Anonymous wrote:I am for sure depressed right now. I am an attorney 15 years into my federal government career who picked flexibility/stability over high pay because I’m a mom.

The salary trade off seemed worth it because the FEHB and FERS. I also started at an agency that has been pro-telework since before Obama.

Now I feel like all this could be taken away because why? Some billionaires want to gloat over people losing jobs or having job flexibilities removed (which let’s admit has a particularly disparate effect on moms who may not otherwise stay in the workforce). I can’t rewind time and be 15 years into a private sector career with more money, so I may have picked wrong in the long term.

Still, I’m trying to remain optimistic DOGE will not be very effective and the Trump administration will have bigger fish to fry. But just the fact that the incoming president and his supporters have such vitriol toward the people who help the government function is demoralizing.

Also, how can you call yourself a patriot, but then hate this country’s employees and want to dismantle the civil service so it becomes a horrible bottom tier career path?

Anonymous wrote:I am for sure depressed right now. I am an attorney 15 years into my federal government career who picked flexibility/stability over high pay because I’m a mom.

The salary trade off seemed worth it because the FEHB and FERS. I also started at an agency that has been pro-telework since before Obama.

Now I feel like all this could be taken away because why? Some billionaires want to gloat over people losing jobs or having job flexibilities removed (which let’s admit has a particularly disparate effect on moms who may not otherwise stay in the workforce). I can’t rewind time and be 15 years into a private sector career with more money, so I may have picked wrong in the long term.

Still, I’m trying to remain optimistic DOGE will not be very effective and the Trump administration will have bigger fish to fry. But just the fact that the incoming president and his supporters have such vitriol toward the people who help the government function is demoralizing.

Also, how can you call yourself a patriot, but then hate this country’s employees and want to dismantle the civil service so it becomes a horrible bottom tier career path?

Anonymous wrote:I am for sure depressed right now. I am an attorney 15 years into my federal government career who picked flexibility/stability over high pay because I’m a mom.

The salary trade off seemed worth it because the FEHB and FERS. I also started at an agency that has been pro-telework since before Obama.

Now I feel like all this could be taken away because why? Some billionaires want to gloat over people losing jobs or having job flexibilities removed (which let’s admit has a particularly disparate effect on moms who may not otherwise stay in the workforce). I can’t rewind time and be 15 years into a private sector career with more money, so I may have picked wrong in the long term.

Still, I’m trying to remain optimistic DOGE will not be very effective and the Trump administration will have bigger fish to fry. But just the fact that the incoming president and his supporters have such vitriol toward the people who help the government function is demoralizing.

Also, how can you call yourself a patriot, but then hate this country’s employees and want to dismantle the civil service so it becomes a horrible bottom tier career path?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$100k is not a lot of money. I don't understand why so many people think that Fed admin assistants earn a lot of money. Some people have worked 15 years to make $100k.

So how much should someone make? Where should they live? Should everyone make under $60k and live in Frederick and commute hours to DC, while all the "educated" people live in DC proper and bike to work? How long should someone have to work to make a salary that is will pay for their kids to go to college, enjoy a vacation or even feed themselves. Or should only people who attended high end universities earn over $100k?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone making more than 100K without a masters degree deserves to have a pay cut. The HR and admin employees know they can’t make the equivalent in the private sector. Those with professional degrees can easily double to triple their current government salaries.

This is one of the big problems. Too many positions in government allow people grade and step increases without merit. HR and admin employees no matter how long they worked at a private company (unless you are the head of HR) would rarely be earning 100K plus just for longevity. I know a lot of people in the government making significantly more than those in private industry for equivalent work (though there are few equivalency's in the private sector for a lot of these jobs). I'm not talking about lawyers and scientists who are highly trained with advanced degrees who absolutely should be making 100K plus to retain compensate and retain them.

No, admins aren't entitled to a salary that lets them send their kids to fancy colleges without debt and to take posh vacations. Enough madness.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:$100k is not a lot of money. I don't understand why so many people think that Fed admin assistants earn a lot of money. Some people have worked 15 years to make $100k.

So how much should someone make? Where should they live? Should everyone make under $60k and live in Frederick and commute hours to DC, while all the "educated" people live in DC proper and bike to work? How long should someone have to work to make a salary that is will pay for their kids to go to college, enjoy a vacation or even feed themselves. Or should only people who attended high end universities earn over $100k?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone making more than 100K without a masters degree deserves to have a pay cut. The HR and admin employees know they can’t make the equivalent in the private sector. Those with professional degrees can easily double to triple their current government salaries.

This is one of the big problems. Too many positions in government allow people grade and step increases without merit. HR and admin employees no matter how long they worked at a private company (unless you are the head of HR) would rarely be earning 100K plus just for longevity. I know a lot of people in the government making significantly more than those in private industry for equivalent work (though there are few equivalency's in the private sector for a lot of these jobs). I'm not talking about lawyers and scientists who are highly trained with advanced degrees who absolutely should be making 100K plus to retain compensate and retain them.

No, admins aren't entitled to a salary that lets them send their kids to fancy colleges without debt and to take posh vacations. Enough madness.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone making more than 100K without a masters degree deserves to have a pay cut. The HR and admin employees know they can’t make the equivalent in the private sector. Those with professional degrees can easily double to triple their current government salaries.

Anonymous wrote:$100k is not a lot of money. I don't understand why so many people think that Fed admin assistants earn a lot of money. Some people have worked 15 years to make $100k.

So how much should someone make? Where should they live? Should everyone make under $60k and live in Frederick and commute hours to DC, while all the "educated" people live in DC proper and bike to work? How long should someone have to work to make a salary that is will pay for their kids to go to college, enjoy a vacation or even feed themselves. Or should only people who attended high end universities earn over $100k?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone making more than 100K without a masters degree deserves to have a pay cut. The HR and admin employees know they can’t make the equivalent in the private sector. Those with professional degrees can easily double to triple their current government salaries.

This is one of the big problems. Too many positions in government allow people grade and step increases without merit. HR and admin employees no matter how long they worked at a private company (unless you are the head of HR) would rarely be earning 100K plus just for longevity. I know a lot of people in the government making significantly more than those in private industry for equivalent work (though there are few equivalency's in the private sector for a lot of these jobs). I'm not talking about lawyers and scientists who are highly trained with advanced degrees who absolutely should be making 100K plus to retain compensate and retain them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone making more than 100K without a masters degree deserves to have a pay cut. The HR and admin employees know they can’t make the equivalent in the private sector. Those with professional degrees can easily double to triple their current government salaries.

This is one of the big problems. Too many positions in government allow people grade and step increases without merit. HR and admin employees no matter how long they worked at a private company (unless you are the head of HR) would rarely be earning 100K plus just for longevity. I know a lot of people in the government making significantly more than those in private industry for equivalent work (though there are few equivalency's in the private sector for a lot of these jobs). I'm not talking about lawyers and scientists who are highly trained with advanced degrees who absolutely should be making 100K plus to retain compensate and retain them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone making more than 100K without a masters degree deserves to have a pay cut. The HR and admin employees know they can’t make the equivalent in the private sector. Those with professional degrees can easily double to triple their current government salaries.

This is one of the big problems. Too many positions in government allow people grade and step increases without merit. HR and admin employees no matter how long they worked at a private company (unless you are the head of HR) would rarely be earning 100K plus just for longevity. I know a lot of people in the government making significantly more than those in private industry for equivalent work (though there are few equivalency's in the private sector for a lot of these jobs). I'm not talking about lawyers and scientists who are highly trained with advanced degrees who absolutely should be making 100K plus to retain compensate and retain them.

The for-profit diploma mill industry in the DMV is built on helping Feds move up the pay scale by getting the required check in the box.

Protect the legit Fed scientists and RIF the diploma factory masters holders.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone making more than 100K without a masters degree deserves to have a pay cut. The HR and admin employees know they can’t make the equivalent in the private sector. Those with professional degrees can easily double to triple their current government salaries.

This is one of the big problems. Too many positions in government allow people grade and step increases without merit. HR and admin employees no matter how long they worked at a private company (unless you are the head of HR) would rarely be earning 100K plus just for longevity. I know a lot of people in the government making significantly more than those in private industry for equivalent work (though there are few equivalency's in the private sector for a lot of these jobs). I'm not talking about lawyers and scientists who are highly trained with advanced degrees who absolutely should be making 100K plus to retain compensate and retain them.

Anonymous wrote:THE PRIVATE INDUSTRY Does not WANT your OUTDATED SKILLS, trust me, I’ve seen it too many times

Anonymous wrote:Anyone making more than 100K without a masters degree deserves to have a pay cut. The HR and admin employees know they can’t make the equivalent in the private sector. Those with professional degrees can easily double to triple their current government salaries.

Anonymous wrote:

Those with professional degrees can easily double to triple their current government salaries.

Not when Biglaw conducts mass layoffs because all of their regulatory enforcement and counseling work has dried up. No more merger enforcement, SEC defense, counseling on banking regulations, etc., etc. What do you think generates business in DC?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that many people are happy to see other people get fired. It reminds of public floggings. Some people are very envious that Federal jobs are secure, stable and can offer an opportunity to live a simple way of life.

I notice so many people want to see the Federal government run like a business. Yet, I know so many people in the private sector who are sick, overweight, stressed and living very challenging lives unless they earn over $200k. Even those people are working themselves to the bone.

Federal salaries are not even that high considering the cost of living in the DMV. It saddens me that so many people are living hand to mouth and that as a collective, we would rather bring everyone down instead of increasing salaries across private sector for the average American. How much more can a billionaire earn, buy and sell? At one point does the collective well being of the nation become a priority over seeing another group suffer financially?

This is typical federal employee BS. The private sector is better. Better pay, and often better benefits. No, the federal workforce is not healthier.

I feel bad for federal employees who have been brainwashed to fear the private sector.

The private sector employees hundreds of millions of people. It’s not all a sweat shop and it doesn’t exist to try to lay people off.