I read the provided chart as one agency implemented a RIF. Not that a single person was fired, unless there is more paperwork that backs up that claim.
I don't know about the overall status, I can only speak to my organization. What this directorate did was to offer early separation incentives for the people that were within 3 years of retirement. All of those positions that were vacated by retiring individuals were removed from the end strength and will not be backfilled. This directorate had a little over 100 retire and those positions went away.
Can't imagine why anyone has concerns with the federal gov't managing money and making America a better place - I mean, hell, they have unions.
I feel like intentionally misleading reports and stories should have some sort of consequence. This is a load of shit, and anyone who has set foot in a government office in the last 4 years knows it is a crock of shit. It is purely semantics. Any positions of people retiring were not renewed. Many term positions were not renewed or replaced as "contractors." Offices are empty. This will play well with the Fox News crowd, but it is just more 1984esque BS.
If you have a term position that has been renewed for the last 10 years, and then it isn't renewed for the first time, I would call that "job loss." I know 3 people personally who experienced this, and I don't even work in a government office.
Okay. They barely hire "regular employees" anymore. The only "regular employees" in the office I volunteer in are near retirement. I'm just trying to figure out how the two people I know for a fact got let go due to the sequester don't count. There is clearly something weird going on with how this report was formulated. As I said, anyone who has been in a government office lately knows it. Lots of empty offices.
The investigators looked at 23 federal agencies and found that 19 agencies reported curtailing hiring; 16 reported rescoping or delaying contracts or grants for core mission activities; 19 reported reducing employee training; 20 reported reducing employee travel; and 7 reported furloughing more than 770,000 employees from 1 to 7 days.
so you're saying that there has been a net loss of employees or payroll (either will do), including contractors, on the government dole? This isn't a Fox News anything. The bottom line is that our government is inefficient as hell, poorly managed, idiotically structured, has stupid as hell accessions, lacks any shred of accountability (almost by design changes over time) and has no real means of turning off the spigot. There is no political will any longer to actually manage. The fact that semantics actually makes a comment of this nature even possible is ludicrous.
So? I didn't ask about the DOI. I asked about net government jobs (spend or headcount). I can tell you that we just subbed to a gov't contractor that can't find enough people to fill all of the crap work projects he's been allocated. Guy was bragging about the windfall around the IT space.