DOGE at DoD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:were any dod probationary employees fired today?

Yes. 2 in my office. Civilians. Not at the Pentagon. One a vet but too highly ranked to qualify for vet protection.

If you retired from the military, you do not get a vet protection. Only disabled 40% or more vets do for RIF. I was told DoD firings to begin as soon as Friday evening. Probationary employee lists were due to DOGE either yesterday or by the end of day today, but services can apply for exemptions. Nuclear propulsion engineers are hard to find.

Firing the probationary employees is not a RIF.

Firing 50 or more employees is a RIF by legal definition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Aren't people supposed to have a security clearance and drug tests before they work with sensitive government systems?

In a responsible, serious, legally operating government, yes. These fools would be no where near a federal office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Word is they're going to cut promotional activities. Bands, parades, outreach to schools airshows. Which is funny because rhe MAGA types love those things. And it will definitely hurt recruiting.

Yeah, remember the flyovers Trump had on July 4 last time he was in office?

The bands are military people, though (not civilians, I think).

All those things are done by officers.

Military band is not officers. The conductor is an officer, but not the band members themselves.

but how much would they actually save by cutting army band etc.? or what kind of fraud waste abuse would there be? we're talking about bunch of musicians - artists basically, the least 'swamp-istique' part of the swamp...

Is that on the table? I thought they were just cutting civilians.

Don't listen to what they "say" they are doing or why -- just watch what they actually are doing and it's impact. They lie like breathing. This has zero to do with saving money or fraud waste and abuse. Zero. Use your eyes not your ears.

[Anonymous]

Have DoD civilians in probationary status received formal written notice from HR of termination yet? Or just informal email?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS recently graduated with a MS degree from CMU, undergrad from MIT, is scheduled to start as a Fed for the DoD on February 24th. He received an email last night that it will not happen. He turned down offers from Apple, Amazon, and an IB company to work for the DoD. This is a loss for the defense department.

He should reach out quietly to his government contact - not HR but the hiring manager - and see if they are able to hire him through a “body shop” contractor for now, then convert him to government later. This is quietly happening in some parts of DoD.

Don’t do it. This was me several years ago. I made a mistake. Back on the market now and I am confident I can find the next opportunity but I wish I hadn’t thrown away the pathways that were open to me coming out of an elite school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any insight on:
* DOD Contractors?
* FFRDCs (APL, MITRE, IDA, CNA etc)
Thank you.

I work for one of the “Big 5.” We haven’t gotten any terminations at all yet. We also have some contracts at civilian agencies and haven’t seen any impacts there either.

Most of these FFRDCs have a lot of bloat and need to get down. Look at a place like IDA, most of their time is spent on making reports on Govt dime that are not useful. This is to make them look good and just to spread their name around and their budget is $300M+/ year. Need to cut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any insight on:
* DOD Contractors?
* FFRDCs (APL, MITRE, IDA, CNA etc)
Thank you.

I work for one of the “Big 5.” We haven’t gotten any terminations at all yet. We also have some contracts at civilian agencies and haven’t seen any impacts there either.

Most of these FFRDCs have a lot of bloat and need to get down. Look at a place like IDA, most of their time is spent on making reports on Govt dime that are not useful. This is to make them look good and just to spread their name around and their budget is $300M+/ year. Need to cut.

I worked at DoD for a while. All of defense is like this. Some serious waste. But also, including at IDA, some pockets of deep expertise and ability. I don’t know how to get it leaner. But I can promise you that cutting young PhDs/masters who were willing to work as feds (we have a tough time recruiting them because they are so in demand in the private sector) to better identify quality and innovation in defense procurement via these thoughtless, across the board firing of probationary employees is not it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any insight on:
* DOD Contractors?
* FFRDCs (APL, MITRE, IDA, CNA etc)
Thank you.

RAND is a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any insight on:
* DOD Contractors?
* FFRDCs (APL, MITRE, IDA, CNA etc)
Thank you.

RAND is a mess.

MITRE is too, op.

[Anonymous]

Those contractors have a lot of fat to trim off the top. The executives shouldn’t be allowed to make more than SES IMO. See how it works?

[Anonymous]

CNN is reporting they want to fire 50,000 civilian employees at DOD. Which is insane.

The Defense Department has temporarily paused a plan to carry out mass firings of civilian probationary employees until Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon’s Office of General Counsel can carry out a more thorough review of the impacts such firings could have on US military readiness, two defense officials familiar with the matter told CNN.

The pause comes after CNN reported on Wednesday that the mass terminations, which could affect over 50,000 civilian employees across the Pentagon, could run afoul of Title 10 section 129a of the US code. Following that report, Pentagon lawyers began reviewing the legality of the planned terminations more closely, the officials said.

That law says that the secretary of defense “may not reduce the civilian workforce programmed full-time equivalent levels unless the Secretary conducts an appropriate analysis” of how those firings could impact the US military’s lethality and readiness. The law also says that mitigating risk to US military readiness takes precedence over cost.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/21/politics/pentagon-firings-review/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CNN is reporting they want to fire 50,000 civilian employees at DOD. Which is insane.

The Defense Department has temporarily paused a plan to carry out mass firings of civilian probationary employees until Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon’s Office of General Counsel can carry out a more thorough review of the impacts such firings could have on US military readiness, two defense officials familiar with the matter told CNN.

The pause comes after CNN reported on Wednesday that the mass terminations, which could affect over 50,000 civilian employees across the Pentagon, could run afoul of Title 10 section 129a of the US code. Following that report, Pentagon lawyers began reviewing the legality of the planned terminations more closely, the officials said.

That law says that the secretary of defense “may not reduce the civilian workforce programmed full-time equivalent levels unless the Secretary conducts an appropriate analysis” of how those firings could impact the US military’s lethality and readiness. The law also says that mitigating risk to US military readiness takes precedence over cost.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/21/politics/pentagon-firings-review/index.html

50,000? Good lord. Well I guess that’s going to be one huge class action suit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CNN is reporting they want to fire 50,000 civilian employees at DOD. Which is insane.

The Defense Department has temporarily paused a plan to carry out mass firings of civilian probationary employees until Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon’s Office of General Counsel can carry out a more thorough review of the impacts such firings could have on US military readiness, two defense officials familiar with the matter told CNN.

The pause comes after CNN reported on Wednesday that the mass terminations, which could affect over 50,000 civilian employees across the Pentagon, could run afoul of Title 10 section 129a of the US code. Following that report, Pentagon lawyers began reviewing the legality of the planned terminations more closely, the officials said.

That law says that the secretary of defense “may not reduce the civilian workforce programmed full-time equivalent levels unless the Secretary conducts an appropriate analysis” of how those firings could impact the US military’s lethality and readiness. The law also says that mitigating risk to US military readiness takes precedence over cost.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/21/politics/pentagon-firings-review/index.html

This is a classic "first they came for" situation. Everyone keeps wanting to believe DOGE is not going to go after DoD, or will only go after bloat and waste, or won't cut services that benefit red states.

Spoiler: They are and they will, so either get activated now or wait for them to come for you, but etiher way it's coming.

[Anonymous]

8% cut across DoD every year for the next 4.

Lists of cuts are due to the pentagon this week. Not just probationary employees are being terminated.

No word on what it means for contractors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CNN is reporting they want to fire 50,000 civilian employees at DOD. Which is insane.

The Defense Department has temporarily paused a plan to carry out mass firings of civilian probationary employees until Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon’s Office of General Counsel can carry out a more thorough review of the impacts such firings could have on US military readiness, two defense officials familiar with the matter told CNN.

The pause comes after CNN reported on Wednesday that the mass terminations, which could affect over 50,000 civilian employees across the Pentagon, could run afoul of Title 10 section 129a of the US code. Following that report, Pentagon lawyers began reviewing the legality of the planned terminations more closely, the officials said.

That law says that the secretary of defense “may not reduce the civilian workforce programmed full-time equivalent levels unless the Secretary conducts an appropriate analysis” of how those firings could impact the US military’s lethality and readiness. The law also says that mitigating risk to US military readiness takes precedence over cost.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/21/politics/pentagon-firings-review/index.html

Who’s “they”? The Ketamine Kaiser?