Posted on 01/16/2019 11:59:55 AM PST by Eric Roelfsema
I have a proposal for federal employees.
With the exception of the President and the Vice President, since Congress has a minimum age limit, (25 for the US House, 35 for US Senate), why cannot we consider a proposal for a maximum age limit for Federal Employees.
If a federal employee, except for President and VP, obtains the age of 65 or 70, they must retire from the Federal job. If they wish to continue in their Federal job, they do not get their Federal salary. The must live off their pensions and whatever other money they may have.
The reason the President and VP are exempted is due to the fact that all eligible voters in the US gets a chance to choose who they want to become the President.
Age discrimination.
The problem is not that some of them get old. The problem is how to get rid of the ones that either do not or can not perform regardless of age.
I think this is an awful idea. Some friends lost their son and his wife in an auto accident two years ago. They are raising their four young children. She is 62 and works part time, he is 69 and works full time for the city. He intends to work as long as he possibly can to support and educate those children. The very idea he should be forced to retire when he is the breadwinner for a young family is an outrage.
Since the shutdown (26 days & counting) is approaching 30 days (when RIF procedures are supposed to kick in) I say let the RIFs begin.
Of course since the older employees mostly have seniority, they’ll be able to continue enjoying their well-paid (eventually) free-from-work vacations.
I do not think this is a good idea.
If someone is not performing their job to expectation, let them go.
If a person is performing their job to expectation, thank them.
OPM has already waived the RIF rule for “this” shutdown.
Like noone could see that coming...
Term limits are better - 2 and out.
I would support 1 even.
There are plenty of high performing subject matter experts out there in the federal government who are well up there in years. Those people are not the problem. The problem, IMHO, with the federal workforce is that there is no real way to cull the underperforming people from the workforce. Not only that, but there is no real (as in likely to be implemented) way to easily create one without missing and hitting people we would want to keep.
One way to clear out the less valuable parts of the older crowd would be to direct (through legislation, and that’s probably not happening soon) all feds still actively employed under CSRS (the old, more generous, retirement system) as of some near term date would automatically be converted to FERS. It wouldn’t stop older people from working, but it would change the older workforce structure.
No. Don’t go after human individuals and their freedoms.
Instead, eliminate POSITIONS and billets and functions of agencies. Instead, eliminate entire federal departments and agencies.
Fat chance of this alternative happening, but age shouldn’t be a criteria.
Instead of an age limit, we should simply pass state-level term limits for people to fill our Federal offices. Each election, even “Federal Elections” are STATE ELECTIONS - ran by STATE LAWS!
If each State would pass term limits on how often someone could run for the same office, we would see a huge drop in the stupidity levels in our Federal Offices!!
Of course, I would prefer a Constitutional Amendment with term limits, so that every state had the same limits, but the chance that people like Pelosi and Schumer would EVER vote to get themselves and their dregs kicked out of office is slim and none!!
As for your regular Federal employees, I say eliminate as many alphabet agencies, billets, positions, etc as humanly possible and never, EVER refill them!!
Bad idea... At this stage in the deterioration of the federal employee force, the older employees are the only ones who were raised on the old American work ethic... If anything, get rid of all feds under the age of 50...
Simply return the Senators to the place they belong, being appointed by the States and subject to recall.
Voter ID for any and all eligible
ONLY people can donate to candidates, and all must be published weekly
No benefits for non-citizens other than emergency medical
Foreign nationals arrested on US soil will be detained and deported to the country of their birth, and we will support imprisonment in their home country for them for a period of up to 5 years depending on the crime, and if they are convicted.
Term limits, not age limits.
All federal jobs need to pass Congress’s constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited power test.
More specifically, if Congress cannot justify a given federal job under it’s Section 8-limited powers then Congress needs to do the following.
Basically, Congress needs to stop appropriating unconstitutional taxes for constitutionally indefensible federal jobs so that the states can find new revenues to hire such employees away from the feds.
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States."—Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Conceptually, the former federal employee will then do the same work for a state that they were doing for the feds.
”... the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Federal Constitution, is in the States, and not in the Federal Government [emphases added].” —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe, 1866. (See about middle of 3rd column.)
"It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.” — Justice Brandeis, Laboratories of democracy.
Note that the constitutional limit on states as laboratories of democracy is that states cannot abridge constitutionally enumerated rights.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
I might be mistaken, but should they be able to get social security those those children? They may want to ask.
That ship has sailed.
Congress and the Executive will continue setting up programs that exceed the limit of enumerated powers, until there are successful court challenges.
And the only way there will ever be successful court challenges is if you first either pass amendments AND/Or have a congressionally approved plan to hand those functions back to the states.
No judge, not even conservatives judges, are going to invalidate Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security on enumerated powers. Nor will they invalidate other programs for the same reasons.
“If they wish to continue in their Federal job, they do not get their Federal salary. The must live off their pensions and whatever other money they may have.”
Why would someone who is on pension want to keep working? Nefarious reasons perhaps?
“
If someone is not performing their job to expectation, let them go.
If a person is performing their job to expectation, thank them.
“
It is nearly impossible to fire a federal employee. Unless you catch them murdering someone or insulting a minority it takes OVER 2 YEARS TO FIRE ONE OF THEM!!! They can even get off if caught stealing.
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.