Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 23
Page 2 of 3
Page 2 of 3
Agency Can Reassign Employee--And Fire An Employee Who Refuses to Go
Total Comments: 23
Page 2 of 3
Page 2 of 3
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $12.7463 | +0.0008 | +0.04% |
| F | $12.5956 | +0.0340 | +0.12% |
| C | $10.4853 | -0.3174 | +0.49% |
| S | $12.3632 | -0.4115 | +1.28% |
| I | $14.3592 | -0.2050 | +0.73% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $12.5675 | -0.2638 | +0.63% |
| L 2030 | $12.6930 | -0.2335 | +0.55% |
| L 2020 | $12.9186 | -0.1958 | +0.47% |
| L 2010 | $13.8674 | -0.1008 | +0.25% |
| L Income | $12.8084 | -0.0642 | +0.19% |
January 8, 2009
Search:
Custom Search
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
|
Twitter 
© 2009 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
SOS?
BLM
Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:41 AM
Post Reply
Sounds like the Engineers are up to the Same Old Stuff--and there was something else going on.
After I refused to sign a $2,000,000 modification that had no Statement of Work, they redistributed the work at my field office and I had a choice of separation, unacceptable transfers (to Bagdad or Headquarters), or find my own next job. It was worth the 3-grade reduction to get away from the USACE environment.
directed reassignments
retired
Mon Jun 23, 2008 2:32 PM
Post Reply
I worked at agencies which used directed reassignments to encourage retirements. But when I was leaving (strictly on my own initiative), the reasons were more legitimate: tightening budgets were prompting major reorganizations and down-sizing. Directed reassignments help agencies avoid running RIFs and disrupting even more people. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...
Cost of Turnover
Dod
Mon Jun 23, 2008 2:59 PM
Post Reply
who actually won here? Now the agency must incur the cost of rehiring (turnover does cost), bad PR and the loss of evidently a very good and valued engineer to private industry. So with all their "rules" and "regs" who really won and who lost.
I also agree with the other commenter who said this is bad for families. These mgt bonuses are driving decisions not the human cost. Employees are only as valuable as their next bonus.
Re: Cost of Turnover
DoC
Mon Jun 23, 2008 6:59 PM
Second, there probably was no rehiring involved. I would guess that his position was being abolished due to a reorganization and redistribution of the workload to other localities.
Third, what is bad for a family is the breadwinner allowing himself to be fired from the Govt out of downright stupidity! I doubt he now has an engineering job in private industry since being fired from a Govt position is a very large black mark on a professional record.
I wish him and his family godspeed and good luck in finding another job, but sometimes it's just amazing how some individuals have to learn the basic lessons in life the really hard way.
Re: Cost of Turnover
TSO
Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:11 PM
The employee works for the employer.. in other words, you do what the boss tells you, not the other way around. That seems incredibly obvious but so many people posting here can't seem to figure that out.
Re: Cost of Turnover
DOD
Wed Jun 25, 2008 10:13 AM
To what degree?
If I work for the government does that mean the lead in my office should have more control than the "rules"?
Does the first line supv?
The Dept Head?
The CO?
That is why there are rules. We all work for the taxpayer. Not some petty kingdom builder.
I have taken reassignment when it was because of BRAC, reorganization, AC-76, etc. Once because some idiot thought my job wasn't necessary and I got out on a voluntary reassignment before he started eliminating the job completely. A couple years later I was dragged, kicking and clawing, back when they realized they were losing serious capablilty without the lower level support staff. I am now looking for something in a different command for I am tired of the constant shuffling.
Re: Cost of Turnover
Army
Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:16 AM
That said, has anybody been talking to the younger generation fresh out of college these days?
I am reaching that point where I now know why the experienced, mature Federal employees retire.
Re: Cost of Turnover
dod
Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:33 AM
That being said, it's obvious that the employee is NOT the boss. That's the whole point. The employee has no business telling the organization he doesn't want to work where they want him to just because he doesn't like it.
What's Next??
DOD
Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:29 AM
Post Reply
There is a good chance that we will be in Iraq & Afghanistan, for a long time, no matter who wins the election in November. I also expect the draft to resume sometime after 2009. This really creates serious supply & demand situations. Imagine this being used on the average federal worker!!
Move or be re-moved
USAF
Tue Jun 24, 2008 10:51 AM
Post Reply
Sounds like the old story--mgmt had someone they wanted to get rid of, so they give the person an assignment they can't accept. SOP! that's why workers don't trust management.
Re: Move or be re-moved
dod
Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:14 PM
agency can reassign an employee
NLRB
Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:52 PM
Post Reply
good article. informative. shows employees the limitations on their rights.
Transfer as a way to get rid of someone
DoD
Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:59 PM
Post Reply
I wouldn't count on that MSPB ruling as being the end of the conversation. I had management try to transfer me only a year ago and I fought it. I was told I had to transfer based on a faulty assessment of a work injury I had incurred the year before last. However, the job was less desirable and the hours were worse (all third shift in a 24 hour facility). The pay would have been the same and since it would have been a lateral, the PCS move would not have covered everything. I found a loophole and drove my car right through it.
The only salient word in the whole argument was "management" and that is where I had them. My job is management grade, but I am not a manager. Therefore, the whole "moving managers" thing did not apply. In the year since, they have lost 20% of the people in my particular position group to retirement or to outside jobs. Now they need us and are kissing our butts to keep us happy.
Sometimes, it is good to be the drone.