Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yeah eeo is required under title vii. We're not listing any eeo complaint folks as dei. Ugh.
But at some agencies, the dei and eeo functions are in the same office. This will be a mess to implement.
Yes. Mine spend the majority of their time on dei and not eeo.
There were a lot of employees disgruntled over their high salaries and the fact that they could hire more people when critical programs couldn’t. But damn. That opm memo is a bloodbath. I didn’t want them to be fired.
why not fire them? They are useless and a waste of money ?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That's not what a RIF is, OP.
The OPM memo calls it a RIF.
Holy shit, the OPM memo is a bloodbath. Wow. The EO stopped short of this, this is absolutely nuts.
https://chcoc.gov/sites/default/files/OPM%20Memo%20Initial%20Guidance%20Regarding%20DEIA%20Executive%20Orders.pdf
I wonder how many acting heads are going to quit rather than send out those memos.
I honestly can’t see the person acting at my agency sending that out - she’s just the last one standing and as far as I can tell totally non-political.
Anonymous wrote:That NIH DEIA office is…something else.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm pretty shocked to see that they included accessibility in this. And disgusted.
I have worked with hard of hearing individuals at my agency. One had an ASL interpreter assigned to her. I suppose that accommodation is gone? As is the interpreter?
And I know of two projects designed to allow for greater accessibility for hard of hearing individuals. One is so good that the future intent was to release it to the public.
We have blind people and places for them to take their service animals to urinate/defecate. Will those spaces be destroyed?
And surely there are veterans with disabilities from their service - have their accessibility requests caused "shameful discrimination?"
It should be a law on the books to override/accommodate that component of the acronym.
Anonymous wrote:I'm pretty shocked to see that they included accessibility in this. And disgusted.
I have worked with hard of hearing individuals at my agency. One had an ASL interpreter assigned to her. I suppose that accommodation is gone? As is the interpreter?
And I know of two projects designed to allow for greater accessibility for hard of hearing individuals. One is so good that the future intent was to release it to the public.
We have blind people and places for them to take their service animals to urinate/defecate. Will those spaces be destroyed?
And surely there are veterans with disabilities from their service - have their accessibility requests caused "shameful discrimination?"
Anonymous wrote:It’s shocking to discover that half the commenters on this thread are apparently employed by the federal government and also lack basic reading comprehension skills. Are you this bad at your jobs?
Anonymous wrote:I'm pretty shocked to see that they included accessibility in this. And disgusted.
I have worked with hard of hearing individuals at my agency. One had an ASL interpreter assigned to her. I suppose that accommodation is gone? As is the interpreter?
And I know of two projects designed to allow for greater accessibility for hard of hearing individuals. One is so good that the future intent was to release it to the public.
We have blind people and places for them to take their service animals to urinate/defecate. Will those spaces be destroyed?
And surely there are veterans with disabilities from their service - have their accessibility requests caused "shameful discrimination?"
Anonymous wrote:It’s shocking to discover that half the commenters on this thread are apparently employed by the federal government and also lack basic reading comprehension skills. Are you this bad at your jobs?
Anonymous wrote:Good riddance!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That's not what a RIF is, OP.
The OPM memo calls it a RIF.
Holy shit, the OPM memo is a bloodbath. Wow. The EO stopped short of this, this is absolutely nuts.
https://chcoc.gov/sites/default/files/OPM%20Memo%20Initial%20Guidance%20Regarding%20DEIA%20Executive%20Orders.pdf
I wonder how many acting heads are going to quit rather than send out those memos.
I honestly can’t see the person acting at my agency sending that out - she’s just the last one standing and as far as I can tell totally non-political.
Anonymous wrote:It was overblown at my agency. Glad to see it go.