Replies

Blue-ribbon commissions, Washington Post investigative reports and even the Office of Personnel Management itself have concluded that public managers, faced with literally year-long or more crusades to rid themselves of the indolent and incompetent, simply don't try.

I personally witnessed one federal manager who spent nearly a year documenting excessive abuses of the agency's phone system by a person on his staff. The manager prepared an air tight case against the employee, but the net result of the effort was that the person was simply reassigned to another position--where the abuses continued. The employee has since been promoted. Another obstacle facing federal managers is that there are unions for government employees that are quick to defend their members. The grievance process can be very painful for managers, and that is another reason why they tend to avoid disputes with employees.

The old saying from those of us who have worked for the Feds is; "It takes an "ACT OF CONGRESS" to fire a Federal Employee".

Those who support a Federal program, those who say they CAN be fired, and have been, aren't projecting the "norm" that happens in the REAL WORLD with regard to Federal Employee's.

HOWEVER,... I might support a Federal Employee Program **IF** there is a clause that they CAN BE DISMISSED IMMEDIATELY upon failing to do their duty!! HOWEVER,... The Unions are EXTREMELY savvy at getting around the RULES. So, we are left again, with "It takes an ACT OF CONGRESS to fire a Federal Employee".

So we are more inclined to go with Murkowski's Congressional bill. Have the FEDS oversee the employee's. Pay them better,.. but have stricter rules, and FIRE them if they don't do their job. Better training, remedial training,..etc.