The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: TheSarge on November 17, 2008, 08:10:06 AM
-
By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 17, 2008; A01
In wooing federal employee votes on the eve of the election, Barack Obama wrote a series of letters to workers that offer detailed descriptions of how he intends to add muscle to specific government programs, give new power to bureaucrats and roll back some Bush administration policies.
The letters, sent to employees at seven agencies, describe Obama's intention to scale back on contracts to private firms doing government work, to remove censorship from scientific research, and to champion tougher industry regulation to protect workers and the environment. He made it clear that the Department of Housing and Urban Development would have an enhanced role in restoring public confidence in the housing market, shaken because of the ongoing mortgage crisis.
Using more specifics than he did on the campaign trail, Obama said he would add staff to erase the backlog of Social Security disability claims. He said he would help Transportation Security Administration officers obtain the same bargaining rights and workplace protections as other federal workers. He even expressed a desire to protect the Environmental Protection Agency's library system, which the Bush administration tried to eliminate.
"I asked him to put it in writing, something I could use with my members, and he didn't flinch," said John Gage, president of the 600,000-member American Federation of Government Employees, who requested that Obama write the letters, which were distributed through the union. "The fact that he's willing to put his name to it is a good sign."
The letters, all but one written Oct. 20, reveal a candidate adeptly tailoring his message to a federal audience and tapping into many workers' dismay at funding cuts and workforce downsizing in the Bush years. Many of Obama's promises would require additional funding, something he acknowledged would be difficult to achieve under the current economic conditions.
Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said the letters were intended to communicate to federal workers his position on their agencies.
In a letter to Labor Department employees, Obama wrote: "I believe that it's time we stopped talking about family values and start pursuing policies that truly value families, such as paid family leave, flexible work schedules, and telework, with the federal government leading by example."
Obama wrote to employees in the departments of Labor, Defense, Housing and Urban Development, and Veterans Affairs, along with the TSA, the EPA and the Social Security Administration. Defense was the only area in which he did not make promises requiring additional spending, the letters show.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/16/AR2008111602440_pf.html
-
We. Are. SCREWED.
-
We. Are. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. SCREWED.
Fixt....or slightly more accurate, I think.
-
I believe that it's time we stopped talking about family values and start pursuing policies that truly value families, such as paid family leave, flexible work schedules, and telework, with the federal government leading by example."
telework????
Quick, everyone change their party affiliation to Democrat and get ya-self a federal job..
Damn skippy, "teleworking" is what I am talking about people...
-
Obama is on a freight train that is running along at full speed which is about to hit a brick wall of moderates in Congress.
There is not a chance that most of his delusional agenda will make it through. The moderate Democratic members of Congress are moderate for a reason -- their constituents. They want to get elected again.
He hasn't even been elected by the electoral college yet and you can feel the pending nastiness in the air. :popcorn:
-
...to remove censorship from scientific research...
Unless of course the Zero administration disagrees with the research.
-
Unless of course the Zero administration disagrees with the research.
I see that as his nod towards expanding embrionic stem cell research
-
Defense was the only area in which he did not make promises requiring additional spending, the letters show.
I guess cuts will go on in Defense, gotta pay for all those other more important agencies :bird:
Pandering to the Unions...............we can see in detroit what the Unions have done :thatsright:
-
I guess cuts will go on in Defense, gotta pay for all those other more important agencies :bird:
Pandering to the Unions...............we can see in detroit what the Unions have done :thatsright:
It's damn near IMPOSSIBLE to fire a DA or DoD civilian as it is...what more can he do for them that they don't already have?
It's part of the reason why they have a crappy attitude towards those of us in uniform in the first place.
They know that no matter who is in office or what rank you are...THEY aren't going to lose their job because of what they do or do not do for you.
-
All of them but Defense are total Democrat preserves in the first place, and Bush soured a shitload of the DOD civilians on voting for a Republican in the foreseeable future with NSPS, or NSPOS if you want a more accurate description of it.
-
All of them but Defense are total Democrat preserves in the first place, and Bush soured a shitload of the DOD civilians on voting for a Republican in the foreseeable future with NSPS, or NSPOS if you want a more accurate description of it.
Yeah................I'm now a YE-3
-
Yeah................I'm now a YE-3
Sounds like you did okay on it, almost all of the attorneys (who Rumsfeld hated because they kept telling him there were these 'law' thingies that said he couldn't do just whatever the hell he felt like that day) ended up being YA-2s which means there is slightly less upward mobility than before, miniscule as that was.
YA2 maxes out at exactly the top of the GS13 scale, so the pay is capped where it was but you can't even count on the same moderate longevity increase. DOD attorney positions are not progressive, you stay in the grade you were hired at until you find a better job, ideally in another agency which DOES have progressive jobs, and until you can afford to eat a move if you stay in DOD, because they almost never pay for it.
-
Yeah................I'm now a YE-3
Yeomen 3rd Class? Did you get demoted?
:uhsure:
-
After witnessing more than my share of DoD civilian inefficiency, laziness, and sheer "**** you, I've got tenure" examples, it doesn't surprise me a whit to see The Messiah's assurances that he'll throw more money at the problem.
Of course, this is a recurring theme - don't fix the problem, just throw money at it. It'll go away. Right?
:loser:
-
After witnessing more than my share of DoD civilian inefficiency, laziness, and sheer "**** you, I've got tenure" examples, it doesn't surprise me a whit to see The Messiah's assurances that he'll throw more money at the problem.
Of course, this is a recurring theme - don't fix the problem, just throw money at it. It'll go away. Right?
:loser:
As a guy who has done Federal labor law cases for the past 15 years (DEFENDING the Government when it disciplined or cut loose the bad actors and deadwood), I'd have to say the DOD was a model of efficiency compared to most of the rest of the government, ugly as it is in DOD. The problem with the system is not so much that it's impossible to fire anyone, as the fact that the managers generally don't feel that they'll be supported or rewarded in any tangible way by increasing efficiency by cutting an anchor loose. They are generally right about that, and it does take a ridiculous amount of effort to actually fire someone for inefficiency (not so much for misconduct, especially with a pattern past lesser discipline for it).
Tenure is a pretty good description of it...basically in a world where most of the private sector works under "At will" conditions, the Government uses the archaic lifetime-employment model where removal has to not only be for cause, but for damned-near indisputable cause. NSPS didn't actually change any of that, it's practical effect so far has mainly been limited to making ratings a divisive and complex pain-in-the-ass, and enabling people working in the Beltway to get paid a lot more than their counterparts actually juggling the eggs at the installations and activities in the field.
-
Interesting about your experience with DoD, DAT.
Most of my own involvement with DoD civilians occurred in Europe, where it's even more obtuse and screwy because of the various civil laws of Germany, SOFA Agreements, etc.
Having to defend the government against the dead wood and bad actors pretty much nails the point home - that there are tons of civil servants out there who not only perform badly but expect that the government owes them a living.
Managers confronted with poor performers have to resort to very lawyer-like documentation tactics to make their case, as well. I've heard and seen horror stories of managers with dossiers inches thick and stories on their sub-par performers that span years to run into a "t" not crossed or "i" not dotted and find that all that work, effort, and aggravation gets flushed down the crapper.
These are the folks who prefer to deal with the fallout of the bad performer (which usually isn't much, since the bad performer is rewarded with less and less work over time) rather than put their 'nads out there on the chopping block - again.
-
As a guy who has done Federal labor law cases for the past 15 years (DEFENDING the Government when it disciplined or cut loose the bad actors and deadwood), I'd have to say the DOD was a model of efficiency compared to most of the rest of the government, ugly as it is in DOD. The problem with the system is not so much that it's impossible to fire anyone, as the fact that the managers generally don't feel that they'll be supported or rewarded in any tangible way by increasing efficiency by cutting an anchor loose. They are generally right about that, and it does take a ridiculous amount of effort to actually fire someone for inefficiency (not so much for misconduct, especially with a pattern past lesser discipline for it).
Tenure is a pretty good description of it...basically in a world where most of the private sector works under "At will" conditions, the Government uses the archaic lifetime-employment model where removal has to not only be for cause, but for damned-near indisputable cause. NSPS didn't actually change any of that, it's practical effect so far has mainly been limited to making ratings a divisive and complex pain-in-the-ass, and enabling people working in the Beltway to get paid a lot more than their counterparts actually juggling the eggs at the installations and activities in the field.
It did kinda if implemented correctly. We just converted on October 26th. In the YE field....(which is only about 14 jobs, usually some kind of engineering technician or science technician)......YE-2 tops out at GS-10, step 10. Where YE-3 tops out at GS-13 step 10..............it also runs from GS-9. The one thing they don't tell you about the paybands and are very cryptic about them when asked is...........................you will only move as far through them as you would as a GS position.
This pay scale is a way for the goverment to save money as they can give you a raise (if qualified on the grading) or a bonus or both. I suspect that they will give good raises a couple of years and then revert to only bonuses as it will not count towards retirement.
I have hope for the change of NSPS.............cause unlike how PS describes DOD civilians, I bust my damn ass everyday and in a perfect world under NSPS would execel greatly...............especially since there is no longer a waiting period for step advancements...............though I am believing that this will be like Obummers hope and change
-
Yeomen 3rd Class? Did you get demoted?
:uhsure:
Don't they teach you dog faces anything...............................a Yeomen is a YN :hammer: Even the brownshoes know that