DEI RIFs

[Anonymous]

My DH was asked to track his GDEI contacts in a spreadsheet. Like, as in label people by name, industry, etc. He wasn’t allowed to ask them, of course, but was he supposed to guess if they were gay, Latino, Asian, AA and would want to be listed as such? His agency wanted his office to track them so they could report DEI metrics.

His office didn’t do it. They guessed it was a pretty bad idea. The performative tracking was scary.

I’m a minority and my fed DH is white. I said heck no to the secretive tracking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My agency must have had some inside information because last fall they changed the name of the DEI office to EEO.

If they changed it after nov 5th of 2024 the EO will make them report it; it also says it will prosecute people who do not report it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thank bloody hell.

Last few emails from our DEIA office have included Webinar invites on talks for

How to decolonize
Harvesting bison meat and safety implications
Institutional racism
Cultural appropriation
Anti-racism progress: is not being racist enough?

Just whacky, zainy stuff. DEIA is a made up cottage industry that serves zero purpose at making people more productive to meet organizational goals. All it does is foster resentment, division, and workplace toxicity when all people want to do is go to work. None of this stuff is appropriate for work. If you want outside lectures, fine, do whatever. Why are you using professional resources to setup meetings about eating bison meat? It's lunacy.

I'd love to know move about harvesting bison meat. Better than taking pointless PII training for the 100th time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Anyone? Of course not. But if you ONLY hire people who aren’t white…

Being white is not a protected class.

[Anonymous]

My relative does accessibility work at the White House (ensuring that new construction jobs are ADA compliant, that there are supports for deaf/hard of hearing at press conferences, wheelchairs can navigate). He's being put on leave effective today.

Hard to understand why anyone wouldn't want the above work to continue, or who would think that this work is at all extraneous/unnecessary. Shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My relative does accessibility work at the White House (ensuring that new construction jobs are ADA compliant, that there are supports for deaf/hard of hearing at press conferences, wheelchairs can navigate). He's being put on leave effective today.

Hard to understand why anyone wouldn't want the above work to continue, or who would think that this work is at all extraneous/unnecessary. Shameful.

Republicans were complaining on X about sign language interpreters the other day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Anyone? Of course not. But if you ONLY hire people who aren’t white…

Being white is not a protected class.

I thought race is a protected class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DH was asked to track his GDEI contacts in a spreadsheet. Like, as in label people by name, industry, etc. He wasn’t allowed to ask them, of course, but was he supposed to guess if they were gay, Latino, Asian, AA and would want to be listed as such? His agency wanted his office to track them so they could report DEI metrics.

His office didn’t do it. They guessed it was a pretty bad idea. The performative tracking was scary.

I’m a minority and my fed DH is white. I said heck no to the secretive tracking.

This is made up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DEIA is a made up cottage industry that serves zero purpose at making people more productive to meet organizational goals. All it does is foster resentment, division, and workplace toxicity when all people want to do is go to work.

Right. We should never be made to consider anyone different from ourselves. We should be unified. Like a bundle of wooden rods. Maybe with an axe in the middle. What’s that called again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just wondering how many people impacted by this are straight white men? I’m guessing not to many.

Guessing not many White men got these jobs in the first place.

Exactly. So this is effectively targeting minorities.

Only because the original hiring was discriminatory.

So hiring anyone who isn’t white is discrimination

Anyone? Of course not. But if you ONLY hire people who aren’t white…

Being white is not a protected class.

Yes it is - all races are protected classes. the more you know!

[Anonymous]

What is a DEI hire?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DH was asked to track his GDEI contacts in a spreadsheet. Like, as in label people by name, industry, etc. He wasn’t allowed to ask them, of course, but was he supposed to guess if they were gay, Latino, Asian, AA and would want to be listed as such? His agency wanted his office to track them so they could report DEI metrics.

His office didn’t do it. They guessed it was a pretty bad idea. The performative tracking was scary.

I’m a minority and my fed DH is white. I said heck no to the secretive tracking.

This is made up

It 100% is not made up. I know, it may seem fake but it’s true. I think DH still has the email. He kept it just in case they got in trouble later. This is moot because they decided not to follow the directive.

It was put in place support their metrics up the chain, not for any other reason. Don’t think this doesn’t happen m.

[Anonymous]

How many people are in 'DEI' jobs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's not what a RIF is, OP.

The OPM memo calls it a RIF.

Holy shit, the OPM memo is a bloodbath. Wow. The EO stopped short of this, this is absolutely nuts.

https://chcoc.gov/sites/default/files/OPM%20Memo%20Initial%20Guidance%20Regarding%20DEIA%20Executive%20Orders.pdf

I wonder how many acting heads are going to quit rather than send out those memos.
I honestly can’t see the person acting at my agency sending that out - she’s just the last one standing and as far as I can tell totally non-political.

That memo is just...another level. I will be very interested to see if our acting sends it out. It's one thing to say, hey, we've decided to eliminate all these programs. It's something totally different to say they resulted in "shameful discrimination" and then threaten the workforce if they don't report "coded language." But nothing to see here! It's all good and totally normal governing.

+1. These people didn't create the DEI offices and in most cases didn't create the policies people are complaining about. They were assigned to do a job. It's fine to decide that job is unwanted now, but making the employees into villains should worry everybody. Every fed will at some point work on something the other side doesn't like.

[Anonymous]

Is DEI = WFH jobs or jobs with family friendly hours?