|
|
Post by hamster on Oct 16, 2019 22:51:56 GMT -5
Maybe because its in our interest to have a professional civil service and not a revolving door like so much of the private sector. Bismarck understood this. I agree that there are legions of underperforming feds. I attribute that to lazy superiors who can't stand the inherent confrontation of PIPing a deserving employee. I always thought it had something to do with the constitution and federal employment as a property right. It’s in the Law of the Sea Convention, or perhaps the UN Charter. Duh. |
|
|
|
Post by arkstfan on Oct 17, 2019 8:33:49 GMT -5
I certainly enjoy the benefits of being a federal worker, and no one, federal or not, likes to contemplate cuts to his compensation. However, I am probably at least as fed up with the inability to get rid of non-producers and low-quality producers as the authors of the proposal in question. Those people make my job harder. If we did a better job policing ourselves then maybe we wouldn't have to contemplate reductions for all. I guess I just don't understand why it HAS to be so much harder to fire a lousy fed than any other lousy worker in America. Maybe because its in our interest to have a professional civil service and not a revolving door like so much of the private sector. Bismarck understood this. I agree that there are legions of underperforming feds. I attribute that to lazy superiors who can't stand the inherent confrontation of PIPing a deserving employee. In my experience working city, county, state and Federal levels way too many managers became manager because they were a good employee and usually most senior with no demerits to their name so they got bumped up without regard to whether they were suited for the work. It was "their turn". Training is often a joke. Even if good material is available it is thrown at the new manager so fast it's like drinking from a fire hose. Working with HR as chief counsel for one agency and serving as counsel for the grievance board in another agency it was nauseating how many bad employees survive in employment because the managers cannot follow the agency discipline procedures. Typical case. Manager tries to tell us that Bad Employee has a long history of bad deeds. We look at the file and all that is in there is the manager's thinly documented paperwork to suspend the employee and absolutely no contemporaneous documentation of the prior disciplinary actions required before advancing to suspension nor allegation or documentation of an act that would start at suspension in the freaking manual they've been given. The managers deal with bad actors all too often in one of two wrong ways. Wrong way 1. Stew about the bad actor but fail to document until they reach the snapping point and want the employee fired. The employee is stunned that what they have done for years is now a problem. Manager tries to skip all the early tiers of discipline and loses the appeal/grievance and either keeps at it building the employee's case that the manager has a vendetta because invariably someone else in the office is doing similar things with no repercussions. The manager will usually get frustrated and give up. Wrong way 2. Hitting all the employees with a new rule to deal with the excesses of one employee. Employee Alpha listens to music on a speaker set too loud. Rather than address it with Alpha explaining the music is too loud and is disturbing co-workers, the manager bans listening to music. So employees Beta and Gamma who keep their music low enough to not disturb others lose their music as do Delta and Epsilon who use headphones. Instead of Alpha being upset (maybe) about being asked to turn that down, all five employees are upset. You can't have managers afraid to discipline directly in accordance with policy without it resulting in problems. |
|
|
|
Post by natethegreat on Oct 17, 2019 17:03:50 GMT -5
Maybe because its in our interest to have a professional civil service and not a revolving door like so much of the private sector. Bismarck understood this. I agree that there are legions of underperforming feds. I attribute that to lazy superiors who can't stand the inherent confrontation of PIPing a deserving employee. In my experience working city, county, state and Federal levels way too many managers became manager because they were a good employee and usually most senior with no demerits to their name so they got bumped up without regard to whether they were suited for the work. It was "their turn". Training is often a joke. Even if good material is available it is thrown at the new manager so fast it's like drinking from a fire hose. Working with HR as chief counsel for one agency and serving as counsel for the grievance board in another agency it was nauseating how many bad employees survive in employment because the managers cannot follow the agency discipline procedures. Typical case. Manager tries to tell us that Bad Employee has a long history of bad deeds. We look at the file and all that is in there is the manager's thinly documented paperwork to suspend the employee and absolutely no contemporaneous documentation of the prior disciplinary actions required before advancing to suspension nor allegation or documentation of an act that would start at suspension in the freaking manual they've been given. The managers deal with bad actors all too often in one of two wrong ways. Wrong way 1. Stew about the bad actor but fail to document until they reach the snapping point and want the employee fired. The employee is stunned that what they have done for years is now a problem. Manager tries to skip all the early tiers of discipline and loses the appeal/grievance and either keeps at it building the employee's case that the manager has a vendetta because invariably someone else in the office is doing similar things with no repercussions. The manager will usually get frustrated and give up. Wrong way 2. Hitting all the employees with a new rule to deal with the excesses of one employee. Employee Alpha listens to music on a speaker set too loud. Rather than address it with Alpha explaining the music is too loud and is disturbing co-workers, the manager bans listening to music. So employees Beta and Gamma who keep their music low enough to not disturb others lose their music as do Delta and Epsilon who use headphones. Instead of Alpha being upset (maybe) about being asked to turn that down, all five employees are upset. You can't have managers afraid to discipline directly in accordance with policy without it resulting in problems. Amen! Example 1 reminds me of a case when I was presiding over unemployment appeals hearings. A small business owner fired a young man for being late to work his umpteenth time. Unfortunately for the owner, he had never disciplined the young man once. He thought the young man should have realized how many breaks he had been given. Instead, he had just created a pattern of acquiescence. |
|
|
|
Post by Rabbit Bat Reindeer on Oct 17, 2019 20:21:03 GMT -5
Word is leaking out from one of those "all managers" calls a few days ago that Commissioner Saul has a mind to get rid of telework entirely, if possible, for all positions in the agency. He has directed the various deputy commissioners to come up with some sort of new scheme for telework by early next calendar year. If he doesn't get something satisfactory, he'll try to get rid of it altogether. Not entirely sure what the justification would be for this, given the various statutes and contracts involved, but the threat is out in the open now.
Would be a huge, huge blow to people who depend on telework to make government employment sustainable. Plenty of people at all salary levels keep working for SSA because of the flexibility. Seems like a way to nudge employees to seek work elsewhere, without actually doing some sort of RIF.
So, no transfers, and if the Commissioner has his way, no telework. Great time to be in public service.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2019 20:37:55 GMT -5
Word is leaking out from one of those "all managers" calls a few days ago that Commissioner Saul has a mind to get rid of telework entirely, if possible, for all positions in the agency. He has directed the various deputy commissioners to come up with some sort of new scheme for telework by early next calendar year. If he doesn't get something satisfactory, he'll try to get rid of it altogether. Not entirely sure what the justification would be for this, given the various statues and contracts involved, but the threat is out in the open now. Would be a huge, huge blow to people who depend on telework to make government employment sustainable. Plenty of people at all salary levels keep working for SSA because of the flexibility. Seems like a way to nudge employees to seek work elsewhere, without actually doing some sort of RIF. So, no transfers, and if the Commissioner has his way, no telework. Great time to be in public service. Not surprised one bit. This administration has declared war on public employees. The swamp, the deep state, is to blame for many ills affecting the US. |
|
|
|
Post by marathon on Oct 17, 2019 22:33:37 GMT -5
Word is leaking out from one of those "all managers" calls a few days ago that Commissioner Saul has a mind to get rid of telework entirely, if possible, for all positions in the agency. He has directed the various deputy commissioners to come up with some sort of new scheme for telework by early next calendar year. If he doesn't get something satisfactory, he'll try to get rid of it altogether. Not entirely sure what the justification would be for this, given the various statues and contracts involved, but the threat is out in the open now. Would be a huge, huge blow to people who depend on telework to make government employment sustainable. Plenty of people at all salary levels keep working for SSA because of the flexibility. Seems like a way to nudge employees to seek work elsewhere, without actually doing some sort of RIF. So, no transfers, and if the Commissioner has his way, no telework. Great time to be in public service. Not surprised one bit. This administration has declared war on public employees. The swamp, the deep state, is to blame for many ills affecting the US. So what’s the return? Now, I schedule 50 a month and hit 500+ yearly for the privilege of telework. TPTB remove telework as an option. Where is my carrot? Telework is removed. Ok. So now I’m not scheduling 50 a month. Period. Can’t do it. My commute is 2 hours a day. Edits (now extensive after the OGC calls recently) and my hearings will be longer to address what OGC wants. Plus added times for VHRs to show CDs in unrepped cases. To do it properly without telework and credit? Now you maybe get 25-30 a month. #shortsighted. |
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on Oct 17, 2019 23:01:02 GMT -5
Word is leaking out from one of those "all managers" calls a few days ago that Commissioner Saul has a mind to get rid of telework entirely, if possible, for all positions in the agency. He has directed the various deputy commissioners to come up with some sort of new scheme for telework by early next calendar year. If he doesn't get something satisfactory, he'll try to get rid of it altogether. Not entirely sure what the justification would be for this, given the various statues and contracts involved, but the threat is out in the open now. Would be a huge, huge blow to people who depend on telework to make government employment sustainable. Plenty of people at all salary levels keep working for SSA because of the flexibility. Seems like a way to nudge employees to seek work elsewhere, without actually doing some sort of RIF. So, no transfers, and if the Commissioner has his way, no telework. Great time to be in public service. while I have predicted this as a possibility/likelihood, I talked to a pair of managers on the call who said no such thing was discussed. I asked because of a staff meeting we had last week. My guess was that telework would change at the end of this month and it was going to be discussed. Both managers (separate offices) said nothing had been stated/implied this far with regard to telework. Let’s remember COSS is a numbers guy. ALL the numbers say that telework is more productive than life in the office. Unless, of course they want to get rid of people (they do). So Possible? Absolutely. |
|
|
|
Post by christina on Oct 18, 2019 7:44:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by lawyeredbylaws on Oct 18, 2019 7:59:48 GMT -5
COSS doesn't really care about numbers. He's only using numbers to justify making life miserable for everyone and to get to the real goal, which is reducing the number of employees. You can't assume he's acting in good faith. Almost every agency under the current Administration does not operate in good faith in regard to the treatment of their employees.
|
|
|
|
Post by nappyloxs on Oct 20, 2019 18:04:24 GMT -5
Word is leaking out from one of those "all managers" calls a few days ago that Commissioner Saul has a mind to get rid of telework entirely, if possible, for all positions in the agency. He has directed the various deputy commissioners to come up with some sort of new scheme for telework by early next calendar year. If he doesn't get something satisfactory, he'll try to get rid of it altogether. Not entirely sure what the justification would be for this, given the various statutes and contracts involved, but the threat is out in the open now. Would be a huge, huge blow to people who depend on telework to make government employment sustainable. Plenty of people at all salary levels keep working for SSA because of the flexibility. Seems like a way to nudge employees to seek work elsewhere, without actually doing some sort of RIF. So, no transfers, and if the Commissioner has his way, no telework. Great time to be in public service. Sounds like example 2 from Arkstfan’s post. I highly doubt it will affect certain positions within OHO. This is most likely geared towards operations, but applying it to all components. Judges might see a reduction in telework, but legal assistants would probably be affected most. Outside of OHO, OGC, OAO, and other legal positions telework several days per week. It is ironic that COSS claims to be about technology. I don’t totally understand why people think TPTB necessarily want to reduce the workforce. It will be reduced through attrition. New performance plan policy will reduce staffing. The DDS has a backlog that will only grow. They still allow overtime in many places. Lastly, they are funded/will be funded for staffing levels. With the APT goal of 280, there is no reason to Intentionally cut staffing levels. Of course, I am being optimistic as everything I witness is TPTB implements the policIes they think will squeeze the most widgets out of us. |
|
|
|
Post by shoocat on Oct 21, 2019 16:52:39 GMT -5
Maybe because its in our interest to have a professional civil service and not a revolving door like so much of the private sector. Bismarck understood this. I agree that there are legions of underperforming feds. I attribute that to lazy superiors who can't stand the inherent confrontation of PIPing a deserving employee. In my experience working city, county, state and Federal levels way too many managers became manager because they were a good employee and usually most senior with no demerits to their name so they got bumped up without regard to whether they were suited for the work. It was "their turn". Training is often a joke. Even if good material is available it is thrown at the new manager so fast it's like drinking from a fire hose. Working with HR as chief counsel for one agency and serving as counsel for the grievance board in another agency it was nauseating how many bad employees survive in employment because the managers cannot follow the agency discipline procedures. Typical case. Manager tries to tell us that Bad Employee has a long history of bad deeds. We look at the file and all that is in there is the manager's thinly documented paperwork to suspend the employee and absolutely no contemporaneous documentation of the prior disciplinary actions required before advancing to suspension nor allegation or documentation of an act that would start at suspension in the freaking manual they've been given. The managers deal with bad actors all too often in one of two wrong ways. Wrong way 1. Stew about the bad actor but fail to document until they reach the snapping point and want the employee fired. The employee is stunned that what they have done for years is now a problem. Manager tries to skip all the early tiers of discipline and loses the appeal/grievance and either keeps at it building the employee's case that the manager has a vendetta because invariably someone else in the office is doing similar things with no repercussions. The manager will usually get frustrated and give up. Wrong way 2. Hitting all the employees with a new rule to deal with the excesses of one employee. Employee Alpha listens to music on a speaker set too loud. Rather than address it with Alpha explaining the music is too loud and is disturbing co-workers, the manager bans listening to music. So employees Beta and Gamma who keep their music low enough to not disturb others lose their music as do Delta and Epsilon who use headphones. Instead of Alpha being upset (maybe) about being asked to turn that down, all five employees are upset. You can't have managers afraid to discipline directly in accordance with policy without it resulting in problems. Very similar to my experience. Most managers wouldn't or couldn't take the time to document as needed to support the desired disciplinary action. When a manager did what was required I had no problem getting the employee disciplined, including up to being fired, and getting that action upheld by the EEOC, MSPB or both. |
|
|
|
Post by shoocat on Oct 21, 2019 16:54:25 GMT -5
Not surprised one bit. This administration has declared war on public employees. The swamp, the deep state, is to blame for many ills affecting the US. So what’s the return? Now, I schedule 50 a month and hit 500+ yearly for the privilege of telework. TPTB remove telework as an option. Where is my carrot? Telework is removed. Ok. So now I’m not scheduling 50 a month. Period. Can’t do it. My commute is 2 hours a day. Edits (now extensive after the OGC calls recently) and my hearings will be longer to address what OGC wants. Plus added times for VHRs to show CDs in unrepped cases. To do it properly without telework and credit? Now you maybe get 25-30 a month. #shortsighted. My plan pretty much exactly if this is done. |
|
|
|
Post by bp on Oct 25, 2019 15:48:45 GMT -5
I see that list and think it will lead to more ALJ positions in locations other than D.C. While I'm sure none of the ALJs working for those agencies in D.C. want to move, I am in favor of more Midwestern ALJ jobs. They aren't wrong that cost is living is better in the Midwest, and for those ALJs that are at the top end of the pay scale, it could be an improvement.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawn on Oct 25, 2019 17:58:29 GMT -5
I see that list and think it will lead to more ALJ positions in locations other than D.C. While I'm sure none of the ALJs working for those agencies in D.C. want to move, I am in favor of more Midwestern ALJ jobs. They aren't wrong that cost is living is better in the Midwest, and for those ALJs that are at the top end of the pay scale, it could be an improvement. You can add parts of the Southwest to that COL is better post. I am learning to quickly appreciate the same. $2.00 to park all day. C’mon, you are kidding me. That’s gonna run you almost 40 bucks where I come from every day and Sunday! |
|
|
|
Post by arkstfan on Oct 28, 2019 10:54:15 GMT -5
I see that list and think it will lead to more ALJ positions in locations other than D.C. While I'm sure none of the ALJs working for those agencies in D.C. want to move, I am in favor of more Midwestern ALJ jobs. They aren't wrong that cost is living is better in the Midwest, and for those ALJs that are at the top end of the pay scale, it could be an improvement. You can add parts of the Southwest to that COL is better post. I am learning to quickly appreciate the same. $2.00 to park all day. C’mon, you are kidding me. That’s gonna run you almost 40 bucks where I come from every day and Sunday! PAY TO PARK! Bah. If parking isn't free, it isn't worth going to. |
|
|
|
Post by dshawn on Oct 28, 2019 17:57:08 GMT -5
Well, I don’t know where you live or are from arkstfan, but I am guessing it is not the East Coast. If you are not willing to pay to park, then your options there will be quite limited. Hell, I’ve paid $36.00 for 2 hours just for the privilege of going to court just to learn they are not getting to my case today. Well, in fairness, my clients did. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmyjiggles on Oct 28, 2019 21:03:28 GMT -5
You can add parts of the Southwest to that COL is better post. I am learning to quickly appreciate the same. $2.00 to park all day. C’mon, you are kidding me. That’s gonna run you almost 40 bucks where I come from every day and Sunday! PAY TO PARK! Bah. If parking isn't free, it isn't worth going to. Lol, man you probably arent getting out much if that's the case. Or at least not in any metro area. |
|
|
|
Post by arkstfan on Oct 29, 2019 9:27:41 GMT -5
Well, I don’t know where you live or are from arkstfan, but I am guessing it is not the East Coast. If you are not willing to pay to park, then your options there will be quite limited. Hell, I’ve paid $36.00 for 2 hours just for the privilege of going to court just to learn they are not getting to my case today. Well, in fairness, my clients did. I live in the south and 25 cents to park for 30 minutes at lunch is irksome. I saw Allison Krause a few weeks ago and parked on the street for free. Grocery stores don't have parking gates. Office parking is free. Only downtown even has pay parking. I was using a bit of hyperbole but it is rare to need to pay here. |
|
|
|
Post by arkstfan on Oct 29, 2019 9:29:14 GMT -5
PAY TO PARK! Bah. If parking isn't free, it isn't worth going to. Lol, man you probably arent getting out much if that's the case. Or at least not in any metro area. Restaurant my kids like it's 50 cents per hour on a meter. I'd rather drive half a mile to a place that has free parking (and I think better food). |
|
|
|
Post by Top Tier on May 13, 2023 21:23:03 GMT -5
|
|
