Federal worker is an oxymoron, like military intelligence.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't think it would happen this time. Is there any way the House would vote for back pay in the current political climate?
Don't be naive. The House doesn't give a shit what the public thinks. Their approval rating is like 30%.
True, but there pretty much is a national hatred of Feds and contractors alike. I think there is popular support to screw both anyway they can.
This is true. Signed, the public
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't think it would happen this time. Is there any way the House would vote for back pay in the current political climate?
Don't be naive. The House doesn't give a shit what the public thinks. Their approval rating is like 30%.
True, but there pretty much is a national hatred of Feds and contractors alike. I think there is popular support to screw both anyway they can.
This is true. Signed, the public
Anonymous wrote:When we were forced to work unpaid, because we were essential personnel, the last time, we never really got paid back.
Anonymous wrote:OP, you're confusing a full government shutdown with an administrative furlough. They're very different and not comparable situations.
Bottom line -- no one is getting back pay for administrative furlough days under the sequester. Absolutely, positively, no way.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In a government shutdown, which is different, employees who are required to work because they are deemed essential get back pay, and Congress has historically voted for back pay for all employees. I think if there is a furlough, we're not getting back pay.
This is important. In the past, when feds have been "furloughed" it was because the government literally shut down. In this case, the government will not shut down. Each agency will be forced to slash its budget. And the only feasible option to do that in many instances will be to furlough workers. Agenciec sould, theoretically not furlough anybody (and nstead, say, sell off all property, close airports, etc). It is fundamentally different fromt he past furloughs as a legal matter. I would not expect it to be handled the same way.
Anonymous wrote: In 1996, my agency kept working through the stalemate. We did not close. We are fee-funded, but not deemed 'essential'.
Every other agency that shut-down basically got paid a week's vacation.
Not sure how it will play out this time...
Anonymous wrote:Furlough starts either in March or April, I can't remember.