ADVERTISEMENT

Perspective from a recently fired probationary federal employee...

I went through a reduction in force in 1973 after I had only worked a year. Once the dust settled they offered me a position in an isolated part of Alaska ( took off there with a wife and 3 small children, but at least it was a job). I would still hope before the dust settles that you may get an option that won't result in termination. I do remember getting the same exact letter you got and it was 52 years ago.
Working for the state or the fed has always been the target of the lazy comments. We used to get them after fighting fires for weeks on end and saving peoples homes from burning.
I wish you the best and hopefully some options will open up when this situation quiets down.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: d-dawg and LrgK9
So many things I could say but none of which will help you, I do hate to see anyone lose their job and understand your ire about the “reason”. There is massive bloat in the federal government IMO which needed to be addressed. Whether that was done correctly is another matter. Both my parents retired from Civll Service, and while we never discussed it, I’m guessing the reason they retired at 55 was because of the people they worked with. I could be wrong, but just a guess.

My wife has been laid off 3X in her career. After the first time, I told a guy I met she’d been laid off and he said, “Not a problem. I’ve been laid off 4X and every time I came out with a better job.” And the same thing happened with her. So keep your head up and keep chopping.

I go to church with a kid who works for FEMA. You sound a lot like him. Easy for me to say, but I told him not to worry either.
 
40% of the people in this country simply hate the government and the people in it without any thought whatsoever that there may be many who are dedicated to serving their country through a job they love. The way jobs are being cut now without any vetting or plan that makes sense is simply a reflection of their attitudes and the people they have empowered.

The government needs trimming based on merit, but that takes too much time and effort. The angry mob wants its gratification quickly. Sorry you were caught up in it.
The fix is never easy. If it was, we never would've gotten in trouble in the first place.
 
Is this all you got? Just sympathy for the guy and relating it to your life experiences without any evaluative comments concerning what Trump and Musk are doing? You are obviously a smart guy or you wouldn't have a law degree--what is it that you MAGA supporters think Trump's goal is? Do you think that he and his billionaire friend will ever give up control of the government? Or perhaps that is Ok with you?
I have to laugh. Their goal is to reduce the size of government so that it can keep functioning. Like any layoff, it is painful to through,

Honestly, how much did you think we can borrow? Interest on our debt is the largest payout we have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TivoliDawg
This is going to be long so read it if you want, but I am going to at least tell my story.

I made the decision to join the federal government last year around this time. I had been a state government employee for the previous 14 years and my dream job finally opened in the feds. This was a job I had dreamed about joining for at least 10 years. A job that I watched multiple times get posted, only to find out it wasn't open to the public and thus I wasn't eligible. So I kept grinding in my state job hoping for a chance one day. Mind you, this state job was fantastic. I thoroughly enjoyed it, enjoyed the people I worked with. However, I wanted to move to the federal side because of the better opportunities for career advancement. Now some might read "career advancement" and think to themselves it doesn't belong in federal government. And that's fine if you think that way, but just remember to attract quality candidates you have to have quality pay. If you pay McDonald's salaries you will get McDonald's quality. Also, the type of work I do is not typically suited for the private sector. I'm not going to give specific details but let's just say it deals with the outdoors, and leave it at that.

So with that backstory out of the way, fast forward to this time last year when I started my federal career. I loved it. Loved the job, loved the people, loved the office. I'm busting my ass doing this job because 1) I have a fantastic work ethic that was instilled in me by my parents, 2) I'm passionate about the work I was doing, and 3) I was serving the American people and trying to do right by them. A couple of months go by and I find out my supervisor is making a lateral move to another state, a move that was better for his family and I'm proud and happy for him. However, that left a void in his position. I stepped into his role and tried to learn the nuances of my new position, plus his. I was essentially doing what I could to do both jobs. I would say that it probably ended up being more 80% his job, 20% the one I was actually hired for. This "new" position I was in didn't come with extra compensation, just a whole lot more stress and headache. Once again though, I loved the people I worked with and if I hadn't stepped in it would have hurt them. So I was glad to do it. And yes, there was the thought in the back of my mind that this would set me up nicely to get the promotion to his job once it was posted. I had been receiving glowing reviews from my new assigned supervisor and everyone else in the office. I will say it was nice for so many people to recognize the hard work that I was putting in.

Three days ago I receive a phone call and was told then that I would be terminated because I was still in my probationary period, meaning I had less than a year of service. In fact, I had 11 months 2 weeks of service in. That's right, I was 15 days away from being out of my probationary period. I was devastated, still am. The four stages of grief are real as I've been going through them. One of the biggest kicks to the pants of that phone call was I was told my termination letter would state the reason I was let go is because of poor performance. I was told in actuality that is furthest from the truth and that my performance had been outstanding. They can't do that right, that's a complete lie so there's no way right? Well I received the email the next day and sure enough it said "The Agency finds, based on your performance, that you have not demonstrated that your further employment at the Agency would be in the public interest. For this reason, the Agency informs you that the Agency is removing you from your position of ******* with the Agency and the federal civil service effective immediately." I have so many thoughts about this. First, note how impersonal that is and they couldn't even figure out the widget or whatever it takes to actually state the agency I worked for...just says "the Agency". Second I have never had a poor performance review. So please produce for me a document stating that. I will be calling HR on Tuesday (Monday is a federal holiday) and requesting it, which they won't be able to do because it doesn't exist.

I was not the only one in my office that received this exact letter, with wording about "poor performance", even though they had been receiving glowing reviews also. In fact, 99% of the people in my office receive glowing reviews. They are all extremely hard workers and care about the job they do. They aren't remote workers out playing golf on the clock. They are field staff who put in long hours when needed and truly dedicate themselves to their craft. I have been in contact with many that are still employed, at least at the moment, and they are devastated by our recent terminations. I have told them that I'm not trying to be an alarmist but they had better start looking for other jobs as well. Probationary employees are just the first round. No one knows what the next wave is going to look like, but trust that there will be a next wave.

I have no idea what the future is going to hold. I have no idea what this vaunted holy grail private sector is going to look like. Especially after the job market is flooded with recently fired feds. Once again I'll say, my career isn't exactly suited to the private sector. So it's either a career change where I've spent 15+ years gathering experience, or going back to the state. I'm perfectly willing to go back to the state, but the financial hit is going to suck. Having said that, maybe the state would give me more job security so that I'm not beholden to the wims of political administrations every 4 years. Of course there are governor elections every 4 years, so maybe that's wrong....a thought I would have never even entertained before the last couple of weeks.

I'm not posting this to garner any empathy, change anyone's political minds, or ask for any assistance. I'm an adult and can figure things out on my own. In fact I'm betting if you've been willing to read this, it might garner a "well that sucks for that guy" or "sorry you're going through this", and then you'll move on. That's to be expected. We are strangers on a message board. You don't know me any more than I know you. I hope that this never happens to you though because the human element is real. I guess I'm posting this to vent. Typing this has almost been therapeutic and allowed me to use this forum as a sounding board. But perhaps more importantly I'm posting this so that people can see the actual truth behind this chaos. This isn't firing people for actual poor performance. It's hiding behind the idea of poor performance to justify terminating thousands and thousands of people. It's appealing to the masses who see these firings and think to themselves "yeah let's get rid of these wastes, these weeds". Just know you are being fed lies about some of the actual waste.

Having said all of that, I have one question for the folks on this board. It's pretty simple and I don't want to get into big debates about government waste and fraud. My question is...when you were told by this administration about cuts, is firing 100s of thousands of people what you had in mind? That's it, that's all I want to know. I'm a taxpayer and I'd like government waste to be rooted out. But I damn sure didn't think that the federal employees were that waste.

I don't understand why federal employees have been vilified to the point where 100s of thousands of people losing their jobs is cheered and celebrated. I don't know what we did to anger so many people just because we had the audacity to have a career in the federal government. I don't know how we got to a point where people can no longer disagree without hating each other. I just hope we can come back from this point before it's too late.

Edit: I wanted to also mention that probationary employees that decided to take the "generous" severance package and replied resign to the email are now being fired instead and told they won't be receiving the severance. Also, if an employee promotes to a supervisor's position they are entered into a supervisor's probationary period for a year, no matter how long they had been on with their agency beforehand. There are multiple people like that who had 10+ years experience that recently promoted that were terminated. Again, just putting the facts out there from someone who has firsthand knowledge of the situation.
I hate it for you but your country 36 Trillon in debt jobs have to cut. Wat to meny people on the Government payroll. In a time that our population grew on 2% our government grew 55% that math does not work
 
This is going to be long so read it if you want, but I am going to at least tell my story.

I made the decision to join the federal government last year around this time. I had been a state government employee for the previous 14 years and my dream job finally opened in the feds. This was a job I had dreamed about joining for at least 10 years. A job that I watched multiple times get posted, only to find out it wasn't open to the public and thus I wasn't eligible. So I kept grinding in my state job hoping for a chance one day. Mind you, this state job was fantastic. I thoroughly enjoyed it, enjoyed the people I worked with. However, I wanted to move to the federal side because of the better opportunities for career advancement. Now some might read "career advancement" and think to themselves it doesn't belong in federal government. And that's fine if you think that way, but just remember to attract quality candidates you have to have quality pay. If you pay McDonald's salaries you will get McDonald's quality. Also, the type of work I do is not typically suited for the private sector. I'm not going to give specific details but let's just say it deals with the outdoors, and leave it at that.

So with that backstory out of the way, fast forward to this time last year when I started my federal career. I loved it. Loved the job, loved the people, loved the office. I'm busting my ass doing this job because 1) I have a fantastic work ethic that was instilled in me by my parents, 2) I'm passionate about the work I was doing, and 3) I was serving the American people and trying to do right by them. A couple of months go by and I find out my supervisor is making a lateral move to another state, a move that was better for his family and I'm proud and happy for him. However, that left a void in his position. I stepped into his role and tried to learn the nuances of my new position, plus his. I was essentially doing what I could to do both jobs. I would say that it probably ended up being more 80% his job, 20% the one I was actually hired for. This "new" position I was in didn't come with extra compensation, just a whole lot more stress and headache. Once again though, I loved the people I worked with and if I hadn't stepped in it would have hurt them. So I was glad to do it. And yes, there was the thought in the back of my mind that this would set me up nicely to get the promotion to his job once it was posted. I had been receiving glowing reviews from my new assigned supervisor and everyone else in the office. I will say it was nice for so many people to recognize the hard work that I was putting in.

Three days ago I receive a phone call and was told then that I would be terminated because I was still in my probationary period, meaning I had less than a year of service. In fact, I had 11 months 2 weeks of service in. That's right, I was 15 days away from being out of my probationary period. I was devastated, still am. The four stages of grief are real as I've been going through them. One of the biggest kicks to the pants of that phone call was I was told my termination letter would state the reason I was let go is because of poor performance. I was told in actuality that is furthest from the truth and that my performance had been outstanding. They can't do that right, that's a complete lie so there's no way right? Well I received the email the next day and sure enough it said "The Agency finds, based on your performance, that you have not demonstrated that your further employment at the Agency would be in the public interest. For this reason, the Agency informs you that the Agency is removing you from your position of ******* with the Agency and the federal civil service effective immediately." I have so many thoughts about this. First, note how impersonal that is and they couldn't even figure out the widget or whatever it takes to actually state the agency I worked for...just says "the Agency". Second I have never had a poor performance review. So please produce for me a document stating that. I will be calling HR on Tuesday (Monday is a federal holiday) and requesting it, which they won't be able to do because it doesn't exist.

I was not the only one in my office that received this exact letter, with wording about "poor performance", even though they had been receiving glowing reviews also. In fact, 99% of the people in my office receive glowing reviews. They are all extremely hard workers and care about the job they do. They aren't remote workers out playing golf on the clock. They are field staff who put in long hours when needed and truly dedicate themselves to their craft. I have been in contact with many that are still employed, at least at the moment, and they are devastated by our recent terminations. I have told them that I'm not trying to be an alarmist but they had better start looking for other jobs as well. Probationary employees are just the first round. No one knows what the next wave is going to look like, but trust that there will be a next wave.

I have no idea what the future is going to hold. I have no idea what this vaunted holy grail private sector is going to look like. Especially after the job market is flooded with recently fired feds. Once again I'll say, my career isn't exactly suited to the private sector. So it's either a career change where I've spent 15+ years gathering experience, or going back to the state. I'm perfectly willing to go back to the state, but the financial hit is going to suck. Having said that, maybe the state would give me more job security so that I'm not beholden to the wims of political administrations every 4 years. Of course there are governor elections every 4 years, so maybe that's wrong....a thought I would have never even entertained before the last couple of weeks.

I'm not posting this to garner any empathy, change anyone's political minds, or ask for any assistance. I'm an adult and can figure things out on my own. In fact I'm betting if you've been willing to read this, it might garner a "well that sucks for that guy" or "sorry you're going through this", and then you'll move on. That's to be expected. We are strangers on a message board. You don't know me any more than I know you. I hope that this never happens to you though because the human element is real. I guess I'm posting this to vent. Typing this has almost been therapeutic and allowed me to use this forum as a sounding board. But perhaps more importantly I'm posting this so that people can see the actual truth behind this chaos. This isn't firing people for actual poor performance. It's hiding behind the idea of poor performance to justify terminating thousands and thousands of people. It's appealing to the masses who see these firings and think to themselves "yeah let's get rid of these wastes, these weeds". Just know you are being fed lies about some of the actual waste.

Having said all of that, I have one question for the folks on this board. It's pretty simple and I don't want to get into big debates about government waste and fraud. My question is...when you were told by this administration about cuts, is firing 100s of thousands of people what you had in mind? That's it, that's all I want to know. I'm a taxpayer and I'd like government waste to be rooted out. But I damn sure didn't think that the federal employees were that waste.

I don't understand why federal employees have been vilified to the point where 100s of thousands of people losing their jobs is cheered and celebrated. I don't know what we did to anger so many people just because we had the audacity to have a career in the federal government. I don't know how we got to a point where people can no longer disagree without hating each other. I just hope we can come back from this point before it's too late.

Edit: I wanted to also mention that probationary employees that decided to take the "generous" severance package and replied resign to the email are now being fired instead and told they won't be receiving the severance. Also, if an employee promotes to a supervisor's position they are entered into a supervisor's probationary period for a year, no matter how long they had been on with their agency beforehand. There are multiple people like that who had 10+ years experience that recently promoted that were terminated. Again, just putting the facts out there from someone who has firsthand knowledge of the situation.
I’m very sorry to hear your story, and there are tens of thousands of other people going through the exact same experience right now. What you are being subjected to is wrong morally and is likely to be found wrong legally as well.

With that in mind, be sure you have hard copies of as many of your performances reviews and other relevant personnel files as you can get your hands on. I have some experience with labor laws and terminations and in the private sector being terminated for cause with no evidence or record of poor performance is problematic to say the least. I suspect your protections as a federal employee are even better.

There will be class action lawsuits and they will have a very good chance of being successful. That doesn’t help you today but it could have a meaningful impact down the road.

Regarding the overall situation, I suspect many people will soon have firsthand experience that the federal government is not nearly as bloated as they have been led to believe. Large organizations inherently have inefficiencies, and the larger the organization the more true that is. The applies to any organization, public or private. It’s simply an immutable truth. But that doesn’t mean that you can cut 20%, 30% or 80% (as was humorously suggested in this thread) without impacting or destroying the effectiveness of the organization. And determining and cutting where there are actual inefficiencies and managing the required transition is not something that the world’s richest man and an army of young developers can accomplish. We are seeing that every day now.

The GOP have proposed $4.5T in tax cuts over the next decade. If they were serious about cutting the deficit, those tax cuts wouldn’t be the cornerstone of their first budget under Trump 2, but here we are.

I wish you good luck as you navigate this process. Stay strong and focused and you will land on your feet.
 
I’m very sorry to hear your story, and there are tens of thousands of other people going through the exact same experience right now. What you are being subjected to is wrong morally and is likely to be found wrong legally as well.

With that in mind, be sure you have hard copies of as many of your performances reviews and other relevant personnel files as you can get your hands on. I have some experience with labor laws and terminations and in the private sector being terminated for cause with no evidence or record of poor performance is problematic to say the least. I suspect your protections as a federal employee are even better.

There will be class action lawsuits and they will have a very good chance of being successful. That doesn’t help you today but it could have a meaningful impact down the road.

Regarding the overall situation, I suspect many people will soon have firsthand experience that the federal government is not nearly as bloated as they have been led to believe. Large organizations inherently have inefficiencies, and the larger the organization the more true that is. The applies to any organization, public or private. It’s simply an immutable truth. But that doesn’t mean that you can cut 20%, 30% or 80% (as was humorously suggested in this thread) without impacting or destroying the effectiveness of the organization. And determining and cutting where there are actual inefficiencies and managing the required transition is not something that the world’s richest man and an army of young developers can accomplish. We are seeing that every day now.

The GOP have proposed $4.5T in tax cuts over the next decade. If they were serious about cutting the deficit, those tax cuts wouldn’t be the cornerstone of their first budget under Trump 2, but here we are.

I wish you good luck as you navigate this process. Stay strong and focused and you will land on your feet.
Whoa. Layoffs are standard practice in private and publicly held companies, union and non-union, and a merger could result In wholesale layoffs for redundant departments. No one should take their job as a lifetime appointment. At Goldman Sachs, for example, the bottom 10% are laid off yearly. You’re clearly out of your depth regarding this issue. And the rest is just an opinion.

IBM
  • In 1993, IBM laid off 60,000 people, the largest corporate job cut in U.S. history at the time.
Tech company layoffs
  • In 2023, Google laid off 12,000 jobs, the largest layoff in the company's history.
  • In 2024, Intel laid off more than 15,000 jobs, and Amazon laid off over 27,000 positions.
  • In 2024, Volkswagen AG laid off 35,000 people, Tesla laid off 14,000 people, and Dell laid off 12,500 people.
Other major layoffs
  • Sears laid off 50,000 jobs and closed 113 stores in 1993.
  • Citigroup laid off 50,000 jobs during the 2008 financial crisis.
  • General Motors closed five factories and cut 47,000 jobs in 2009.
  • Boeing laid off 31,000 jobs after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

  • In 2020, the U.S. had 13,516,000 job layoffs, the highest number ever.
  • In 2022, the U.S. had 15.4 million layoffs
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: stray
Whoa. Layoffs are standard practice in private and publicly held companies, union and non-union. No one should take their job as a lifetime appointment. At Goldman Sachs, for example, the bottom 10% are laid off yearly. You’re clearly out of your depth regarding this issue. And the rest is just an opinion.
I’ve personally RIFed hundreds of people in ten or so different states (and the UK) and I’ve been deposed as a witness in a wrongful termination lawsuit. How about you?

I will admit I’ve never worked for the federal government, but I suspect that their protections are at least as good if not better than those afforded the private sector. Of course, in the private sector, employee protections vary significantly from state to state.

Falsely firing someone for cause is all about denial of benefits. That’s why Elon and crew are executing the cuts this way, because there is no budget earmarked to pay for them. I’m confident that a fifteen year federal employee is guaranteed certain financial and benefit considerations upon termination that are voided when terminated for cause. If the OP has a history of good to exceptional performance reviews with not a single issue identified in their history, they deserve exactly what has been promised upon their termination and the courts can generally be counted on to agree with me.

I have fired people for cause, and the process is very specific. You have to communicate and document the issues, put the employee on a PIP (performance improvement plan) and then only after what is at least typically thirty days (depending on the state) you have to document and communicate again how the employee has failed to improve their performance. Fail to follow that process, particularly with an individual who is in a protected class (age, race, gender, sexual orientation) and you open yourself up to a lawsuit.

Of course, a PIP is not required in cases involving violence, theft of other illegal activity.

Tens of thousands of people are being falsely fired for cause with zero documentation to support that determination because Elon and team are lying. The courts are likely to find in favor of the plaintiffs in those cases.
 
Last edited:
Whoa. Layoffs are standard practice in private and publicly held companies, union and non-union, and a merger could result In wholesale layoffs for redundant departments. No one should take their job as a lifetime appointment. At Goldman Sachs, for example, the bottom 10% are laid off yearly. You’re clearly out of your depth regarding this issue. And the rest is just an opinion.

IBM
  • In 1993, IBM laid off 60,000 people, the largest corporate job cut in U.S. history at the time.
Tech company layoffs
  • In 2023, Google laid off 12,000 jobs, the largest layoff in the company's history.
  • In 2024, Intel laid off more than 15,000 jobs, and Amazon laid off over 27,000 positions.
  • In 2024, Volkswagen AG laid off 35,000 people, Tesla laid off 14,000 people, and Dell laid off 12,500 people.
Other major layoffs
  • Sears laid off 50,000 jobs and closed 113 stores in 1993.
  • Citigroup laid off 50,000 jobs during the 2008 financial crisis.
  • General Motors closed five factories and cut 47,000 jobs in 2009.
  • Boeing laid off 31,000 jobs after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

  • In 2020, the U.S. had 13,516,000 job layoffs, the highest number ever.
  • In 2022, the U.S. had 15.4 million layoffs
Now run the numbers of how much each of those companies spent in severance and benefits for those layoffs. They DID NOT fire all those people for cause to save money, and if they had they would have been sued and lost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: celticdawg
I’ve personally RIFed hundreds of people in ten or so different states (and the UK) and I’ve been deposed as a witness in a wrongful termination lawsuit. How about you?

I will admit I’ve never worked for the federal government, but I suspect that their protections are at least as good if not better than those afforded the private sector. Of course, in the private sector, employee protections vary significantly from state to state.

Falsely firing someone for cause is all about denial of benefits. That’s why Elon and crew are executing the cuts this way, because there is no budget earmarked to pay for them. I’m confident that a fifteen year federal employee is guaranteed certain financial and benefit considerations upon termination that are voided when terminated for cause. If the OP has a history of good to exceptional performance reviews with not a single issue identified in their history, they deserve exactly what has been promised upon their termination and the courts can generally be counted on to agree with me.

I have fired people for cause, and the process is very specific. You have to communicate and document the issues, put the employee on a PIP (performance improvement plan) and then only after what is at least typically thirty days (depending on the state) you have to document and communicate again how the employee has failed to improve their performance. Fail to follow that process, particularly with an individual who is in a protected class (age, race, gender, sexual orientation) and you open yourself up to a lawsuit.

Of course, a PIP is not required in cases involving violence, theft of other illegal activity.

Tens of thousands of people are being falsely fired for cause with zero documentation to support that determination because Elon and team are lying. The courts are likely to find in favor of the plaintiffs in those cases.

The firing of a probationary period federal employee is going to be the difference
in your analysis.

A wrong or false reason likely is not even an issue.

Significant difference to status between probationary and permanent classification. Dead Sea v Atlantic Ocean gaps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1yodawg and willdup
I’ve personally RIFed hundreds of people in ten or so different states (and the UK) and I’ve been deposed as a witness in a wrongful termination lawsuit. How about you?

I will admit I’ve never worked for the federal government, but I suspect that their protections are at least as good if not better than those afforded the private sector. Of course, in the private sector, employee protections vary significantly from state to state.

Falsely firing someone for cause is all about denial of benefits. That’s why Elon and crew are executing the cuts this way, because there is no budget earmarked to pay for them. I’m confident that a fifteen year federal employee is guaranteed certain financial and benefit considerations upon termination that are voided when terminated for cause. If the OP has a history of good to exceptional performance reviews with not a single issue identified in their history, they deserve exactly what has been promised upon their termination and the courts can generally be counted on to agree with me.

I have fired people for cause, and the process is very specific. You have to communicate and document the issues, put the employee on a PIP (performance improvement plan) and then only after what is at least typically thirty days (depending on the state) you have to document and communicate again how the employee has failed to improve their performance. Fail to follow that process, particularly with an individual who is in a protected class (age, race, gender, sexual orientation) and you open yourself up to a lawsuit.

Of course, a PIP is not required in cases involving violence, theft of other illegal activity.

Tens of thousands of people are being falsely fired for cause with zero documentation to support that determination because Elon and team are lying. The courts are likely to find in favor of the plaintiffs in those cases.
I went through several of these during my 40 years and was forced to move during one under Nixon. I got the same exact letter that he did 52 years ago; I guess some things never change. When you go to work for the Fed you can be terminated for any reason during your probationary period which varies by the agency you work for. If you are past your probationary period then you can appeal your termination to The Merit Systems Protection Board .
 
  • Like
Reactions: doerunn
Now run the numbers of how much each of those companies spent in severance and benefits for those layoffs. They DID NOT fire all those people for cause to save money, and if they had they would have been sued and lost.
Except for Sears, they all made billions afterward. If it was not worth it, they wouldn’t do it. Being a drone in Personnel, you should know that.


AND you should have known that a person should always take the first buyout offer, and for the rest, their close out costs will be subtracted from the same funds they would have received if they took the buyout.
 
Last edited:
The fix is never easy. If it was, we never would've gotten in trouble in the first place.
I went through a few of these with the Fed ,and the public could have cared less one way or the other primarily due to their distaste of federal workers in general. In other words, no political backlash at all. The big difference this time is 70% of the public support this action and that number is growing daily due to the waste and fraud being exposed. I still think a lot of people affected by this will get some other options, but these are different times in the United States.
 
The firing of a probationary period federal employee is going to be the difference
in your analysis.

A wrong or false reason likely is not even an issue.

Significant difference to status between probationary and permanent classification. Dead Sea v Atlantic Ocean gaps.
That’s an interesting point, and as I’ve said, I have no experience with federal labor laws.

According to ChatGPT, OP’s prior tenure should not be erased by a probationary period associated with a promotion, but I’d consult with a labor lawyer to be sure.

AI Alert:

In general, if a long-term federal employee receives a promotion that requires a probationary period, their status depends on the circumstances of their employment.

1. Retention of Career Tenure:
• If the employee was already a career (tenured) employee before the promotion, they retain their career status even while serving a probationary period in the new position.
• This means that if they are removed from the new position during probation, they typically have the right to return to their previous position or a similar one rather than being fully laid off.
2. Reduction in Force (RIF) Protections:
• During a Reduction in Force (RIF) (e.g., layoffs due to budget cuts), career employees retain their competitive status and seniority from their prior position.
• If the employee is in probation for the new role, their status in a RIF scenario will still be based on their total federal service time and previous tenure.
• However, if their previous job was abolished, they may have fewer placement rights, depending on agency policies.
3. Adverse Action Protections:
• Probationary employees in a new role do not have the same appeal rights as a fully tenured employee if removed for performance reasons specific to the new role.
• However, if the removal is unrelated to their performance (e.g., misconduct, RIF), they may still have appeal rights through the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) or union protections.

Key Takeaways:

• A long-term federal employee keeps their career tenure even while on probation for a new promotion.
• If removed during probation, they often have return rights to their prior grade/position.
• In a RIF scenario, their status depends on total federal service time, competitive status, and prior role protections.
• If they voluntarily switched job series, their return rights may be limited.

Would you like specifics on a particular federal agency or situation?
 
That’s an interesting point, and as I’ve said, I have no experience with federal labor laws.

According to ChatGPT, OP’s prior tenure should not be erased by a probationary period associated with a promotion, but I’d consult with a labor lawyer to be sure.

AI Alert:

In general, if a long-term federal employee receives a promotion that requires a probationary period, their status depends on the circumstances of their employment.

1. Retention of Career Tenure:
• If the employee was already a career (tenured) employee before the promotion, they retain their career status even while serving a probationary period in the new position.
• This means that if they are removed from the new position during probation, they typically have the right to return to their previous position or a similar one rather than being fully laid off.
2. Reduction in Force (RIF) Protections:
• During a Reduction in Force (RIF) (e.g., layoffs due to budget cuts), career employees retain their competitive status and seniority from their prior position.
• If the employee is in probation for the new role, their status in a RIF scenario will still be based on their total federal service time and previous tenure.
• However, if their previous job was abolished, they may have fewer placement rights, depending on agency policies.
3. Adverse Action Protections:
• Probationary employees in a new role do not have the same appeal rights as a fully tenured employee if removed for performance reasons specific to the new role.
• However, if the removal is unrelated to their performance (e.g., misconduct, RIF), they may still have appeal rights through the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) or union protections.

Key Takeaways:

• A long-term federal employee keeps their career tenure even while on probation for a new promotion.
• If removed during probation, they often have return rights to their prior grade/position.
• In a RIF scenario, their status depends on total federal service time, competitive status, and prior role protections.
• If they voluntarily switched job series, their return rights may be limited.

Would you like specifics on a particular federal agency or situation?
Politics can play strange roles in adverse actions. During the 15,000 employee RIF during Clinton, many people were targeted who worked for resource agencies like I did ( Al Gore was against any land or vegetation altering ). Some of us had many years of service and would have been a rather hard target to terminate, so the administration tried other methods to make people leave. Since most of us were involved in multiple lawsuits with the Sierra Club, Earth First, Wilderness Society, et al, we relied on our qualified immunity guarantee that the Fed would defend us if we were working within the scope of our employment. Overnight Clinton signed and executive order removing that protection that forced many of us to get $1 million plus liability policies just to protect us from litigation for just doing our jobs. This was considered an adverse action because of what it did and should have been overturned, but politics ruled the day and I kept the policy until Bush took office and rescinded the order.
 
What do you do with an agency that develops a virus under a sub-line item, that kills several million people? But Fauci found a workaround of Obama’s prohibition on such work, and the work proceeded. They said that in the Senate Homeland Security Committee meeting. Kind of hard to defend that, and I support Obama here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThreeDawgNight
That’s an interesting point, and as I’ve said, I have no experience with federal labor laws.

According to ChatGPT, OP’s prior tenure should not be erased by a probationary period associated with a promotion, but I’d consult with a labor lawyer to be sure.

AI Alert:

In general, if a long-term federal employee receives a promotion that requires a probationary period, their status depends on the circumstances of their employment.

1. Retention of Career Tenure:
• If the employee was already a career (tenured) employee before the promotion, they retain their career status even while serving a probationary period in the new position.
• This means that if they are removed from the new position during probation, they typically have the right to return to their previous position or a similar one rather than being fully laid off.
2. Reduction in Force (RIF) Protections:
• During a Reduction in Force (RIF) (e.g., layoffs due to budget cuts), career employees retain their competitive status and seniority from their prior position.
• If the employee is in probation for the new role, their status in a RIF scenario will still be based on their total federal service time and previous tenure.
• However, if their previous job was abolished, they may have fewer placement rights, depending on agency policies.
3. Adverse Action Protections:
• Probationary employees in a new role do not have the same appeal rights as a fully tenured employee if removed for performance reasons specific to the new role.
• However, if the removal is unrelated to their performance (e.g., misconduct, RIF), they may still have appeal rights through the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) or union protections.

Key Takeaways:

• A long-term federal employee keeps their career tenure even while on probation for a new promotion.
• If removed during probation, they often have return rights to their prior grade/position.
• In a RIF scenario, their status depends on total federal service time, competitive status, and prior role protections.
• If they voluntarily switched job series, their return rights may be limited.

Would you like specifics on a particular federal agency or situation?
I thought he was long time with state but just new/short with feds.

Yep, he’s less than a year in with fed job.
 
Last edited:
Except for Sears, they all made billions afterward. If it was not worth it, they wouldn’t do it. Being a drone in Personnel, you should know that.


AND you should have known that a person should always take the first buyout offer, and for the rest, their close out costs will be subtracted from the same funds they would have received if they took the buyout.
Way to both fail to understand the thread and be a dick while doing it.

I've never been a drone in personnel. I built and sold two companies and then worked for a number of years at the companies that made those acquisitions.

At the first of those acquirors, I was running a five-hundred-person digital agency that was negatively impacted when the dotcom bubble burst and had to manage layoffs to maintain profitability, which I did. I chose to be in the room for every single one of those layoffs because I believe that's what leaders do. It was an unpleasant but highly educational experience.

I never said (nor would I ever suggest) that layoffs are illegal or unproductive. I said that falsely firing someone for cause, particularly simultaneously falsely firing a large group of employees for cause, can be highly problematic, particularly if a legal argument can be made that it was done expressly to deny otherwise proscribed benefits upon termination. Look at every one of the examples your provided and they all had quite significant one-time charges associated with those layoffs. I believe that part of Elon's issue is that there is no money earmarked to pay for layoffs or buyouts, which is why he is taking this approach.

But again, I'm not a labor lawyer and was simply making some observations based on my experience. Some others in this thread have provided some very good counterpoints to my observations. You just weren't one of them.
 
Trump & Musk are simply the least worst of the two.
Their approach is needed but given Trump’s history of cronyism and unbridled narcissism - you got to worry.

The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune still hold sway over most all of us.
By saying that Trump and Musk are the least worst of the two, I assume you are comparing them with Biden. At this point, there is no basis for such a comparison based on what Trump and Musk are doing. It is unprecedented and stands alone in the history of the United States. You got to do a whole lot more than worry because what they are doing is absolutely frightening and leads directly to absolutism and a dictatorial regime. My ancient German friend tells me that what they are doing compares well with what Hitler did in the 1930's. I am old enough to remember when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, so what they are doing scares the bejesus out of me
 
By saying that Trump and Musk are the least worst of the two, I assume you are comparing them with Biden. At this point, there is no basis for such a comparison based on what Trump and Musk are doing. It is unprecedented and stands alone in the history of the United States. You got to do a whole lot more than worry because what they are doing is absolutely frightening and leads directly to absolutism and a dictatorial regime. My ancient German friend tells me that what they are doing compares well with what Hitler did in the 1930's. I am old enough to remember when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, so what they are doing scares the bejesus out of me
Oh god . . . Did you work for CBS?
 
By saying that Trump and Musk are the least worst of the two, I assume you are comparing them with Biden. At this point, there is no basis for such a comparison based on what Trump and Musk are doing. It is unprecedented and stands alone in the history of the United States. You got to do a whole lot more than worry because what they are doing is absolutely frightening and leads directly to absolutism and a dictatorial regime. My ancient German friend tells me that what they are doing compares well with what Hitler did in the 1930's. I am old enough to remember when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, so what they are doing scares the bejesus out of me
Man you have to be kidding!
 
By saying that Trump and Musk are the least worst of the two, I assume you are comparing them with Biden. At this point, there is no basis for such a comparison based on what Trump and Musk are doing. It is unprecedented and stands alone in the history of the United States. You got to do a whole lot more than worry because what they are doing is absolutely frightening and leads directly to absolutism and a dictatorial regime. My ancient German friend tells me that what they are doing compares well with what Hitler did in the 1930's. I am old enough to remember when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, so what they are doing scares the bejesus out of me
Clinton removed 426,000 federal workers although many were done through buyouts, but also many were outright firings of employees who worked for agencies that Clinton ,and particularly Al Gore, were after for environmental reasons ( I know I was there). There have been others throughout history, but not this number primarily due to smaller federal employment.
The big thing with what is going on now is the public perception of government. Latest polls show 55%( with some people estimating 70%) plus supporting the firings and the work of DOGE.

Corrected the % as per willdup
 
Last edited:
Whoa. Layoffs are standard practice in private and publicly held companies, union and non-union, and a merger could result In wholesale layoffs for redundant departments. No one should take their job as a lifetime appointment. At Goldman Sachs, for example, the bottom 10% are laid off yearly. You’re clearly out of your depth regarding this issue. And the rest is just an opinion.

IBM
  • In 1993, IBM laid off 60,000 people, the largest corporate job cut in U.S. history at the time.
Tech company layoffs
  • In 2023, Google laid off 12,000 jobs, the largest layoff in the company's history.
  • In 2024, Intel laid off more than 15,000 jobs, and Amazon laid off over 27,000 positions.
  • In 2024, Volkswagen AG laid off 35,000 people, Tesla laid off 14,000 people, and Dell laid off 12,500 people.
Other major layoffs
  • Sears laid off 50,000 jobs and closed 113 stores in 1993.
  • Citigroup laid off 50,000 jobs during the 2008 financial crisis.
  • General Motors closed five factories and cut 47,000 jobs in 2009.
  • Boeing laid off 31,000 jobs after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

  • In 2020, the U.S. had 13,516,000 job layoffs, the highest number ever.
  • In 2022, the U.S. had 15.4 million layoffs
We know there have been large layoffs in industry and the government workforce needs to be reduced, but you seem to be missing the issue of how it is being done. You mentioned that Goldman Sachs lays off the bottom 10% yearly. People who go into those jobs where their performance is mostly based on production, know they have to produce. These government layoffs are not even close to that situation.

It seems like everyone is being told their performance is poor and that appears to be b.s. As mentioned in a post above, when employees get promoted they are automatically in a "probationary period". Now these people have been included in the terminations. Just stupidity on someone's part. Nuclear energy people got termination letters and when they realized their mistake the next day they couldn't contact some because those people no longer had their federal email. Now I read that FAA people also indiscriminately got terminated. Don't we have a shortage of people? Some may need to be terminated for cause, but that's not what is happening.
 
folks just coming out of nowhere lol
are these double accounts for the ones who are embarrassed about what happened in November lol

We know there have been large layoffs in industry and the government workforce needs to be reduced, but you seem to be missing the issue of how it is being done. You mentioned that Goldman Sachs lays off the bottom 10% yearly. People who go into those jobs where their performance is mostly based on production, know they have to produce. These government layoffs are not even close to that situation.

It seems like everyone is being told their performance is poor and that appears to be b.s. As mentioned in a post above, when employees get promoted they are automatically in a "probationary period". Now these people have been included in the terminations. Just stupidity on someone's part. Nuclear energy people got termination letters and when they realized their mistake the next day they couldn't contact some because those people no longer had their federal email. Now I read that FAA people also indiscriminately got terminated. Don't we have a shortage of people? Some may need to be terminated for cause, but that's not what is happening.
I got that same standard letter over 50 years ago. Some things never change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eastmandawg
By saying that Trump and Musk are the least worst of the two, I assume you are comparing them with Biden. At this point, there is no basis for such a comparison based on what Trump and Musk are doing. It is unprecedented and stands alone in the history of the United States. You got to do a whole lot more than worry because what they are doing is absolutely frightening and leads directly to absolutism and a dictatorial regime. My ancient German friend tells me that what they are doing compares well with what Hitler did in the 1930's. I am old enough to remember when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, so what they are doing scares the bejesus out of me
I'm pretty sure Hitler wasn't interested in reducing the power of the central government and advancing school choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SprayTanDawg
folks just coming out of nowhere lol
are these double accounts for the ones who are embarrassed about what happened in November lol
CNN is preparing to do mass layoffs as their ratings have tanked to the lowest since it's inception. Most of these are the ultra liberal reporters who have failed to listen to Warner Brothers warnings to tone it down. Many of them are going off the deep end with unsupported allegations and many of their viewers believe whatever they say.
 
Clinton removed 426,000 federal workers although many were done through buyouts, but also many were outright firings of employees who worked for agencies that Clinton ,and particularly Al Gore, were after for environmental reasons ( I know I was there). There have been others throughout history, but not this number primarily due to smaller federal employment.
The big thing with what is going on now is the public perception of government. Latest polls show 70% plus supporting the firings and the work of DOGE.
Your post spurred me to do a little research.

Here is what I found:
1990 - 3.4m federal employees
2000 - 2.8m
2010 - 2.65m
2020 - 2.9m
2024 - 3m

During that same timeframe, the US population has grown from 253m people to 347m, or 37%. Yet the number of federal employees is smaller than it was in 1990.

It's an incredibly simplistic analysis, but surprising, nonetheless.

Where are you finding 70% approval polling for DOGE? I can't find that anywhere and it sounds like exactly the kind of made up number that Trump and Elon would tout as fact, but I may be wrong.


"DOGE has been one of the main programs drawing support and criticism in the early weeks of Trump’s term, with critics concerned about how much access Elon Musk and his team have to Americans’ personal data, as well as spending cuts that will affect Americans and people around the world.

Despite the criticism, according to the Trafalgar poll, 49% approve of Musk and his efforts with DOGE, while 44% disapprove. Other polls show DOGE’s approval at similar levels, with a recent Economist/YouGov poll finding that 42% view the department favorably and 38% unfavorably."
 
I'm pretty sure Hitler wasn't interested in reducing the power of the central government and advancing school choice.
The first thing Hitler concentrated on after taking over as Chancellor was dismantling core democratic institutions. Whether you think that has been Trump's primary goal since at least when the lost the 2020 election up until today is all a matter of perspective, I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: celticdawg
Your post spurred me to do a little research.

Here is what I found:
1990 - 3.4m federal employees
2000 - 2.8m
2010 - 2.65m
2020 - 2.9m
2024 - 3m

During that same timeframe, the US population has grown from 253m people to 347m, or 37%. Yet the number of federal employees is smaller than it was in 1990.

It's an incredibly simplistic analysis, but surprising, nonetheless.

Where are you finding 70% approval polling for DOGE? I can't find that anywhere and it sounds like exactly the kind of made up number that Trump and Elon would tout as fact, but I may be wrong.


"DOGE has been one of the main programs drawing support and criticism in the early weeks of Trump’s term, with critics concerned about how much access Elon Musk and his team have to Americans’ personal data, as well as spending cuts that will affect Americans and people around the world.

Despite the criticism, according to the Trafalgar poll, 49% approve of Musk and his efforts with DOGE, while 44% disapprove. Other polls show DOGE’s approval at similar levels, with a recent Economist/YouGov poll finding that 42% view the department favorably and 38% unfavorably."
I meant in our history, not just the last 40-50 years. I did not mean Musks personal approval rating, just the work that DOGE is performing. As more and more waste and abuse is being reported the number is climbing ( 55% 4 days ago and climbing rapidly), as I would hope it would no matter who the President may be. Remember Clinton had massive support for trimming the government down of waste.
If I was a Democrat this would be the approval rating that would concern me the most: "The party of Jefferson, Jackson, Kennedy, Clinton, Obama and Biden holds a 57% unfavorable rating among voters, according to the Quinnipiac University survey released Wednesday, while just
31% of voters say they have a favorable view."
 
Last edited:
Stand up, dust yourself off and get back to work.

We've all lost jobs due to similar circumstances throughout our careers.

I wish the federal reduction would only affect dims but..................unlike the Left, Republicans would never do that.

At least I didn't read you ran out and bought a $70K truck and got a new 3500 sq ft house mortgage for 12% interest last year.

*Law enforcement is hiring like crazy throughout metro Atlanta with salaries easily hitting 3 digits at many agencies.

Good luck my friend.
 
The first thing Hitler concentrated on after taking over as Chancellor was dismantling core democratic institutions. Whether you think that has been Trump's primary goal since at least when the lost the 2020 election up until today is all a matter of perspective, I guess.
Could be, but I worried more about this with Obama and Biden:



These are the eight levels of controls by Saul Alinsky to transform a nation through socialism into communism.

1. Healthcare – control healthcare and you control the people.

2. Poverty – Increase the poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you provide everything for them to live.

3. Debt – Increase the debt level to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes and this will produce more poverty.

4. Gun control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from government. That way you are able to create a police state.

5. Welfare – Take control of every aspect (food, housing, income) of their lives because that will make them fully dependent on the government.

6. Education – Take control of what people read and listen to and take control or what children learn in school.

7. Religion – Remove belief in God from the government and schools because the people need to believe in only the government knowing what is best for the people.

8. Class warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. Eliminate the middle class.
 
The first thing Hitler concentrated on after taking over as Chancellor was dismantling core democratic institutions. Whether you think that has been Trump's primary goal since at least when the lost the 2020 election up until today is all a matter of perspective, I guess.
Yes, Hitler attacked institutions in order to consolidate power. Trump is attacking bureaucratic institutions to decentralize power and reduce the size of the central government.
 
I hate that you lost your job. It is truly a humbling situation. Been there, done that.

Here is my take. I know when there are widespread changes that have to happen, good people get caught up in it. There is no way to avoid it. The federal gov't has 2M employees. Within the last 18 months, Ol' Joe was hiring 87k IRS agents. There are so many federal employees and gov't leaders took advantage. There is no denying it. The move to "wave the wand" was needed. All the while, I know there are 1000s of good hard working people, like you, that get caught in the net. 2Mj+ employees isnot sustainable.

It's the same with immigration. The system was exploited for partisan evil. Waving a big ol' "Come on in" flag at the border. Shuffling money, allocated for other things BTW (i.e. FEMA), around and paying for hotels, cars, flights, debit cards. Again, this is all because of evil, lying, thieve gov't leaders. Not just Dems. I think you'll find McConnell gets what's coming to him. With that said, good hard working, self supporting, tax paying illegals are going to get sent home. Families will be split as some are legal, some aren't.

Taxes are paid by middle-class W-2 employees. The burden is heavy on me. I paid 70k+ in taxes and I'm not rich. I'm on the tail end of raising a family of 7. Something had to be done. I truly don't think, from Trump/Musk, that this is political to them. I do think there are some politicians that Trump is out to prove that they have been stealing. I look forward to that.

I hate you got caught up and I truly hope the best for you.
 
Yes, Hitler attacked institutions in order to consolidate power. Trump is attacking bureaucratic institutions to decentralize power and reduce the size of the central government.
You hope. You know that Trump has control of the Senate and House and essentially the Supreme Court, so he already has centralized power. Trump has already demonstrated that he will not accept the results of free elections by the January 6th fiasco. We have two billionaires in control of the government so if there is not a strong resistance by the people we will turn into an oligarch or worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: willdup
You hope. You know that Trump has control of the Senate and House and essentially the Supreme Court, so he already has centralized power. Trump has already demonstrated that he will not accept the results of free elections by the January 6th fiasco. We have two billionaires in control of the government so if there is not a strong resistance by the people we will turn into an oligarch or worse.
When he starts trying to confiscate weapons, censoring free speech, and attempting to prosecute journos instead of returning education dollars back to the states and enforcing our immigration laws, I'll start worrying about his intentions. From where I'm sitting, O and Biden did a lot more of the things that fascist do than Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zingerdawg
You hope. You know that Trump has control of the Senate and House and essentially the Supreme Court, so he already has centralized power. Trump has already demonstrated that he will not accept the results of free elections by the January 6th fiasco. We have two billionaires in control of the government so if there is not a strong resistance by the people we will turn into an oligarch or worse.
You sound paranoid, sit back and relax.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT