Anonymous wrote:Honestly, they aren't trying to be reasonable. They're trying to get people to quit.

Anonymous wrote:Well, this is a first. Scientists are deserting the USDA and refusing to move to the Kansas City Area.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2019/07/17/742519999/future-of-key-farming-research-uncertain-as-2-3-of-usda-staff-say-they-wont-move

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's projected to be a fast move, the spouse has to find work, you have to find someplace to live and someone to buy your house in the DC area.

And you have to pay for it all yourself. On a federal salary, while still living in the DC area and replacing your spouses lost income.

Technically not the case. Pretty ballsy that the scientists still won't move. The area must be sub-par.

According to the USDA’s cost / benefit analysis, @USDA_ERS & @USDA_NIFA employees were offered $50,000 to cover “residential real estate, transport & storage of household goods, and travel” from DC to KC for the employee AND family.

The [b]average home in KC costs $150 grand, BTW.[/b]

Anonymous wrote:I doubt they're giving them 50k. That's just what the government will pay up to. If you get a uhaul and do it yourself, you can't pocket the extra 45k.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's projected to be a fast move, the spouse has to find work, you have to find someplace to live and someone to buy your house in the DC area.

And you have to pay for it all yourself. On a federal salary, while still living in the DC area and replacing your spouses lost income.

Also, there's some chance it might not happen... So maybe you're in the 10% of people who does all of that and then the move gets cancelled and you're left with... what?

Anyone who legitimately thinks it's reasonable to ask federal employees to relocate themselves and their families to an entirely different area in ~3 months (w/ no relocation assistance!) is out of their f*ing minds.

They're getting $50,000...

That's 1/3rd the cost of buying a KC house outright. Hell, they could sell their NoVA house and use just the appreciation and pay for the new KC house in cash.

I actually meant no logistical assistance. Also, they will be paid lower salaries in KC because the cost of living is lower, which may create issues w/ fixed expenses. And $50,000 is not that much if you think about having to terminate leases pre-maturely (which you may not even be able to), sell off-season (or carry two mortgages/one mortgage + one lease), pay to move your stuff cross-country, pay for plane tickets for at least 2 trips per family member unless some people are moving/starting schools sight unseen, etc.

I'm not actually saying that the Fed gov't is unreasonable to relocate people to save money. It's forced relocation in a 3 month period that is insane. If this was done over a 2 year phase in -- perhaps w/ folks getting more $$ for relocation expenses if they move sooner -- this would be far more reasonable.

Please. Standard operating maneuver in D.C. is to push paperwork so long that its not an issue anymore. In 2-years it would be 2021, the administration would be a lame duck, and I doubt fighting with a freaking federal agency to move a bunch of ingrates who don't want to go.

This is ridiculous. It's like the Coast Guard refusing to be based on the freaking coastline.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's projected to be a fast move, the spouse has to find work, you have to find someplace to live and someone to buy your house in the DC area.

And you have to pay for it all yourself. On a federal salary, while still living in the DC area and replacing your spouses lost income.

Technically not the case. Pretty ballsy that the scientists still won't move. The area must be sub-par.

According to the USDA’s cost / benefit analysis, @USDA_ERS & @USDA_NIFA employees were offered $50,000 to cover “residential real estate, transport & storage of household goods, and travel” from DC to KC for the employee AND family.

The average home in KC costs $150 grand, BTW.

It's even better than that. They aren't giving them $50k; that's the number that they used to estimate the overall costs. Government relocation includes a house hunting trip (including spouse), real estate closing costs on the home here, shipment of goods, transportation to the new duty station, temporary quarters, etc. A government relocation is a sweet deal.

It is taxed as income though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's projected to be a fast move, the spouse has to find work, you have to find someplace to live and someone to buy your house in the DC area.

And you have to pay for it all yourself. On a federal salary, while still living in the DC area and replacing your spouses lost income.

Also, there's some chance it might not happen... So maybe you're in the 10% of people who does all of that and then the move gets cancelled and you're left with... what?

Anyone who legitimately thinks it's reasonable to ask federal employees to relocate themselves and their families to an entirely different area in ~3 months (w/ no relocation assistance!) is out of their f*ing minds.

They're getting $50,000...

That's 1/3rd the cost of buying a KC house outright. Hell, they could sell their NoVA house and use just the appreciation and pay for the new KC house in cash.

I actually meant no logistical assistance. Also, they will be paid lower salaries in KC because the cost of living is lower, which may create issues w/ fixed expenses. And $50,000 is not that much if you think about having to terminate leases pre-maturely (which you may not even be able to), sell off-season (or carry two mortgages/one mortgage + one lease), pay to move your stuff cross-country, pay for plane tickets for at least 2 trips per family member unless some people are moving/starting schools sight unseen, etc.

I'm not actually saying that the Fed gov't is unreasonable to relocate people to save money. It's forced relocation in a 3 month period that is insane. If this was done over a 2 year phase in -- perhaps w/ folks getting more $$ for relocation expenses if they move sooner -- this would be far more reasonable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's projected to be a fast move, the spouse has to find work, you have to find someplace to live and someone to buy your house in the DC area.

And you have to pay for it all yourself. On a federal salary, while still living in the DC area and replacing your spouses lost income.

Also, there's some chance it might not happen... So maybe you're in the 10% of people who does all of that and then the move gets cancelled and you're left with... what?

Anyone who legitimately thinks it's reasonable to ask federal employees to relocate themselves and their families to an entirely different area in ~3 months (w/ no relocation assistance!) is out of their f*ing minds.

They're getting $50,000...

That's 1/3rd the cost of buying a KC house outright. Hell, they could sell their NoVA house and use just the appreciation and pay for the new KC house in cash.

I actually meant no logistical assistance. Also, they will be paid lower salaries in KC because the cost of living is lower, which may create issues w/ fixed expenses. And $50,000 is not that much if you think about having to terminate leases pre-maturely (which you may not even be able to), sell off-season (or carry two mortgages/one mortgage + one lease), pay to move your stuff cross-country, pay for plane tickets for at least 2 trips per family member unless some people are moving/starting schools sight unseen, etc.

I'm not actually saying that the Fed gov't is unreasonable to relocate people to save money. It's forced relocation in a 3 month period that is insane. If this was done over a 2 year phase in -- perhaps w/ folks getting more $$ for relocation expenses if they move sooner -- this would be far more reasonable.

Anonymous wrote:It would cost the employees 10% to buy and sell a house, an expense that likely comes out of their own pockets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's projected to be a fast move, the spouse has to find work, you have to find someplace to live and someone to buy your house in the DC area.

And you have to pay for it all yourself. On a federal salary, while still living in the DC area and replacing your spouses lost income.

Technically not the case. Pretty ballsy that the scientists still won't move. The area must be sub-par.

According to the USDA’s cost / benefit analysis, @USDA_ERS & @USDA_NIFA employees were offered $50,000 to cover “residential real estate, transport & storage of household goods, and travel” from DC to KC for the employee AND family.

The average home in KC costs $150 grand, BTW.

It's even better than that. They aren't giving them $50k; that's the number that they used to estimate the overall costs. Government relocation includes a house hunting trip (including spouse), real estate closing costs on the home here, shipment of goods, transportation to the new duty station, temporary quarters, etc. A government relocation is a sweet deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's projected to be a fast move, the spouse has to find work, you have to find someplace to live and someone to buy your house in the DC area.

And you have to pay for it all yourself. On a federal salary, while still living in the DC area and replacing your spouses lost income.

Technically not the case. Pretty ballsy that the scientists still won't move. The area must be sub-par.

According to the USDA’s cost / benefit analysis, @USDA_ERS & @USDA_NIFA employees were offered $50,000 to cover “residential real estate, transport & storage of household goods, and travel” from DC to KC for the employee AND family.

The average home in KC costs $150 grand, BTW.

It's even better than that. They aren't giving them $50k; that's the number that they used to estimate the overall costs. Government relocation includes a house hunting trip (including spouse), real estate closing costs on the home here, shipment of goods, transportation to the new duty station, temporary quarters, etc. A government relocation is a sweet deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just heard they've been told they have until September 30th to relocate.

How long have they known? Because selling a house in less than 60 days when you had no previous plans to do so is INSANE.

It looks like this was announced on June 13th. That said, you don't have to sell a house and move by September 30th (which would be ~3 1/2 months) you just need to show up for work.

Here is another interesting point from the press release announcing this: https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2019/06/13/secretary-perdue-announces-kansas-city-region-location-ers-and-nifa

It will save over $300 million over 15 years.

USDA conducted a Cost Benefit Analysis and conservative estimates show a savings of nearly $300 million nominally over a 15-year lease term on employment costs and rent or about $20 million per year, which will allow more funding for research of critical needs like rural prosperity and agricultural competitiveness, and for programs and employees to be retained in the long run, even in the face of tightening budgets. On top of that, state and local governments offered generous relocation incentives packages totaling more than $26 million. Finally, this relocation will give USDA the opportunity to attract a diverse staff with training and interest in agriculture. To learn more about USDA's Cost Benefit Analysis, you may view the USDA Cost Benefit Analysis document (PDF, 331 KB).

“We did not undertake these relocations lightly, and we are doing it to enhance long-term sustainability and success of these agencies. The considerable taxpayer savings will allow us to be more efficient and improve our ability to retain more employees in the long run.

It would cost the employees 10% to buy and sell a house, an expense that likely comes out of their own pockets. Plus it will cost millions to replace the employees who don't go, and a lot of $$ to find their spouses jobs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's projected to be a fast move, the spouse has to find work, you have to find someplace to live and someone to buy your house in the DC area.

And you have to pay for it all yourself. On a federal salary, while still living in the DC area and replacing your spouses lost income.

Also, there's some chance it might not happen... So maybe you're in the 10% of people who does all of that and then the move gets cancelled and you're left with... what?

Anyone who legitimately thinks it's reasonable to ask federal employees to relocate themselves and their families to an entirely different area in ~3 months (w/ no relocation assistance!) is out of their f*ing minds.

They're getting $50,000...

That's 1/3rd the cost of buying a KC house outright. Hell, they could sell their NoVA house and use just the appreciation and pay for the new KC house in cash.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's projected to be a fast move, the spouse has to find work, you have to find someplace to live and someone to buy your house in the DC area.

And you have to pay for it all yourself. On a federal salary, while still living in the DC area and replacing your spouses lost income.

Technically not the case. Pretty ballsy that the scientists still won't move. The area must be sub-par.

According to the USDA’s cost / benefit analysis, @USDA_ERS & @USDA_NIFA employees were offered $50,000 to cover “residential real estate, transport & storage of household goods, and travel” from DC to KC for the employee AND family.

The average home in KC costs $150 grand, BTW.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just heard they've been told they have until September 30th to relocate.

How long have they known? Because selling a house in less than 60 days when you had no previous plans to do so is INSANE.

It looks like this was announced on June 13th. That said, you don't have to sell a house and move by September 30th (which would be ~3 1/2 months) you just need to show up for work.

Here is another interesting point from the press release announcing this: https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2019/06/13/secretary-perdue-announces-kansas-city-region-location-ers-and-nifa

It will save over $300 million over 15 years.

USDA conducted a Cost Benefit Analysis and conservative estimates show a savings of nearly $300 million nominally over a 15-year lease term on employment costs and rent or about $20 million per year, which will allow more funding for research of critical needs like rural prosperity and agricultural competitiveness, and for programs and employees to be retained in the long run, even in the face of tightening budgets. On top of that, state and local governments offered generous relocation incentives packages totaling more than $26 million. Finally, this relocation will give USDA the opportunity to attract a diverse staff with training and interest in agriculture. To learn more about USDA's Cost Benefit Analysis, you may view the USDA Cost Benefit Analysis document (PDF, 331 KB).

“We did not undertake these relocations lightly, and we are doing it to enhance long-term sustainability and success of these agencies. The considerable taxpayer savings will allow us to be more efficient and improve our ability to retain more employees in the long run.