Since the government organizations are providing the product (they produce it for private industry) who is going to tell the private company what the product is and what the details of the prodcut are? The GOVERNMENT agency employees.

I agree they are having a tough time, but think about how tough it would be if the government wasn't there to guarantee the loans. I've seen a similar thing with attempting to re-fi my own house. VA now does 100% refinance loans. I was able to find exactly 1 lender who was participating in the program as it was written after contacting 15 companies. I found 1 other lender that was participating in the program, but instead of only requiring good credit (like the law states) they were requiring excellent credit.


Yes I know basic economic theory. I also know many in the governemtn who are passively looking for another job. When the economy gets better (sooner or later the liberals will get voted out and the economy will improve), or when or compensation gets cut they will be actively looking for a nother job.


That is not what I've seen in private industry as far as mergers and acquisitions. What it boils down to is wethere or not the employees (they might only be concerned about the senior managment) at the company being purchased will be taken care of. Will the leadership be able to maintain their position and possibly improve it in the future. Actually yes you can give raises with stocks. It's called bonus instead of giving caash money you give payment in stocks. The wife had a job that paid like that several years ago.


That would be possible, if the wife hadn't stayed in contact with old friends at her old job. They still talk and have lunch together since they work in the same industry they talk about the industry. Everythign she was told by HR was also beign told and implemented in the office.

They offer like the government, for the positions they were hiring for. Here is the pay take it or leave it. It was always the same pay for the new hires. It didn't matter if there were 20 applicants or 2 they always offered the same pay. Senior management at her company was smart at one time. They knew employees would talk about how much they make, even if there is a policy against it. So they had a very regimented pay scale without much lienincy. Only after purchasing a few other companies did they run into problems with pay, since the new employees were making market wages while the employees at the parent company were earning below market. Word gets out.The number of employees my wife managed went from a high of 16 locally to a low of 7 over the course of 2 years and it wasn't due to downsizing. The employees were using the company as a stop gap until they could find a better paying job.


No I have worked in the private sector. I have seen what is going on in the private sector and felt the sting of no raise while paying a lot more for worse benefits when I worked in the private sector and this was during the good times. My wife has just about always worked in the private sector, so I kind of have a good idea what she was going through financially, since it directly effected me. That is one of the fallacies many people have of government workers. Most do not start their employment with the government and that is all they know. Most have held private sector jobs and have a good idea what the deal is out there.

 

In the case of the US Treasury bonds. Not that hard to do, bonds are part of a series 7 exam. Nothing too difficult about that.
Bet you can look over the EU lines and find enough subject matter experts from Leaman and the likes to replace all of the US Treasury, and it would run better. Then again, the US Treasury has a task, get the money the US does not have to spend.
Another agency that makes complex rules that a law requires, of course that agency. Then again that is self fulfilling job creation. Not like you would ever see this in the private sector. Wonder why it is a spending problem.

Considering HUD & FHA helped make the mess with the loans they insured, why do you think it is do hard to get one processed these days.
They are still trying to process non standardized loans, which is a hands off event to most ( majority of ) lenders. Wonder why it was so hard to find one ?
They had their fill of this trash, and with Feddie & Fanny suing to recoup money from the banks, not FHA, how long is this going to continue ?
HUD and FHA got a bad rep with this mess, and if Feddie & Fanny keep up suing banks to get back money, you are going to see less and less dealings with FHA & HUD. Like that, one govt agency screws another, and the private sector is left holding the bag. Wonder why they are changing the ground rules, banks cannot stay in business by giving houses away to people, they are not Ed McMan.

Again, welcome to what the private sector has been dealing with since 2009. Pay Cuts, pay more of your benefits, and more OT without getting paid for it ( exempt-salary ). Some are looking, good for them. If they can find better pay, great. How they keep in mind what happens when the Health Care law makes the next implementation phase ( more money out of pocket ).

Not to sure which ones you are following. HP latest acquisition was about HP trying to fill the void anticipated in the revenue stream by kicking the entire PC ( incl laptop & tablet ) to the curb. The company they are buying is fairly strong, but they know they cannot compete long term stand alone, with the likes of Oracle, so they are bailing while they can. GM trying to sell Hummer and Saturn. They know long term they cannot get revenue out of them, dump it. got any mergers where the acquisition was not about long term health of the companies on either side ?

Sure, if the company has the shares waiting. else it is issuing stock in place of cash, and eroding the existing share price by that amount. Again, same as going to the bank to get a loan to use for payroll. The company will be punished for it on the share price.


Great for the company she just left then. They are one of a select few that are doing well enough to pay out now, rather than wait and see if the POTUS American Jobs Act passe ( or some form of the House and POTUS bill ), which would have let them off the hook for half of the Social Security taxes ( the POTUS version had job increase or payroll increase via raises included in this ). They have enough money to through around, maybe the wife should have considered the counter offer. Less employees to manage and a pay bump at a strong company. Not looking too good leaving that strong of a company in these times. When things started to pull out, image what that company could do with GDP increase of 2% ? Got the name of this publicly traded company, you make it sound like a strong performer, worth owning.


Now this sounds like the remainder of the private sector.
They do not have the cash to pay 2005 wages, and have a glut of applicants. Expect this to happen until reported UE numbers drops below 7.5%.


you forgot the kicker, 30% pay cuts. I like the you have seen it, but have not experienced it at the govt.
This is what I am getting at, private sector is cutting wages ( along with layoffs ), coupled with the last raise was 2007 or 2008. I see where you have not had a raise, but I do not see where you have gone backwards to 2007 levels.
Private sector when they don't have the money, needs to make cuts.
Govt feels they can just use a law to increase revenue, so they can keep spending at the same levels.
Starting to sound like England in the 1100s.

 

Who collects taxes? Who hunts down tax cheats (except those favored by the politicals)? Who is the only authorized agency to handle fiscal issues in the US? Who is the only authorized agency to mint money?


You do realize HUD and FHA only guarantee the loans they don't actually invest or make loans. The investors are teh investors. The people who guaranteeing the loans only guarnatee the loans. Just like the waranty on our trucks as long as the banks make the loans within the standards of the program FHA and HUD will reimburse the bank for bad loans. If we modify our turcks or fail to maintain them Ford will void our warranty.


Unpaid O/T only can happen in salaried positions, and then only up to a certain limit. Even salaried postions have a cap on teh number of hours worked before O/T is paid. Those limits have to be spelled out though before it is enforceable. It is in the labor laws. I researched it when the wife was working between 70-80 hour weeks with no O/T.

All mergers are for the benefit of both companies, unless one company is in foreclosure/bankruptcy/receivorship.

We are not talking about a hypothetical. The company DID have the shares on hand. With the number of shares they had to spend to purchase these other companies they could have funded bonuses for about 30 years. These shares were on hand. They were not obtained from splitting or otherwise coming up with more shares, they were owned by the company.

Great for the company she just left then. They are one of a select few that are doing well enough to pay out now, rather than wait and see if the POTUS American Jobs Act passe ( or some form of the House and POTUS bill ), which would have let them off the hook for half of the Social Security taxes ( the POTUS version had job increase or payroll increase via raises included in this ). They have enough money to through around, maybe the wife should have considered the counter offer. Less employees to manage and a pay bump at a strong company. Not looking too good leaving that strong of a company in these times. When things started to pull out, image what that company could do with GDP increase of 2% ? Got the name of this publicly traded company, you make it sound like a strong performer, worth owning.

Wow, dude normally I agree with what you type, but you really do need to actually read what I have written. I said, "HR floated the idea of my wife coming back..." I never said there was a job offer. The conditions surrounding my wife walking from the company (again not going to get into it as most are private issues with the company) and taking a 20k per year pay cut makes it very difficult for the company to just come out and offer. They have to schmooze her back. They know it will cost them to get her. She is no longer a manger. When she left she went back to line worker status, that was how bad the work conditions at her company were. The company has a strong bottom line and it has been listed as one of the strongest in its industry for several years, but that comes at a cost of beign ultra conservative and not taking many risks. The major problem is upper mangement. I'm not giving the name out because much of the information I know is from her (although other I have posted is in the public realm) and there could be some other issues with things going on over there. She is interested in going back if the conditions are what she wants and disclosure can put her on the bad list.

What you seem to fail to grasp is that I have worked in the private sector within the last 5 years. My wife has worked in the private sector within the last year. She had seen her hours go from an average of 45-50 per week to 70-80 per week with no pay raise at her old company. Technically that is a huge pay cut (not too mention her bonus schedule being changed for the worse). In her industry bonuses are a significant portion of pay. To tell you how many hours she was working she took a 20k per year pay cut, but took a $2 per hour pay raise. You are correct I have not seen MY pay cut, but my wife's was. Is it really irrelevant whether the money comes from my employment or my wife's. Either way it is going into the same account and paying the same bills. About the same time my wife was made an officer of the company they changed the leave schedule so instead of a minimum 3 weeks vacation she had two weeks until she was with the company 10 years. All the officers before her kept their extra leave.

 

Something else to look at. The estimate for money spent for federal employee compensation is in the neighborhood of 258 billion dollars. How much of that do you think can be cut out? Keeping in mind financial issues for government employees can result in release of protected information. Sure you can come up with an arbitrary number, like 50 billion, but where does it come from and how do you divie it up? Restructuring must be done. For example, FHA, HUD, RD, VA, and a couple other areas all provide government guaranteed mortgages. Most of these programs are similar enough that they can be combined into one organization. That cuts many employees, but most are at the lower end of the pay scale, unless early retirements are offered and the lower level employees are promoted.

 

True, only the Govt performs this function ( today ). That does not automatically make them a subject matter expert, mean they go above the call, or are efficient at their job. Again, to quote your old Sgt, they can make me work long, they can't make hard. Job still pays the same either way.

Yes I do, that is why I said insure ( which is actually what they do ).
if the loan goes bust, the underwriter is to be covered by the insurance HUD & FHA provide. This is where the swept under the rug is coming into play. Fanny & Freddie are going after the banks for all of the amount, FHA & HUD are strangely left out of covering their insured amounts...

You might want to read the DOL rules on this, you have it wrong. Not all salaried positions have to pay over time at some point.
Specifically to Executive, Administrative, Professional, Computer & Outside Sales Employees as long as they make a min amt per week, and per year in total.
The job functions ( not title ) listed above is considered exempt from any OT by the DOL, as long as they make ~ 25K / yr and get at least ~ 500.00 per week. From your post, your wife falls in the Professional Exemption category.
I found this, and all I had to do was read the law that is published, didn't need a govt agency to explain it to me....
Section 13(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act as defined by Regulations, 29 CFR Part 541.


In theory maybe.
Obviously you have never been through one at large companies.
There is always a looser, someone is always in charge, and it is usually the one acquiring. This is not beneficial for both.
Every acquisition I have been through was termed a merger of equals, and the company usually falls apart in short order from this feel good attitude of win - win ( and gets sold off for a fraction of the value to another company ).
Acquisitions are not the special Olympics, there is only 1 winner.
Look at Cisco Systems, all the benefit was for Cisco, the company being acquired got the short end of the stick.
Cisco has successful acquisitions due to Cisco having the money to buy the company, they make the rules, and more often than not, the acquired company employees are on the street within 6 months, unless it is critical to the product line they bought ( sales, administrative, marketing, etc are tossed to the curb ).

Hypothetical is all I have, you still won't give a name, or provide all the info up front. For all I know you are writing the story of this based upon my answers. I have no way to know either way on this...

That is called the start of negotiations.
Had she shown some interest, I am sure it would have went to the next level of a written counter offer. Else they were just paying her lip service, which could be. Then again, that lip service is also the round in the company about resetting wages to be equal...

Now look back, BlueJay's place, they have the unpaid OT AND paycuts ( and increased medical costs ). It is not a technical cut, it is a real cut.
That is what the private sector has these days. Clear on what the private sector calls a pay cut now ?

Due to changing jobs. Sorry self inflicted. BJ's place, they had to do it to keep the place in business. The employees made the sacrifice to keep most of the people around.

Private sector is about 30%, so ~30% ?
Find it strange how govt pay is to be immune from the same cuts that private sector is making.
SLED in IL they still got their raises this year ( due to a 66% personal income tax increase ), and benefits left untouched.
Actually upheld the IL constitution that SLED employees cannot have their benefits reduced ( or the contribution increased ) or pay reduced at any time ( yes they wrote this in as law ).

You are trying to explain away why the govt cannot cut spending in payroll.
Can't be cut there, can't be cut in Social programs, can't be cut in education. This is the story the left is telling the population, which is why they try to make it an income problem.

Again, Tax everyone that makes 250K or more per year @ 100%.
This is ~ $ 900B in additional tax revenue for CY2010.
Last year the fed overspent by ~ $ 1.6 T.

 

And you won't get a name. Some of the information I have shared is considered private for the company and can damage their reputation and the community's perception. The industry that company is in requires a good reputation. And if there was an opportunity my wife would have exploited it. You see an offer was never made. The idea that she might have a place there was (and it was unsolicited by me wife).

Now look back at what I posted and you quoted. I very specifically stated he bonus schedule was modified so she was paid less. As I already stated in her job bonus is a significant part of their compensation. As I already stated that means she took a REAL pay cut. I have had to repeat myself several times in this exchange. It gets tiresome and appears you are posting only to see yourself post.

I already covered this. I'm not repeating myself again.

Uh no you are not reading what I am posting. I already covered this. I already stated the critters hold the big three budget busters out so they can not be cut. I already stated while at the same time trying to balance the budget on the backs of the federal workers. I already stated without a significant reorganization of the government there is not enough expense in federal compensation for the federal workers to just cut pay and benefits. I already stated the government will have to cut people, although I did not come out and say it explicitly. Simply cutting people and not reorganizing with efficiency in mind will result in employees looking for the exit (job stability is one of the perks to federal employment). The same people I already identified. From the example I provided earlier about the mortgage programs the government could literally cut approx 50% of the workers in those programs. I don't know the exact number of those workers but it would easily be in the thousands. Figuring half the average federal compensation (most being downsized would be in the lower pay grades) and approx 2000 employees the critters could easily cut 120 million out of the budget while maintaining efficiency. If a pay bump is needed they could easily bump the employees up 1-2 grades and still have savings.

I had a longer response spelled out, but since I have had to repeat myself several times, I know you are not reading what I am posting and figured there is no point in posting it.