-
Posts
3097 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by The Original Greaser Bob
-
-
11 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:
if those two send an email promising 8 months severance if I reply with “Resign” and stop showing up/dialing into work, there is zero chance this promise will be met.
If that happens, we can discuss.
Doesn't look like any promises made.
-
5 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:
Elon offered 3-6 months of severances for those who were hit by the main Twitter layoff in 2023. Elon then gave them 1 month a few months later. Dared them to sue.
Not really. He said he'd to honor Twitter's prior severance plan and then broke an oral promise to do so. That case that attempted to say that the promise created an ERISA plan.
I'm not assuming that anything is offered until the employees are provided some written document that promises the specific pay.
Is Trump a liar and full of shit? Agree with you.
Am I going to automatically assume that any deal an employee takes is unenforceable? No.
Because I haven't seen the deal.
-
43 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:
Most likely the best workers would take the offer because they're confident they can find employment elsewhere. The worst of the worst are the ones who will stay. The people you mention who are mailing it in.
I've never heard of voluntary buyouts being a benefit from an efficiency standpoint. And as a citizen I only care about the efficiency. Personally I don't care about govt costs especially as I get older.
The benefit of the buyout is usually morale.
This administration is not concerned about efficiency - they might be if they end up deciding that the particular agency should sitll exist with a skeleton crew.
-
2 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:
I don't have any problem with the general idea of a buyout but I don't think the best method is for the top of the organization to offer buyouts to 100% of the workforce. Seems a bit manic to do so.
Not wanting to sidetrack too much, but it's kind of hard to limit the offer without it raising possible discrimination claims.
You want the people who most want out to leave. You want the people who want to stay to stay.
I was a fed for eight years. Some very fine people. But some people that are mailing it in, just like any large organization.
-
2 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:
The win-win for Trump is if many take the offer and he fires them without paying them.
Okay, and then maybe he'll kill all the jews, too.
But that's not the debate I'm interested in. That's more of a leopards eating faces kind of thing. And I'll leave it to that thread in a couple of weeks.
-
6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:
That offer came anonymously from an office that has no authority to offer it and in a way completely out of line with how the federal government handle any personnel action. A better question is why anyone would think it is valid.
I guess I'm focused more on the actual idea of the buyout than the "validity" of any communication.
If it purports to come from management, then any employee relying on it would likely have a case for detrimental reliance.
I will agree that there is probably no limit to how much Trump can fuck someone over. I'm more focused on all the things that we clearly have evidence that he's fucked someone over.
-
1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:
Why do you believe that Trump and Elon would stick to their word? Past history says they don’t.
Do you have any evidence that either offered a severance package or an exit incentive and then didn't pay it? Certainly that would be easy to find for Elon.
This is completely win-win for the Trump Administration.
-
Just don't fuck with the unfrosted brown sugar cinnamon Pop Tarts.
-
I'm curious why many of you think that the retiring feds would get screwed out of their payment? Tiny price to pay to shrink the payroll -- most of the younger folks would find another job and be more likely to vote Republican next cycle. Congress would gladly fund it.
-
1
-
-
Something tells me I'm the only guy on this board whose primary thought is "I wish Clinton had offered me this buyout when he got elected and they were talking about the government closing and I was ready to jump ship from the feds."
-
25 minutes ago, 'stache said:
Fired for lack of loyalty to the regime. Totally normal for a modern western democracy.
Loss of trust is a perfectly acceptable non-discriminatory business reason to terminate someone.
When it's based on a legitimate belief in conduct which reflects the same.
We will see what the new standard is.
-
Never doubt the bravery of Mike Pence and his wisdom in picking his battles!
And if you don't like RFK, Jr., you're probably a fattie.
-
2 hours ago, bolverk said:
The fed employees are given 1 week to decide.
Interesting. In the private sector, you have 45 days to consider and seven days to revoke after signature if over 40 IF you are also signing a release. (OWBPA)
I week to decide but don't have to sign a release. That doesn't seem like a problem.
Whether the program is funded properly or legal is a separate issue.
-
13 hours ago, The Ace of Aces said:
No one should reply to that email without taking to a lawyer first.
-
So many companies routinely pare their employee rolls through RIFs whenever they need to meet their numbers. The gentler, better ones offer buyouts with various exit incentives.
Of all the stuff going on, a massive exit incentive plan seems like one of the least problematic things this guy is doing. Devil's in the details, but you don't have to fight voluntary resignations in courts/federal arbitration, unlike RIFs and firings.
-
11 hours ago, SaucyJack said:
wwjd
Get a 3D printer and multiply the fish sticks.
-
2 hours ago, David Dennison said:
This country is run by children.
My three-year-old grandson would replace most of the joint chiefs of staff with transformers but he wouldn't be petulant about it.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:
Clarence, I think we should go after Loving vs. Virginia next. What do you think?
Me being a chalupa and my wife being a redhead, Loving doesn't apply, correct?
-
11 minutes ago, HOOKEM4 said:
Give it a few weeks when it actually hits them. They will all suffer and then try to make you feel sorry for them. It is astounding how many of them didn't read the doctrine and are now just taken aback. I read it and thought, I really really don't like it and it will effectively end America, but I will survive. I feel dumb trying to fight for those that will suffer only to have them call me stupid all while I was trying to help them. Sometimes you have to let your kids touch the stove.
I think there are enough people who are going to suffer who voted the right way to keep all of us busy.
-
5 minutes ago, Satchel said:
Shrink it to what, specifically?
When the libtard tears dry up?
You're asking me to try to figure out what these psychopaths want?
-
3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:
Do it with 3-4 months severance then
They've probably done the math, and they don't get enough takers unless they go more than six months.
-
I love wasting my time on these boards, but the vile pieces of shit that are doing Trumpian bidding sure are making it easy to consider spending more time in contemplation and actual engagement in service on behalf of the least of our brothers.
-
3
-
-
So now we're all just brown-skinned bit players in Yellowstone, it seems.
-
1
-
-
Or as mdmost says, replace them with true believers.
ICE activity/raids
in Cloak Room
Posted