Are things calming down, Feds?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel calm for now. I will worry about things when they happen.

This. We’re in for a long haul, people. Constantly freaking out does no good, at all. It’s what they want us to do. Staying calm is resisting.

That, and as a supervisor, I can’t afford to be flipping the f out all the time.

This. They talk a lot of talk, but when I look at it immediately surroundings, dry little has changed other than the fact that I see my staff in person a bit more. Not that what HAS happened elsewhere isn’t horrible—it’s just not happening to me and there’s very little I can do to help other than stay calm and competent.

USAID person here. This was my attitude, shared by many coworkers. I now wish we had freaked out more and earlier. We should have blown whistles, created paper trails, questioned orders, coordinated with outside allies.

If I could give advice to my January 20th self, it would be: Do not be the frog in the pot.

What exactly do you think you can do before? We can’t strike. What leverage do you think we have? Do our job REALLY good so they appreciate us? Write to the Oligarch newspapers? Look for another job, that’s what I’m doing because that’s the only prep worth anything.

I keep thinking about this. We can’t strike but we did sign an oath to defend our government from enemies foreign and domestic. At what point in the dismantling of the government do we need to take action to defend it in line with our oath. My agency is being gutted and sold off for parts. Just showing up every day and waiting for the RIF feels unpatriotic.

So if they try to eliminate us en masse, we go on strike and then they can legally fire us for cause? This seems like
playing into their hands.

What? You can demonstrate if you are on admin leave. And definitely if you’ve been terminated.

Yeah that’s not what a strike means. Trying to force the hand of an employer who has already fired you isn’t a threat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel calm for now. I will worry about things when they happen.

This. We’re in for a long haul, people. Constantly freaking out does no good, at all. It’s what they want us to do. Staying calm is resisting.

That, and as a supervisor, I can’t afford to be flipping the f out all the time.

This. They talk a lot of talk, but when I look at it immediately surroundings, dry little has changed other than the fact that I see my staff in person a bit more. Not that what HAS happened elsewhere isn’t horrible—it’s just not happening to me and there’s very little I can do to help other than stay calm and competent.

USAID person here. This was my attitude, shared by many coworkers. I now wish we had freaked out more and earlier. We should have blown whistles, created paper trails, questioned orders, coordinated with outside allies.

If I could give advice to my January 20th self, it would be: Do not be the frog in the pot.

What exactly do you think you can do before? We can’t strike. What leverage do you think we have? Do our job REALLY good so they appreciate us? Write to the Oligarch newspapers? Look for another job, that’s what I’m doing because that’s the only prep worth anything.

I keep thinking about this. We can’t strike but we did sign an oath to defend our government from enemies foreign and domestic. At what point in the dismantling of the government do we need to take action to defend it in line with our oath. My agency is being gutted and sold off for parts. Just showing up every day and waiting for the RIF feels unpatriotic.

So if they try to eliminate us en masse, we go on strike and then they can legally fire us for cause? This seems like
playing into their hands.

What? You can demonstrate if you are on admin leave. And definitely if you’ve been terminated.

Yeah that’s not what a strike means. Trying to force the hand of an employer who has already fired you isn’t a threat.

What part of “prohibited” doesn’t make sense to you? We can’t strike. They’ll fire us for cause. This is one reason I think federal unions are a little silly. What leverage do they have with hostile management?

[Anonymous]

USAID is all RIFed and without systems access, so no, not better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel calm for now. I will worry about things when they happen.

This. We’re in for a long haul, people. Constantly freaking out does no good, at all. It’s what they want us to do. Staying calm is resisting.

That, and as a supervisor, I can’t afford to be flipping the f out all the time.

This. They talk a lot of talk, but when I look at it immediately surroundings, dry little has changed other than the fact that I see my staff in person a bit more. Not that what HAS happened elsewhere isn’t horrible—it’s just not happening to me and there’s very little I can do to help other than stay calm and competent.

USAID person here. This was my attitude, shared by many coworkers. I now wish we had freaked out more and earlier. We should have blown whistles, created paper trails, questioned orders, coordinated with outside allies.

If I could give advice to my January 20th self, it would be: Do not be the frog in the pot.

What exactly do you think you can do before? We can’t strike. What leverage do you think we have? Do our job REALLY good so they appreciate us? Write to the Oligarch newspapers? Look for another job, that’s what I’m doing because that’s the only prep worth anything.

I keep thinking about this. We can’t strike but we did sign an oath to defend our government from enemies foreign and domestic. At what point in the dismantling of the government do we need to take action to defend it in line with our oath. My agency is being gutted and sold off for parts. Just showing up every day and waiting for the RIF feels unpatriotic.

So if they try to eliminate us en masse, we go on strike and then they can legally fire us for cause? This seems like
playing into their hands.

What? You can demonstrate if you are on admin leave. And definitely if you’ve been terminated.

Yeah that’s not what a strike means. Trying to force the hand of an employer who has already fired you isn’t a threat.

What part of “prohibited” doesn’t make sense to you? We can’t strike. They’ll fire us for cause. This is one reason I think federal unions are a little silly. What leverage do they have with hostile management?

Aren't the unions helping the fired feds fight back?

[Anonymous]

I feel like things are calming down. I think so many of us thought it would be the chance to get rid of low performers but nope.

[Anonymous]

Just wait til the weekly 5 bullet points request comes out tomorrow!

[Anonymous]

They want to cut 50% so it's not calming down.

[Anonymous]

Someone died from Ebola. The measles are spreading. It's not calming down.

[Anonymous]

Trump tweeted some insanity about how he’s instructed his cabinet to take a scalpel instead of a hatchet to the cuts. Lol someone must have showed him his poll numbers and today’s employment numbers. We’ll see if he really means this. Meanwhile CIA and DOD are laying ppl off in droves..

[Anonymous]

Or national park visitation numbers in 2024

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RIF takes time to formulate ranking orders. That’s why things appear quiet. You better believe every agency is putting together lists.

Unless you're GSA, where they decide to take the easy way out and just fire entire divisions/offices - no need to rank people when you axe that way.

Yup. They laid off the whole division of people in my job function, which is focused on compliance with a specific major law. It's not looking good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like things are calming down. I think so many of us thought it would be the chance to get rid of low performers but nope.

This. I was hoping our low-performing, absentee, secretary would finally be held accountable but it doesn’t look like that will be happening anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They want to cut 50% so it's not calming down.

There’s no way they’re cutting 50%. That’s bluster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They want to cut 50% so it's not calming down.

There’s no way they’re cutting 50%. That’s bluster.

They are shutting everything down, keeping just “essential” and building back from that.

Previous shutdowns already showed they can operate for a long time without nonessential, pandemic shutdowns also reinforced that idea. And they can hire back people as they find a need, but only after trying to privatize it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like things are calming down. I think so many of us thought it would be the chance to get rid of low performers but nope.

This. I was hoping our low-performing, absentee, secretary would finally be held accountable but it doesn’t look like that will be happening anymore.

Same. And PIPs are such a joke for Feds.

But yeah, lay off our poor probies who were excellent workers.