Anonymous wrote:Honest question: I've heard that in the event of a government shutdown leading to federal workers being placed on furlough, they are eventually compensated for their lost wages once the shutdown concludes. What's the rationale behind this policy? It seems that during the furlough, no productive work is being performed, and the majority, if not all, private contractors do not receive any retroactive compensation. Moreover, the shutdown itself is usually a result of insufficient funding or disagreements regarding future funding.
Just trying to understand, thanks!
Anonymous wrote:Why do we let politicians go home in August if there is no budget.
We need a law saying they can’t go back to their states until we have a budget.
Why do they get to be late on their deliverables every.single.year?!?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honest question: I've heard that in the event of a government shutdown leading to federal workers being placed on furlough, they are eventually compensated for their lost wages once the shutdown concludes. What's the rationale behind this policy? It seems that during the furlough, no productive work is being performed, and the majority, if not all, private contractors do not receive any retroactive compensation. Moreover, the shutdown itself is usually a result of insufficient funding or disagreements regarding future funding.
Just trying to understand, thanks!
It's not a policy, it's a law.
If your point is that private contractors should also receive back pay, I won't argue with you.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Does it make sense to pay backpay for shutdowns? Not really. But shutdowns themselves don't make sense.
It's basically a lockout - an employer telling its employees that they can't work, can't take another job, and have to return as soon as they declare. Yet it's not sensible to pay? Yeah, I get it - the employees in many cases aren't going actual work for the government (legally they can't) but the employer is specifically telling them not to work even though they continue to be employed.
Just so it's clear - it's not like a vacation. You can't plan anything around it. You don't know until midnight on Sept. 30 that it's starting, and it could last an hour, a day, a week, a month. And you're not getting paid. Who could just go off and have fun during that period.
It's horribly inefficient to be sure - I'd rather work for my pay than not - but it is entirely because Congress and the President can't get their acts together (obviously the blame falls more specifically in each shutdown). If nothing else, federal employees should get paid as recompense for the big FU C and P give them every so often.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about the other side of the equation? Tax payers are paying for services not rendered during the shutdown, is that fair to the tax payers?
Fortunately for the taxpayers, at least those of us who don't live in D.C., we have a good venue to seek relief for this unfairness: Don't elect lawmakers who can't manage to keep the lights on in the U.S. government.
Anonymous wrote:What about the other side of the equation? Tax payers are paying for services not rendered during the shutdown, is that fair to the tax payers?
Anonymous wrote:Why do we let politicians go home in August if there is no budget.
We need a law saying they can’t go back to their states until we have a budget.
Why do they get to be late on their deliverables every.single.year?!?
Anonymous wrote:What about the other side of the equation? Tax payers are paying for services not rendered during the shutdown, is that fair to the tax payers?
Anonymous wrote:What about the other side of the equation? Tax payers are paying for services not rendered during the shutdown, is that fair to the tax payers?