48
top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] theangriestbird@beehaw.org 18 points 4 days ago

why are these people leaving? they should force the government to fire them and make a big stink about it.

[-] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's generally referred to as "a principled stance." The same result will happen either way; this way, you get to tell your kids you made the right choice.

[-] theangriestbird@beehaw.org 1 points 3 days ago

to me, the more principled stance would be to stay and resist until they are forced to fire you, which makes them look bad. I would have no qualms about telling my kids I made the right choice in that scenario. But others have pointed out that doing this might lead to a career civil servant losing their retirement benefits, and I can understand that that is a lot to throw away for resistance actions that will ultimately change very little.

[-] itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com 3 points 3 days ago

Probably has something to do with retirement funds. If you have been paying into the system for 30+ years you need that money when you retire and don’t want to see it wiped out or reduced if you are fired.

Being principled in government jobs has a high cost.

[-] theangriestbird@beehaw.org 1 points 3 days ago

this makes a lot of sense to me. I can understand choosing to resign if this is the case.

[-] Megaman_EXE@beehaw.org 2 points 3 days ago

I've been wondering if either they're being paid very well to leave or being threatened.

[-] millie@beehaw.org 2 points 3 days ago

.. One could say the same of participation in the electoral process. Taking your ball and going home doesn't work any better as a voter than as an official.

[-] theangriestbird@beehaw.org 6 points 3 days ago

i don't really agree that "one could say the same" because these are totally different situations. A voter is not a civil servant. A voter does not get paid to vote. Most voters did not swear an oath to defend the constitution (unless they are a naturalized citizen). A single voter also has no power to block an insurgent force from taking over key government systems, unlike a civil servant.

[-] King_Bob_IV@startrek.website 3 points 3 days ago

Also a voters pay and retirement benefits are not likely to be impacted by how they vote. Civil service it can make a huge difference in the long run if you retire vs get dismissed.

[-] jarfil@beehaw.org 2 points 3 days ago

A single voter has(had) the power to join other single voters.
Most civil servants have little power against an AR.

[-] millie@beehaw.org 2 points 3 days ago
[-] elfpie@beehaw.org 4 points 3 days ago

Is this being dismissive? You presented your point of view and they presented theirs. A nice exchange. You don't have to agree and you don't have to answer, but this end felt like an eye roll.

[-] millie@beehaw.org 2 points 3 days ago

It is a massive eye roll.

[-] Earflap@reddthat.com 8 points 3 days ago

Jesus fuckin christ. Quitting still gets them what they want. Force them to fire you and be an obstructionist little shit the whole way out.

[-] King_Bob_IV@startrek.website 7 points 3 days ago

As much as that is a wonderful sentiment. Retirement vs firing might make a substantial difference in their quality of life i. Retirement whereas getting fired is a symbolic gesture that may or may not have any impact at all. I can understand trying to make sure that personally you come out as on as possible.

[-] Earflap@reddthat.com 2 points 3 days ago

Hmm, yeah, I suppose that's a good point. Thanks for the perspective.

this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2025
48 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10257 readers
201 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS