- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Fed Employees being paid for not working
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:02 pm to dcbl
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:02 pm to dcbl
Certain areas in DOD will not be replaceable. But as a whole, there are a few areas that can be cleaned out.
Also outside of DOD, that is where the fat (so to speak) is. I'm certain they will be looking in those areas and can clean out quite a bit.
Most of the people you've seen bitching on YouTube and Reddit are in the fat areas. Another reason why they are so paranoid. Even under Biden (bigger government of course), they are always worried about getting shite-canned.
Also outside of DOD, that is where the fat (so to speak) is. I'm certain they will be looking in those areas and can clean out quite a bit.
Most of the people you've seen bitching on YouTube and Reddit are in the fat areas. Another reason why they are so paranoid. Even under Biden (bigger government of course), they are always worried about getting shite-canned.
0
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:03 pm to Chazreinhold
Hell they’ve already been paid for not working. Now there’s an end in sight, and we know who the baddies are.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:03 pm to theballguy
quote:
Sometimes you have to offer it up in the hopes that they will take it because there's little you can do to actually fire them.
Exactly. Firing them without cause would simply result in years of lawsuits that would be settled in favor of the employees if Dems were to win the presidency in four years.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:03 pm to Jimmy Russel
quote:
Hell they’ve already been paid for not working. Now there’s an end in sight, and we know who the baddies are.
Look at the ones bitching the most.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:05 pm to Mizzoufan26
quote:
we will pay for no productivity for 8 months and then struggle to hire all the open spots back on 1 October.
What gives you the idea they will be looking to fill those jobs?
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:07 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Not all defense positions are eligible for this program
you are, once again, being obtuse and narrowing in on a specific area and ignoring the big picture
it’s your MO
you are, once again, being obtuse and narrowing in on a specific area and ignoring the big picture
it’s your MO
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:07 pm to dcbl
quote:
I do not for one minute buy into your assertion that qualified people (within government or the ranks of qualified contractors) will be forced out that require replacements that are difficult to find
You stupid mother fricker, this applies only to government civilians, not government contractors. You not having an understanding of the difference isn’t at all shocking, because you have no idea what you’re talking about. Let’s take one small piece, military healthcare relies heavily on civilians. Now, when you think about military healthcare do you think good happy thoughts? This will further frick military members and their families out of the ability to get care. Medical professionals get 8 months of free pay, get to leave for higher paying civilian jobs, and as those civilian slots are programmed into the overall manpower makeup will be rehired into 8 months from now.
All of that to say you have no idea what your stupid arse is talking about
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:09 pm to Chazreinhold
It is a common practice. I was let go in a "reorg", got a year severance. It will payback for the employer in year 2/3/4 etc. It is also a way to keep you from suing the company.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:12 pm to dcbl
I don't know why you think I'm speaking to one specific domain, because that isn't what I said.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:27 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
OK - outside of this thread, I have not seen anything that supports that anyone other than federal employees is eligible for this early retirement
perhaps you could link me up to something that shows that contractors that provide essential services will be pushed out that need to be rehired at a higher rate
also; the Trump agenda is to reduce waste and costs, I’m not sure this will play out like you think it will
perhaps you could link me up to something that shows that contractors that provide essential services will be pushed out that need to be rehired at a higher rate
also; the Trump agenda is to reduce waste and costs, I’m not sure this will play out like you think it will
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:31 pm to dcbl
quote:
I have not seen anything that supports that anyone other than federal employees is eligible for this early retirement
What are you even talking about?
Contractors will replace government civilians, at a significant markup.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:32 pm to deeprig9
quote:
It's common in the private sector
9 months certainly isn’t common.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:47 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
What are you even talking about?
Contractors will replace government civilians, at a significant markup.
no they won’t
It just seems that we disagree - my premise is that the government is filled with bloat and needs to be pared down
Your premise seems to be that we lose essential and key people that must be replaced from folks in the private sector
your position is not moving the needle with me that the government employs far too many people and that a good number of them are riding paychecks without providing value
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:49 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
also - everything I am seeing shows that many areas won’t be affected (like jobs that are tied to national security) — the rabbit hole over who is or is not “essential” is interesting; but not compelling enough to refrain from trying to shrink the public workforce
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:53 pm to dcbl
quote:
no they won’t
Oh, they absolutely will. I've already been asked to consult on proposals.
quote:
Your premise seems to be that we lose essential and key people that must be replaced from folks in the private sector
Not at all. My premise is that we lose people, and they'll be replaced by others that make the right people money. That won't be across the board, obviously.
quote:
your position is not moving the needle with me
That's fine by me. Trump and Elon are counting on it. I'm just along for the ride.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 6:57 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Contractors will replace government civilians, at a significant markup.
also - show me where this offer is available to “government civilians” (which I would call “contractors”)
lastly; let’s assume your premise is true (we will have to replace government labor w private labor)
Here is a story - I used to own a small direct mail company; I was blessed to find a graphic artist that was exceptional!
Over the years, I has numerous other graphic artists that would offer to work for a lower rate, sometimes even half. I tried a few of them out, but always found that it was far less expensive to pay my original girl a higher rate because she got twice as much done in half the time and produced better quality results
so; I don’t buy into your argument
Posted on 2/1/25 at 7:00 pm to dcbl
quote:
show me where this offer is available to “government civilians” (which I would call “contractors”)
You don't know the difference between a government civilian and a contractor, yet you feel qualified to argue with me on this topic?
quote:
lastly; let’s assume your premise is true (we will have to replace government labor w private labor)
My "premise" continues to be that we will replace them, not that we must replace them.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 7:07 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:all the info I can find defines a “government civilian” as a government employee that works in a non military role
You don't know the difference between a government civilian and a contractor, yet you feel qualified to argue with me on this topic?
again, you are arguing that we will lose all of our best people and wind up being forced to hire back for the same services at a higher rate
This may wind up happening in some situations; but by and large, the Trump plan looks like we will mostly see bloat and inefficient workers forced out
Posted on 2/1/25 at 7:14 pm to dcbl
quote:
all the info I can find defines a “government civilian” as a government employee that works in a non military role
OK, now do contractor.
quote:
again, you are arguing that we will lose all of our best people
It doesn't seem that you have the slightest idea of what I'm arguing. I didn't say anything about our "best" people.
Posted on 2/1/25 at 7:18 pm to Chazreinhold
quote:
What is the rationale behind the Trump Administration's decision to pay federal employees 8 to 9 months of salary while they are not working—
It is called severence pay and accepting it eliminates any recourse for returning to the employer and no legal objections.
I got a healthy severence after 29 yrs of employment at a private company and by taking it I agreed not sue or solicit employment with that company ever again. If I was to return to work for that company or any of its sister companies it would take the CEO's approval for that to happen.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News