Defense workers begin receiving furlough notices

[Redfairen]

Source: Washington Post

The Department of Defense has begun delivering furlough notices to civilian employees, setting in motion a chain of actions that will result in hundreds of thousands of Defense workers losing time on their jobs.

Some 750,000 Defense employees face up to 11 days of furlough beginning July 8 owing to automatic budget cuts mandated by sequestration. Although most other federal departments have managed to avoid furloughs, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced May 14 that the Pentagon has concluded that it cannot make the necessary cuts without them.

The distribution of the notices of proposed furloughs, which began Tuesday, is scheduled to be completed by June 5.

“To the greatest extent possible, employees will be notified of a furlough in writing, hand-delivered to the employee by the immediate supervisor,” said Navy Cmdr. Leslie Hull-Ryde, a Department of Defense spokeswoman.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2013/05/29/defense-workers-begin-receiving-furlough-notices/

[MADem]

1. Other agencies have already done this.

Treasury, e.g.

It's unfortunate. They probably could have resolved this sequester issue with a single vertical cut, but that would piss off congresscreatures whose districts support that line item.

[SlimJimmy]

2. I agree, it's unfortunate that so many workers have to suffer just because the government

couldn't get their act together. And when I say government, I mean Republicans.

[dkf]

28. It was a bipartisan effort to keep weapons that no one wants.

The Republicans couldn't do it by themselves.

[SlimJimmy]

34. Agreed. It had to be a bi-partisan effort. I just think the Republicans held on to the

notion of zero defense cuts at all, and that is what *partially* led us to the sequester and the much more dramatic cuts to not only defense, but numerous government programs. But your point is well taken.

[24601]

39. Don't be too quick on that judgment because it is inaccurate. I am a DoD civil servant. My

organization, a Defense Agency, has at least three different civilian pay (CIVPAY) line items. Over the past 6 months, our leadership has kept us informed every step of the way. We have sufficient finds in each CIVPAY line item to reduce expenditures by the amount required by sequester - and still have enough to avoid any furloughs.

The Administration - not Congress - made the decision to require our leadership to furlough us anyway.
Why? Because they don't like government employees? Not at all, it's strictly a partisan decision to affect as many people as possible in order to mislead everyone and instead blame Congress.

Not every DoD organization is in the same situation. The Departments of the Army and the Air Force do not have enough money to avoid furloughs and in those cases, Congressional action would in fact be required. But there are multiple CIVPAY line items throughout DoD. Many Defense Agencies/Components, including the Navy and Marine Corps have enough funds remaining to not furlough anyone.

If this was fiscally necessary, I'd say so and wouldn't complain. But when I know that the Administration is unnecessarily ordering furloughs for political effect, it would be disingenuous to blame the whole thing on Congress. It also has the potential for major blowback - just picture DoD Component Chiefs testifying under oath before Congressional committees that many furloughs could have been avoided but were directed. There goes the 2014 congressional elections.

What is my recourse? I can appeal the furlough to the Merit Systems Protection Board (not a DoD element), file an ethics complaint with the DoD IG for false statements; and, I can request my Representative (Defense Sub-Committee Chairman on the House Appropriations Committee) investigate the Secretary of Defense for ordering unnecessary furloughs. Unlikely that I'll prevail, but worth the effort.

[SlimJimmy]

41. Have you read my responses in this thread? I support those who work for DoD and have many friends

who will in fact be furloughed due to the sequester.

[24601]

42. I read it - but you placed all the blame on the Republicans and it just isn't so. The precise point

I was making is that even after reducing CIVPAY line items as required by sequester, many organizations have sufficient funds to not furlough personnel but have been directed to anyway.

I received my notice today of furlough of up to 11 days. I don't blame either Democrats or Republicans in Congress. The Secretary of Defense ordered the furlough to happen even though it's not necessary. I do not have the information to indicate whether the President ordered it or gave the Secretary discretion.

That said, Congress does share blame for some of the furloughs - not ours, but in those organizations that lack enough CIVPAY funds to keep everyone working.

But blaming only Republicans is not honest. Blaming only Congress is not honest.

My next step? I'm investigating whether my furlough can be appealed to the United States Merit Systems Protection Board. From their website (www.mspb.gov), here is the MSPB Mission:

"Protect the Merit System Principles and promote an effective Federal workforce free of Prohibited Personnel Practices."

MSPB jurisdiction includes furloughs of 30 days or less. It should be interesting.

[SlimJimmy]

43. My understanding is that DoD could not make the budget with the dollars they had left for the

year. The Secretary of Defense apparently had little discretion in doing the furloughs. As to Congress, they had ample opportunity to rectify the sequester and failed to do so. They knew about this train wreck more than a year ago and waited until the last second to address it. The Republicans *could* have budged on tax increases for the rich, but held firm. That was the point I was making.

[24601]

45. The biggest misunderstanding is that DoD has a big aggregated civilian pay fund from which

we are all paid.

The reality is that DoD Components - primarily the 4 Services (Army, Marines, Navy, Air Force), 16 Defense Agencies (Defense Commissary Agency, Defense Logistics Agency, etc.) and 7 Defense Field Activities (DoD Education Activity, TRICARE Management Activity, etc) have their own specifically appropriated and authorized budgets. Further, there are multiple Civilian Pay Line items within each that relate to the program functions against which the employee is assigned.

When the Defense Information Systems Agency runs out if money for its civilians on billets funded by the Information System Security Program, the SECDEF can't just take & use leftover money from the DoD Education Activity civilian pay line item. Such reprogramming actions have legal restrictions and Congressional Committee approval is required at different threshold levels.

So today, the Navy and Marines, even with the sequester reductions, have enough money in their civilian pay line items to pay all their civilians. The Army and Air Force do not and will run out of money before the end of the fiscal year, 30 September.

My organization has three major civilian pay line items and our General managed the money carefully. Even with the reduction due to the sequester, we have enough money to avoid any furloughs. From the beginning of the fiscal year, he has kept us informed every step of the way. He has, however, been directed to furlough employees anyway. That order came from the Secretary of Defense. Whether the actual decision was made by the Secretary or the President, this was a unilateral decision made exclusively by the Executive Branch.

Congress is not involved in this furlough decision. Via the continuing resolutions, Congress appropriated & authorized enough money and the President signed it into law.

Note that I not claiming that all furloughs are fiscally unnecessary. Yes, some services/agencies/activities do not have sufficient money - but the administration is ordering far more than is required.

[SlimJimmy]

51. Agreed. And thanks for the detailed explanation.

Note that I not claiming that all furloughs are fiscally unnecessary. Yes, some services/agencies/activities do not have sufficient money - but the administration is ordering far more than is required.

Got it.

[groundloop]

3. One last attempt to damage the economy

I suspect that the publicans are relatively pleased with the sequester (except of course for defense cuts), as it will undoubtedly slow the economy. And beyond all of that, it really sucks for the thousands upon thousands of people who are being screwed over by the right wing's refusal to negotiate.

[Andy823]

4. GOP's new plan

A plan to make those unemployment numbers stop going down! The whole sequester was about trying to once again tank the economy, they just hate the fact things were getting better, and then try and blame it all on president Obama. All the scandals have been to try and take the "good" news about the economy, lower deficits, etc. out of the public eye.

Seem like once again it'a all bout destroying thing instead of fixing them!

[AgingAmerican]

5. It's the "Drown the US Government in a bathtub" thing

Of course the GOP love the sequester. Most of the things it cuts they have been trying to kill for decades.

[xtraxritical]

6. Finally, some good news from the sequester, slash DoD! Way to go, yeah!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

8. Don't hurt the employees, though. Cut unnecessary programs, some contracting support.

But don't cheer the fact that government employees are being targeted.

[NutmegYankee]

9. Way to support hurting families!

Sick.

[xtraxritical]

11. Oh, it's ok you just bleed the taxpayers and rah rah for imperialism, talk about welfare.

[NutmegYankee]

14. Paying Government employees is not welfare.

Sad that you don't understand the difference.

[Thor_MN]

46. Paying a person to provide a needed good or service is not welfare

Paying a person for something that provides no value...

I feel for anyone losing income, been there, done that. However, we spend far too much on "Defense" and reining in that horse is going to hurt.

[NutmegYankee]

47. Oh it has value.

Just not to you. Oddly I see this opinion expressed on the right frequently, usually for the Depts they hate.

I remain disgusted.

[Thor_MN]

49. And this value that you perceive is what exactly?

What value does our nation get for the vast overspending that we do in the name of "defense"? Does anyone really think that the majority of the countries of the world are going to band together to attack us?

[SlimJimmy]

18. I have quite few friends that work for DoD in some capacity or another. What you are

cheering is a 20% cut in pay to many families that can't afford it.

[former9thward]

20. So you don't want any defense cuts???

The DoD is bloated beyond belief. Any cuts in the defense budget will ultimately mean less employees somewhere. I support major cuts in defense and that will mean hundreds of thousands of employees will lose their jobs.

[SlimJimmy]

21. I think we can cut programs without sacrificing the GS-4s and GS-5s that

make up the vast support network for our troops in areas such as training and security. I have quite a few friends in DoD, and I can assure you that first, they are not rich or on some kind of gravy train, and second that they work as hard as anyone for their pay. Your callousness is noted.

[former9thward]

22. Cut programs???

People work in and for programs that will be cut. So people will be cut. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan worked "as hard as anyone for their pay". Is that the standard? Maybe we should have keep fighting in Iraq and never get out of Afghanistan so we can keep them working. What DoD programs can be cut without people being cut? Be specific. You support for a bloated DoD is noted.

[kysrsoze]

29. Unfortunately, it has to happen somewhere. Now...a shift to other infrastructure work

... would be a good substitute which results in improvements over instruments (no consumers except possibly foreign weapons buyers) of war would be a very good thing. The same thing needs to happen in the medical field - jobs to shift from insurance fluff to actual healthcare delivery.

Again, you can't cut the defense budget, or any budget without eliminating some jobs. It's not all $10,000 hammers.

[SlimJimmy]

32. You really have it bad for the DoD, don't you? I read elswhere that you want this because you are

anti-war. Dramatically cutting hundreds of thousands of people out of work will not stop a single war - you know that right?

[xtraxritical]

35. F--- DoD go DoT

[former9thward]

37. No I don't know that.

Lets try it and see what happens. We have been doing it the other way for decades and it has led to endless war.

[SlimJimmy]

38. If we decimated the DoD today, and laid off 700,000 workers. The United States government

could still declare war the next day. The only consequence would be the need to rebuild the military in a hurry. I use WWII as my best example. The US literally went into hundreds of millions of dollars of debt in the buildup after we declared war on Japan.

Cutting the DoD does nothing to stop war, nothing.

[NutmegYankee]

23. You want to lay off hundreds of thousands of people?

And with the ongoing recession most will not find comparable pay and benefits and their families will suffer.

Why exactly are you here? Seriously?

[former9thward]

24. Why exactly are you here? Seriously?

You want to keep an out of control DoD budget that inevitably leads to wars just because people work for it? You are ok with thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people getting killed all over the world just so the DoD can keep a bloated budget and employ people for jobs that do nothing for society. Yes why are YOU here?

[NutmegYankee]

26. Because I believe in Keynesian economics.

Because I like strong unions. Because I want a strong Middle class. Because I want my fellow citizens to have good jobs. And your plan is anti-all of that.

[former9thward]

27. I am anti-war.

You, not so much. That says it all.

[Hugin]

31. Have you ever heard of reimbursable programs?

Many DOD civilians work on them and many of them are non- defense related.

Guess where the biggest cuts are being taken.

In addition THE.WHOLE.REST.OF.THE.GOVERNMENT.IS.TAKING.CUTS!

To include the social programs that can least afford cuts of any size.(to include social security and medicare, which all Federal employees pay into and therefore reduced) So, if you think being pro-sequester is being anti-war and suffering you are sadly mistaken.

[kysrsoze]

30. The jobs need to shift to other industries. Enough money has been wasted on weapons and war.

[xtraxritical]

36. ^POINT^

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

7. Had my first furlough day this past Friday, May 24.

[itsrobert]

25. I have been on some Army and Navy bases

and on Holiday weekends, they almost every time stretched a 3 day holiday weekend out to a 4 day weekend for the active duty folks. The civilian employees were encouraged to take leave on these days because there was not much work to do with 75 percent of the base given an extra day off. On Air Force bases, a holiday weekend with the exception of Thanksgiving and Christmas was rarely turned into a 4 day weekend.

[4dsc]

10. 11 days off isn't going to kill anyone

This is a good move because we do have a bloated and wasteful defense department. These people are living on gravy street and its time they experience the real world.

[bitchkitty]

12. 11 days of pay is a lot

for working families. I'm sure a secretary for the DoD is fairly well paid, but what if he or she is the sole breadwinner? It's a lot, especially if you've got a family.

[Hugin]

16. Gravy Street?

I'll pass your sympathies on to their dependents.

[SlimJimmy]

19. So you think a GS-6 making 35k a year can take a 20% hit in pay, and that's gravy?

What planet do you live on?

[24601]

48. I received my furlough notice today. It was delivered electronically - an email with a hyperlink

to an internal web page with a .pdf of a signed memorandum.

I'm not really happy about it - especially since it's not necessary (see my earlier posts). It will feel like 20% from July 7 through September 21; however, as a percentage of annual pay it's 11/260, or 4.23%.

[SlimJimmy]

50. I guess that was my point. A GS-5 who is just getting by will feel the effect of a 20% cut for

those three months. I'm afraid it might take quite a bit of time for them to catch up on the lost pay. It is my understanding that all furlough notices must have been hand delivered by their immediate supervisor, and signed. Am I wrong about that?

[24601]

52. I believe the DoD Spokesman said that was the ideal way. We certainly know it was coming because our

chain of command, local supervisors through top General at our agency, really have been transparent about out budgets and what is being directed at what level.until later

The actual notice came into my (official) computer email at 3:35 AM (EST - I'm in Tampa) Friday morning. I didn't come in quite that early and my supervisor had seen his cc of my notification and called me (we are in different buildings) to ensure I saw it.

Yesterday's notice was actually that they propose to furlough me. The requirement is that this is delivered to me no less than 30 days before the furlough would begin. Then there is a 2nd notice that has to be given that the furlough is in effect.

What I received yesterday was generic and didn't even have my name on it. It was a memo signed by our Deputy Associate Director of HR. To view/print it, the email has a hyperlink that takes us to a web page. When we hit the button to see it, it records the date and time we view the notification. I don't have any problem with the mechanism because it's a good way to create an electronic record of receipt and we are scattered all over the place Defense Agencies have liaison officers to all the Combatant Commands. I hang my hat with & support the Headquarters, US Special Operations Command on MacDill AFB. Not having a Special Ops background, I have to admit how much I'm in awe of my uniformed colleagues. A large number have served multiple combat tours and many have to use this headquarters time to get the surgeries to try and fix the wear & tear to their bodies.

Central Command Hqs is a mile or two down the street. They are SadCom and we are HappyCom. The "Core Staff" civilians for both commands are Air Force Civil Servants. The Air Force really doesn't have the money to avoid furlough and the staffs affected. Other folks here, like the Department of Energy and Defense Threat Reduction Agency LNOs, are not going to be furloughed.

[SlimJimmy]

54. Thanks again for the great info. It brings everything into better focus.

[24601]

55. You're welcome. I think we are better served getting the facts out and understanding who actually

did/does what.

There are all kinds of puzzling twists to this. For example, DoD Instruction 1400.25 governs management of civilians. The section governing this defines furloughs of less than 30 days as an "adverse action", and of course this isn't supposed to be characterized that way.

So, I believe that an appeal based on the due process prerequisites for adverse actions, coupled with the fact that the money is actually available in the the affected CIVPAY line items, may make for interesting appeals.

If my agency says "no - it was directed by SECDEF", appealing that to the US Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) puts the disposition out of political reach. My intuition is that my agency is doing what was directed but won't be at all unhappy if the MSPB overrules the furlough.

MSPB really exists in part precisely to keep politics out of the civil service and jealously guard their independence and quasi-judicial authorities, so I believe also that they likely don't really care if the SECDEF wanted to maximize furloughs to demonstrate a wider-reaching effect.

In the meantime, we are cutting back our family budget. Our oldest heads to college in the fall and, at noon tomorrow, our other will move to be a HS senior. And my wife is having open heart surgery in nine days, so she will be out of action during recovery the rest of the summer. Her prognosis is very good - surgical risk is much lower than the risk of not operating.

Both of the kids have jobs for the summer.

Of course, if those guys at either Powerball or Florida lottery get their acts together, (AKA self-imposed tax for the math-challenged), these issues will not really matter.

We have some short-term challenges, but in the bigger scheme of things, we recognize that we are in better shape than many. I believe understandably, work isn't #1 on my mind right now. DU reading/posting is kind of my diversion from time to time.

[SlimJimmy]

56. You have brought clarity to this subject, and I for one, appreciate it. As I've previously stated,

I have a number of friends who work for DoD. Although I too work for the federal government, and as such have a basic understanding of these issues, my position has not been effected by the sequester.

Please accept my best wishes for your wife during both her surgery, and her recovery.

[24601]

57. Thank you for the good wishes. Friday we head out from Tampa and her surgery

is scheduled for Monday, June 10th at the Cleveland Clinic. Dr. Eric Roselli is the Surgeon and he's done about 1500 of these. He's also on YouTube discussing the procedure -

In our case he's not touching the valve, just replacing the portion of the Ascending Aorta with the aneurysm. We met with him on May 23rd, the 3rd day of the pre-op workup. He's also a nice guy in person and easily connected.

Keeping your sense of humor really helps deal with the stress. During the three-day pre-op, Cleveland Clinic repeated every test she ever had and added a few new ones. Wednesday (May 22nd) was completely taken up by a Heart Catheterization. It really kicks your butt - but nothing compared to the open heart procedure coming up.

All day she had a bright yellow wrist band that said "FALL RISK" and everyone was very careful. Thursday morning, we were waiting for the hotel shuttle. She stood up and tripped over her bag, or shoes or baggy PJ pants. Catching her fall on her arms, it continued to hurt all day and she mentioned it to Dr. Roselli. So one of the best heart surgeons in the country, maybe the in the world, told her to get her arm checked out at the ER. We did, it's a very mild break of the radial head (the kind that you don't cast or set - just use a sling). So she also was on Percocet for about 5 days. It doesn't affect getting prepped for the surgery.

BTW, our opinion so far is that the Cleveland Clinic is awesome. We also did a surgical consult at Tampa General. Their proposal was a slightly more complicated procedure and she agreed with Cleveland's assessment.

It does take us away from home for the surgery. After the surgery, she'll spend 5-7 days in the hospital and another 2-3 in Cleveland before being cleared to travel home.

We are taking it in stride. The folks at work (at Hqs USSOCOM) are great. There's a lot going on, but it was "whatever time or other support you need", no exceptions.

[SlimJimmy]

58. Excellent video. I especially liked the failure rate for this type of procedure: zero point four

percent. That's awesome, and am sure is good news for your family. I also agree that this surgeon seems to be extremely well versed in this procedure. Clearly he has performed literally tens of hundreds of them with great success.

I think you and your wife have made an excellent decision in this case, and again offer you my best wishes.

[quadrature]

13. a chance to seek out employment that benefits society .nt

nt

[24601]

53. Not sure what specifically what you mean. I am allowed to work as a wal-mart greeter during my

furlough days. I believe however that positions providing goods and services to the government are prohibited by the ethics rules - as are any jobs that are politically partisan, like for a DNC phone-bank.

Jobs that reflect poorly (porn star) or involve illegal activity (marijuana distributor) are highly discouraged and could result in loss of our civil service employment.

But if your comment was just a mean snark about people who spend a career in DoD, you are entitled to your bigoted position and many of us have or will put our lives on the line to defend your right ignore history.

Some of the most devastating conflicts the US has fought have been when we were unprepared after we reduced defense. The trend is that we have avoided wars for which we were prepared.

I'm leading the parade on the issue of reforming defense, especially procurement. But I have little patience for anyone who thinks that across the board reductions is a smart way to do it. I have no patience for those who reduces 40% of DoD's intelligence capability on the 1990s but then acted surprised that we were surprised in 2001.

[Hugin]

15. K&R

Wow, just, wow... The replies in this thread are really something.

Now, I know the old guard of DU is really gone.

[quakerboy]

17. In a more ideal world

A few of these employees would just let Halliburton and Xe and the others know that they would be examining the books and criminally charging anyone who had cheated the DOD, and alakazam, there would be plenty of money back in the budget for everyone to stay employed as much as ever.

OF course, in a more ideal world, most of these DOD employees would be with Justice or EPA or any of a dozen other agencies, tracking down and holding corporations and banks to the law, and none of this would ever have been an issue

[forestpath]

33. Disgusting that employees are forced to pay for the the spineless showboating of

hypocritical politicians.

[lynne]

40. Welcome to the world of the private sector -

- I was "furloughed" three years ago and lost 6 months work before finding a part-time job. My husband was "furloughed" and my son was "furloughed" twice all due to budget reductions.

I would have gladly taken an 11 day furlough. Hell, even 11 weeks. This griping over losing 11 days is laughable. I live in the DC area, it's impacting people I know. They're moaning and complaining and I just smile and nod my head and say "Welcome to my world".

[wickerwoman]

44. Sorry for your experiences,

but they're not an excuse to minimise other peoples' misfortunes.

Federal government employees were furloughed in 1995, 2010 and 2011. It's not a new phenomenon for them either.

I was out of work for four years. Does that mean I get to "smile and nod my head" at your "laughable" six months?