Related Posts
Conversation Starter
Subject Expert
Bowl Leader
Conversation Starter
Additional Posts in Federal, Government, and Public Sector
Coach
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
The rationale was “they can’t fight back if we fire them.” There’s no logic involved in any of these decisions and we need to stop acting like this is anything but ruthless cruelty and a takeover of the government.
No rational in my option. Current admin is basically the blind leading the blind.
Coach
I'm not at all making any partisan points on any of this or debating the merits of one way or another, this is a purely objective take.
If the stated goal is to minimize the workforce as quickly as possible, the laying off of probationary employees is the best first step. Probationary employees do not have the statutory protections that career-conditional employees have, so it is far easier to let them go than it is to let non-probationary employees go.
For letting non-probationary employees go, there is a mix of statutory and regulatory rules around how a RIF must be conducted, and merit is the *last* evaluating factor there, with tenure being the second behind type of appointment.
RIFs take a long time to go through and there's a rigorous and very convoluted process that must be followed to determine the order of people to cut.
And just in general in federal employment, tenure is of far more consequence than merit or capability. The entire federal employment structure is built around tenure as the central point, with everything else being at best ancillary factors.
TL;DR: Given the stated goal of minimizing the federal workforce as quickly as possible, letting probationary employees go is the first step in that process.
Or the cheapest! Or the ones with current technical skills! So shortsighted.
In a normal year, the govt loses more people than those that took the fork offer. They could have offered a generous early retirement package and told agencies not to backfill and ended up in a better place. They would lose older people who cost more and who are less likely to get on board with new systems and processes. They could also hold probationary status over the newest people to get them to do what they want.
Except this is not about efficiency or preserving the mission or serving the taxpayer. It’s about retribution and causing as much pain and suffering as possible.
The insanity is the point with this crew…
These were the easiest employees to let go as you can basically fire without cause during the probationary period. It's absolutely insane the way this is all happening.