Anonymous wrote:
I know someone who retired on 1 day's notice, left the office on Weds. saying he was taking annual leave Thurs. and Friday and retiring effective Sunday.

OMG, whoever this is, I love it

Will remember this when I have to retire in 30+ years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the current thinking was ASAP? They will pay you for 2 weeks, but they would like you gone in a few days...

This. What if you give them more than two weeks notice and they decide they want you gone way before those two weeks are up? Then you'll have some extra time off you had not planned for.

If you're in a full-time perm position, they can't fired you more quickly than you're going to quit in OP's situation. So the risk you describe is not really there for feds - but the risk others describe of it just being awkward and unpleasant is real. I know my director will take it as a personal offense when I leave - even though she's not offering me any growth if I stay, so my exit would be best as short & sweet.

I agree that they can't fire someone in a federal full-time perm position more quickly than we would quit. But I also agree that MANY federal managers/directors take people moving on as a personal offense. Even though they can't fire you that fast, they CAN do things like make you do undesirable tasks, shi**y travel, etc.--just to exercise their power one last time. I've seen it happen. They can retaliate against you in a variety of ways. A 2-week notice virtually eliminates the possibility of that because those 2 weeks are going to be consumed by you transitioning out.

I wouldn't ever give more than 2 weeks notice in the federal government, unless I was in a really top-notch agency/office with competent, reasonable managers that supported my professional development and growth. Unfortunately, many will actively try to stifle your growth (limit training and professional development opportunities) to keep you in your position long-term. And to those, I will always give only a 2-week notice when I move up and out.

Anonymous wrote:As someone who has given more than 2 or 3 weeks notice several times in the past, I've regretted it every time. After two weeks of notice you are so ready to leave and people are ready for you to go. No one is so important that things cannot be wrapped up with steady work over 2 weeks. But three is very courteous and prevents anyone from speaking ill, ever. Dont do more than that (imho)

+1 2 weeks is enough for any job. More than that is actually a bad idea.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the current thinking was ASAP? They will pay you for 2 weeks, but they would like you gone in a few days...

This. What if you give them more than two weeks notice and they decide they want you gone way before those two weeks are up? Then you'll have some extra time off you had not planned for.

If you're in a full-time perm position, they can't fired you more quickly than you're going to quit in OP's situation. So the risk you describe is not really there for feds - but the risk others describe of it just being awkward and unpleasant is real. I know my director will take it as a personal offense when I leave - even though she's not offering me any growth if I stay, so my exit would be best as short & sweet.

2 weeks (plus maybe a few days if I've been treated particularly well) is the maximum I'm willing to give. 2 weeks is just enough time to hand off my projects, tie up loose ends, and process out. It takes months at my agency to hire people, and that's if they actually find someone both qualified and willing to sign on. So its not like if I gave them more notice it would really make a difference. They'd still be very short staffed.
When you give more than 2 weeks, it just gives them time to retaliate, try to sabotage, and just generally mess with you--something that is always a possibility, even in an environment that you had previously found to be positive and supportive. People will resent the fact that you have the ambition, moxy, or just flat out ability, to move on in your career. People will resent it because they might be jealous that you've done it and they haven't or can't. They might resent having to pick up your workload. Many managers will resent having to get off their azz and either help pickup your workload or deal with the fallout of losing a person.

I've had one manager (who was abusive and incompetent) who would be extremely angry when people would give only 2 weeks notice. She was too stupid to realize that people were giving two weeks notice because they knew she would make their life miserable if they gave more.

The more notice you give, the more power you give them. Ask yourself if you really trust your managers enough to do that.

I'd give 2 weeks.
I don't feel like I owe them anything. I would try to use up my vacation if I could to avoid the rather large ding on it you get if you choose to be paid out for them.
The longer you give them, the more miserable they're likely to make your life.

And again, I don't owe them anything. After pay freezes, furloughs, and a general hostile environment, I really wouldn't care. I say let them miss this position being filled. But sadly, I don't have another job. cry.

But if you like your job/office/etc, I'm sure you'll have a different view.

Anonymous wrote:As someone who has given more than 2 or 3 weeks notice several times in the past, I've regretted it every time. After two weeks of notice you are so ready to leave and people are ready for you to go. No one is so important that things cannot be wrapped up with steady work over 2 weeks. But three is very courteous and prevents anyone from speaking ill, ever. Dont do more than that (imho)

Agreed. I gave them 4-5 weeks, my supervisor kept me to it and after I transition what needed to be done she turned very hostile and made the remaining time miserable.

It seems like 2 weeks is fine. No way can you replace the person for many months so an extra week wont make a difference.

Several weeks?!?

It takes a few months at minimum to replace anyone where I worked, the amount of notice is/was a complete non-factor unless they were going to poach someone internally.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would do 4-6 weeks for govt.

Why?

Not the PP quoted, but maybe because it takes so long to fill govt. positions? I gave 3 weeks but ended up staying 4. They weren't in a rush to have me go and they weren't going to be able to have a successor in place for several weeks at least.

Anonymous wrote:I would do 4-6 weeks for govt.

Why?

I would do 4-6 weeks for govt.

Anonymous wrote:I thought the current thinking was ASAP? They will pay you for 2 weeks, but they would like you gone in a few days...

This. What if you give them more than two weeks notice and they decide they want you gone way before those two weeks are up? Then you'll have some extra time off you had not planned for.

I thought the current thinking was ASAP? They will pay you for 2 weeks, but they would like you gone in a few days...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's it not an inter-agency move and you're resigning or retiring, there are no requirements. It's up to you and your conscience.

I know someone who retired on 1 day's notice, left the office on Weds. saying he was taking annual leave Thurs. and Friday and retiring effective Sunday.

I got a buyout and retired this year and gave my office director (I was a manager) about 35 days notice, I told him the day before the buyout list was going to be given to him.

I did it as a courtesy since I like him and knew that my leaving would increase his load and cause him to have to scramble to cover what I did. Otherwise I would have been ready to wait until much closer given the lack of professionalism and incompetence permeating our management ranks below his level.

But I'm aware of no requirement for any notice period, there's also the question of how quickly your organization and HR can process your retirement or resignation.

Did he hate his job and co workers? Did they speak badly about him after he left?

He was fed up. As many are. No re the co-workers, they were envious.