Congressional Hearing Reveals Systemic Problems with Bureaucratic Agencies - In This Case Widespread Sexual Harrassment

[Seymour Flops]

In this clip, X talks to the long-time chair (18 years) of the Federal Depositor Insurance Corporation. These are the folks who - when you put money in the bank - guarantee you will be able to withdraw part or all of it, without regard to whether the bank is well managed or run by fools.

It turns out the real fools are at the FDIC.

There is a hostile work environment at that agency, particularly for women. They are denied opportunities for advancement and for the kind of travel that is essential for advancement to the senior positions. Male sexual harrassors are not fired, but sent to other agencies. They throw office parties in which people puke and pee inside the building and on the roof.

Federal employees are very, very protective. Not of women or of employee rights, but of the employment itself. It seems that the mid and upper management will do whatever it pleases to employees, except fire them when termination is the obvious solution.

His answer is the same as Kamala's answer to the border crises: "look at" the problem to find the underlying causes.

These are the people that you trust your paycheck, for expendatures and savings.

This is not a partisan issue. Incompetent and/or hostile Federal employees who cannot be fired is a problem across administrations. You doubt the existance of "The Deep State?" I call it "the entrenched bureaucracy," and it is very real.

 

[1srelluc]

How could that be since most of them only go into the office once a week?

 

[Seymour Flops]

How could that be since most of them only go into the office once a week?

Well, maybe this is why they are so reluctant to start going to work again.

Anyone know a female federal employee who may be experiencing some of that?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Well, maybe this is why they are so reluctant to start going to work again.

Anyone know a female federal employee who may be experiencing some of that?

I know a large number of female fed employees, including my wife.

Are they harassed? If men telling dick jokes and making childish innuendo style jokes are harassment then I guess they are. My wife, being a Marine wife who spent 15 years around Marines does not feel she is being harassed, but legally I think it could apply if someone complained.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I know a large number of female fed employees, including my wife.

Are they harassed? If men telling dick jokes and making childish innuendo style jokes are harassment then I guess they are. My wife, being a Marine wife who spent 15 years around Marines does not feel she is being harassed, but legally I think it could apply if someone complained.

So, she has managed to avoid those kinds of going on that we are seeing at the FDIC? In a way, it may be fortunate that she is in a agency that is so lethargic that I doubt any of them could work up the energy for sexual harassment.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So, she has managed to avoid those kinds of going on that we are seeing at the FDIC?

Have they been reported at any other agency?

The FDIC is an odd agency. I applied for a job with them about 10 years ago and was flown to DC for a 3 day interview. There were about 30 of us, each from different regions. The first day was us being interviewed and the next two was them selling the agency to us, even to include a dinner at the FDIC HQ where all the big wigs showed up. It was one of the oddest experiences I have ever had related to a job. In the end I did not get the job as it involved being away for weeks with maybe coming home on weekends and they pretty much did not hire anyone with young kids.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

In this clip, X talks to the long-time chair (18 years) of the Federal Depositor Insurance Corporation. These are the folks who - when you put money in the bank - guarantee you will be able to withdraw part or all of it, without regard to whether the bank is well managed or run by fools.

It turns out the real fools are at the FDIC.

There is a hostile work environment at that agency, particularly for women. They are denied opportunities for advancement and for the kind of travel that is essential for advancement to the senior positions. Male sexual harrassors are not fired, but sent to other agencies. They throw office parties in which people puke and pee inside the building and on the roof.

Federal employees are very, very protective. Not of women or of employee rights, but of the employment itself. It seems that the mid and upper management will do whatever it pleases to employees, except fire them when termination is the obvious solution.

His answer is the same as Kamala's answer to the border crises: "look at" the problem to find the underlying causes.

These are the people that you trust your paycheck, for expendatures and savings.

This is not a partisan issue. Incompetent and/or hostile Federal employees who cannot be fired is a problem across administrations. You doubt the existance of "The Deep State?" I call it "the entrenched bureaucracy," and it is very real.

trump needs to completely revamp these inefficient lazy fucking slobs

 

[Foxfyre]

In this clip, X talks to the long-time chair (18 years) of the Federal Depositor Insurance Corporation. These are the folks who - when you put money in the bank - guarantee you will be able to withdraw part or all of it, without regard to whether the bank is well managed or run by fools.

It turns out the real fools are at the FDIC.

There is a hostile work environment at that agency, particularly for women. They are denied opportunities for advancement and for the kind of travel that is essential for advancement to the senior positions. Male sexual harrassors are not fired, but sent to other agencies. They throw office parties in which people puke and pee inside the building and on the roof.

Federal employees are very, very protective. Not of women or of employee rights, but of the employment itself. It seems that the mid and upper management will do whatever it pleases to employees, except fire them when termination is the obvious solution.

His answer is the same as Kamala's answer to the border crises: "look at" the problem to find the underlying causes.

These are the people that you trust your paycheck, for expendatures and savings.

This is not a partisan issue. Incompetent and/or hostile Federal employees who cannot be fired is a problem across administrations. You doubt the existance of "The Deep State?" I call it "the entrenched bureaucracy," and it is very real.

This isn't all that new actually. Going back 10, 20, 30 years there were reports of federal employees using taxpayer dollars for lavish parties and other frivolous things. They have no fear of losing their jobs. At most they get a tongue lashing and then it's back to business as usual. They aren't even embarrassed by it anymore.

Ever since the COVID lockdowns, a great many federal workers never went back to the office. An estimated 40 to 50% now 'tele-work' from home some or all of the time. And that does beg the question of how much honest work are we getting out of at least some of these people?

I have encountered federal employees who were excellent at their jobs, true public servants, helpful, informative, efficient, effective. But I've also encountered a whole bunch with poor people skills who really didn't give a damn whether they solved your problem or not. I've been in the social security office where every seat was filled and there was standing room only as I observed employees chatting at the coffee pot and seemingly oblivious to the fact people were waiting.

But there are also those who do their jobs and do them very well.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Have they been reported at any other agency?

The FDIC is an odd agency. I applied for a job with them about 10 years ago and was flown to DC for a 3 day interview. There were about 30 of us, each from different regions. The first day was us being interviewed and the next two was them selling the agency to us, even to include a dinner at the FDIC HQ where all the big wigs showed up. It was one of the oddest experiences I have ever had related to a job. In the end I did not get the job as it involved being away for weeks with maybe coming home on weekends and they pretty much did not hire anyone with young kids.

Apparently, they have been this weird for more than twenty years, all under the same chief who was finally brought before congress to answer for it.

This isn't all that new actually. Going back 10, 20, 30 years there were reports of federal employees using taxpayer dollars for lavish parties and other frivolous things. They have no fear of losing their jobs. At most they get a tongue lashing and then it's back to business as usual. They aren't even embarrassed by it anymore.

Ever since the COVID lockdowns, a great many federal workers never went back to the office. An estimated 40 to 50% now 'tele-work' from home some or all of the time. And that does beg the question of how much honest work are we getting out of at least some of these people?

I have encountered federal employees who were excellent at their jobs, true public servants, helpful, informative, efficient, effective. But I've also encountered a whole bunch with poor people skills who really didn't give a damn whether they solved your problem or not. I've been in the social security office where every seat was filled and there was standing room only as I observed employees chatting at the coffee pot and seemingly oblivious to the fact people were waiting.

But there are also those who do their jobs and do them very well.

The federal government has a system in which an agency, and it's subordinates are given sums of money to spend for the year. The pressure is on to spend all of it, otherwise be given less the next year.

But they want to keep money in reserve, so they don't budget tightly to spend it all on perations. Then at the end of the year or fiscal year, they have buckets of money to be spent or lost, so they do the elaborate parties, retreats, gifts, etc.

 

[Foxfyre]

Apparently, they have been this weird for more than twenty years, all under the same chief who was finally brought before congress to answer for it.

The federal government has a system in which an agency, and it's subordinates are given sums of money to spend for the year. The pressure is on to spend all of it, otherwise be given less the next year.

But they want to keep money in reserve, so they don't budget tightly to spend it all on perations. Then at the end of the year or fiscal year, they have buckets of money to be spent or lost, so they do the elaborate parties, retreats, gifts, etc.

That does seem to be the case but it's wrong, wrong, wrong. And a responsible government or agency chief would put a stop to it. Another excellent argument for zero base budgeting in my opinion.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The federal government has a system in which an agency, and it's subordinates are given sums of money to spend for the year. The pressure is on to spend all of it, otherwise be given less the next year.

100%. Even when I was in the Marine's all monies had to be spent by Sept 30th. Used to send pilots on cross country flights they did not need for training/proficiencies just to use up all the TAD money

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That does seem to be the case but it's wrong, wrong, wrong. And a responsible government or agency chief would put a stop to it.

It is wrong, but it is the way the Govt does things, just doing away with the "use it or lose it next year" mentality could probably cut 5% off the budget

 

[elektra]

The threshold for sexual harassment is so low, that a man telling a woman that her perfume smells nice or that she has on a nice sweater will get him fired.

Everyone is equal, no different, but so many people are offended/destroyed, simply by having to work with a man.

They then go home to their, "emotional support cat", and are still unable to get through the day.