Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think anyone would disagree but across the board cuts don't address the problem with waste. Non-performing organizations and employees will continue to be protected until they do the hard work of justifying each and every position, right now there has been an influx of hires because they new this was coming. They now need to do the hard work of determining where the waste resides.
Then there is the difficult problem of fighting the civil service system, this is the easy part.
But it should be a lot more than about waste. It should be about eliminating functions that the government should not be involved with and regulations that should be eliminated.
Just remember, when the levees break in LA again after a hurricane dont scream for the government and FEMA to do anything. When a chemical plant spills hundreds or thousands gallons of toxic chemicals rendering water unpotable for thousands of people like what happened in WV, don't cry for the EPA to do something. When a drought hits and devestates crops in the Midwest don't cry for government relief.
OP - I find your poll offensive. As a federal employee for one this country's most renown agencies, a true crown jewel, I assure you that I and my many colleagues bust our butts every day to ensure better lives for all.
I find your existence as a federal employee offensive. And there are no crown jewel agencies.
Trump has said he wants to drastically reduce the federal workforce. What should be his target?
His Target needs to be Duplicative Programs and programs that are inefficient & failures.
The workforce will go down naturally when the programs are stopped. Hiring Freeze and Attrition solves much of the problem, when added to failing programs are trash-canned.
A static Percentage is not needed. From reading the Government employee blogs - they are hoping for Buy Out packages so they can "retire". I would not be in favor of that (depending on the arrangements).
I don't know what percentage, but start with the freeze and attrition, and then reassess in 6 months, then a year.
You can't create jobs for some groups and throw others out on the street. It makes no sense.
Maybe it should be easier for departments to get rid of dead wood. Perhaps some procedures need to be changed.
this. start with attrition, and see what happens. after that go through each department and see which are working, and which are dead wood, and work accordingly.
This keeps getting brought up but the facts don't change.
A) The toxic waste was there because of the mining company. It wasn't profitable for them to properly manage the mess. The EPA was attempting to clean the mess they left behind up.
B) It was a private contractor that accidentally broke the seal. That stuff could have leaked out at any time because it was not properly contained by the miners.
I find your existence as a federal employee offensive. And there are no crown jewel agencies.
I laughed pretty hard.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
