome to the world that the private sector has been living in for years now.

Here's what I don't understand. The world that the private sector has been living in for years has been one that is basically raping the working people while the corporate overlords line their pockets.

The working people would be much better off with job protections and pensions that federal employees enjoy. (But let's not pretend that the job protections and pensions that they enjoy haven't also been eroded--they certainly have. Federal retirement benefits are nothing like they used to be.)

So somehow the questions are not: Why doesn't the private sector offer benefits that are similar to those of federal employees? Why doesn't Congress push to protect their constituents like they protect themselves and their congressional employees?

Instead the question is: Why don't federal employees suffer like the rest of us?

What we have here is a circular firing squad. Rather than turning our weapons on corporations and business owners, we turn the weapons on each other. Misery loves company I suppose.

b/c people opt into government jobs (although clearly not so easy any longer) and agree to receive less money in exchange for pensions, healthcare and job security. I'm not a Fed; I'm a teacher. But my IT pals in government could be making shit loads more in the private sector. Job security is nonexistent, however, and when you have a family to support, you don't want to risk it.

I have two kids. Both my husband and I are educators. We live comfortably but certainly don't have the salary to buy us a European vacation each year. Our healthcare is number one, however, and when we retire, we'll probably draw in a combined income of over $120K - maybe more b/c his salary is much higher now in a new position. We also contribute to a shared plan and have our own individual plans.

So while we're not making $500K a year, we live w/in our means, have saved up for the future (including college) and work our asses off in our jobs.

I don't feel the need to apologize for my choices.

You made your decision. Now live with it.