View Full Version : Checkout These Numbers
BMT (RIP)
02-26-2013, 07:05
There are about 4,100 federally funded civilian employees working on the Infantry and Armor post.
The civilian workers are represented by the American Federation of Government Employees, with everyone considered part of the bargaining unit, but only about 900 of them dues-paying members
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2013/02/25/2397576/benning-says-tough-choices-ahead.html#storylink=cpy
BMT
Badger52
02-26-2013, 08:19
That ratio sounds about right. AFGE, like most unions, reflects that if you are a manager/supervisor you are evil. Otherwise, you're part of the "bargaining unit" whether you pay dues or want anything to do with them or not.
Alot of times they're simply a hurdle that must be jumped, and if you give them a knee as you go over it's ok too. When a 2nd gate officer is posted with M4 in overwatch of the guy/gal checking ID's, they're the ones that protest because they think someone might get their panties or sensibilities in a wad. But their numbers look better that way.
I was told by the local's president one time, in a meeting on the record in front of a mixed collection of grades, that they didn't really care about me "and your [my] kind" because I was in a "profession" and regarded as a white-collar employee and probably made enough money. Sound familiar?
(The d**khead later went on to the National machine so he apparently had the kool-aid part down pat.)
American Federation of Government Employees....They are oxygen thieves! They do nothing to help and usually are the dumbest ones in the room in any type of Employee-Management Conflict Resolution event.
I look out for my folks way more than any union rep ever will!
If the furloughs do kick in and continue through the end of the fiscal year, federal civilian workers would lose about 20 percent of their pay. Soldiers are exempt from the cuts.
Read more here: http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2013/02/25/2397576/benning-says-tough-choices-ahead.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy
So, workers lose 20% of "their" pay! How much do the managers lose? Just sayin'
So, workers lose 20% of "their" pay! How much do the managers lose? Just sayin'
I am set to lose 20% of my management pay as well.
Just sayin'
If we could lose 20% of the Congress, then this sacrifice would be well worth it.
Federal govt-wise, those 22 days for 700k employees add up to around $1.5B - that's a chunk of change.
One has to wonder how much the various levels of govt could save nowadays by allowing telecommuting for as many of its employees as possible - lower salary rqmts, less need for daycare, no associated travel costs or time spent going to/from work, no parking rqmt, etc.
Richard :munchin
FlagDayNCO
02-28-2013, 09:45
Richard, I have to say that enough of the civilian government workforce already telecommutes. There are a lot of empty seats in the offices and so many are at an "appointment" or "working remotely" that it becomes a challenge to get anything accomplished. With all the benes and perks that get attached to these jobs, you may be onto a cost savings idea. Fewer subsidized parking garages, fewer government vehicles, fewer cafeterias, fewer day care centers, and fewer of every nook-and-cranny support operation that is "necessary" for the work force. Just look at how many commuters are not on the road the day of a national holiday.
Badger52
02-28-2013, 10:59
Federal govt-wise, those 22 days for 700k employees add up to around $1.5B - that's a chunk of change.
One has to wonder how much the various levels of govt could save nowadays by allowing telecommuting for as many of its employees as possible - lower salary rqmts, less need for daycare, no associated travel costs or time spent going to/from work, no parking rqmt, etc.
Richard :munchinYou're right sir, it would be a notable piece. A great many places simply don't allow telework as one of the available "alternative work schedules." Lots of places still think of the paradigm of the employee as widget and they want to be able to walk through & count the widgets. The coin that could be saved by allowing, for example, many in the IT profession to telework, even a few days/week, would be notable.
Oh, the AFGE might have to answer to the snowplow or forklift driver why telework doesn't work for them. All victims should be equal, of course.
ddoering
02-28-2013, 12:44
Federal govt-wise, those 22 days for 700k employees add up to around $1.5B - that's a chunk of change.
One has to wonder how much the various levels of govt could save nowadays by allowing telecommuting for as many of its employees as possible - lower salary rqmts, less need for daycare, no associated travel costs or time spent going to/from work, no parking rqmt, etc.
Richard :munchin
If you take 20% of every welfare/food stamp recipient's take home how much would that be. Sounds "fair" to me.
Our "represntative" system was set up at a time when a horse was the quickest way to get a message, or a voice, anywhere.
Technology has changed dramatically, they should use it, stay home and meet as a group, occasionally.
Hagel (Nebraska) hasn't lived in Nebraska for ten years !
:munchin