Hi everybody. We’ve been in this dystopian slog for quite a while now so I think those who have hung on must have developed some best practices for keeping up morale and motivation, other than leaning on spite and mission.

What have you personally done to keep up morale?

What has your boss or team done?

Genuinely curious and “asking for a friend.“ Ha.

Page 105

Victoria Barton - "Is there anything we can put in the National Flood Insurance Program's lapse with Exercise Analysis Group to hit at Biden?"

Page 167

Victoria Barton - "So they're saying we should fire 20,000 people? Which ones are they firing? Maybe I'm re***ded."

Hi! Does a departing manager have any incentive (or disincentive) to give high ratings or recommend promotions on their way out to another team? Curious if there were any "big picture" things that come into play when promoting a ladder position employee when a manager is leaving the team.

“More reorganizations are in the air at the Department of the Interior under Doug Burgum’s leadership. What good will come out of this latest round of reorganizations, which are supposed to come to the fore in September?
Probably not much.

When historians look back at the unraveling of the Department of the Interior, they’ll probably start with the budget and staffing cuts. They’ll also point to Secretary Burgum’s endless efforts to please President Trump, using hundreds of millions of our tax dollars to fund his vanity projects throughout DC.
They should.

The Trump administration’s deep reductions in funding and staffing have been devastating. National parks are operating with skeletal crews. Scientists are being forced out in droves. Conservation programs are being hollowed out. Entire offices have been left unable to carry out the missions Congress assigned them.
Those cuts deserve every headline they receive.
And so does the rampant corruption and abuse of taxpayers associated with Trump vanity projects throughout DC — from the Reflecting Pool to the ballroom. It is corruption on a scale we have never seen before. But that is only part of the story.

Burgum’s Systematic Weakening of Interior
Away from the television cameras and outside the public spotlight, Burgum is systematically weakening the institutions that make the department effective, accountable, and worthy of the public’s trust. These changes don’t produce dramatic photographs like shuttered visitor centers or overflowing trash cans in national parks. Instead, they quietly erode the guardrails that prevent corruption, protect scientific integrity, and ensure taxpayer dollars are spent based on merit rather than politics.

Take oversight. Every federal agency depends on a strong, independent inspector general (IG) to investigate waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct — including misconduct by the agency’s own political leadership. Inspectors general are intended to answer to the law, not to political operatives.

Never has the need for a strong and independent IG at Interior been greater than now. And yet,  Burgum has installed Dennis Kirk — a contributor to Project 2025 and former Heritage Foundation official — to the role.
Installing the architect of the ideological blueprint driving the administration’s agenda undermines the independence of the IG’s office, making it political and all but neutering the office’s ability to conduct real and actual oversight. Burgum’s exact goal.
Then there is the administration’s effort to politicize the federal grant process.”

I’ve attended the retirement seminar that is offered at work, but are there fiduciary type experts in federal retirement that can look at my specific situation and offer advice ?

I’m DoD with 30 years in but 2 years from MRA, and our “experts” at work won’t get into specific advice for us as individuals. I’d like to speak to someone directly so I can lay out all the financial details and get some guidance on a retirement plan.

I’d like to keep serving as long as possible but I have some disabilities and I’m worried about getting forced out because of the administrations views on the disabled.

I’ve had a “temporary” RA that allows some teleworking and other accommodations since my original remote agreement was terminated in 2024 and I had to re-apply, and I keep waiting for that other shoe to drop.

If there is a better place to ask this please let me know. If this post isn’t allowed here, moderators please delete and apologies in advance.

DOI has started moving many SES folks around the department. Including many that have held their position for many years, have heard of at least 5-7 moves today. Mainly within USGS, the Secretary’s Office, FWS and BOR. Anyone else in DOI or larger gov hear of any new SES moves?

Federal employees have been having essentially the same conversation for years:

What will our raise be next year?

1%? 2%? 3%? Will locality pay increase? Will Congress intervene? Will the president propose something different?

I think we're asking the wrong question.

The real question should be:

Why doesn't federal pay have a reliable mechanism that protects employees' purchasing power and keeps compensation reasonably competitive with the broader labor market?

This isn't something that started with the current administration. Federal employees have experienced periods of pay freezes, below-inflation increases, and growing pay-comparability concerns across Democratic and Republican administrations and multiple Congresses.

The cumulative effect matters.

If your salary increases 1% while prices increase 4%, you didn't really receive a raise. Your paycheck got larger, but your real purchasing power declined.

Do that repeatedly over many years and the difference compounds.

FEPCA was supposed to address part of this

Congress already recognized this problem when it passed the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act (FEPCA) of 1990.

The idea was that federal compensation should remain reasonably competitive with nonfederal employment, including geographic differences through locality pay.

Yet decades later, federal employees are still debating every year whether their next adjustment will keep up.

That's not a functioning long-term compensation strategy.

We need to think beyond next year's raise

Rather than fighting every December over another temporary percentage, Congress should consider a permanent reform built around three principles:

1. Protect purchasing power

Federal salaries shouldn't be allowed to substantially fall behind inflation for years and then require employees to beg Congress for a catch-up adjustment.

There should be a mechanism that considers cumulative inflation and prevents persistent erosion of real wages.

2. Maintain labor-market competitiveness

Inflation isn't the only issue.

The federal government competes with private companies, state and local governments, universities, hospitals and other employers for engineers, accountants, firefighters, scientists, healthcare professionals, IT specialists, cybersecurity professionals and countless other occupations.

Federal compensation needs to reflect that reality.

3. Fix pay comparability instead of ignoring it

If the existing FEPCA system isn't going to be implemented as originally envisioned, Congress should reform it.

Create a transparent formula incorporating inflation, comparable labor-market wages and locality differences—and actually use it.

"But higher federal salaries cost taxpayers money."

Absolutely. Compensation costs money.

But underpaying employees isn't necessarily free either.

Vacancies cost money.

Turnover costs money.

Recruiting and training replacements cost money.

Overtime costs money.

Contracting out work can cost money.

Losing experienced employees means losing years of institutional knowledge.

And agencies that cannot offer competitive compensation eventually have difficulty attracting the people needed to perform their missions.

We should be evaluating the total cost of maintaining an effective federal workforce, not simply asking how little we can spend on salaries this year.

Maybe it's time for some bottom-up economics

For decades, American economic policy has frequently emphasized tax reductions and incentives at the top with the expectation that the benefits eventually work their way through the economy.

Whatever your political philosophy, there's another side worth considering:

What happens when middle-class workers simply have more real disposable income?

Workers spend money on housing, groceries, childcare, restaurants, vehicles, home repairs and businesses in their communities.

A federal pay system that preserves real middle-class purchasing power isn't just an employee issue. Federal workers live and spend money in communities throughout the United States.

This shouldn't be partisan

Federal employees serve under Republican presidents and Democratic presidents.

We work for Republican administrations and Democratic administrations.

And federal employees live in red states, blue states and everywhere in between.

You don't have to be a Democrat or Republican to believe the United States government should be able to recruit and retain competent employees.

So maybe we should actually make some noise.

Contact your two senators and your House representative

It takes a few minutes.

Tell them you want Congress to address long-term federal pay reform, not simply next year's adjustment.

Ask for:

• Restoration of federal purchasing power lost during periods when pay significantly lagged inflation.
• A credible federal/private-sector pay-comparability system.
• Locality adjustments that reflect actual labor markets.
• An automatic mechanism that prevents years of cumulative inflation from quietly eroding federal salaries.
• Congressional oversight of recruitment, retention, vacancies and turnover when evaluating federal compensation.

And personalize your message.

Tell them what you're seeing at your agency.

Are experienced employees leaving?

Are positions difficult to fill?

Are younger employees declining offers?

Are people leaving for state government or private-sector positions?

Are vacancies creating more overtime and workload for everyone who remains?

Those stories matter.

Imagine if even a small percentage of us did this

There are millions of civilian federal employees, plus retirees, spouses and family members.

That's a substantial number of constituents.

One email probably doesn't change federal pay policy.

Thousands of constituents contacting congressional offices about the same specific issue can make it an issue congressional offices have to pay attention to.

So contact your senators.

Contact your representative.

Republican or Democrat.

Don't just ask:

"What's my raise next year?"

Ask:

"Why are we still using a system that allows federal employees' real purchasing power to erode for years at a time?"

Federal employees shouldn't have to fight the same battle every year.

Restore the lost ground. Fix federal pay comparability. Protect real purchasing power. And build a compensation system designed for the next 30 years instead of the next budget cycle.