[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Corrupt Government Title: Trump makes it easier to fire deficient govt workers… finally Billed as the first step toward broad civil service reform, senior administration officials announced in a call with reporters on Friday afternoon three executive orders aimed at making it easier to fire poor performers and ordering harsher treatment of union representatives. “Today, the president is fulfilling his promise to promote a more efficient government by reforming civil service rules,” said Andrew Bremberg, director of the president’s Domestic Policy Council. “Every year, the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey shows that less than one third of federal employees believe poor performers are adequately addressed by their agency. These executive orders make it easier to remove poor performing employees, and ensure that taxpayer dollars are more efficiently used.” Some of the biggest (and best) changes address policies which we’ve been carping about here for years. The first one shortens the period of Performance Improvement Plans (where the misbehaving or underperforming worker is given time to straighten up and fly right) to 30 days across all agencies. Under the old system, these PIPs could last up to half a year. The next change really hits the motherload, though. Trump is clamping down on so-called “official time” where employees who are union officials can spend unlimited time doing union work while they are on the clock, sometimes doing zero work for the public. They also get to use offices and other government equipment for union work at no cost. Trump is clamping down on that, ordering that no union officials spend more than 25% of their work hours on union business and ordering a new agreement where the unions can use their own facilities or pay rent for using government offices. These changes are long, long overdue. Already being called “a devastating blow” by some union supporters, opponents may be surprised to find that there probably isn’t much sympathy among the public for the status quo in government human resources management. This is particularly true for anyone who has spent any amount of time working in the private sector. In a normal job out in the real world, if you repeatedly screw up massively or are credibly accused of any serious malfeasance, odds are that you will be packing up your desk and heading for the parking lot before the end of the day. But as the Washington Times reported this week, one study after another shows that federal government workers are treated far differently than the rest of us. (Emphasis added) A recent Government Accountability Office report showed that it takes between six months and a year to remove a federal employee for poor performance, followed by an eight-month appeals process. One official indicated some lower numbers for the average amount of time it takes to remove someone for poor performance or misbehavior, averaging close to 120 days. But that’s still months longer than what happens in the real world. And we’ve frequently seen discharged employees remaining on the payroll while an appeals process drags on for months or even years. What precisely makes these workers so much more “special” than everyone else? This should not be some sort of forbidden question when the taxpayers are the ones paying those wages. The one thing missing from these executive orders was a fresh look at the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). Originally designed as a safeguard against political retribution against career workers when different parties take control, the MSPB has morphed into a union tool to prevent most workers from ever being fired. The MSPB has overturned some truly jaw-dropping dismissals, including people found dealing drugs out of their office desk or spending the workday watching porn on their government computer instead of working. Since it was created through congressional action Trump couldn’t just do away with it entirely, but some measure of sanity should be possible to impose. Perhaps Trump will get around to the MSPB in the next round of EOs. Poster Comment: Finally! Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest With Trump in there we also need less bureaucrats and studies and all that b*******. He can make all the decisions himself better than them.
#2. To: A K A Stone (#1) I only hope he gets around to going after the Merit Systems Protection Board. And paying employees to stay home when the Dems insist on shutting down government. They need to give up the pay or come to work.
#3. To: Tooconservative (#2) And paying employees to stay home when the Dems insist on shutting down government. They need to give up the pay or come to work. I've witnessed two shutdowns - believe it or not, they want to come to work. Plus, it isn't their fault that politicians play their budget games. They report to work the first day and sign some sort of announcement or policy paper acknowledging they know what is going to happen for an indefinite period of time. I recall one women crying and another woman comforting her as they walked down the hall heading for the exit for home that first morning, October 1, 2013. So, I disagree with your point of view.
#4. To: Fred Mertz (#3) So, I disagree with your point of view. When the shutdowns are over, the furloughed workers are all paid in full. Essentially free extra vacation days.
#5. To: Tooconservative (#4) That is how it is. The workers can't go to work unless they are one of few considered mission-essential. I had a friend who worked in an operations center who was mission-essential while his bosses had to stay home or away from work because those were the rules. I'm finished with presenting facts to you. The politician decide to pay them during the shutdown when they aren't at work, after the fact. Take it up with the politicians.
#6. To: Fred Mertz (#5) That is how it is. The workers can't go to work unless they are one of few considered mission-essential. If they aren't essential, then maybe their jobs should be terminated.
#7. To: Tooconservative (#0) President Trump issued a series of executive orders Friday ... The Republicans control Congress and Trump has to use EO's to make changes?? Congress can't get off their lazy asses to pass this popular legislation? What, are they still working on repealing Obamacare? Meaning the next President could easily undo everything Trump has implemented.
#8. To: misterwhite (#7) "Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool." - Paul Begala, July 1998 Of course, you are right. Better to put it into law.
#9. To: Fred Mertz (#3) So, I disagree with your point of view. Who would have guessed that Obama supporter little chief wet pants would support people not having to work to get paid.
#10. To: A K A Stone (#9) Typical simpleton response from a know-nothing. Way to go, Pebbles.
#11. To: Fred Mertz, A K A Stone (#10) Way to go, Pebbles. I worry about, Stone too.
#12. To: buckeroo (#11) The record now shows that buckeroo agrees with chief wet pants that government workers shouldn't have to work to get paid.
#13. To: A K A Stone (#12) I gave up worrying about you.
#14. To: Tooconservative (#8) I was being sarcastic when I said they were still working on repealing Obamacare. Turns out they are still working on repealing Obamacare. My frustration meter is pegged at "11".
#15. To: misterwhite (#14) I was being sarcastic when I said they were still working on repealing Obamacare. Turns out they are still working on repealing Obamacare. You and Trump both. And a lot of others. I don't recall if you posted on this thread, still in the sidebar. LF: How Trump Can Dismantle Obamacare Without Congress When they removed the "tax" for 0dingaCare in the tax cut bill, that created a ticking time bomb that will go off in January. If normal juridical principles are followed, it will force the Court to strike down 0-care next January at the first challenge to its constitutionality.
So maybe 0-care will repeal itself, next January. It's probably more likely than getting the GOP to repeal it.
#16. To: Tooconservative (#15) So we end up with a mandate with no penalty. Obamacare should collapse by itself. But the problem with leaving this toothless legislation in place is that a future Congress could revive it with a simple tax increase. Oh well. Take what you can get. This Republican-controlled Congress is very disappointing. Democrats would -- and did -- roll over the Repblicans with this kind of power.
#17. To: misterwhite (#16) But the problem with leaving this toothless legislation in place is that a future Congress could revive it with a simple tax increase. No, if this holds water legally with the Court, the entire bill will have to be struck down. Roberts' decision to allow it to continue hinged on the "tax". If there is no tax but there is a mandate... Well, Roberts has had plenty of time to invent some creative legal doctrine if he really wants to. Obviously, he has no scruples about doing so.
#18. To: Tooconservative (#6) If they aren't essential, then maybe their jobs should be terminated. Remove the word "maybe" and you nailed it. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. #19. To: misterwhite (#7) The Republicans control Congress and Trump has to use EO's to make changes?? Yes. See the problem a little clearer now? 90+ percent of the alleged Republicans in state or national officers these days are NOT the opposition to the left,they are members of the Borg who ran as Republicans because that was the only way they could get elected. They will generally support some genuine conservative cause in election years,but it is always something that is guaranteed to fail,and they then go on teebee and rant and rave about how they need to be re-elected so there will be enough votes to get it passed the next time it comes up. Blame the ignorant fool voters for this that vote party labels. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. #20. To: buckeroo, Fred Mertz, A K A Stone (#11) I worry about, Stone too. He gets too emotional,and emotions always interfere with reasoning. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. #21. To: misterwhite (#14) Turns out they are still working on repealing Obamacare. Hey! Cut them some slack! The committees are all still meeting and studying what needs to be done. You don't expect them to just jump right in and make changes without every opinion being heard and every suggestion being scrutinized do you? Not to worry! I fully expect them to present some suggestions the instant the 2020 campaigns begin! They will be all over it with suggestions then,like ducks on June Bugs! In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments. #22. To: Tooconservative (#17) Roberts' decision to allow it to continue hinged on the "tax". If there is no tax but there is a mandate... I agree. Roberts would have struck it down had it remained a "penalty". So he re- labeled it a "tax" which made the bill constitutional. Now, let's pretend the Obamacare bill in it's entirety was presented to the U.S. Supreme Court ... but it contained nothing about a tax, penalty, fine, contribution, whatever. It would have passed constitutional muster, even with Roberts. This is where the legislation is now, after the tax cut. A toothless law. But if it is not repealed in it's entirety, it can be re-activated by simply passing the tax portion of it.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||||
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|