Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s “weird” and “stupid” is the notion that a president would fire his chief market regulator bc he tweaked working hours or allowed a little telework.

I don’t care about the chairman getting fired. I care about deeper cuts at the agency, which I do think become more likely if we are thumbing our nose at the President’s directive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s “weird” and “stupid” is the notion that a president would fire his chief market regulator bc he tweaked working hours or allowed a little telework.

I don’t care about the chairman getting fired. I care about deeper cuts at the agency, which I do think become more likely if we are thumbing our nose at the President’s directive.

Anonymous wrote:What’s “weird” and “stupid” is the notion that a president would fire his chief market regulator bc he tweaked working hours or allowed a little telework.

Anonymous wrote:What’s “weird” and “stupid” is the notion that a president would fire his chief market regulator bc he tweaked working hours or allowed a little telework.

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry. But some $250K a year lawyer from the SEC had an imaginary conversation between Russ Vought and POTUS as if she could possibly know what occurs inside the Oval Office. And you think the poster above is weird????

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry. But some $250K a year lawyer from the SEC had an imaginary conversation between Russ Vought and POTUS as if she could possibly know what occurs inside the Oval Office. And you think the poster above is weird????

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some posters need to realize that the people working at the SEC and complaining are making the same complaints I see or hear other government workers making. Maybe this forum is SEC heavy, but these complaints about WFH, RTO, CBAs, applying for jobs, etc. all seem inline with what others are complaining about.

The difference is that many of you sound entitled, privileged, and completely tone-deaf. And frankly, some of you come off as outright delusional—which makes me question just how intelligent you really are, despite being the highest-paid attorneys in the federal government.
This isn’t a “SEC-heavy” board, no matter how much you’d like to pretend it is. If you actually read the other posts, you'd see participation from employees across a wide range of agencies—financial regulators, independents, big and small. And unlike the SEC employees on this thread, they’re not flaunting arrogance or spending 30-odd pages complaining about the injustice of the current SEC situation. People are upset for good reason: they’re losing telework, dealing with CBAs in flux, watching their work-life balance collapse, and commuting two-plus hours to perform jobs they were hired to do remotely—while managing kids, breastfeeding infants, and making far less than the average SEC salary. But they aren’t writing long screeds elevating their own discomfort as though it’s uniquely catastrophic. That kind of self-aggrandizing is quite revealing. Frankly, like others here, I hope the SEC gets exactly what’s coming. I hope the IT guy turns you in. And if a RIF hits? So be it. There are plenty of qualified, grounded attorneys at CFPB, FDIC, FRB, OCC, and elsewhere who are more than ready to take your place—without the ego, the theatrics, or the martyr complex.

I never thought I’d say this about fellow federal employees, but if the axe falls on SEC, it may actually be a step toward restoring some humility and sanity in this workforce.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some posters need to realize that the people working at the SEC and complaining are making the same complaints I see or hear other government workers making. Maybe this forum is SEC heavy, but these complaints about WFH, RTO, CBAs, applying for jobs, etc. all seem inline with what others are complaining about.

The difference is that many of you sound entitled, privileged, and completely tone-deaf. And frankly, some of you come off as outright delusional—which makes me question just how intelligent you really are, despite being the highest-paid attorneys in the federal government.
This isn’t a “SEC-heavy” board, no matter how much you’d like to pretend it is. If you actually read the other posts, you'd see participation from employees across a wide range of agencies—financial regulators, independents, big and small. And unlike the SEC employees on this thread, they’re not flaunting arrogance or spending 30-odd pages complaining about the injustice of the current SEC situation. People are upset for good reason: they’re losing telework, dealing with CBAs in flux, watching their work-life balance collapse, and commuting two-plus hours to perform jobs they were hired to do remotely—while managing kids, breastfeeding infants, and making far less than the average SEC salary. But they aren’t writing long screeds elevating their own discomfort as though it’s uniquely catastrophic. That kind of self-aggrandizing is quite revealing. Frankly, like others here, I hope the SEC gets exactly what’s coming. I hope the IT guy turns you in. And if a RIF hits? So be it. There are plenty of qualified, grounded attorneys at CFPB, FDIC, FRB, OCC, and elsewhere who are more than ready to take your place—without the ego, the theatrics, or the martyr complex.

I never thought I’d say this about fellow federal employees, but if the axe falls on SEC, it may actually be a step toward restoring some humility and sanity in this workforce.

Anonymous wrote:No, but DOGE does have an email address they've made public. Maybe it's high time I anonymously send over the link for this thread. I think SEC needs some "large scale RIFs" to happen since so many of you are struggling with the new norm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some posters need to realize that the people working at the SEC and complaining are making the same complaints I see or hear other government workers making. Maybe this forum is SEC heavy, but these complaints about WFH, RTO, CBAs, applying for jobs, etc. all seem inline with what others are complaining about.

The difference is that many of you sound entitled, privileged, and completely tone-deaf. And frankly, some of you come off as outright delusional—which makes me question just how intelligent you really are, despite being the highest-paid attorneys in the federal government.
This isn’t a “SEC-heavy” board, no matter how much you’d like to pretend it is. If you actually read the other posts, you'd see participation from employees across a wide range of agencies—financial regulators, independents, big and small. And unlike the SEC employees on this thread, they’re not flaunting arrogance or spending 30-odd pages complaining about the injustice of the current SEC situation. People are upset for good reason: they’re losing telework, dealing with CBAs in flux, watching their work-life balance collapse, and commuting two-plus hours to perform jobs they were hired to do remotely—while managing kids, breastfeeding infants, and making far less than the average SEC salary. But they aren’t writing long screeds elevating their own discomfort as though it’s uniquely catastrophic. That kind of self-aggrandizing is quite revealing. Frankly, like others here, I hope the SEC gets exactly what’s coming. I hope the IT guy turns you in. And if a RIF hits? So be it. There are plenty of qualified, grounded attorneys at CFPB, FDIC, FRB, OCC, and elsewhere who are more than ready to take your place—without the ego, the theatrics, or the martyr complex.

I never thought I’d say this about fellow federal employees, but if the axe falls on SEC, it may actually be a step toward restoring some humility and sanity in this workforce.