Posted on 01/14/2017 7:20:09 AM PST by george76
As part of its broader package of rules for the 115th Congress, the House of Representatives revived the Holman Rule, a provision that allows House members to propose amendments to spending bills that closely manage federal agencies. These "retrenchment" amendments can affect details down to individual federal salaries and the number of staff in an office.
...
The restoration of the Holman Rule means merely that when it comes to firing a federal employee, the president's signature on an act of Congress can do it. It doesn't seem extraordinary that the heads of the federal government should be able to dismiss their staff. Up to now, firing even the worst federal bureaucrat has been very, very difficult, so difficult that voters no longer control the agencies they employ and that govern their lives.
...
Given that the rule requires an act of Congress, it will be invoked only to deal with the most egregious cases. But there is an abundance of cases in which the bureaucracy and arbitrators cover up for their colleagues.
Take Elizabeth Rivera of Puerto Rico, for example, who was restored to her job at the Department of Veterans Affairs after pleading guilty to involvement in an armed robbery. Her union not only thwarted managers' attempts to fire her, but even successfully won back pay for the period when she had been off the job. As part of its argument for her reinstatement, officials of the American Federation of Government Employees pointed out that her manager at the agency is also a convicted sex offender.
...
Internal Revenue Service employees who deleted Lois Lerner's emails when they were under congressional subpoena were not fired.
...
VA managers who stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from their agency could not be fired.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
I can see how the rule reducing someone’s pay to $1 would be useful
I don’t buy into the bill of attainder counter argument. Appropriations begin in the House and the House should have full authority to decline payment for substandard services be it to an individual, an entire agency or a contractor.
The president should be able to fire anyone, as well.
Government employee unions are the most powerful in the nation and one of their main functions is to protect employees who don’t perform, who are unable, who are criminal, who won’t follow instructions, etc. And they do a great job of keeping them on the job. I suspect a goodly percentage of government employees at all levels should not be working for the taxpayers.
And, be sure, they will work against Donald Trump as they have done against all Republican Presidents and Department leaders.
Unionized against the citizen - their supposed boss.
Unions in the public sector are a travesty.
Drain the swamp.
Pay for the flood damage from the Gold King Mine.
Yep - I was in civil service for 15 years and had cause to fire two - the "easy" one only took 10 months and two prior years of documentation....
At any time, for any reason. Without recourse. This whole notion that governement employment means “job for life” has to end. Instead, government employees need to believe their continued employment is in the hands of The People, as managed through through their elected leaders.
If this means breaking the government employees unions, then break away!
Nice thing about this problem the de-unionization of FedGov could be accomplished with an executive order. Since it was JFK’s executive order that allowed it. Even FDR thought government unions were a terrible idea.
Though I doubt if Trump will do this “direct assault” on them right away. The “Holman Rule” has a nice indirect “Akido-like” approach to the problem
Whoever controls the federal employee pay computer controls the federal employees.
Turnabout is fair play.
Make every pay increase a pay decrease.
Subtract travel pay from regular pay.
Blame everything on computer glitches.
When the employee complains, stall them for four years and then tell them they are being uncooperative and should perhaps be fired.
Turnabout is fair play.
Federal employees do this to their fellow citizens.
You should give that second thought.
mark
I wonder why the CLINTON FOUNDATION or CLINTON GLOBAL INITIATIVE didn't offer to help pay for this cleanup ? In the interest of 'aiding' the 'public'.
Its not that hard to get rid of people for cause, the problem is that many managers are simply lazy and don't know how to build a case.
Getting rid of poor performers is a challenge because many agencies have agreed to binding arbitration in their union contracts.
I believe this should be illegal because the government does not have the authority to negotiate away its responsibility to manage its workforce.
Imagine if every congressmen was given an assignment by the RNC to each locate 100 items of government bad regulations, corrupt government employees, waste, etc. These lists would then be vetted by both the associated committee in the House and by the Trump administration. Then eliminated according to this process.
For every one of these identified and eliminated, a given congressman would get a bonus of reelection support from the RNC.
For every item greater than the first 100, they would get a bonus-and-a-half. Over 200, double bonus. Over 300 triple bonus.
It wouldn’t actually matter how the congressman found out about the abuses. Complaints from constituents would actually serve a very useful purpose.
This would be ridiculously cost effective in reducing the size and over-regulation by government.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.