(August 29, 2014) Reduction in force is a term that frightens most federal workers. It means uncertainty, potential loss of a job, disruption, and usually more questions than answers. Politicians (even the ones who want to shrink the federal government) oppose them. So do managers, unions, and most people who write about government issues. Most agencies have been “successful” in recent years in avoiding RIFs. They have used attrition, hiring slowdowns and buyouts to reduce their workforce without resorting to a RIF. Most people will tell you a RIF is something to be avoided at all costs.
Most downsizing is not as dramatic as the story of NADEP Jacksonville. Usually it is smaller numbers and is driven by budget cuts or mission changes. The first choice of solutions is generally to let attrition take care of the problem. If normal attrition is not adequate, agencies accelerate it by offering buyouts. There are some problems with that approach. Here are just a few:
Buyouts are not what they used to be. When buyouts were first introduced in the 1994 Workforce Restructuring Act, employees were offered up to $25,000 to voluntarily leave, either by retiring or resigning. Twenty years later, buyouts are still $25,000, even though they would have to have increased to $39,300 to keep pace with inflation (as measured by the consumer price index). The $25K that looked like a good deal 20 years ago looks a lot less desirable today.
Buyouts are usually not targeted effectively. The intent of buyouts was to (a) accelerate turnover to maximize savings and (b) target where that turnover occurred so agencies would lose people in the jobs and grades they no longer wanted and keep the ones they needed to keep. In the interests of “fairness” many agencies simply offer blanket buyouts first-come, first-served. The acceleration factor remains, but the targeting is lost. What was intended as a precision tool for making targeted reductions becomes a blunt instrument. Agencies often lose the people and skills they need to retain and keep the people and skills they need to lose. What is touted as fairness is often leadership cowardice and unwillingness to make the tough decisions leaders are paid to make. The wrong jobs are vacated, the wrong people leave, and buyouts just help an agency get to a bad outcome faster.
Rumors of buyouts often stop attrition. People are not stupid. When they hear their agency may be contemplating buyouts, those who are planning to leave but have options will wait until the offer is made.
A RIF is not a great experience and it should never be the first tool to pull from the agency toolbox. But it should be in that toolbox and should not be a forbidden subject. It is far more effective and less dangerous than random attrition, untargeted buyouts and early retirement.
To RIF or Not to RIF – Government Executive
Hey muleface..they probably wouldn’t take you into the service so ya gotta be a hater…served my time protecting chicken pukes like you so you could talk about things ya do not experience. Yes it does mean preference for veterans…LIVE WITH IT–CHOKE ON IT
RIF vast number of clerks/carriers/mailhandlers and watch profits, efficiency, and service all improve.
Enufisenuf how does the Federal Government Riff.
What are the rules an order?
Official, not that made up crap from the voices in your head.
Mark Diamonstein…the last APWU president! First they’ll RIF then……the lay offs! Go picket that !
RIF vast number of eas/mgmt and watch profits, efficiency, and service all improve.
34 years give me.the buyout to much corruption and nepotizum
My union contract states no layoff. This must be for the dog eat dog management world.
Wheres my 25000. all they offerd me was 10000. Iwould love to get 25. This is just a way of getting around no layoff clause.
All those age discriminating law suits Cavdog.
I mean you got a 71 yr old Vice President thinking about running for President in 2016.
You better do right them CSRS right with a sweet buyout, instead.
Start It Up
They are planning to close around 80 Plants in 2015 so RIF becomes a hot topic
Hey the Vice President of The United States is like 71 an thinking about running for President in 2016.
who’s your daddy?
3rd: there are laws in place? For now? Cavdog.
Issa stance the no nothing old-timers incentive don’t let the door hit you in the a$$ won’t fly. To make it work? A year severance pay?
How say you old timers?
I did hear that some in Congress use the compassion word, and IMO this should be one for the ages to put the CSRS employees in the history book once and for all.
Something “sweet” were we all sign on the dotted line. Even yours truly a veteran CSRS employee with a mick Jagger time is on my side world tour on the horizon attitude.
Will see…enjoy.
Maybe if management was transparent on what was possibly coming, many employees can make a better decision to leave
There would be an early out first, as part of any RIF.
http://www.postal-reporter.com/blog/usps-offers-postmasters-early-retirements-ahead-of-rifs/
http://www.postal-reporter.com/blog/usps-seeking-reduction-in-force-rif-administrator/
Yes! there’s a rif coming soon. cut and paste in your browser
Does this mean veterans get preference? Hee hee.
their are soo many clerks looking for a buyout now that my po will lose 3/4 of their clerks. Bring it on.
RIF’s for who? not management for sure.
First a little correction there are about 47K CSRS emplooyees.
Secound if there is going to be a RIF why not RIF all the CSRS that have 42 plus year and are at the max 80 percent benefit? That would be about 1800 employees. To go still farther why not RIF all who are 65 or older? Thats 33500 employees saving the post office almost 2 Billion a year in pay alone.
RIFs do suck
So does this mean there might be RIF’s coming up?????????
“A RIF is not a great experience and it should never be the first tool to pull from the agency toolbox. But it should be in that toolbox and should not be a forbidden subject. It is far more effective and less dangerous than random attrition, untargeted buyouts and early retirement.”
WTF? let’s pull this from the tool box an lite it after inserting it in your 0.
Great idea RIF the lower pay an benefits employees while your CSR employee stands looking cross eyed at you in your stand up talk with 30 plus years waiting to hand you a 5 week 3971 cause it’s getting that time of year again an their in the 440 club.
There’s what something like 79K CSR employees left? You need to buyout them, whatever craft their in.
But stupid is as stupid does….Stupid.