Catholic school graduates, both prep and college. I had many Jewish co-workers, too. Outside of work discussions, most of the topics were sports and office gossip. Despite this memo, I doubt that will change.

along with encouraging mass retirements. So when they backfill some of those positions, they may end up attracting the loons to join.

Fork-in-the-road for example - those billets disappear on 1 Oct.

they have already been backfilling - and mainly because a whole pile said "fuck it" and didn't bother returning when they called (in some cases begged) for them to come back.

I expect they will do a whole "new" type of "propaganda-style recruiting" in order to "transform" the current government into "the swamp" that they have projected onto Democrats.

...due to the legal cases, but DRP (fork in the road) has been cleared by the courts. I have five paychecks left until I'm officially retired.

either retire or do the "fork in the road". But that whole nonsense has only been temporarily "cleared by" the *lower* courts" but not for the merits. Because some of these courts move so slow, you are seeing a number of cases filed back in February, finally being addressed the past month or so. In some cases in these earlier cases, the judge rejecting the suit because the filer didn't have standing (and that was mostly the Unions and some states, etc., where they couldn't "show harm" to their organizations specifically). Later cases were done with those same orgs PLUS some employees and those have finally gone forward.

The offer of a "buyout" is in violation of the Antideficiency Act because such money wasn't previously appropriated. You are now seeing them doing backasswards "Rescission" packages (which the "legal" way to get approval to return funding that Congress already authorized per the Budget and Impoundment Control Act).

I remember back in the '90s under Clinton when buyouts and RIFs were underway. But THAT was done via LEGISLATION by Congress and only went into effect AFTER those bills became law (with a schedule/details for how it would work). I had posted about this back in February here - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=3390588

----
H.R.3345 - Federal Workforce Restructuring Act of 1994

SUMMARY

Funds have to be appropriated for a buyout, but existing billets are already appropriated.

We’ll just agree to disagree on the legality of it.

It's how the appropriations are worded in the legislation (I have had to take multiple "Appropriations Law" courses in order to support/approve direct-report procurements and contracts as a Supervisor and COTR). This is why I linked to what was done under Clinton - which shows what is needed to "authorize" a reprogramming of funds for such a purpose.

(ETA - some agencies were told they would have "buyouts", which again, are illegal absent authorizing legislation)

For DRP, the funding is being used for salaries - nothing had to be reprogrammed.

Under President Clinton there were actual buyouts - the money was reprogrammed, and they paid out lump sums for people to leave. That's not how DRP works - there is no lump sum (other than annual leave payout at retirement date).

Everything is being done like it was before I outprocessed, other than my timecard (with 80 hours of admin leave) being submitted by my previous supervisor instead of by me. People who took DRP are considered the same as anyone else who is put on admin leave for an extended period of time, meaning that we can be called back up until 30 September (although I don't personally know of anyone from my agency that has been called back), we have to check in with a phone call or text every few days, just so they know we're still alive, we still have to follow all of the rules (no drugs, Hatch Act, etc.) until 1 Oct, etc.

I have been posting about this since this past January -

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143383585
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143385728

And this in particular which is explicit - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143413943

It has been inconsistent across agencies which is why the whole thing is horribly bogus and illegal.

...but that's never what it was, except for that last link you posted with the $25,000 cash lump sum - that to me is obviously illegal, because as you've pointed out, no funds have been appropriated for a buyout.

As it pertains to the DRP, none of the documentation I received, from the initial OPM email through all of agency paperwork, ever included the word buyout. I looked specifically for that term, because as you've pointed out, that would not be legal, given how the money was appropriated.

At my agency, and this is pretty standard for any agency with high-level security clearances, employees were put on extended admin leave fairly frequently if concerns were raised and their clearance had to be re-adjudicated. Once re-adjudication was completed, they either returned to work, quit/retired, or were fired, depending on the outcome of the re-adjudication.

The only difference with DRP is that it was voluntary v. mandated.

They have been treating the federal government as if it were "private industry" - where anything goes - literally ignoring and violating all manner of laws that govern the employment conditions of federal employees (including the various Civil Service Acts).

The early "firings" without a 60-day notice and other crap is an example that has now been forgotten in the "flood the zone" news cycle. But since I was posting many of the LBN OPs on it (although not always in complete detail but enough to do a search to get the info pulled up), I remember what were breathtaking illegalities underway that some courts were halting (and have kept halted - in some cases, leaving employees in limbo).

Before I retired, I recall various "recent" changes to "Retirement" options that were made - including what was dubbed a "phased retirement", which effectively helped to reduce FTEs at an agency (since these employees are essentially "part time" ) but kept the knowledge base intact as those who selected this option, transitioned out.

But early on, most of these codified processes have been ignored, misunderstood, or misused, and 6 months later, are slowly being realigned into something that would attempt to be "legal"... but it's not really there yet.

Most of the earliest idiotic "Fork in the Road" emails had to be revised over and over and over because they were so blatantly illegal and confusing. And the stupid media didn't help and were instead amplifying the misinformation due to pure laziness and an apparent lack of any "government-knowledgeable" staff among their employees.

(ETA - I was a Supervisor for a bunch of years and know all about "Administrative Leave" because I have had employees put in that status. There are a series of escalation steps to go through before you get to that point though)

last year, when I set my retirement date for December 2025...I thought it would be a good way to wind down my career, but at our agency, it was very hard to get approved.

Yeah, I can't speak for other agencies about how they put people on extended admin leave, but at my agency, there were no escalation steps when it came to clearances, because it wasn't the supervisors putting them on admin, it was the security office. When they decided someone had to be re-adjudicated, they were out immediately. I never had an employee on extended admin leave for anything other than clearance issues.

I had one employee who we suspected of timecard fraud...after a lengthy investigation, the fraud was confirmed, she admitted it, was put on unpaid leave for two weeks and had to pay the money back. Two months after she came back to work, the security office called me, asked me to set up a meeting with her in my office, and they took her badges, had her accounts shut down, and she was put on paid admin leave. Turns out that when they reviewed the file on the timecard fraud, they did a quick credit check, and she was found to be behind in paying one of her bills, but she hadn't reported it, as is required. So she was out for months while they re-investigated and re-adjudicated her clearance.

infractions such as physical violence and/or stalking at the workplace (and I have witnessed both and felt sorry for the Supervisors of those employees), various levels of insubordination, misuse of government credit cards and/or property, etc. In some cases, the documentation was arduous to get approval for the longer periods of administrative leave beyond a day, week, or 2 weeks (for obvious "due process" reasons).

...the paperwork for those situations! Totally necessary for due process reasons, but what a mess.

They have been trying to train them for these jobs, but they are simply not too bright.

…of your religion, none of this is new. Fed employees have always been able to display religious items, take part in prayer groups or religious studies/groups during break time, pray, etc.

In nearly 40 years, I’ve never seen a problem with it.

…and then harassment claims will be filed.

If by “in your face” you mean the proselytizing part.

christian... or at least, monotheistic? I think there was one throwaway towards Judaism. But I'd lay odds me hanging a protective Pentacle on the office wall would NOT be judged as "correct"... and I'd be told to stop trying to sell paganism. This is all going to come back and bite them in the ass some day in the future... hopefully, the near future. I think the masses are getting tired of people using the religion excuse to not do whatever their job says they should do. Scapegoating religion only goes so far before the majority starts rejecting the religion completely, IMO. Especially when you've got a holy roller coworker intent on "saving your soul" and getting you to their church some Saturday or Sunday morning. Or, worse, a supervisor who feels everyone *must* start off the work day with groups prayer. Talk about a threatening work environment! Wars have been fought over which religion was the "one, true, only way" and I can see workplace violence centered around religion happening as people just flat out reject it all. If one could say we're in the early stages of the new Dark Ages, perhaps critical thinking (and believer restraints) might be the New Enlightenment.

Oh wait, opiate.

and one important takeaway in my mind is proselytizing at work will lead to deaths.

Just slowly went off the deep end trying to convert everyone. We had to let him go (so did his wife). He had been a good worker for years, so we kept him on the books at minimum wage so he would not lose his health insurance, but he was not allowed back in the office. We kept him for 6 months until he found a new job.