Government Tenure

1. 67

   abwilliamsposted 7 years ago

   We are all familiar with the term 'Tenure', in particular, when discussing Teachers/Professors.
   I do not like that Teachers/Professors, even the bad ones, may retain a position indefinitely, based solely on the time they've put in.
   Apparently, cleaning house, mopping up the mess, draining the swamp in D.C., including the V.A., is quite the task, nearly impossible!
   How did we get to the point where Government employees, even the bad ones, may retain a position indefinitely, simply because they are Government employees?
   A permanent post = Tenure. Impossible to undo?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Well it depends on what you mean by "solely the time they put in." If the time they put in is dependent on meeting certain standards of performance and excellence I have no problem with giving tenure as long as those standards continue to be met. So meeting those standards should minimize the chance of tenuring bad ones, but if I were to always meet those standards (which should be a given anyway to keep my job) the added security of tenure, meaning that as long as I am doing my job satisfactorily I can not be fired at the whim of some bureaucrat, would be a deserved security. .

      replyreport
      1. 67

         abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         I'm familiar with too many cases of Teachers biding their time, safe and secure within their tenured status, neglecting their duties.
         Their students are not receiving a quality education.....not from them.
         Therein lies my problem!
         I certainly do not wish for anyone doing their job, to the best of their availability, to be fired on a whim, but I don't think a job should come with
         a guarantee or a lifetime warranty.
         We would have had to close the doors of our Business a long time ago. Insubordination and non-productivity would have sunk us.
         
         That (pensions, etc ) is probably a discussion for another day!
         
         I sure as heck think we've got a huge problem with 'permanent fixtures' in government. Dug in, biding their time, not accomplishing a darn thing.
         How do we get rid of them?

         replyreport
   2. 79

      Credence2posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Government employees can not be fired? That is a brazen fabrication. This is part and parcel of the never ending attack of the rightwinger on public sector employees.
      
      To Tazer, you got it right, tenure as an advantage is only obtained through the maintenance of work standards.
      
      Isn"t that the ideal for any employee, Ms. AB?

      replyreport
      1. 67

         abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         I did not say, "can not", my words were "nearly impossible" Mr. Cred.

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Credence2posted 7 years agoin reply to this

            "Nearly impossible" is not right either.... I can speakto the issue as a former civil service employee.

            replyreport
   3. 78

      colorfuloneposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      This is a Facebook post by Lieutenant General William "Jerry" Boykin. 
      
      Do you know what Deep State means? Have a look at the definition because you need to understand it.
      
      deep state (noun): a body of people, typically influential members of government agencies or the military, believed to be involved in the secret manipulation or control of government policy.
      "the deep state and its policy of allowing extremist ideologies to flourish may be the actual issues of concern”
      
      Why is this important to understand? It is because there is a Deep State operation occurring in America. Consider the following:
      
      1. There are more people in the Trump administration who were put there by President Obama than those brought in by Donald Trump. These include civil servants and appointees. This administration is just inundated by people whose loyalty is to the previous administration. Some of those “imbeds” are behind the leaks and mischief that is causing so much trouble for the Trump administration. They are committed to destroying President Trump and his presidency.
      
      2. President Obama is deeply engaged in an organization called “Organizing For Action” (OFA) which is designed to continue his agenda and see it through to fruition. It is well funded and has 250 chapters nationally. Obama himself is pulling the strings on most of its activities. They include a variety of subversive activities including organizing most of these anti-Trump protests. This is also part of the Deep State element as many of the people in the government are operating from a playbook designed by Obama and OFA.
      
      3. The Deep State element in our government is targeting specific individuals in the Trump administration for destruction in an effort to destroy the Trump presidency. That is why LTG(R) Mike Flynn was exposed by these deeply imbedded insurgents in the Intelligence Community and the Dept of Justice. Flynn was identified as having spoken to the Russian ambassador before Mr Trump was inaugurated. I doubt that he committed any crime but whoever exposed his name did and that was one of these Deep State operatives in the Trump administration. Others are also targeted including Seb Gorka and Steve Bannon, both of whom I consider to be friends. The accusations against them on myriad issues are false claims but that doesn’t stop the opposition from making them and keeping things stirred up.
      
      4. There are over 1,000 positions in the executive branch that require senate confirmation. If the senate does not confirm people for these positions then the people who were in the previous administration stay in their jobs unless they resign and that is exactly who you have running much of our government right now, people from the Obama administration. Unless the senate gets off the dime and gets moving
      on confirmations, this will not change. Equally bad is that thousands of Obama people still hold key non-conformation positions and will not leave unless forced to do so.
      
      Note: Houston, we have a problem. Please take this seriously as this is not conspiracy theory. Trump cannot succeed with building his own  team. The Obama acolytes are really good and are doing exactly what they set out to do. We have to start putting pressure on the Dems in the senate to start confirming the Trump team.
      
      I see Susan Rice is in the news again, this time for being the person responsible for the unmasking.  She along with Obama and Clinton blamed Benghazi on a video.  So, that's what she is made of.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         I'm familiar with Jerry Boykin, he is credible!
         
         Yep....Susan "there was a hateful video..." Rice herself.
         Have you seen anything in the News!? I haven't.

         replyreport
         1. 88

            crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Once again, the Susan Rice story is being unmasked as false. It's almost as if anything coming out of the President's mouth can be assumed false.

            replyreport
            1. 67

               abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               By whom Cranky?  What do you mean by "Once again.....unmasked as false"?

               replyreport
               1. 88

                  crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  The Susan Rice story is not accurate. Another alternative fact from Trump.
                  
                  http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017 … tto-ac.cnn

                  replyreport
                  1. 67

                     abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Oh Okay.  CNN, got it. Still waiting......

                     replyreport
                     1. 88

                        crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        What do you consider a reliable news source?

                        replyreport
                        1. 67

                           abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           I don't know that I can do that. I do know that CNN became political long ago, losing credibility with me, because they lost objectivity. I cannot consider them when considering a reliable News Source.

                           replyreport
                           1. 88

                              crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                              Well, where do you get your news? I suppose it is clear that CNN has a very different perspective on this Susan Rice news than Fox does.

                              replyreport
                              1. 67

                                 abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                 Since you mentioned Fox News, when I have tuned in, I've at least witnessed some objectivity.
                                 I listen to talk radio.  My News feed consists of multiple publications.  It varies from day to day.
                                 I take it all in and then, I go with my gut. My instincts never steer me wrong.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 88

                                    crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                    https://www.poynter.org/2012/survey-npr … ed/174826/

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 67

                                       abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       What is this? I'm not in the habit of opening random links.

                                       report
                                    2. 88

                                       crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       http://www.businessinsider.com/study-wa … all-2012-5

                                       report
                                    3. 88

                                       crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       They are links (they are about the same thing) about a study whose data suggests that those who watch Fox News are not well informed.

                                       report
                                       1. 67

                                          abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                          Okay. Who did the study? Was a study done on CNN as well? MSNBC?

                                          report
                                          1. 83

                                             psycheskinnerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                             The study was done by Fairleigh Dickinson University.  Took me all of 5 seconds to find that.  Too much time to invest in fact checking?

                                             report
                                             1. 67

                                                abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                                Yes, I'm self-employed.

                                                report
                                    4. 88

                                       crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       It's a scientific study done by Farleigh Dickinson University's Public Mind survey research.
                                       
                                       PublicMind recently received an “A” rating from statistician Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight blog. The ratings measure both accuracy and bias for all major polling services in the United States, providing an update to similar research the poll watchers conducted in 2014.
                                       
                                       PublicMind was found to have a 94 percent accuracy rate for predicting election results, and is one of only two A-rated polling institutes with zero bias to their rankings.

                                       report
                                       1. 67

                                          abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                          Hmm...I'm not the least bit intrigued by any of this.
                                          
                                          I do plan on digging deeper into the concept of a 'shadow government' though.
                                          My curiosity has been piqued!

                                          report
                                    5. 88

                                       crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       I'm not at all surprised.

                                       report
                                    6. 88

                                       crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       There's also this Pizzagate thing. You would probably find that very interesting too.

                                       report
                                       1. 67

                                          abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                          Okay Cranky....you've sufficiently gotten in your jabs.
                                          
                                          I no longer tune into CNN, because I 'choose' not to. I, personally, believe they've completely lost all objectivity. I've reached this conclusion, all on my own.
                                          If you 'choose' to tune in....go for it, it is a Free Country.
                                          You brought up Fox News, because I did not and you so desperately needed to share your prized links. You've evidence; surveys that prove, those that 'choose' to tune into the FNC are the most uninformed among us.
                                          You don't end it there...now you are attempting to insult my intelligence, because I'm not moved by nor impressed with your shared prized links. How am I doing?
                                          
                                          May we now get back to the Topic at hand?

                                          report
                                    7. 88

                                       crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       Pizzagate is the shadow government!

                                       report
                                       1. 67

                                          abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                          Okay I must have been watching the FNC the day that News Story came out.

                                          report
   4. 83

      psycheskinnerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Have you considered why tenure exists?  It can give unjustified immunity, but it is also absolutely necessary to allow a representative to act according to their conscience and their long term goals of supporting the public good. Without tenure/terms every decision is made to please lobbyists and the lowest common denominator. 
      
      The founding fathers created they system with the goal of avoiding both rank populism and tyranny.  The system needs to be improved, not destroyed.  Look at almost any other country to see how much worse things could be if we lose the middle ground between these two extremes.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Disagree. 
         Tenure - To give someone a permanent post
         The Founding Fathers would not be fans, not in the least.

         replyreport
   5. 67

      abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      My Topic Title should have ended with a question mark.
      My bad.

      replyreport
2. 57

   Nathan Dunneposted 7 years ago

   I believe you are oversimplifying. I have known teachers who were excellent at there job and been fired despite earning tenured status for various reasons such as change in academic structure and loss of funding. There is a deeper problem in the system in my humble opinion. I do agree that some tenured teachers are allowed to keep there position despite being jaded husks of the teacher they began as due to politics and a number of other reasons that have nothing to do with academics. This is clearly wrong and displays a deeper problem at the core of education> Forgive me for only using teachers as an example but this is what I have knowledge of & experience with thus the only way I can share my thoughts accurately, as I do not have first hand experience with other area's/fields and feel it would be wrong of me to pass judgement on that which I do not truely understand. This is a provocative point and deserves discussion but I think it needs to be looked at more broadly and openly. If possible without judgment that turns all discussions into gripe sessions.

   replyreport
   1. 67

      abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly.....and that's what I'm referring to, "the deep problem at the core", which exists. Whether it's in the classroom or within a Government Department.
      The V.A. for example, needs to be turned upside down, emptied of all those that stall our Veterans from receiving not only expedited care, but the best quality care possible...anywhere, anytime!
      
      The task is proving to be easier said, than done.

      replyreport
      1. 88

         crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Really, aren't you just generally annoyed by any person who holds and/or retains a job despite being incompetent?
         
         The downside of unions is that they sometimes protect incompetent people from being fired or make it more difficult. The upside of unions is that they fight for fair pay and protect people from being fired unjustly.
         
         Consider, however, the difference in how people at the bottom of the professional food chain are treated from those at the top. Incompetent people at the bottom usually end up getting fired with 0 compensation, as they probably should. However, those at the top, CEOs for instant, get huge settlement packages when they do a really poor job. (paid for by the taxpayer or shareholders)
         
         Tenure - most often associated with colleges - allows teachers to teach without the threat of interference by administration and/or politics. It's an important protection when applied appropriately. Within university administrations, however, those at the bottom can lose their jobs and receive no compensation while those at the top who do poorly, frequently get to retire with giant benefit packages or if they've committed some kind of crime (usually sexual harassment) they just go off quietly into the good night.

         replyreport
      2. 88

         crankaliciousposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         You should examine the way the system works as well. Government jobs usually pay less than private sector jobs and part of their appeal is that they come with certain protections and benefits. They also attract less talented applicants sometimes.

         replyreport
3. 67

   abwilliamsposted 7 years ago

   I'm a small business Owner/Operator....Tenured by Default, the other 50 percenter and I, are the ones burning the midnight oil, hoping there's something left for us, after the Gov, Employees, Suppliers, et al are paid.
   Our pension plan is what we can tuck away here and there and a prayer that we remain healthy until we can retire.
   Not complaining, we chose to go the entrepreneurial route!
   Who am I to even speak on the subject, right? I've never been a civil servant, but I
   am a tax paying citizen, so that gives me every right to know how those tax dollars are being spent. Someone is propping up the dead weight, those just taking up space until their retirement day! (not saying ALL Government Employees!)
   An effective Manager, Supervisor, etc. knows when an Employee is productive and when they are not, when they are team players and when they are not, when they are professional and when they are far, far from it! (I will reserve further commentary on professionalism at this time)
   The boss acts accordingly with either raises, promotions, probation or dismissals.
   Why should it be any different within the Government? The dismissal part that is?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The new director of the VA , said  " ................there will be none going to work at the VA. high on coke and watching porn all day on my watch .........."
      
      "tenured civil service employees "   there is one problem .

      replyreport
      1. 67

         abwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Well that's good to know! Yikes....it's worse than I suspected. Surely, no one would have a problem with this type of crackdown!?

         replyreport
4. 67

   abwilliamsposted 7 years ago

   I need to be very careful here and choose my words wisely......
   Psyche - Are there lessons given in condescension, which help create a Leftist or does it just come naturally for most?

   replyreport