Posted on 01/08/2019 7:03:41 AM PST by COBOL2Java
They are not being “forced to work”. They can quit any time they want.
Or, they can continue working in anticipation of being paid when the budget passes.
Their choice.
:: the union who is supposed to have your best interests in mind. ::
Ha! Good one. Y’all wyepeepo tickle me.
Or don’t make them work. If they are that valuable, make them “essential”
If you had worked for a corporation, the Feds would have come after them if you didn’t get paid on time for working.
But the government can make you work even if you can’t get paid.
This is an interesting separation of powers case. If the judiciary can order the executive to pay workers without an appropriation, what use is the legislative branch.
I personally think the case should be thrown out but it won’t be and those working and on furlough will be paid in full when a bill is passed and signed by the president.
I hope PDJT refuses to sign any appropriation that doesn’t fully authorize securing the southern boarder with a permanent barrier.
No appropriation? No job. The jobs are gone. Would that make these folks happy?
The level of gullibility never ceases to amaze me. lol
Not 100% true. It takes an act of Congress, after the shutdown is over, to retroactively give them back pay. Which then the President has to sign.
Up to now, that has been the case. But it's not a guarantee.
It is not optional for some agencies. My agency always has money but we are considered essential and if we didn’t have money we would still have to come in.
See. Now you tickled, too.
By the time it gets heard the crisis will be over.
But yeah, if they don’t want to work just let them go.
I remember this coming up in 1978 as a junior guy in the Air Force, and we discussed as the shutdown approached...just loafing off and not really accomplishing anything. ‘Sarge’ told us that would all lead to paperwork, and loss of a stripe. At the time, the bank on base spoke up and said they’d cover our normal paychecks (if any were not there) and I thought that was a pretty positive deal. I doubt if they’d do that today.
But you are correct, if a company was shutdown and forced you to work....the first one to go and screw with the company would be the US gov’t.
Too bad it doesn't work that way. The jobs don't magically disappear.
LOL! "just let them go"...
You're funny.
First, remember that "essential" services are indeed essential. We take them for granted. But we all agree that things like national defense, the Border Patrol, law enforcement, air traffic controllers, public health and emergency response personnel, etc. should continue. They should be immune from hostage taking in the course of budgetary brinksmanship.
What happens if we pay them? Simple. The people doing these essential services will get paid. The hundreds of thousands of federal employees performing non-essential tasks won't. Note that non-essential doesn't mean unwanted or undesirable; YMMV, but I like the National Park Service, the Forest Service and myriad other federal programs whose personnel will get squeezed. But I would concede that these functions are non-essential and are fair game in the budget wars. So....
The fact is, these non-essential federal employees, if it comes down to it, never truly need to be recalled. Their programs don't actually need to restart. Many I would want to keep, but I have my list -- as I'm sure you have yours -- of programs that I'd be happy to trim or eliminate. Let the Democrats know that the time of judgment has come. We're ready to bargain -- but if they want to play scorched earth, we're ready to close these programs down for good, or many of them. And every day the shutdown continues, the price will get higher. If essential services can't be held hostage, the budget cutters have the upper hand. Ya' think Schumer and Pelosi will stonewall border security if it means most of Commerce, HUD, EPA and big chunks of a dozen more departments get shut down for good?
>...the government is effectively making slaves or indentured servants.
I think anyone is allowed to quit. The options are quit or work for deferred pay.
Except for the people that aren’t required to work for deferred pay. In the private sector you’d get a small portion of your pay after a few months. It’s called being laid off.
Wouldn’t that be great? Congress fails to pass a budget, so all nonessential employees are let go.
Reading Wimpy taught me to never fall for it.
“I’d gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today”
He never did pay for one...
If by "let go" you mean they voluntarily quit, then yes, that would be great.
It would be a mess for a while but in the long run we would have a leaner government.
I am willing to take the hit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.