Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Some federal workers more likely to die than lose jobs

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,055
    Post Thanks / Like

    Some federal workers more likely to die than lose jobs

    [URL]http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-07-18-fderal-job-security_n.htm?csp=obnetwork[/URL]

    [QUOTE]
    Federal employees' job security is so great that workers in many agencies are more likely to die of natural causes than get laid off or fired, a USA TODAY analysis finds.

    Death rather than poor performance, misconduct or layoffs is the primary threat to job security at the [URL="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Government+Bodies/Environmental+Protection+Agency"][COLOR=#00529b]Environmental Protection Agency[/COLOR][/URL], the [URL="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Small+Business+Administration"][COLOR=#00529b]Small Business Administration[/COLOR][/URL], the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Office of Management and Budget and a dozen other federal operations.
    The federal government fired 0.55% of its workers in the budget year that ended Sept. 30 11,668 employees in its 2.1 million workforce. Research shows that the private sector fires about 3% of workers annually for poor performance, says John Palguta, former research chief at the federal [URL="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Merit+Systems+Protection+Board"][COLOR=#00529b]Merit Systems Protection Board[/COLOR][/URL], which handles federal firing disputes.

    The 1,800-employee Federal Communications Commission and the 1,200-employee Federal Trade Commission didn't lay off or fire a single employee last year. The SBA had no layoffs, six firings and 17 deaths in its 4,000-employee workforce.
    When job security is at a premium, the federal government remains the place to work for those who want to avoid losing a job. The job security rate for all federal workers was 99.43% last year and nearly 100% for those on the job more than a few years.
    HUD spokesman [URL="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/People/Politicians,+Government+Officials,+Strategists/Jerry+Brown"][COLOR=#00529b]Jerry Brown[/COLOR][/URL] says his department's low dismissal rate providing a 99.85% job security rate for employees shows a skilled and committed workforce. "We've never focused on firing people, and we don't intend to start now. We're more focused on hiring the right people," he says.
    [URL="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/San+Francisco+State+University"][COLOR=#00529b]San Francisco State University[/COLOR][/URL] management professor [URL="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/John+Sullivan"][COLOR=#00529b]John Sullivan[/COLOR][/URL], an expert on employee turnover, says the low departure rates show a failure to release poor performers and those with obsolete skills. "Rather than indicating something positive, rates below 1% in the firing and layoff components would indicate a serious management problem," he says.
    The government laid off 385 people in reorganizations last year a 0.02% rate, or one in every 6,000 employees. No comparable private sector layoff rate is available.
    USA TODAY analyzed the Office of Personnel Management's database to examine job security in the federal workforce. Firings are for all reasons, including poor performance, stealing and sexual harassment. The Postal Service and uniformed military personnel are not included in the data. Departures from seasonal jobs, such as Census taker, are not counted.
    "The notion that you can't fire federal workers is a myth because we do it. But it doesn't happen frequently," says Palguta, vice president of the Partnership for [URL="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Public+Service"][COLOR=#00529b]Public Service[/COLOR][/URL], which advocates for a high-quality government workforce.
    Palguta says some federal workers quit before they are fired, so the data underestimate how many poor performers are weeded out. Efforts to streamline the government cause few layoffs because federal law gives preference to certain workers, such as military veterans, making it hard to match protected workers with the skills needed, he says.
    USA TODAY found that nearly 60% of firings occur in the first two years of employment, mostly workers on probation and outside the federal job protection system. Blue-collar workers are twice as likely to be fired as white-collar employees. The federal government's 12,700 food preparation workers had the highest rate of getting fired last year 2.5%.
    White-collar federal workers have almost total job security after a few years on the job. Last year, the government fired none of its 3,000 meteorologists, 2,500 health insurance administrators, 1,000 optometrists, 800 historians or 500 industrial property managers.
    The nearly half-million federal employees earning $100,000 or more enjoyed a 99.82% job security rate in 2010. Only 27 of 35,000 federal attorneys were fired last year. None was laid off. Death claimed 33.
    Other findings:
    [B]Secure location.[/B] The 168,000 federal workers in Washington had the safest jobs 99.74% job security in 2010. Least secure: Indiana 98.35%.
    [B]Salary.[/B] Two-thirds of those fired or laid off earned less than $50,000 a year.
    [B]Total turnover[/B]. [URL="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Government+Bodies/NASA"][COLOR=#00529b]NASA[/COLOR][/URL], the space agency, had the government's lowest total turnover rate in 2010 just 4% of its 18,700 employees quit, died, retired or were dismissed.
    [/QUOTE]

  2. #2
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,255
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Trades;4065151][URL]http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-07-18-fderal-job-security_n.htm?csp=obnetwork[/URL][/QUOTE]

    Sort of like Quntum pointed out...why retire from a job that demands so little.

    Quantam and I worked at the same place and it was slow, boring and typical government. I audited MANY government agencies as a CPA and if you ask perhaps 50 percent of the workers they tell you they work a reasonable amount but are not overworked. Ask the other workers like Quantum or anyone who had a non government job they and tell you what a JOKE the place is.

  3. #3
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF via Strong Island
    Posts
    29,383
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;4065155]Sort of like Quntum pointed out...why retire from a job that demands so little.

    Quantam and I worked at the same place and it was slow, boring and typical government. I audited MANY government agencies as a CPA and if you ask perhaps 50 percent of the workers they tell you they work a reasonable amount but are not overworked. Ask the other workers like Quantum or anyone who had a non government job they and tell you what a JOKE the place is.[/QUOTE]

    As a lender, I dealt many times with 2 different Civic tax offices; the California franchise tax board, and the perennially hopeless Tax Assessors office of SF City and County. If the FTB was run in the same manner of the TA office, omg I can't even imagine. It exactly as you say.

  4. #4
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,395
    Post Thanks / Like
    CPA, try not to cum in your pants.......:D


    [QUOTE]Almost 4,000 Federal Aviation Administration workers are facing furloughs after Congress adjourned Friday without passing a measure to reauthorize the agency's funding, according to the Transportation Department. A $2.5 billion program providing grants for airport construction projects also will shut down, and thousands of construction jobs could be jeopardized.[/QUOTE]



    [url]http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-22/us/faa.funding.expiration_1_faa-administrator-randy-babbitt-faa-workers-essential-air-service?_s=PM:US[/url]

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,255
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;4066611]CPA, try not to cum in your pants.......:D






    [url]http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-22/us/faa.funding.expiration_1_faa-administrator-randy-babbitt-faa-workers-essential-air-service?_s=PM:US[/url][/QUOTE]

    I wear depends for times just like these.:D

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6,890
    Post Thanks / Like
    It is this policy that continues to make the beltway an unrealistic work place environment. Job for life and then a pension.....

    The federal gov't has some of the worst employees who waste a great deal of taxpayer monies and other resources just to keep their fiefdom in place. If the American people really looked into the situation, there would be a tremendous amount of 'change'.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,395
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;4066618]I wear depends for times just like these.:D[/QUOTE]

    Sure, you just happen to have one on now. :D

  8. #8
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,395
    Post Thanks / Like
    Oh and by the way, when Congress didn't do anything with the FAA and let the deals expire, a tax to the airlines expired as well. Guess what! The Airlines increased their fares! Awesome stuff!

  9. #9
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,255
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;4066639]Oh and by the way, when Congress didn't do anything with the FAA and let the deals expire, a tax to the airlines expired as well. Guess what! The Airlines increased their fares! Awesome stuff![/QUOTE]

    So what....most make NO MONEY. Dont fly, at least we have a choice.

    Now lets have layoffs at Dept of Energy, Education, Agriculture to name a few.

    America will NOT notice a difference.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us