Thread: TARGET ON YOUR BACK

Terms of employment. We're not facing a cut but they're not facing the same term of employment for doing the same job as someone next to them.

Change the term of employment mid stream on me, and then we have an issue.

I'm not sure how this is going to save anything since many aren't allowed to replace retiring/leaving employees now.

Oh well.

Originally Posted by Khotso

Who cares? Federal employees and retirees are a target. It hurts us all in the end. It's all about dragging everyone down to the same low level rather than trying to raise all boats. Very few of our "leaders" are saying the right thing. We need more Sherrod Brown's.

Since this is the public area of the forum I won't get all political here, but we could be having this conversation in Redistribution of Wealth thread in the Political Forum. Maybe I'll meet you over there and tell you why.

Originally Posted by Frixxxx

Terms of employment. We're not facing a cut but they're not facing the same term of employment for doing the same job as someone next to them.

Change the term of employment mid stream on me, and then we have an issue.

I'm not sure how this is going to save anything since many aren't allowed to replace retiring/leaving employees now.

Oh well.

Went through the same thing in early 80's. Came out with FER's and hiring freeze. Only hired temps and contractors. It showed real savings on the costs of government. Showed how hiring contractors moved their wages over to private sector and cut retirement cost. Didn't show how they were being paid 10% more an hour because of no retirement commitment. Nobody said anything about mid-management and workers were made up 60% of government retirees. This was just what I witnessed. The contractors under bided the government to show savings and when the skill set was gone from the government they raised their rates. After the economy turned, bonuses had to be offered to get skilled people and all the temps became permanent.

Originally Posted by Frixxxx

Terms of employment. We're not facing a cut but they're not facing the same term of employment for doing the same job as someone next to them.

Change the term of employment mid stream on me, and then we have an issue.

I'm not sure how this is going to save anything since many aren't allowed to replace retiring/leaving employees now.

Oh well.

First of all Frixxx....it's semantics and I think second of all, they intend on lifting the hiring freeze for most agencies...otherwise, this whole bit with higher retirement contributions for newbies after January 2014, is just smoke and mirrors..