Quote:
Originally Posted by buggyone
I understand what you said. However, when someone leaves their employment for one reason or another, it is the usual practice to fill the vacant slot.
Let me explain how it ideally works in Federal government. Notice I said IDEALLY - knowing it does not always work this way but some managers want to hire at the highest grade possible to maintain their budgets. HR fights as well as they can but are sometimes overridden. This has been going on in EVERY administration.
A HR Specialist will review the vacant position to ensure it is needed. The HR Specialist will then review the position to make sure it is at the proper pay level or if it could be filled at a lower grade or as a trainee position. This is called position management.
What the Republicans are proposing is when a position becomes vacant, it will not be backfilled until another similar slot is vacated as well (2 leave, 1 hired). Employee morale suffers since they are doing twice the work as before with no higher pay. My youngest son had essentially the same experience with a large food company.
I did not post this as an argument for anyone, so do not take it as one, I posted it as information. It is not posted to have anyone repond with negatives toward government employees, etc. Thanks.
|
I know this will sound coarse and unfeeling. But if that's the way staffing in the federal government works, then they're going to have to join the real world as it exists in private industry today. If they wind up being required to do all the work that 10-20% more people did before their departments were downsized, then they'd better get used to it. And they'd better not get too down in the dumps over having to work longer, harder and smarter. They shouldn't forget that there are hundreds of thousands of highly qualified out-of-work people out there who would be overjoyed to take the jobs that makes their morale suffer so.
My son works for an auto company. Over 12-18 months, he had to downsize his department by 50%. The amount of work and responsibilities didn't change one iota. It was up to him and the people still employed to figure out a way to get the job done with the input of fewer people. "Work smarter" as they say. I'd also say that it means working longer hours and more days per week for the same pay.
Government employees better get used to the same environment. If we are to cut spending to the degree the arithmetic tells us it needs to be cut, some simplistic 2-for-1 attrition formula won't come close to providing the needed spending cuts.