Question
I’m a federal employee. The mass firings have shaken all of us up. I’m trying to keep my head down and just do my job but it’s nerve-racking. “You have just days to decide to quit and take a buyout with guaranteed pay until September” followed by “Well, there may be no budget to pay you” or “Come back to work, we didn’t mean you.” It’s all a cluster-f*ck! My boss and his boss have convened several phone calls and Zooms and I can’t believe the mixed messages! Our union is on this but I’m wondering if you have any advice on how I could protect myself.
Nick’s Reply
Now that is a tall order! I don’t pretend to be an expert in federal jobs, but here goes.
This newsletter steers clear of politics. But then again, Ask The Headhunter frequently goes head-to-head with HR — and this is probably the biggest HR cluster-f*ck we’ve ever seen.
HR everywhere can and must learn from this.
Where’s the HR management?
The question is, what constitutes HR in this management catastrophe? Is it Elon Musk? Is it the President? Is it DOGE? The Office of Personnel Management? Does each federal agency have its own HR? Who is authorized to make HR decisions about who gets fired, how it’s done, who is “government waste,” who decides what a severance package is, etc.?
Then we have what you refer to as mixed messages — or what I call the incompetency of people that are running the joint without (pardon me) HR skills, credentials or common sense.
Everyday there are multiple “HR policy” flip-flops coming out of D.C. — though there is no indication this has anything to do with policy, and everything to do with running roughshod over millions of employees without any objectively defined justification or reason. Elon Musk (I love his cars but wouldn’t want him anywhere near my company) may be brilliant in many ways, but managing employees isn’t his strong suit! Evidence of this is in his corn pone orders that read like the beta of a first-gen AI bot wrote them. They’re obviously written by a neophyte to government who is blissfully naïve about the law.
Where is the legal compliance?
Even if every single federal employee was an example of wasteful spending, the law still doesn’t support the ham-fisted actions Musk and his DOGE are taking. Even some of the worst HR departments in the commercial sector have proper procedures for laying off workers, and rarely does it happen so quickly and without due process.
You know how critical I am of HR, but this is a perfect example where someone with an ounce of HR acumen would be welcome — at least to do what most HR execs do, and that’s to worry about compliance with the law.
So we must look at the top-most federal executive in HR, the Acting Director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Charles Ezell, who goes by “Chuck E.” on LinkedIn, a conceit that I’m guessing would get him ghosted more often than not if he were job hunting. And, ahem, 2,059 followers? Really?
As evidenced by his public profile, Chuck E. is all data architect and data jockey — with zero HR cred. There is no mention of HR in any of his skills lists. (He does have lots of keywords, but none in HR.) But why would the top federal HR dog cede key HR functions to Elon Musk? (Maybe because the DOGE pen is all data jockeys, too?)
I could be ranting about any inept, unqualified HR exec but I’m focused on this one because you asked. And, to quote my sainted mother-in-law, I’m impressed. But not favorably.
Prepare for legal action
So what can you do to protect yourself? While a federal job is different from a commercial one, there are still rules and many of the most important ones cross over. This is why the federal government is being sued six ways from Sunday by employees and unions, and it’s why you should gather legal evidence against your employer if you’re caught in this mess. (Please see The 6 Gotchas of Goodbye.)
In case you will need to file legal action, keep a diary of events including dates and times. Save all documentation including e-mails and social media posts.
Then there’s the advice of my good buddy, powerhouse employment attorney Mark Carey, whose clients are all employees, never employers. Coincidentally, Mark just published a podcast titled The Power of Recording Your Boss. Though it may be a bit repetitive, it offers some gold nuggets you can’t afford to miss.
Press RECORD
If you are in a one-party consent state, record phone calls and conversations related to your potential termination and/or to inconsistencies between your organization’s published “code of conduct” and its own behavior.
Such recordings are admissible in court and, according to Mark, can make an employee’s case: “When you record something like this… it’s a direct statement made by an employer as an admission of fact… it’s an admission against interest by an employer… it’s called smoking gun evidence and you can use it.”
One-party consent means it’s legal in your state to record a conversation between two or more people as long as just one party to the conversation (usually just you) is aware it’s being recorded. (This includes Zooms — use an off-camera recorder.) Check this list of one-party consent states; note that District of Columbia is on it. Mark Carey’s podcast provides more information about when you can and can’t record legally.
Use your phone
I’m not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. If your federal job (or any job) is at risk, and if you’re in the middle of being suddenly fired for no reasons related to performance, then this is indeed a cluster-f*ck. Prepare for possible litigation. You’re not powerless in the face of the most powerful people in the world. It may be that your own most powerful weapon to protect your job and career is your phone — just press RECORD.
Are you a federal employee? Did you get fired from a federal agency by DOGE without due process? Did your agency’s HR meet with you to discuss your job? No? What are you doing about it? Have you made any recordings to use in court?
NOTE: I’d like to hear from folks in the HR community, too. What do you say about all this?
: :
As someone who spent 15 years at one company with countless reorganizations followed by 6 jobs in 8 years due to layoffs, pandemic, startup attrition. I feel your pain. Here is the good news. You know something is coming, if not for you then for your coworkers. If not now then sometime in the next four years.
So don’t just wait. If there are anyone you want to keep in contact with, get their phone numbers and personal emails. Line up references before everyone is scattered to the four winds. Get your LinkdIn profile set up. Get your resume together. Start a discord or slack channel for sharing leads.
Are their documents, templates, presentations you’ve done or find useful. As long as it is not confidential or secret send your self a copy.
Now would be a good time to look at your finances too. If you haven’t yet, refinance your mortgage at a lower rate now while your work history shows stability. Set up a HELOC to give yourself a cushion.
At the end of the day this is not your fault. Your network of bosses and supervisors are not making these decisions and are at just as much risk as you are.
As an HR professional, it’s important to approach this situation with a balanced perspective, prioritizing both compliance and empathy. The federal employee’s experience highlights a critical issue: the impact of unclear communication and inconsistent management on employee well-being and organizational stability.
From an HR standpoint, this scenario underscores the need for:
Transparent Communication: Mixed messages create confusion, erode trust, and create employee anxiety. A robust internal communication strategy, particularly during organizational changes or crises, is vital to ensure clarity and provide a sense of direction.
Compliance and Due Process: Regardless of the industry—public or private—employment decisions must adhere to legal frameworks and established protocols. Sudden layoffs without due process or clear rationale expose the organization to legal risks and damage its reputation as an employer.
Employee Support Systems: HR should be proactive in offering support resources, such as counseling services and employee assistance programs (EAPs), and clear guidance on the next steps, including how to navigate severance packages or re-employment options.
Leadership Accountability: When senior leaders (in HR or broader management) are not equipped with the necessary skills to manage such situations, the organization risks operational and cultural fallout. Investing in leadership training and ensuring that decision-makers are well-versed in legal and ethical employment practices is crucial.
To the employee, I would very humbly and respectfully advise:
Document Everything: Keep detailed records of communications, meeting notes, and any directives received. This is invaluable for legal protection or clarifying what has been shared.
Engage with Your Union: Since the union is already involved, maintain regular contact with them. They can provide support and guidance on your rights and potential actions to take.
Stay Professional: While the situation is understandably stressful, maintaining professionalism will help, especially if you need to take formal action or seek new employment opportunities.
Finally, if the HR community can take away one lesson from this, it is that during times of uncertainty, our role is not just administrative but strategic. We must stabilize, advocate for employees, ensure compliance, and advise leadership to make thoughtful, legally sound, and humane decisions.
Thank you to everyone who has shared their experiences and insights. To all federal and non-federal employees navigating this turbulent time, know that your resilience and professionalism matter. While the path forward may feel uncertain, advocating for your rights, staying informed, and leaning on supportive networks can help you reclaim a sense of stability and purpose. I wish everyone strength, clarity, and hope as you overcome this challenge—brighter days are ahead.
@Demina: Thank you. That was just the kind of HR input I was hoping for.
It’s difficult to feel sorry for workers who disdain and are tone deaf to the very source of their income–taxpayers. Taxpayers who have gone through layoffs likely more than once in their career without ever seeing more than a few weeks of severance let alone 8 months. Taxpayers who have shown up for work everyday. Taxpayers who must perform or get fired. Taxpayers who lost 10 million jobs due to federal mandates in 2020.
As is frequently said in this column, prove to your employer or prospective employer that you can do the job and you will be fine.
@Bill: But the people who have been unceremoniously ejected from their jobs and abused with mixed messages from multiple “management authorities” are all taxpayers, too. It doesn’t seem any federal employees sought severance. It was offered to them, withdrawn, offered again, by most accounts illegally. These workers have been showing up every day, too. I feel your pain about costs to taxpayers but this situation should never have occurred. Every tenet of good HR management has been violated. I don’t think we can blame those impacted. The actual status of hundreds of thousands of workers is still totally up in the air with mixed and contradictory messages coming from multiple federal authorities. This just doesn’t add up and it doesn’t work except as a kind of career terrorism.
I think saying “showing up every day” is a stretch based on the fact that 90%+ of federal employees in Washington, DC were working from home.
The DC bureaucracy is there to execute what the President tells them to do. They do not have jobs to carry out their own political agendas. Instead, they (again 90%+) chose to obstruct Trump in his first term and are now suffering the consequences of their actions.
It’s unfortunate that the very, very few dedicated federal workers will get caught up in this. However, corporations act in much the same way when they announce across the board layoffs that have nothing to do with individual performance.
In the end, what is happening to federal workers is what has happened to tens of millions of private sector employees in the past. The federal workers will have to adjust to it just as we have done throughout our careers.
There is a stereotype of government workers that they do the minimal amount of work to collect their paycheques. The fact that they are unionized makes things worse, not better, i.e. lazy and incompetent workers are protected.
My own experience dealing with government agency: After waiting on hold for ages, the first person I got through to suddenly disappeared after a few minutes, i.e. cell phone call dropped. (Union apparently insisted that they be allowed to use cell phones to provide customer service to taxpayers, even though sensitive information may be included in telephone discussion.) Second individual was unable to hear me when returning to my call after putting me on hold. Failed to be able to hear me, even after apparently numerous attempts to address the connection problem.
The third agent and her supervisor assured me that a copy of the document I needed was going to be mailed to me right away. I never received the promised document, even though both the employee and her supervisor said that the document would be sent to me.
Labor unions negotiating on behalf of government employees enjoy at least four potent advantages, which they long ago learned to exploit.”
First, unlike their counterparts in the private sector, government unions are largely free
from market discipline.
A second advantage lies in the difference between public- and private-sector strikes…..a
strike by police, garbage collectors, teachers, or air-traffic controllers inflicts pain on the
public at large.
A third advantage: in public-sector collective bargaining, labor and management
frequently both stand to benefit from higher wages and more munificent retirement
income.
But a fourth advantage is more significant than any of these: government labor unions
can reward politicians who give them what they want and punish those who don’t. As a
result, negotiations in the public sector have an inherent bias toward higher salaries, more lavish benefits, and more inflexible work rules.
I meant to mention that the experience I mentioned was while they have been allowed to work from home, even discussing sensitive information on the cell phone with tax payers, who are paying their salary.
@Borne: So because you’ve had poor experiences with federal workers, it’s okay for the feds to offer them severance deals, then withdraw the deals, then admit there’s no way to fully fund the deals? And it’s okay for a White House employee to go around the HR management of an agency and order them to explain what they did last week — without consulting the management?
That’s why I call this a cluster-f*ck. No one has yet provided a sound justification for the actions taken against thousands of employees WITHOUT due process, which the law requires.
I don’t doubt you had bad experiences with fed agencies, but this is where over-generalization based on very limited and subjective accounts is misused to justify indefensible actions on a macro scale.
If Musk worked for a corporation in a support capacity as he does in the White House and he pushed out threatening orders to all employees without having those orders vetted legally, he’d be fired.
I’m not interested in the politics, which is where some participants here are going. Our discussion is about how employees can protect themselves from abusive employers. The fed govt is just a stark example here.
I’ve already removed one post for political speach-ifying. Please stick to the topic.
Thanks Nick.
You just described an underfunded understaffed call center. That’s a policy problem, not a worker one.
When the Social Security Administration cuts 50% of it’s staff, I’m sure that will improve.
I’m sure they are going through the legal Reduction in Force process. Identifying all the services and jobs they no longer need. Definitely creating the legally required Retention Register. Clearly providing the 60 day legal notification period. Clearly the experience of interacting with the Social Security Administration will improve after the staff reduction.
Alternatively, they’re not doing any of that. Instead, the executive branch is deciding to reduce funding for something Congress has already set a funding level for.
This would be like a department head reducing services and staff even though the CEO/Board funded the department and asked for the services. Something company HR would have a problem with.
Or in this case, it is a department following the orders of his CEO, President Trump.
There’s no reply below the next comment.
However, the president is not the CEO of the US. More of the top level administrator. The president does not have budget setting authority. Only congress can set a budget and determine the power of the purse.
If we want to eliminate all these jobs, congress should pass a budget that doesn’t fund them. Agencies implement the RIF process to achieve the new budgeted staffing levels. Then, follow that process to lay off workers. That’s the defined legal process to reduce the government workforce.
@Bill. I’m sorry you take such a limited and uninformed view of federal workers. “Showing up every day” does mean WFH still and is much of the priviate sector (moved somewhat to hybrid). There is no evidence that shows that feds working from home are less productive than at the office. Federal workers implement the agenda of the agency they are working for, which means the secretary and yes the president. All of the federal workers I know respect that reality. Your figure of 90% has no basis in reality. Maybe you should meet a few federal workers.
@David: This is based on anecdotal evidence, but I have enough data points that I think it holds water and it suggests possible courses of action.
In my experience, managers that insist on having all workers in the office are poor managers. They’re not good at assessing employee performance no matter where the employee is working. Bringing them back into the office merely allows a manager to see whether they’re at their desks. Few jobs really require being in the office, as COVID revealed.
Dissing federal workers as a class is ludicrous and irresponsible. Scapegoating is the alternative to actually finding out where real problems lie. But it’s easier and fosters ire and ranting mindlessly. We’re in a time when social media makes it possible for anyone to publish their opinions, and now opinions are easily mistaken for facts and news. Opinions are not news or facts. Next time you read a rant on social media, do this test: draw an O beside the opinions and an F beside clear facts.
We now have entire media outlets that traffic in nothing more than insistent opinions.
Part of the problem, IMHO, is that many people can’t tell the difference between facts and opinions anymore (if they ever could). Some people think that anything they agree with is a fact, and anything they don’t agree with is an opinion. And that’s before you get into the things that are neither facts nor opinions: misinformation and disinformation, exaggerations, distortions, and straight up lies.
Thank you, Bill. Word perfect. Came here to say all this.
“As is frequently said in this column, prove to your employer or prospective employer that you can do the job and you will be fine.”
Exactly.
In addition, people are simply sick of multiple government employees doing basically the same job (inefficiently at that) while the rest of us have had to absorbed another fired employees tasks with no pay increase of any meaningful amount – or none at all.
Bill is correct, it’s taken way to long to thin the government payroll to match the work that actually get done.
Sorry, there’s a new sheriff in town and the pathetic waste at many gov gigs is in the process of being “right-sized”.
IOW: Produce like the rest of us have had to our entire careers or suffer the consequences!
I have to disagree with you on this Nick.
I have been a contractor for several of the alphabets in the past. From what I saw a very large amount of Federal employees are just there to do minimal effort and collect a paycheck. The courts have already upheld Trump’s mass layoffs as legal. Elon is not firing anyone, DOGE is finding things and reporting them. Someone else is doing the actual work.
Now, I agree that some good folks are going to be caught up in the firings. Some of them will be asked back. Boeing does this all the time.
As a taxpayer who has been trying to get someone on the phone from the Department of Education for YEARS There is definitely is an air of “to hell with the people we serve” attitude. Maybe all these firings will shake up the hive enough to get people to work again.
80% according to polls support this, even with the possible consequences to good employees.
I would suggest instead of recording and trying to fight a battle you can’t win, that they should comply with any and all requests and take the offered buyout.
The caveat with the buyout is possibly being asked back. Refusal of all requests is a firing with no possibility of return.
Hell, I wish a few of the companies I worked for would have offered this kind of deal, I would not have spent 5 years unemployed during the housing bubble.
The other issue the majority of the US has with Federal employment is that once one gets hired it is damn near impossible to be fired, unlike the private sector which can fire for nearly any reason at anytime.
I have been fired via phone call, in CA, no real reason given, all above board.
No one is immune, a good friend is a CBP cop, the email and optional buyout are even going through them, more so on the office staff than the boots really doing the work.
If I were in this situation I would trust my gut look at this as a logic problem to be solved. I would not be trusting the Union, or the supposed legal folks who fail to look at historical president and case law. Especially if they are taking money to sue.
@Dennis: No matter how I look at this, it’s clear that none of these personnel actions took any account of individual performance. See Demina’s comment above. It was an atom bomb dropped on everyone indiscriminately. Totally indefensible.
We can’t talk about firing an individual “because the federal govt is bloated.” Only because a fair and objective review of each employee is conducted to justify a termination. That’s why there are employment and labor laws.
Before a surgeon amputates a limb, an Xray or MRI is required or we’d have butchers instead of doctors. There was nothing like an MRI in this. It’s too easy to blame all fed workers because Congress and the President are not doing their jobs to constantly assess the viability and value of every fed operation. It’s too easy to blame those employees for our taxes. To take the analogy further, your doc amputates your leg and the next day tells you it was a mistake, but he’s going to try to sew it back on. These very stupid actions have already ruined lives. The idea that this is no problem because the corp world does it, too, is ludicrous.
I could apply your logic to any corporation, and it still would not be logic or hold any water. There’s no place for off the cuff decisions by people that have no understanding of the system they’ve been given authority over — assuming Musk’s authority is even legal. The actions to fire all those workers was arbitrary and capricious. Worse, it was very, very stupid as evidenced by the embarrassing flip-flopping on who’s fired and who should be brought back. In the corp world a board of directors would quickly replace the CEO.
I’ve served in elected office and even I know more about govt HR, budgets, the law and good management practice than Musk. Govt finance, HR and management is not the same as in the private sector.
“From what I saw a very large amount of Federal employees are just there to do minimal effort and collect a paycheck.”
Yep, pretty much sums it up. For many decades, I’ve witnessed the same covering many departments of government with virtually no consequences for the slackers.
Dennis, your overall comment was also fact driven and accurate.
For those that beg to differ, it seems y’all are the same folks that would pee on my leg yet tell me it’s raining.
Impacted employees should immediately open an appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). It is clear none of the RIF laws have been followed. There’s a 30 day clock on filing an appeal.
OPM RIF Rules
Specifically, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel has requested and been granted a 45 day stay preventing the lay off of 6 workers that filed claims. Along with, “The Special Counsel believes other probationary employees are similarly situated to the six workers for whom he currently is seeking relief. Dellinger is considering ways to seek relief for a broader group without the need for individual filings with OSC.”
https://osc.gov/News/Pages/25-22-Stay-Request-Probationary-Employees.aspx
https://osc.gov/News/Pages/25-23-Stays-Granted-Probationary-Terminations.aspx
If this was a private company and they violated the WARN Act, how would people react, and what would HR respond with.
Government employees are by-and-large useless period I have observed many agencies and Bureau’s up close and the people are quite ignorant and frankly, they couldn’t care less period they’re 9 to 5, not 8 to 5, like in industry period I’ve had the same experience as one of the people above who said his xperience was the employees couldn’t care less period they don’t. That’s a fact! If Trump can eliminate billions of dollars by getting rid of useless employees in useless departments, why would everybody not be in favor of that question mark that’s a rhetorical question for the stupid people in the world period look at the TRILLIONS of dollars already saved. And the outrageous FRAUD Zof unauthorized billions wasted by AID on employee’s preferred special interests!
@Wes, that’s a political opinion. Why I am not in favor of what was done is the same reason I’m not in favor of unsupported claims about anything. You’re free to post your opinions, but not about matters of fact. Saying something is a fact does not make it a fact. I do not see one supported fact in your post. If you’re going to keep posting — please, no political speeches about your opinions. I know it’s a fine line in a column like this. Your opinions about the HR issues in this matter are welcome. Political speeches are not. Thanks for your cooperation.
Hey, Nick. Do you have any related suggestions for folks that live in all-party recording states?
One option that comes to mind is to simply record openly, instead of secretly. That might cause the boss to change what they say, but maybe that’s a good thing?
@Ed, I’m not a lawyer but I do believe as long as you put everyone on notice that you’re going to record, they can hang up.
Also not a lawyer, but having had to consider this once in the past, sometimes there is an allowance or at least a gray area, around recordings for personal use, as long as you don’t disclose the recording. Why that’s important – it allows you to transcribe later and capture the precise wording, not just your recollection.
The list that Nick linked to above has a table with the individual states’ verbiage, as well as the map.
Alternatively, you can at least take thorough written notes. If needed, pause a critical conversation to capture the exact wording of a statement when it matters. I have found that can cause a speaker to adjust their wording, especially when they just said something legally questionable. I still want to capture what they said the first time, and then I’m happy to capture their rewording.
Not that I would expect any of these dismissals to be centered around an intelligent conversation.
My condolences if this affects you – not just for the actions themselves, but for the dehumanizing comments by some of your fellow Americans.
Hello Ed –
Allow me to provide my take on your question (from an HR perspective).
In all-party consent states, it’s crucial to follow legal guidelines when recording conversations, particularly in the workplace. Being transparent about recording is not only legally required but can also serve as a strategic approach to fostering accountability.
One effective strategy is to approach the situation with professionalism and clarity. You could say something like, “For clarity and to ensure I don’t miss anything important, I’d like to record this conversation. Are you okay with that?” This sets a tone of openness and can often prompt more thoughtful and careful communication from all parties involved.
If the request to record is denied, take detailed notes instead. Following the meeting, send a recap email summarizing key points and actions discussed. This creates a written record that can be useful if needed in the future.
Ultimately, transparency is key—not only to stay compliant with the law but also to build trust and demonstrate integrity in potentially challenging situations. I hope this is helpful. Thank you
Thanks Nick, Meg, and Demina for the excellent advice.
I’m fortunate in that I’m not a worker affected by this disaster. In fact, there’s a good chance that my employer and personal fortunes will improve under this garbage fire of an administration, but I’m not going to go into detail about that.
“this garbage fire of an administration”
…because the last admin lifted America to uncharted heights of greatness and world-wide respect?
Getting back on topic, the majority of people I know either had stagnant earning power and negative discretionary income due to inflation year after year or lost their job while the good ‘ol gov just keep growing bigger and throwing tax dollars overseas like a drunken pirate.
Public or private sector – a bloated workforce gets corrected one way or another with the public side usually taking WAY too long to adjust.
Even with reduced gov payroll, the US will still be operating deep in debt. Simple math dictates more budget cuts will be needed.
Buckle up!
NOTE TO ALL
This column is about over-the-top HR behavior and the example is the federal government, and about a way recommended by a leading employment attorney to protect yourself whether you work in government or in the commercial world.
All comments about these issues are welcome, and we’ve had some excellent ones.
Disparagement of entire groups of workers, political speechifying without any discussion of the topic at hand, calls to “tear the government down,” “medical experiments” conducted by the government — well, you get the idea. I’m surprised anyone would think political rants and over-generalizations and attacks on entire groups of people are welcome here, much less that anyone would post them.
I rarely remove anyone’s comments. But self-righteous “we’re right, you’re stupid” diatribes, angry political opinions and ridiculous speculations posted as the truth are not welcome here. There are lots of other places to do that.
We stick to the topic. Strong opinions, spirited discussion, good suggestions and supporting information that is useful to others are all welcome. Everyone knows when they go overboard, so please spare me the emails explaining why you think you have a right to rant about your political views on this forum.
I have removed comments that are patently political and/ or offensive. If one of them was yours, please spare us further arguments, stick to the topic and spirit of this forum or don’t comment.
Nick
There is a lot of fed bashing here. And let me tell you. You are completely clueless regarding the vast majority of federal feds. Yes, there are lazy federal employees. There are lazy employees everywhere. Yes, the process necessary to get rid of a lazy employee is onerous. So change the rules. That isn’t what is happening. What is happening is trying to pull out a splinter with a sledgehammer. The wrong tools are being used and you are causing more damage.
Lazy employees? Let me tell you about my organization. We had an all call after the RTO order. Do you know what the second biggest concern was? Our jobs are now at risk if we work extra hours beyond the 40 hour week at home. Yes. You read that correctky people are so dedicated that they want to volunteer their time and are being told no. Does that sound lazy?
The firings are indiscriminate and costly. We have people leading major projects who are private because we grabbed the. Fron industry relatively recently. They took a lay cut to work on something important. They are GOOD. They are working things you probably want your country working on. They are indispensable. They put in the extra hours. Yup, they are on the list.
Part of my organization is about ovesite and isrt is independent development. You really want to get rid of the experienced people making sure you are getting value in your projects? I can tell you I have personally saved you the taxpayer orders if magnitude more dollars than my salary and benefits. The number of times that my organization has stepped in saved a contractors backn by solving the technical problem they have encountered is too numerous to count. And it is done quietly. Like we are supposed to. That was stupid I. Our leaders part.
The image of the lazy government worker needs to banished like the stereotype that it is. It is the same as any racial stereotype. You are just finding a way to demonize someone who is not you.
And if you think this is about effeciency, biy are you misguided. The process being used is probably the least effecient way possible. If the goal is to remove workers, that is the employer’s prerogative. But as a shareholder, what would you say if you learned that a process was being used that is at minimum 4x more expensive than it needs to be? And, it gardener fewer people taking advantage of it than the standard, official way you do this? Yes, the Deferred Resignation Program costs more than the standard severence package that is offered. The details were also kept hidden causing any to decline. Would a corporate CEO survive probably a $4B waste of money for a mess effective program? And that does not count the kisses you are getting from not getting rid of the right people. That is far more.
This is not an HR cluster. This is a C-suite level cluster. And it won’t even help! My first boss always would say that itvis pointless looking for your keys underneath the streetlight if you dropped them in the dark field. That is exactly what is going on here.
@Just Me: The current “chainsaw” approach to cutting employees to save money is not just a stark, indefensible mess, it’s not even the first, much less best, effort to shrink government. Evidence of this is in the almost daily deletion of line items representing savings in this “project.” It shows us the cuts are indiscriminate and not thought out.
30 years ago VP Al Gore ran a multi-year effort that cut around $145 billion in waste and eliminated over 400,000 federal positions — with the bipartisan support of Congress. What Musk is doing is pure drama and PR which, once again, is evidenced in the “Oops – we made mistakes, of course, but we fixed them.” As if such catastrophic errors are to be admired. People’s lives are destroyed and it’s not acceptable to make errors like that. In the Gore example the process was above board, the actions were defensible, and involved the efforts and oversight of people that understood how the changes impacted the country. And it took a few years to pull this off, because it’s not a “We’ll do it day 1!” operation. Rather than work with a team to do it right, Musk paraded his tiny “strike team” – which looks cool because they’re all cowboys armed with algorithms – and demonstrated they can break things like they do at Twitter, but the federal government is another animal entirely.
Lots of folks applaud the “what” of this empoyee-cutting but have no concern for the “how” or the “why” except to opine that we need to save money. Reminds me of an old joke: Want to lose 10 pounds of ugly fat? Cut off your head. “We of course make mistakes, but we quickly correct them.” Some mistakes can’t be corrected. Sometimes, a highly skilled HR team is needed.
I cringe every time news reports refer the current actions as “saving money, reducing fraud and waste”. While that’s the talking point and what DOGE is saying, it is clearly not what is being done. Every report about DOGE saying that should include that it is false.
None of the actions being done are actually saving money. Many are costing more. All of them are reducing services that people depend on. Many of them are breaking federal employment law.
There was already government groups tasked with “reducing fraud and waste” and DOGE fired them, illegally.
If this was a private company, the HR function would have failed to prevent employment lawsuits spectacularly. A core function of HR.