2:17 am, May 6, 2015

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 4
       

  • Downsizing, Relocations, Benefit Reductions Up Next?
    Celtic Wolf
    I have seen many executives and managers build their empires by allowing job creep and by hiring higher graded staff (so the manager's grade goes up). I have also seen certain managers allowed to live in offices away from headquarters and build empires their too. Then when they retire or leave all those staff need to be relocated back to Washington. I think the best incentive and the best benefit reduction should address managers and executives who do not deliver their program goals. If a within grade increase can be withheld for non-performance of a employee, then managers and executives need to share in the pain for non-performance. I often see poor managers (and executives who are racists, facists, or elititists) simply move to other positions and remain Level 2s or 3s. We need to fix what is broken, and stop talking about fixes that simply move the money around.
    Celtic Wolf
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Downsizing, Relocations, Benefit Reductions Up Next?
    ExperiencedFed
    I totally agree with Mr. Wolf and yes, there are "mini kingdoms" that we all know exist. We need to fix what is broken. There are so many areas that need to be addressed, so much abuse where cuts could and should be made. Instead, it appears that the Freshmen Congressmen are taking the easy way of proposing across the board cuts, using a hatchet instead of using a scapel. It takes a lot more time and research to do selective cuts. All salaries should be reviewed, not just those misleading "average" salaries that are publicized in the media. For example, a new GS-3 Clerk in the Cincinnati, OH area starts at an annual salary of $25,891. These employees just had their wages frozen and are being forced to share the pain with private industry. I hope that Congress feels very proud of itself by causing such pain to the newly hired Government employees that were hoping to have a career in the Government. The question is now will they even stay around to see how many more cuts they are going to have to share. --Long-Time Fed
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Federal Service
    Yeziam
    It would not surprise me if Congress used the Postal Service cuts as a an example to apply to other Federal Agencies. More of the hatchet vs the scalpel. While there will certainly be lessons learned that may be useful, there is no reason to go on a rampage of thoughtless layoffs just to appease a population that doesn't understand the value of USG services. That's not to say cuts are not in order, but those cuts should come from the operating budgets where there is real money being wasted on non-sensical expenses in our time of financial hardship. So Congress, before you make any additional precipitous changes to the federal workforce or services provided, you need to do your homework as others have suggested to avoid making painful cuts such as the Clinton administration made to appease the public. Those cuts by the way, choked organizations from doing their jobs because they were across the board cuts without insight into the effect. While Clinton received praise for making the cuts, the political gain and game, resulted in replenishing the military and federal organizations under the Bush administration to shore up the effects of those cuts. Again, there is money to be saved, but one of the stepping stones, might be to ASK the feds where they see money being wasted (like the two contributers above) and then ferret out the best tactics to save money. And finally, it's sad the USPS is facing the reality of a change in public/business demand for their services, but cuts to a losing proposition make sense. The Federal government should NOT be seen trying to prop up a large organization offering outdated products that no one wants (Think Chrysler and General Motors). However, I would think the infrastructure of the USPS should give them solid ground for market advantage to compete with other carriers if they were to change what was offered at competitive pricing. Like the one price boxes, they have proved there are venues where they can offer a service the public desires and which may end up making it a positive contributor vs a liability. Something about throwing the baby out with the bath-water.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • demise of the post office...
    furloughgirl
    I retired from the Post Office in 2009. I know that the business model is not working anymore.. too labor intense... deliver physically to every address in the country 6 days out of 7, are you kidding me? I think the Post Office should be allowed to try out the 5 day system and see how that goes. The American public wants too much for too little money! Gas prices are high.. Imagine the daily gas cost for the USPS! More delivery points are established each year, yet the mail volume is dwindling with the technological advances. Yes, I'm part of the problem.. I prefer to pay my bills online. I do want the Post Office to remain in tact, however, to insure that we can continue to send cards and packages to one another no matter where we live. If it gets privatized, the people in Podunk won't get service. I just don't think the people running it (the USPS) have any idea how to save it. I do think with the infrastructure the Postal Service has already, it should be able to capitalize on that. Certain federal laws have to change for more flexibility and I think new blood (younger and smarter) at the very top is needed to turn the beast around.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }