View Poll Results: Should they recieve back pay

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    17 56.67%
  • No

    10 33.33%
  • Partial (explain)

    2 6.67%
  • Other (explain)

    1 3.33%
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 54

Thread: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

  1. #41
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,893

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    I'm a dangerous guy. We are icing on their **** cupcake. You may as well embrace it now....

    We are used for sympathy by both parties to fool the average citizen into votes. We are portrayed as hapless victims of corporate greed by protestors and critics to fool the average citizen for their votes. We are "Troops to Support" when convenient and especially in front of microphones to fool the average citizen into votes. We are constantly dropped into situations we aren't trained for as politicians preach their ideologies and humanitarianisms to fool the average citizen into votes. And this isn't just about their decrepit behaviors towards the military.

    Does any minority still think a Democrat is a friend? Does any middle class worker think a Republican is a friend?

    Like I always state, "past the voters booth, you simply don't matter." And if you are military, you matter less. But we Americans like our illusions don't we?

    I paraphrase Lentulus Batiatus from the Capua ludus, "Words fall from their mouths like **** from ass."
    That was young Vetius' line, not Batiatus.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  2. #42
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andalublue View Post
    So, how come members of Congress still get paid?
    It's unconstitutional not to.

    Art I, Sect 6
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  3. #43
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    Quote Originally Posted by ggh View Post
    Because they have defined themselves as essential.
    This is really incorrect; I would contend that the Constitution defines them as essential. One person has already stated he will return his pay.

    http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/20...nt-shuts-down#
    Last edited by American; 04-08-11 at 03:47 PM.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #44
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    I had to laugh when I read this. I immediately thought, "Star, your Very Liberal slip is showing!" Then, I looked at what I wrote and said, "Maggie, your Conservative undies are in a wedgie."


    lol honesty at its best...good job maggie

  5. #45
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,037

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean View Post
    That was young Vetius' line, not Batiatus.
    Oh yeah. He was a tool.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  6. #46
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    This is correct if the furlough is being done to "save money". For example, some months ago there was talk about furlouging federal employees 2 weeks out of the year. The plan was to do one day a pay period over a period of 14 pay periods so as not to create a hardship on the employees of an entire 2 week period without pay. This was going to be done to "save money".

    This is not the case of the current furlough. This is not the congress choosing to furlough federal employees to save money, but rather that there is simply no money available to PAY employees so you can't have them come to work. So you can either fire them, or furlough them. Since there will be money at some point eventually its better to furlough them, keep them employed, and bring them back at the point that you DO have money to pay them.

    So in general I agree with you there when a furlough is done to save money. That however is not how this furlough is coming to be. Its not being voted on by congress to save money, its occuring because Congress isn't authorizing any money to pay at the moment. So you're dealing with two different scenarios there.
    So you want people to be paid for work that they didn't do?Why not give employees the opportunity to make up for lost days?
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  7. #47
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    It looks as if a government shutdown is extremely likely to occur at midnight tonight. When that happens essential employees will continue to work, but will not be paid until the shutdown ends. Non-essential employees will be furloughed without their salaries. In 1996, when passing the new budget, the congresses authorized backpay for the employees that were furloughed. Whether or not that will occur for this shutdown is unknown. My question to you is should it be?

    Going against the notion of back pay is a couple of things that I can think of. First and foremost, these individuals will not have worked adn thus shouldn't be entitled to pay. Additionally, as we know we're in a financially troubled time in this country and not paying them would mean more money to be used elsewhere.

    On the flip side, these individuals are not striking. They are not choosing to not work. They are being forced out of their job because the Congress is not successfully doing theirs. They are already being punished by essentially having their salaries at the very least delayed, potentially causing issues for various bills and expenses, and by causing their workload to significantly pile up. Should they have extra punishment placed on top for Congresses ineptitude by not just delaying, but cutting, their salaries?

    So what do you all say? Should there be back pay, should they be paid nothing, or some other alternative?
    Yes - they should get backpay. It is not their fault NOR do they have any control AT ALL. They most certainly can't quickly go and find a new job to work in order to tide them over. . . some might but most don't have that as an option.

    We are all SALARY employees of the government - very few individuals are hourly pay.

    "non-essential" doesn't mean their jobs don't matter or aren't important. It means that their jobs aren't 100% hardcore essential to the functioning of the government itself - but they still need ot get their work done at some point.

    My husband, I suppose, is 'essential' and will work through this bullcrap - he will be receiving 1/2 pay this coming paycheck. Beyond that? Who knows - half, none? Some of his coworkers and assistants are "non essential" however - but that doesn't mean that they still don't have to catch up on their work when they get back - which will be backed up beyond belief. Even one employee at the WTU being gone for ONE day creates a massive backload of crap to be sorted through.

    So - don't consider it "pay for hours not worked" consider it "the many hours of double-duty they have ot pull when they come back" and "asshole tax for the government causing problems beyond belief"

    I don't know how long this will last - how many paychecks will be sliced? How many will be $0.00 altogether? But I hope it doesn't last long - our savings will tap out quickly and then what? Without backpay we'll be back to where we started savings-wise two years ago.
    Last edited by Aunt Spiker; 04-08-11 at 06:50 PM.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  8. #48
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    It looks as if a government shutdown is extremely likely to occur at midnight tonight. When that happens essential employees will continue to work, but will not be paid until the shutdown ends. Non-essential employees will be furloughed without their salaries. In 1996, when passing the new budget, the congresses authorized backpay for the employees that were furloughed. Whether or not that will occur for this shutdown is unknown. My question to you is should it be?

    Going against the notion of back pay is a couple of things that I can think of. First and foremost, these individuals will not have worked adn thus shouldn't be entitled to pay. Additionally, as we know we're in a financially troubled time in this country and not paying them would mean more money to be used elsewhere.

    On the flip side, these individuals are not striking. They are not choosing to not work. They are being forced out of their job because the Congress is not successfully doing theirs. They are already being punished by essentially having their salaries at the very least delayed, potentially causing issues for various bills and expenses, and by causing their workload to significantly pile up. Should they have extra punishment placed on top for Congresses ineptitude by not just delaying, but cutting, their salaries?

    So what do you all say? Should there be back pay, should they be paid nothing, or some other alternative?
    I voted "Other."

    Everything you say is true. On one hand these federal employees aren't working. On the other hand, it's not for their lack of wanting to.

    So here's what I think should happen.

    Constitutionally speaking, all Congressmen and Senators cannot reduce their pay. This is so that their salary can't be used as coercion for a bill.

    So what I think should happen is that each and every Congressman and Senator should donate the pay they get while the government is shut down to a fund to pay for those federal employees who are furloughed.

    After all, these federal employees still have rent and bills to pay, so it's not fair that everybody in Congress is being a total asshat. Therefore those asshats should voluntarily donate their pay to the employees not getting paid.

    That's the only thing that seems truly fair to me.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  9. #49
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    So you want people to be paid for work that they didn't do?Why not give employees the opportunity to make up for lost days?
    I did not say that. I said that a furlough in this case would not be enacted to save money but rather enacted due to lack of allocated money. I was not advocating either way with regards to reimbursement, just pointing out the error in your description of why the furlough would be happening

  10. #50
    Wrinkly member
    Manc Skipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Southern England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    23,227

    Re: Should non-essential employees get back pay?

    The work doesn't magically go away, it sits around until the workers come back and they work through it to catch up. If they are prevented from working for a month, they will still do a years work, but just have eleven months in which to do it. They want to do it but have no choice if they are prevented, why should they lose pay?
    Don't work out, work in.

    Never eat anything that's served in a bucket.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •