Anonymous wrote:The age thing is probably an excuse for whatever other reason the manager has for trying to push her out.

Hard to say but she would be wise to try to move to a different team, supervisor and or role in the agency, OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is he good at her job? Maybe she sucks and the manager wants to hire someone competent.

Then it would be incredibly stupid of them to mention retirement and age instead of just documenting her poor performance.

It takes a long time and a great deal of work to fire a low performer. I agree it's a bad idea to bring up retirement, but it makes sense that they'd want to know if the problem will resolve itself.

This must be something which varies by dept, agency, or office.

The only “forced” move of a single person which I ever have seen was when an employee had a (valid and well documented) religious discrimination case against their immediate supervisor. The complainer kept their job and duties, but was moved laterally on the org chart to report to a non-discriminatory supervisor from one with an obvious axe to grind. This was a wise move by senior management as they would have lost an ugly court case - and the complainer was satisfied with the resolution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's very hard to "push out" a gov employee. It is not by chance "retired in place" is such a common phrase. The manager may be trying to make her uncomfortable so she would leave. She should stop caring.

They can move someone to another office or team, though, can’t they?

Yes they can. The pp is incorrect. You can move one person. Directing work is a managerial discretion and they can move people around if the work changes. The reason behind moving someone must be based on the work however and not based off of the employees race/religion/age/sex etc.

I also have seen only one person moved when there is a personality misfit between the supervisor and the employee. Not everyone works well together and this is an easy fix when there is a personality clash.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's very hard to "push out" a gov employee. It is not by chance "retired in place" is such a common phrase. The manager may be trying to make her uncomfortable so she would leave. She should stop caring.

They can move someone to another office or team, though, can’t they?

Hmm. They usually can't move a single employee, but they could reorg a group.

PP is correct that making a lateral move to a different group and manager is wise.

I have seen managers slowly year-by-year down grade someone's annual performance rating, and then terminate for non-performance after 3-4 years.

Anonymous wrote:It's very hard to "push out" a gov employee. It is not by chance "retired in place" is such a common phrase. The manager may be trying to make her uncomfortable so she would leave. She should stop caring.

They can move someone to another office or team, though, can’t they?

That manager is looking for an EEO case!

I truly care about my employees and don't want them to retire, but it would be helpful for me if I knew their timelines. I'd focus more on cross training. That's probably what her manager was looking for, but phrased it wrong. I have been caught off guard by employees retiring in one month and wished I knew sooner (I could start working with HR to get a job posted the day they leave, to ease the burden on everyone else). I don't know the ages of anyone who works for me though.

Anonymous wrote:A friend that works for a Federal Agency is 62 years old and told me that her manager asked her if she will be retiring. She has not worked that long for the Federal Government. She was a late-career hire and has 7 years of Federal Service. She is not in law enforcement. She work for one of the agencies like the Commerce Dept. She was thinking about working another 3 years until she was 65. She said that her manager has been treating her like a lame duck and began taking away some of her major projects. Is there any recourse to ensure that she is not pushed out? Does the HR at her agency represent her interests or the managers?

This is unusual. Due to the retirement structure, there are many federal employees that have different timelines for retirement based on their age and personal situation. People retire anywhere from 55-75 depending on years of service. It is not unusual for someone with fewer years of service to want to wait a few years until they retire.

Unfortunately, trying to passively get civil servants out of jobs is very common for various reasons. If your friend's manager is not treating her fairly, then she should have a discussion with that manager. If the manager denies trying to get her out, then there is not much to be done as a non-union position. She should look around in her agency or other agencies for a lateral transfer. There are many places in the federal government where civil servants with the right skill set can move even when they are older. Often agencies need a person with X qualifications, but they have restrictions on how they can post such a job and the external hiring restrictions mean a lengthy process to fill the position. If you can lateral someone into the position, you can often have someone in far faster than if you have to open the position fully to external applicants.

Did she tell her boss she was retiring at 65?

Are the timelines on these projects 3+ years in the future? Silly example, but is she an astronaut who was slotted to fly to Mars?

If so, then I see why they need to give the project to someone with a longer runway. When I told my boss I was leaving in six weeks, I wasn’t put on the conference roster for the following year.

But if she just said “no, I don’t have plans to retire yet”, then they’re supposed to treat her like her peers in her job/rating.

Projects/areas of responsibility do get moved around though, especially for more senior GS employees, even when people aren’t retiring. Some agencies are more fluid than others. I think my husband’s responsibilities have changed five times in three years, and they all give themselves new titles, but functionally, they are all doing the same work for the same pay.

So if she’s still in the same role, at the same rate, doing similar work, I wouldn’t worry too much about it.

No my husband wants to work until 75

Yes you can. And fed bosses can lie and not be challenged. Where i was the union listened to mgmt behind the scenes whether to save an employee, or not. Favors back and forth for when the unon wamted something from mgmt. Sorry

She needs to start documenting all interactions with the boss and talk to an attorney. Plus, in the meantime, I would make sure she is doing her work, working on time, etc. until it's settled. In the meantime, trust no one at that job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is she in a union?

OP. No, I recall her telling me that she is not covered by the union. Also she was uncertain if the agency’s HR dept would really be her advocate. That is, would the HR be required to put management’s interest before hers?

The EEO office is the one for employees. Google agency name plus EEO.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is she in a union?

OP. No, I recall her telling me that she is not covered by the union. Also she was uncertain if the agency’s HR dept would really be her advocate. That is, would the HR be required to put management’s interest before hers?

Come on OP, what do you think?

HR represent the agency, not the employee. If she is really concerned, she should consult an employment lawyer with federal agency experience.

But, if her reviews are good, there is not much they can do - and PPs are right that it would be stupid to focus on her age rather than performance.

Is it possible these are long term projects, and the manager is trying (poorly) to make sure someone sticks around to handle them?

Can she ask to be supervised by another manager and explain why? If someone came to me and asked to switch to a different team because a manager asked her about retirement plans and took work away, I would be concerned about that manager.