This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Does anyone know, or have access to information about how many Federal employees have been furloughed? I'm hearing a lot about the Dept of ED because of my sister who worked there, and she has told me that everyone else she's talking to says they are going to be let go soon, but I can't tell if that's true or just people trying to make her feel better. For what it's worth, I live in an area replete with Federal workers--like every other person, it seems. There is a lot of anger and frustration, but not much clarity. So far, it seems like Dept of ED and USAID have had the most dramatic cuts, but people from DHS and Transport are claiming they will lose their jobs 'any day now.'
I presume the employees know more than me, but it also seems like most people don't actually know anything. I also have the sense that there is special malice being heaped on Dept of Ed people that the others aren't experiencing.
Curious if anyone has any good sources on the bigger picture of how many cuts there have been in total.
I have a family member working in HHS. From February:
The prediction was correct, and they put all their probationary employees on admin leave for a month. Apparently switching from a contractor to an FTE spot still confers probationary status, so this included some 10+ year former postdocs who are now being asked to come back.
These probationary firings may or may not have been legal depending on the statutory requirements of firing “for cause.” Some of them have been reversed. Others are still in court. I don’t expect you’ll find good numbers about the number of people fired, because even the government doesn’t seem to be sure.
Either way, supervisors were immediately required to draw up a RIF plan which presumably allows smiting the rest of the workforce. Here is the OPM directive. Plans must be designed to finish by September 30th, though I notice the example plan could be done in June.
This was all before the “5 things” email, which has apparently become a weekly thing now. I assume it’s an attempt to identify “cause” since that’s been a sticking point in the lawsuits. Whether or not it collects any useful information, it’s definitely reminding employees what they have to look forward to.
I don’t know if you’ve ever worked for a company which did a RIF. It’s not fun. Even when you know the date, you still aren’t told any details—even when the next few rungs above you are feeling just as frustrated. The plans are approved at a higher, less personal level.
That’s where almost all federal employees are standing. Anyone hired in the last year has been ambiguously cut, so everyone knows a few. By September 30th, some fraction of the rest will go, too. And that’s if the top management doesn’t think of some other way to move fast and break things.
I have been part of an RIF...a few times, in fact. The difference was they just said, "you're fired. Sign here." There wasn't any will-they/won't-they/when-they. I feel like the "shit-show" part of this is largely on purpose. Make everything so horrible no one will ever come back. Salting the Earth, as it were.
My suspicion is that the part you call a "shit-show" is mostly necessary opsec in an adversarial environment. The bureaucrats are fighting administration goals and if they were made privy to the administration's plans, they'd use that information to defeat the plan (or try to). So there's will-they/won't-they/when-they.
More options
Context Copy link
At my company, there were rumors of a date but no confirmation. When the date came around, they were walking people out one at a time all morning. So there was enough window for speculation.
I agree that it is intentionally slapdash. The uncertainty helps a strategic goal. Everyone who quits is one that doesn’t get severance.
Is that so?
As I understand it, yeah, severance pay is for "involuntary separation."
I'm not sure how that interacts with the administrative leave applied to the probationary hires, though.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
A lot of this is the psychological shock for government workers to find themselves unsure about their futures. Government work has long been understood as a bargain* for the employee: the employee gives up significant salary and upward mobility, and receives in turn a relatively easy job and close to complete job security. You don't make as much money, but you'll never get fired. Current government workers have built their lives around that bargain. They "knew" they were giving up other opportunities, but in exchange they were getting job security.
Now that bargain is being shaken up. Whether anyone has actually been fired or not, they know they aren't wanted, and that their firing might be only a matter of time. This is devastating if you thought you would never be fired.
*One can dispute the accuracy of this bargain, some government workers seem very well paid, but it probably turns into dueling-nit-picking about what the same workers' potential earnings in the private sector would be. Regardless, this bargain is still understood as being in force even if it has factually decayed. Most government workers will tend to compare their careers to the best of their peers in the private sector and find they made less, not to the worst, so even if a government salary is higher overall it still will be perceived as middling.
Yeah, this seems to be largely the case. As a fin-tech worker, the idea of job security is one I can hardly process, but I've been told that easy job and lifetime job security were top reasons for moving to DC. I think also, "there's not actually much work for a PhD in linguistics," is up there. I'm sympathetic to the claims of being terrorized--it seems like the firings are extra confusing and malicious--but I'm a little-shoulder shruggy in terms of losing one's job. It makes me seem like a demon around here. I have to keep up the pretense that I'm sorrowful for all the people. That said, I don't know who's getting fired, so I don't know who to call to make a big scene about how terrible it all is. I've been accused of not being 'curious enough.'
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The IRS announcements were a few weeks ago: a bit under 10% of their current staff (the "probationary" employees) immediately (or at least when the lawsuits shake out) laid off, with a target more like 50% in the long term.
If ever there was a tax season to attempt shenanigans...
... its not this one. All of those IRS agents are now looking to pump up their numbers in order to keep their jobs. Busting Average Joe for some transparently obvious evasion is an easy win for them.
Next year, when the turnover is settled however...
Volunteer with your local Republican Party first. Can’t hurt, might help.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I always keep taxes pretty clean because paying a bit more is worth avoiding the stress of fearing an audit, but this did occur to me as well. Even so my expectation is that within the next few years the IRS gets a big upgrade through AI agents and I don't want those digging into my dodgy filed returns down the road.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The amount matters less than the distribution. Some departments (Education, USAID) are getting hit far, far, far, far more than others. Even in others, cuts are often occurring more at the new-employee level more than the old-employee level, where alternate tactics- such as the early-retirement offers- are being used.
The key point is to look to the employee's relevant secretary. Since DOGE's reigning-in from the 'all employees say what you did' email, the Secretaries appear to have been given primacy in deciding how to approach their workforce.
More options
Context Copy link
Psychological torture also is effective in breaking someone's spirit. And I think that the resistance know in their bones that this time the price they will pay will not be symbolic.
I think that part of Trump strategy is just to teach them learned helplessness
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link