Federal exodus

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The situation (at my agency) is that around 30% of the people are ELIGIBLE to RETIRE and are only sticking around because they like the work and their colleagues.

If even a hint of shenanigans occurs, they will just walk out the door. And if that happens, the shit. will. hit. the. fan. because a lot of these people were in the agency for decades and have a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge that they will take with them. That's how I am reading it.

Oh blah, blah, blah. If they had any integrity they would have walked out under Clinton years ago.

This is just self-soothing wankage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation (at my agency) is that around 30% of the people are ELIGIBLE to RETIRE and are only sticking around because they like the work and their colleagues.

If even a hint of shenanigans occurs, they will just walk out the door. And if that happens, the shit. will. hit. the. fan. because a lot of these people were in the agency for decades and have a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge that they will take with them. That's how I am reading it.

Oh blah, blah, blah. If they had any integrity they would have walked out under Clinton years ago.

This is just self-soothing wankage.

Huh? I came in at the beginning of GWB. He sucked but I could still do valuable work that saves lives. I am in a highly specialized, highly skilled position. If I leave, it will reduce the good work my office can do. I will stay unless and until Trump makes me unable to do that good work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fed is so bloated now its ridiculous. Please... everyone start walking out the door. You won't be missed.

This is not true. My husband is a federal worker. He has a lot of vacation time saved up because over the past 10 years he has barely been able to take a vacation. They are so short staffed that only one staff member can take a day off at a time basically -- meaning everyone gets to rotate who gets to take the Friday after Thanksgiving off. They should have 15 staff members in his office and only have 8 and it has been that way for years. Definitely not bloated and lots of important work not getting done.

My spouse is a former federal worker. And, I would agree that some agencies within the government are either appropriately staffed or under staffed
Too many, however, have a ton of dead wood. That is where the bloat comes in.

Companies - especially large ones - are no different. There is inefficiency everywhere.

[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".



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.

Yes, I agree with you. I'm only saying "Trumpcare" because he will have to change it just a little to say he changed it and he loves to put his name on things. But, yes, it will basically be the ACA now knows as "Obamacare". But the feds are not going to be happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation (at my agency) is that around 30% of the people are ELIGIBLE to RETIRE and are only sticking around because they like the work and their colleagues.

If even a hint of shenanigans occurs, they will just walk out the door. And if that happens, the shit. will. hit. the. fan. because a lot of these people were in the agency for decades and have a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge that they will take with them. That's how I am reading it.

Oh blah, blah, blah. If they had any integrity they would have walked out under Clinton years ago.

This is just self-soothing wankage.

Huh? I came in at the beginning of GWB. He sucked but I could still do valuable work that saves lives. I am in a highly specialized, highly skilled position. If I leave, it will reduce the good work my office can do. I will stay unless and until Trump makes me unable to do that good work.

This describes me as well. But for the first time in my career, I am thinking about cashing in and moving to the industry. I'm starting to wonder if industry resistance might be the best hope for protecting the important government program I have devoted my working life to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation (at my agency) is that around 30% of the people are ELIGIBLE to RETIRE and are only sticking around because they like the work and their colleagues.

If even a hint of shenanigans occurs, they will just walk out the door. And if that happens, the shit. will. hit. the. fan. because a lot of these people were in the agency for decades and have a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge that they will take with them. That's how I am reading it.

Oh blah, blah, blah. If they had any integrity they would have walked out under Clinton years ago.

This is just self-soothing wankage.

Huh? I came in at the beginning of GWB. He sucked but I could still do valuable work that saves lives. I am in a highly specialized, highly skilled position. If I leave, it will reduce the good work my office can do. I will stay unless and until Trump makes me unable to do that good work.

This describes me as well. But for the first time in my career, I am thinking about cashing in and moving to the industry. I'm starting to wonder if industry resistance might be the best hope for protecting the important government program I have devoted my working life to.

I hear you. I said what I plan to do, but I absolutely do not judge anyone else for making a different choice. I'm a woman, and it's hard for me to stay with a chief executive who views me as less than human. And I'm not ruling out leaving. But for now I am staying because I know there will be lives lost if I leave, especially with a hiring freeze.

[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.

Here are another few words about "policy".

The surgeon general just issued a report about a public health crisis on the scale of cancer and AIDS. Twenty-plus million Americans addicted to one or more substances. The places hardest hit are rural areas where, even if people could afford treatment, they'd likely have to drive a few hundred miles on a daily basis for months to get it.

There is no policy to address this, but Obamacare came closest. People are so hung up on insurance that they don't realize it's only one-fraction of the legislation. No pun intended, but I'm dying to see whether or not Trump realizes that the life of hell he envisions for blacks "in the inner cities" is so much worse than he thought for the low-income rural voters who carried him. They carry the heaviest burden of disease and sick people can't work the jobs he's promised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation (at my agency) is that around 30% of the people are ELIGIBLE to RETIRE and are only sticking around because they like the work and their colleagues.

If even a hint of shenanigans occurs, they will just walk out the door. And if that happens, the shit. will. hit. the. fan. because a lot of these people were in the agency for decades and have a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge that they will take with them. That's how I am reading it.

Oh blah, blah, blah. If they had any integrity they would have walked out under Clinton years ago.

This is just self-soothing wankage.

Huh? I came in at the beginning of GWB. He sucked but I could still do valuable work that saves lives. I am in a highly specialized, highly skilled position. If I leave, it will reduce the good work my office can do. I will stay unless and until Trump makes me unable to do that good work.

This describes me as well. But for the first time in my career, I am thinking about cashing in and moving to the industry. I'm starting to wonder if industry resistance might be the best hope for protecting the important government program I have devoted my working life to.

Oh dear, what will we do without you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation (at my agency) is that around 30% of the people are ELIGIBLE to RETIRE and are only sticking around because they like the work and their colleagues.

If even a hint of shenanigans occurs, they will just walk out the door. And if that happens, the shit. will. hit. the. fan. because a lot of these people were in the agency for decades and have a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge that they will take with them. That's how I am reading it.

Oh blah, blah, blah. If they had any integrity they would have walked out under Clinton years ago.

This is just self-soothing wankage.

Huh? I came in at the beginning of GWB. He sucked but I could still do valuable work that saves lives. I am in a highly specialized, highly skilled position. If I leave, it will reduce the good work my office can do. I will stay unless and until Trump makes me unable to do that good work.

This describes me as well. But for the first time in my career, I am thinking about cashing in and moving to the industry. I'm starting to wonder if industry resistance might be the best hope for protecting the important government program I have devoted my working life to.

Oh dear, what will we do without you.

right now, a woman in India is dancing up and down with joy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation (at my agency) is that around 30% of the people are ELIGIBLE to RETIRE and are only sticking around because they like the work and their colleagues.

If even a hint of shenanigans occurs, they will just walk out the door. And if that happens, the shit. will. hit. the. fan. because a lot of these people were in the agency for decades and have a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge that they will take with them. That's how I am reading it.

What if they left and no one missed them. Could you cut 70% of the bureaucrats and policy makers and no one would miss them? Don't we have enough paper now to last into the next ice age?

I suspect PP also complains that the wait time is too long when he calls a fed agency.

Well, maybe they should make Feds come INTO work! The people in my neighborhood with three and four day "work-from-home" days laugh about it, while they laze by the pool, go to the movies, pick up the groceries, and catch up with household chores. I'm not saying everyone abuses it, but enough do to significantly reduce the number of these scam days.

So your neighbors are representative of the entire Fed workforce? Interesting.

I've heard the same reports from other people, living in neighborhoods 20 miles away. The abuse is rampant, and if we put a stop to it and actually required people to come into work and put in a "real" day, we could probably cut 20% of the workforce right there.

Urban legends.

Agencies have cracked down on telework abuses. They don't like telework.

Not urban legends. I'm always running into government workers at the grocery store at 10 a.m., the pool at noon, and the movies at 2 p.m. When I've asked if it's a government holiday, they laugh.

They may be on leave at the time. Worry about yourself.

[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?

Lack of job security in a still crappy economy? Say you're a lawyer making a GS-15/10 with a great work life balance. What's it worth to you to go private for 65K more with a high risk of being at a firm for 2 years max before the knock on the door and the, "hey, do you have a moment?" talk comes? If you are over 40 and that happens, you're cooked.

[Anonymous]

Just a note from a citizen in the real world who pays your salaries in the form of my (hard-earned, private sector derived) tax dollars:

Half of you would never be missed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation (at my agency) is that around 30% of the people are ELIGIBLE to RETIRE and are only sticking around because they like the work and their colleagues.

If even a hint of shenanigans occurs, they will just walk out the door. And if that happens, the shit. will. hit. the. fan. because a lot of these people were in the agency for decades and have a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge that they will take with them. That's how I am reading it.

Oh blah, blah, blah. If they had any integrity they would have walked out under Clinton years ago.

This is just self-soothing wankage.

Huh? I came in at the beginning of GWB. He sucked but I could still do valuable work that saves lives. I am in a highly specialized, highly skilled position. If I leave, it will reduce the good work my office can do. I will stay unless and until Trump makes me unable to do that good work.

This describes me as well. But for the first time in my career, I am thinking about cashing in and moving to the industry. I'm starting to wonder if industry resistance might be the best hope for protecting the important government program I have devoted my working life to.

Oh dear, what will we do without you.

right now, a woman in India is dancing up and down with joy

Well, sure, if you'd like India managing your mother's Medicare plan, that's great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just a note from a citizen in the real world who pays your salaries in the form of my (hard-earned, private sector derived) tax dollars:

Half of you would never be missed.

Federal workers pay taxes too, dunce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just a note from a citizen in the real world who pays your salaries in the form of my (hard-earned, private sector derived) tax dollars:

Half of you would never be missed.

Why don't you try going through your day cutting by half the things the government brings you and see how it goes. You can start by breathing half as much clean air and driving half as much on interstate highways.