5:39 am, April 17, 2014

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.

  • 34
       

  • Pay cut
    Linda
    I think the cut in pay will come from 1 day a week cuts. Furloughs cost money to do. My Area is already down 30% through retirements. A small flurry of hiring right before fiscal year end, but not enough to make up the difference. Our expectations are to do twice the work. Do the math and get real, not going to happen. Another section I see is down 50%, some through new positions and transfers and some through retirement. Customer service has already been cut back. That section is not hiring. Not sure where else they can cut. The work is still there.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • No cutbacks
    Moderate
    If you are IRS then you know that cutbacks there will increase the deficit. IRS brings in revenue.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Not Necessarily
    X-taxman
    Yes and no, Mod-dude. IRS cutbacks in enforcement would very likely have a negative impact on revenue, I agree. However, there are LOTS of places IRS could implement cutbacks that have nothing to do with enforcement, starting with many of the highly paid fluff positions that have the word 'analyst', 'coordinator', or 'assistant' in their title. These positions may not be so noticeable where you work, but believe me they are prevalent across the agency. Over the years there has been much empire building, lots of high pay positions created and awarded to executives' cronies. If the IRS was ever forced to justify these positions and explain what these people do (or don't do), there would be a public outcry like you've never heard. These wasteful positions can and should be converted to enforcement positions.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • To Present Nit wit and X taxman
    Moderate
    I am fully aware there is empire building and excessive fluff positions. However, these people are very influential. Either their jobs will not be cut or they will parachute to other soft positions. I agree that these people should be converted to enforcement or taxpayer service positions, but they might not be able to do that type of work. Instead productive people will be affected.----Again, nit wit, why do you call me dude? And don't go with dudette. That would really be stupid.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Hey....
    X-taxman
    "Dude" is a lot nicer than "nit wit", dontcha think?? Nothing offensive about "dude". It's a term of endearment for crying out loud. "Nit wit", on the other hand, sounds rather bullyish to me.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Our expectations are to do twice the work. U R right; not gonna happen.
    The Original Joe S
    Let's see. Cut ur pay 20% by 1 day / week off. THEN want you to work harder to make it up? = Another 20%. Sure. WORK TO RULE! Not the workers' responsibility to suck it up. They want a government; let them PAY for a government.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Workforce reductions
    GetOffYour Butts
    Fiction Vs Reality Reducing the federal workforce 'saves money' is pure fiction. Cutbacks in employees at the IRS has resulted in over $30 Billion per YEAR if fraudulent tax refunds. Workforce reductions at the post office in recent years (since 2001) from 720,000+ employees down to 520,000 employees now has taken the post office from profits in 2001 to huge and fast growing losses now___even though their charges for Priority mail, parcel post, and extra service such as Delivery track, certified mail, po boxes, insurance have more than Doubled since 2001 which stamp price has steadily increased also since 2001.___and the losses continue to grow. The delivery racking fee has grown from 20 cents in 2001 to 90 cents today and yet the losses grow. A large Flat rate Priority envelope was $2.90 in 2001 and is now $5.60 and the losses grow. Not having enough people to do ANY job is not cost effective at any agency or private business.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • "Predicting the fiscal future is tough to impossible..."
    marine69
    You said it yourself, Mike...so why bother trying? Just another "whip up hysteria" article from a dried-up old hack who should get another job or retire! Gone are the glory days when you worked at the Washington Compost and Federal workers used your column to guide their work day and careers! You're not doing anyone any good with your shrill and sometines subtle 'warnings' to those who are more than aware of what could await them...today's Federal employee is far more informed than those of your 'faded glory' days 30 years ago! WTOP needs to get someone else in your slot and move you on...
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Contracting out government functions
    arignote
    The government spends two to five times the average government salary for contractors. Some of the contractors work at agencies longer than many of the employees. The contractors don't necessarily make more than the government employee they are replacing. The extra cost goes to the contracting company's overhead and profits. So instead of cutting government salaries, we might actually save money by cutting contracting and hiring more feds to do the work.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Pay Cut
    Bud
    Folks,I'm retired CSRS with 36 years service.Being retired you can watch the political scene a little closer.After Hillary's Benghazi testimony and the new immigration proposals,I've become totally turned off by our congressiional "geniuses".The repubs had 5 months to prepare for Hillary's testimony.The Repubs came save for 2 or 3 totally unprepared.Now the both parties want to make 11 million illegals new citizens.It's all about politics(votes)and not about taking care of the country's needs.I'm not advocating one party or the other here.The point is these politicans do not care about you the FED worker one iota.Oue country is going the way of Greece/Spain etc. and no one is willing to stop it politically.I won't be hurt by the inevitable fiscal mess but you working FEDS will be as will my children and grandchildren.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Pension Cut
    Joe
    They could freeze COLA's on pensions for 10 years which would add up to at least a 20% cut. Since budgets are always presented in 10 year time frames it would be a hefty cut for political purposes.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Pay Cut
    Bud
    Joe,works for me if you freeze all working FED pay raises for 10 years and freeze all SSA COLAS too.Plus no congressional raises for 10 years.Great idea,Joe!!!!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Cuts
    Moderate
    Bud, Joe, that will never happen. Joe, the law would have to be changed for pensions to be frozen. May happen, but I doubt it. Thje baby boomers are too huge a voting block.----- Bud, your position will not happen, I hope. The government will lose its good workers and it will end up with drones or inexperienced people who will leave after getting the experience. Can you imagine the IRS with that type of situation? I cannot.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Pay Cut
    Bud
    Moderate,first,Happy New Year.My comments were tongue in cheek at Joe.I'm not serious about freezing FED salaries for 10 years.My friends who are still working at IRS say it's getting very difficult to accomplish the basic missions of audit,collection,returns processing,etc.Main reason is the 4 divisions dont communicate/coordinate very well and most employee managers are located away from employees geographically.I assume you're in field audit so you may have a different opinion on what others are saying.Would be interested in your viewpoint and Linda's also since her comments imply she's in a small POD.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Sorry Bud. I lost the meaning
    Moderate
    Thanks and happy new year to you. You are right about what I do. Basic missions are difficult because of a number of reasons. My manager flexes, but I can reach him by email. Perhaps I will learn how to use the computer phone, but only if I shut down instant communication. I will never allow that. The problem is that we must do unnecessary nonsense on all cases (standardization of product) and other items which results in loss of material tax revenue. Audits are an art with some science. Different situations require different actions. But standardization is the "rule" depending on your manager. A second problem is that managers do not have to be technically skilled. Some are (my manager is), but some are not. A technically unskilled manager cannot do a proper manager's conference or be a good resource for help on an issue. You are generally right about the divisions, but the term is working with each other. They are so concerned with statistics that they forget that we should work together for a better IRS and not pad the numbers.----Hopefully, they will correct the issues
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • FEDS
    Bud
    Moderate,thanks,you gave me an education.Having retired 10 years ago,I'd not heard of standardization of product.And having a technically unskilled field audit group manager,well,I'll just say nicely,unbelievable. I really enjoyed my 36 years and it's great to be retired.Don't think I could manage in today's environment.We worked hard,as did 98% of employees.Lots of accomplishments,some failures.But overall,it was the employees that made this person look good along the way.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }