You know what deal I'd be okay with in exchange for giving Trump $5.7billion for his stupid wall?
Shut down ICE. Fully reinstate DACA. Five year path to citizenship for current residents. Close the immigrant detention camps. And another $5.7 billion to establish and fund a department of immigration assistance whose charter is to proactively asssist undocumented residents on their path to citizenship. Basically Anti-ICE.
not to beat a dead horse, but sure, have that discussion
After they get the government back up and running. Not a second before.
Orphane on
+30
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Has anyone said to Trump (preferably in front of cameras) that by having the government shutdown, he's disabling the same US security he's always prattling on about?
So, to provide some context to the story linked from the last page regarding pay for essential employees whose pay is delayed, it seems that not only are federal employees who work during a shutdown 100% guaranteed back pay once funding is restored, but a court determined that by delaying their pay the federal government violated the FLSA and owed additional damages on top of that pay. Employees in a class action suit won damages in the amount of the minimum wage, plus applicable overtime, for all hours worked during the period less any pay received for work during that period (some employees were paid for a portion of the furlough on time). This was all in addition to the paychecks that they did receive for work performed on the resumption of funding.
This usually doesn't happen, presumably, because shutdowns don't usually last long enough to disrupt pay. Since this one will, we may see another class action suit and another award like this unless the applicable law has been changed in the interim. Since the same principle will apply.
So, since this got BOTP'd, I'll state clearly again: every last employee who works during this furlough will be paid for every hour worked, full stop. Suggesting anything else is spreading misinformation, and harmful. Even using language to intentionally insinuate otherwise is harmful. The actual situation is bad enough, there is no need to distort it.
+5
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
I really hope that ends up being true, because the last thing I want to see Trump do is advocate slavery.
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
The wall would be an acceptable trade for a laundry list of Democratic policy, sure; but that deal can’t be struck, at least in the current fight, because the shutdown is purely about who will have power in the next two years or not. If Trump can shut down the government whenever he wants to demand more shit and succeed, Democrats have no power. If this doesn’t work, Trump has no power. If they struck some kind of absurd grand bargain—the wall in exchange for MFA or something—no matter what the Democrats got, it would be a political win for Trump and lead to further, painful shutdowns over the next two years.
I’d fund the wall in exchange for at least one of comprehensive progressive immigration reform, comprehensive gun control, or Medicare for All, plus funding the government on Democratic budgetary terms for a year, plus permanently removing the potential for future shutdowns via that auto debt ceiling raise thing so we don’t do this again next year
And then I’d go out and say the money exists but no brick will ever be laid, and if it is we’ll tear it down after 2020.
But this is so outlandish as to not even matter. It’s like saying “we’ll fund the wall if Trump resigns and confesses.” The wall is not of infinite negative value and there are theoretical deals that would be worth it, but those deals cannot exist within our current situation and with our current president negotiating.
+5
Options
WeaverWho are you?What do you want?Registered Userregular
I don't think a lot of people get the full logistics of a border wall. It is mind boggling, and would drive up construction costs nationwide, dampening residential and business expansions, create labor shortages, and put the national economy right in the shitter.
Man it’d be nice if just the once Trump said exactly what it was he was ranting about
1) That'd require Trump to know exactly what he's ranting about. Those facts are simply not in evidence.
2) By being nebulous about what he's ranting about (in this case CBS/MSNBC "Fake News!"), he allows his base to wishcast it. If he gets into specifics, then his base can only think it's about that one thing. By being vague, it allows his base to think it's about the thing they care most about. For the ProLifers, he's ranting about abortions. For the 2Aers, he's ranting about gun control. For the racists, he's ranting about the immigrants. Being specific risks his base thinking it's not about "them". Being vague means they can think he's talking directly to them, and saying exactly what they want to hear.
My good friend of nearly 15 years was sworn into the Secret Service this week
Then they told him to go home for the time being thanks to the shut down. My guy has been working his ass off for literal years to get this kind of job, I'm really peeved on his behalf this is happening after all this time. What should have been a celebration is now a waiting game for this shut down to end.
He seems to be taking it well, I think he's just stoked we can play some games in the meantime
I don't think a lot of people get the full logistics of a border wall. It is mind boggling, and would drive up construction costs nationwide, dampening residential and business expansions, create labor shortages, and put the national economy right in the shitter.
Most I've talked to don't know where the Rio Grande is. When educating them, I ask if they are OK walling off the river and giving it to Mexico. Nope. We will build the wall on the other side of the river in that case, they say. They don't care about anything expect building it.
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited January 2019
Everyone knows any good wall needs a moat. Possibly they will get some extra funding for giant mechanical crocodiles with tiny American flags on each tooth.
Has anyone said to Trump (preferably in front of cameras) that by having the government shutdown, he's disabling the same US security he's always prattling on about?
I think the Democrats are just letting it carry on because this is becoming self-evident to various Republican senators and others, who are from places that rely on ports/airport security for many reasons. Going to really hurt them a lot the longer this farce continues.
Also I am amazed that Trumps statements about how he could shoot someone and he wouldn't lose his base's support seem to be more and more true constantly. That anyone could have watched that TV address and not come to the conclusion he's an utterly unhinged loon is just beyond my understanding at this point. He tells the most obvious and easily contradicted lies, yet never seems to budge that 30%ish group of people in any way against him. I'm not even convinced failing to get the wall will do anything to his base as long as he comes up with some lie.
Now the rest of the Republicans? It's obvious they're the ones hoping the democrats cave, because any repercussions will be taken out on the GOP rank and file - not Trump.
(CNN) — Staring at a prolonged government shutdown, Republican senators are privately planning to court Democratic senators on an immigration deal that would give President Donald Trump money for his border wall and include several measures long-sought by Democrats, according to sources familiar with the matter.
After Trump stormed out of a White House meeting with congressional leaders, GOP senators privately gathered in Sen. Lindsey Graham's office Wednesday to discuss a way out of the logjam. The long-shot idea: propose an immigration deal that would include $5.7 billion for Trump's border wall along with several provisions that could entice Democrats.
Those items include changes to help those who are a part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program as well as immigrants from El Salvador and other countries impacted by the Temporary Protected Status program - along with modifications to H-2B visas.
The problem here is once Republicans give Democrats a bunch of shit they want in exchange for a rather paltry amount of money, the public perception of the shutdown will turn on the Dems. It will now be, "the Republicans gave the Dems a lot of things, why are the Dems refusing to open the government?"
For us, we understand the monument to racism/you don't negotiate with terrorists, for the public at large, they'll see the Republicans compromising and the Democrats crossing their arms and being petulant.
(CNN) — Staring at a prolonged government shutdown, Republican senators are privately planning to court Democratic senators on an immigration deal that would give President Donald Trump money for his border wall and include several measures long-sought by Democrats, according to sources familiar with the matter.
After Trump stormed out of a White House meeting with congressional leaders, GOP senators privately gathered in Sen. Lindsey Graham's office Wednesday to discuss a way out of the logjam. The long-shot idea: propose an immigration deal that would include $5.7 billion for Trump's border wall along with several provisions that could entice Democrats.
Those items include changes to help those who are a part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program as well as immigrants from El Salvador and other countries impacted by the Temporary Protected Status program - along with modifications to H-2B visas.
The problem here is once Republicans give Democrats a bunch of shit they want in exchange for a rather paltry amount of money, the public perception of the shutdown will turn on the Dems. It will now be, "the Republicans gave the Dems a lot of things, why are the Dems refusing to open the government?"
For us, we understand the monument to racism/you don't negotiate with terrorists, for the public at large, they'll see the Republicans compromising and the Democrats crossing their arms and being petulant.
Unless what's given is so lopsided in favor of the Democrats (Medicare for All, DACA, DC and PR Statehood, AND Trump's impeachment), that the Republican base would revolt over, the response is "That's definitely worth considering. Open up the government without condition, and we can negotiate."
There's simply no political point behind trying to negotiate on other things while the government is shut down. The only reason the Republicans in the above article are trying, is because they want to be able to give Trump a win. And it'll just encourage the petulant pissbaby and his bootlicks in the Senate, to do the exact same thing next time.
The next threat of a shutdown should be able to be met with "Fuck you. We didn't negotiate then, we won't negotiate now. This is on you.". If Democrats give a fucking inch on anything beyond a clean CR, they're admitting that shutting down the government is a viable negotiating tactic. And that strategy needs to be fucking strangled right now.
So, to provide some context to the story linked from the last page regarding pay for essential employees whose pay is delayed, it seems that not only are federal employees who work during a shutdown 100% guaranteed back pay once funding is restored, but a court determined that by delaying their pay the federal government violated the FLSA and owed additional damages on top of that pay. Employees in a class action suit won damages in the amount of the minimum wage, plus applicable overtime, for all hours worked during the period less any pay received for work during that period (some employees were paid for a portion of the furlough on time). This was all in addition to the paychecks that they did receive for work performed on the resumption of funding.
This usually doesn't happen, presumably, because shutdowns don't usually last long enough to disrupt pay. Since this one will, we may see another class action suit and another award like this unless the applicable law has been changed in the interim. Since the same principle will apply.
So, since this got BOTP'd, I'll state clearly again: every last employee who works during this furlough will be paid for every hour worked, full stop. Suggesting anything else is spreading misinformation, and harmful. Even using language to intentionally insinuate otherwise is harmful. The actual situation is bad enough, there is no need to distort it.
I thought back pay had to be approved by Congress. Is that not true?
So, to provide some context to the story linked from the last page regarding pay for essential employees whose pay is delayed, it seems that not only are federal employees who work during a shutdown 100% guaranteed back pay once funding is restored, but a court determined that by delaying their pay the federal government violated the FLSA and owed additional damages on top of that pay. Employees in a class action suit won damages in the amount of the minimum wage, plus applicable overtime, for all hours worked during the period less any pay received for work during that period (some employees were paid for a portion of the furlough on time). This was all in addition to the paychecks that they did receive for work performed on the resumption of funding.
This usually doesn't happen, presumably, because shutdowns don't usually last long enough to disrupt pay. Since this one will, we may see another class action suit and another award like this unless the applicable law has been changed in the interim. Since the same principle will apply.
So, since this got BOTP'd, I'll state clearly again: every last employee who works during this furlough will be paid for every hour worked, full stop. Suggesting anything else is spreading misinformation, and harmful. Even using language to intentionally insinuate otherwise is harmful. The actual situation is bad enough, there is no need to distort it.
I don't dispute any of that, but it's an incomplete picture that doesn't account for those furloughed (i.e., not working) who still have to pay rent and buy groceries, or that close to half of federal workers aren't federal employees, but contractors who get paid (or don't) by the terms of their contracts. Or the literally millions who depend on indirect income, such as HUD subsidies or SNAP to pay rent or feed their families. Or the fact that the promise of receiving back pay at some point in the future will not help with bills arriving today. In a very real sense, many people will not get paid this week, and many won't at all.
Schumer and Van Hollen are supposedly going to ask for unanimous consent to vote to reopen the government on the senate floor today to remind people that Mich McConnell is keeping the senate from voting on reopening all or any of the government.
I may be wrong, but I thought shutdowns have always turned into paid vacations for all furloughed workers.
Congress (and the President) have to approve this.
Anybody who’s currently working as “Essential” is guaranteed to get paid.
It’s the approval part that I think most of us are thinking might not be so easy this time.
In the past, furloughed and essential employees were retroactively paid for their employment during the shutdown period. Generally, they're still salaried employees and they're still employed, it's just illegal to pay them and illegal to have them work for free (unless they're deemed essential).
In every previous shutdown, the employees have been granted this retroactive pay. It is very likely that this would be the case with this shutdown, but it's no guarantee. Although, it is basically a guarantee that if that backpay were not approved, the government would get sued and have to pay it anyway (at least to essential employees but almost definitely for furloughed employees).
On a different tangent, Trump and the Republicans are likely wasting far more than $5.7 billion with the shutdown for how long it's been going due to the economic impact of non-functioning departments and lost work that will end up paid anyway.
President Rex on
+4
Options
CaptainPeacockBoard Game HoarderTop o' the LakeRegistered Userregular
My household is going to have one of those missed paychecks. Thankfully we can make do, but it's going to be tight.
As far as caving on the wall, the Dems might be able to pull a Spinal Tap and agree to one as long as it's but a few inches high.
Cluck cluck, gibber gibber, my old man's a mushroom, etc.
I may be wrong, but I thought shutdowns have always turned into paid vacations for all furloughed workers.
Congress (and the President) have to approve this.
Anybody who’s currently working as “Essential” is guaranteed to get paid.
It’s the approval part that I think most of us are thinking might not be so easy this time.
All of this is true and correct. Essential workers must be paid by law, it’s guaranteed. Furloughed workers may or may not be paid; but traditionally have been through separate legislation.
But the “working without pay” rhetoric muddies the waters, leads some to believe that pay for working essential employees isn’t guaranteed, and just one page ago a poster linked a story and implied workers might wait years for that pay. Which was simply a misreading of the article.
We need to be crystal clear that workers who are essential and working are guaranteed by law to be paid. Because just one page ago somebody was claiming otherwise.
That’s not at all intended to minimize the uncertainty being faced by furloughed employers or the harm to contractors. But it’s a point of fact that must be kept clear. Literally nobody is working for free. Their pay is delayed until the shutdown ends, but it is absolutely guaranteed.
The Daily Show dug up video of Trump giving a commencement speech in 2004, encouraging graduates;
“Don’t give up. Don’t allow it to happen. If there’s a concrete wall in front of you, go through it, go over it, go around it, but get to the other side of that wall.”
I may be wrong, but I thought shutdowns have always turned into paid vacations for all furloughed workers.
Congress (and the President) have to approve this.
Anybody who’s currently working as “Essential” is guaranteed to get paid.
It’s the approval part that I think most of us are thinking might not be so easy this time.
In the past, furloughed and essential employees were retroactively paid for their employment during the shutdown period. Generally, they're still salaried employees and they're still employed, it's just illegal to pay them and illegal to have them work for free (unless they're deemed essential).
In every previous shutdown, the employees have been granted this retroactive pay. It is very likely that this would be the case with this shutdown, but it's no guarantee. Although, it is basically a guarantee that if that backpay were not approved, the government would get sued and have to pay it anyway (at least to essential employees but almost definitely for furloughed employees).
On a different tangent, Trump and the Republicans are likely wasting far more than $5.7 billion with the shutdown for how long it's been going due to the economic impact of non-functioning departments and lost work that will end up paid anyway.
See, the bolded here is an example of the problem. The "at least to essential employees" bit has no place in this sentence, because there is no approval process whatsoever to paying them, nor would any suit ever be involved. They simply get paid once the shutdown ends, by current law. These kinds of statements add ambiguity to that, where there isn't any. Talking about people "working without pay" does as well...delayed pay can fit within "without pay" but many may take the implication differently. "Working for free" (seen here and elsewhere) is even worse...delayed pay doesn't fit within that. Currently working employees have zero uncertainty whatsoever about if they will get paid, at least if they've listened to the many briefings they've been given. It's solely about when. But there's a lot of confusion among those discussing the shutdown, here and elsewhere, about whether theres a chance that the guys guarding Trump might have to do so for free. They will not. Ever. Period. Every last employee working is guaranteed, 100%, to be paid by law. The only way they don't get paid is if the government never resumes and the republic crumbles.
No shutdown will ever operate like the last one until it actually does. There are no guarantees here.
Yes. There are. The one guarantee is that essential workers who show up will be paid when the shutdown ends. It's a 100% legal obligation under current law.
(CNN) — Staring at a prolonged government shutdown, Republican senators are privately planning to court Democratic senators on an immigration deal that would give President Donald Trump money for his border wall and include several measures long-sought by Democrats, according to sources familiar with the matter.
After Trump stormed out of a White House meeting with congressional leaders, GOP senators privately gathered in Sen. Lindsey Graham's office Wednesday to discuss a way out of the logjam. The long-shot idea: propose an immigration deal that would include $5.7 billion for Trump's border wall along with several provisions that could entice Democrats.
Those items include changes to help those who are a part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program as well as immigrants from El Salvador and other countries impacted by the Temporary Protected Status program - along with modifications to H-2B visas.
The problem here is once Republicans give Democrats a bunch of shit they want in exchange for a rather paltry amount of money, the public perception of the shutdown will turn on the Dems. It will now be, "the Republicans gave the Dems a lot of things, why are the Dems refusing to open the government?"
For us, we understand the monument to racism/you don't negotiate with terrorists, for the public at large, they'll see the Republicans compromising and the Democrats crossing their arms and being petulant.
Unless what's given is so lopsided in favor of the Democrats (Medicare for All, DACA, DC and PR Statehood, AND Trump's impeachment), that the Republican base would revolt over, the response is "That's definitely worth considering. Open up the government without condition, and we can negotiate."
There's simply no political point behind trying to negotiate on other things while the government is shut down. The only reason the Republicans in the above article are trying, is because they want to be able to give Trump a win. And it'll just encourage the petulant pissbaby and his bootlicks in the Senate, to do the exact same thing next time.
The next threat of a shutdown should be able to be met with "Fuck you. We didn't negotiate then, we won't negotiate now. This is on you.". If Democrats give a fucking inch on anything beyond a clean CR, they're admitting that shutting down the government is a viable negotiating tactic. And that strategy needs to be fucking strangled right now.
Yes, in our hearts that's how we want it to be. But think with your head and you know the moment the Republicans come out with a compromise, the narrative changes and becomes "The Republicans compromised, why are the Democrats now refusing?" It sucks, but once again the media narrative will force the Democrats to be the adults in the room.
No shutdown will ever operate like the last one until it actually does. There are no guarantees here.
Yes. There are. The one guarantee is that essential workers who show up will be paid when the shutdown ends. It's a 100% legal obligation under current law.
The question is will those who did not work be paid. That has been the norm, but I do not believe that is codified in law.
No shutdown will ever operate like the last one until it actually does. There are no guarantees here.
Yes. There are. The one guarantee is that essential workers who show up will be paid when the shutdown ends. It's a 100% legal obligation under current law.
The question is will those who did not work be paid. That has been the norm, but I do not believe that is codified in law.
No. Last page somebody once again questioned whether essential workers would get paid, including linking a (misinterpreted) article suggesting they may not.
This page, in response to my underlining that working employees are guaranteed to get paid, somebody notes that there are “no guarantees.” And a bunch of people clicked agree. Also, the quote I just bolded.
It’s a confusion that persists. A question that keeps getting asked.
Edit: To the other point, those that are not working do not get paid under current law. It’s specifically codified that they do not. It will require specific new legislation to pay them.
I'm officially too cynical, as I see that and think "Boy, they sure want their refunds."
Be slightly less cynical imo. They want their voters to get their refunds.
I think they also realize if their voters don't get their refunds in a timely fashion than what minor bump they could have seen from the tax changes is going to be washed away in a sea of anger at the govt dicking over getting them their refund in the first place.
(CNN) — Staring at a prolonged government shutdown, Republican senators are privately planning to court Democratic senators on an immigration deal that would give President Donald Trump money for his border wall and include several measures long-sought by Democrats, according to sources familiar with the matter.
After Trump stormed out of a White House meeting with congressional leaders, GOP senators privately gathered in Sen. Lindsey Graham's office Wednesday to discuss a way out of the logjam. The long-shot idea: propose an immigration deal that would include $5.7 billion for Trump's border wall along with several provisions that could entice Democrats.
Those items include changes to help those who are a part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program as well as immigrants from El Salvador and other countries impacted by the Temporary Protected Status program - along with modifications to H-2B visas.
The problem here is once Republicans give Democrats a bunch of shit they want in exchange for a rather paltry amount of money, the public perception of the shutdown will turn on the Dems. It will now be, "the Republicans gave the Dems a lot of things, why are the Dems refusing to open the government?"
For us, we understand the monument to racism/you don't negotiate with terrorists, for the public at large, they'll see the Republicans compromising and the Democrats crossing their arms and being petulant.
On the plus side I think the american people are realizing that nobody but trump and mcconnell have any actual power to back up any deal made so random senators throwing stuff out there means jack shit. We have seen this story before and it leads nowhere unless it comes from trump directly and even then it's probably not worth the paper it is written on.
0
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
No shutdown will ever operate like the last one until it actually does. There are no guarantees here.
Yes. There are. The one guarantee is that essential workers who show up will be paid when the shutdown ends. It's a 100% legal obligation under current law.
That guarantee is functionally meaningless. Folks in this situation in 2013 did get paid eventually (partially in 2014 and fully during a 2017 legal case), but saying that getting paid money you need for your mortgage in a trickle effect one or four years down the line is literally the same thing as not getting paid when you need to meet your mortgage today.
As a state government employee, who works with many federal employee folks, both myself and my friend group have been on various sides of state and federal shutdowns and furloughs. None of them are set in stone and even if they choose to honor payment for the employees working now, there are a great many ways that directors and section leads can fudge the numbers or withhold partial amounts of payment within the law to maintain unit solvency (and the government doesn't always just flood those units with the money from the shutdown, often they don't receive it immediately but in irregular chunks over the duration of the year).
And for the lions share of folks on furlough, who are not deemed essential, they are very likely to not get paid and cannot count of congress and the president being magnanimous (even if historical precedent says they will be). It only takes once for that not to happen.
So, yes. No shutdown is the same as the last one until it is. And so far, it isn't and won't be until its over and it happens.
No shutdown will ever operate like the last one until it actually does. There are no guarantees here.
Yes. There are. The one guarantee is that essential workers who show up will be paid when the shutdown ends. It's a 100% legal obligation under current law.
That guarantee is functionally meaningless. Folks in this situation in 2013 did get paid eventually (partially in 2014 and fully during a 2017 legal case), but saying that getting paid money you need for your mortgage in a trickle effect one or four years down the line is literally the same thing as not getting paid when you need to meet your mortgage today.
As a state government employee, who works with many federal employee folks, both myself and my friend group have been on various sides of state and federal shutdowns and furloughs. None of them are set in stone and even if they choose to honor payment for the employees working now, there are a great many ways that directors and section leads can fudge the numbers or withhold partial amounts of payment within the law to maintain unit solvency (and the government doesn't always just flood those units with the money from the shutdown, often they don't receive it immediately but in irregular chunks over the duration of the year).
And for the lions share of folks on furlough, who are not deemed essential, they are very likely to not get paid and cannot count of congress and the president being magnanimous (even if historical precedent says they will be). It only takes once for that not to happen.
So, yes. No shutdown is the same as the last one until it is. And so far, it isn't and won't be until its over and it happens.
To be clear, on the bolded, they were paid their full hourly/salary rate immediately after the shutdown, and the “completely” part you refer to was damages in addition to that, right?
Is the case you’re referring to the one I linked a story on last page? Because if so, that seems to be what happened.
No shutdown will ever operate like the last one until it actually does. There are no guarantees here.
Yes. There are. The one guarantee is that essential workers who show up will be paid when the shutdown ends. It's a 100% legal obligation under current law.
That guarantee is functionally meaningless. Folks in this situation in 2013 did get paid eventually (partially in 2014 and fully during a 2017 legal case), but saying that getting paid money you need for your mortgage in a trickle effect one or four years down the line is literally the same thing as not getting paid when you need to meet your mortgage today.
As a state government employee, who works with many federal employee folks, both myself and my friend group have been on various sides of state and federal shutdowns and furloughs. None of them are set in stone and even if they choose to honor payment for the employees working now, there are a great many ways that directors and section leads can fudge the numbers or withhold partial amounts of payment within the law to maintain unit solvency (and the government doesn't always just flood those units with the money from the shutdown, often they don't receive it immediately but in irregular chunks over the duration of the year).
And for the lions share of folks on furlough, who are not deemed essential, they are very likely to not get paid and cannot count of congress and the president being magnanimous (even if historical precedent says they will be). It only takes once for that not to happen.
So, yes. No shutdown is the same as the last one until it is. And so far, it isn't and won't be until its over and it happens.
To be clear, on the bolded, they were paid their full hourly/salary rate immediately after the shutdown, and the “completely” part you refer to was damages in addition to that, right?
Is the case you’re referring to the one I linked a story on last page? Because if so, that seems to be what happened.
This case is about damages for the delay, not the direct pay owed.
It's an incomplete version. Most employees were paid on the next paycheck, but a substantial amount were not. The final payments for the missed time reached the entirety of employees affected by summer of the following year (with the shutdown occurring in October), so just shy of a full year. Some contractors and employees were only partially repaid, and while the settlement in 2017 paid the majority of those affected a settlement, it also was used and considered compensation for funding that had been withheld to a number of employees, meaning that even with the settlement they never received their full benefits and pay due to this day.
No shutdown will ever operate like the last one until it actually does. There are no guarantees here.
Yes. There are. The one guarantee is that essential workers who show up will be paid when the shutdown ends. It's a 100% legal obligation under current law.
That guarantee is functionally meaningless. Folks in this situation in 2013 did get paid eventually (partially in 2014 and fully during a 2017 legal case), but saying that getting paid money you need for your mortgage in a trickle effect one or four years down the line is literally the same thing as not getting paid when you need to meet your mortgage today.
As a state government employee, who works with many federal employee folks, both myself and my friend group have been on various sides of state and federal shutdowns and furloughs. None of them are set in stone and even if they choose to honor payment for the employees working now, there are a great many ways that directors and section leads can fudge the numbers or withhold partial amounts of payment within the law to maintain unit solvency (and the government doesn't always just flood those units with the money from the shutdown, often they don't receive it immediately but in irregular chunks over the duration of the year).
And for the lions share of folks on furlough, who are not deemed essential, they are very likely to not get paid and cannot count of congress and the president being magnanimous (even if historical precedent says they will be). It only takes once for that not to happen.
So, yes. No shutdown is the same as the last one until it is. And so far, it isn't and won't be until its over and it happens.
To be clear, on the bolded, they were paid their full hourly/salary rate immediately after the shutdown, and the “completely” part you refer to was damages in addition to that, right?
Is the case you’re referring to the one I linked a story on last page? Because if so, that seems to be what happened.
This case is about damages for the delay, not the direct pay owed.
It's an incomplete version. Most employees were paid on the next paycheck, but a substantial amount were not. The final payments for the missed time reached the entirety of employees affected by summer of the following year (with the shutdown occurring in October), so just shy of a full year. Some contractors and employees were only partially repaid, and while the settlement in 2017 paid the majority of those affected a settlement, it also was used and considered compensation for funding that had been withheld to a number of employees, meaning that even with the settlement they never received their full benefits and pay due to this day.
I find it odd that not one of the ten or so articles I just read on the case mention this, nor does the 2017 ruling (which I just read through). I suppose I may be missing something. Do you have any source for this? I’m relying on the briefings I’ve received, the OPM guidance available from their site, and every other source I’ve read that implies excepted workers were paid in a timely fashion once the shutdown ended.
However, I’ll admit this wouldn’t be the first time I’ve been wrong. It happens.
Edit: also note that I’m talking solely about federal employees; contractors are another matter.
More than 25,000 individuals have been waiting for more than five years for monetary damages a court said they deserve because the federal government violated the law when it forced them to work without immediate pay during the 2013 shutdown. The government and plaintiffs were finally getting close to resolving and disbursing the payments, but now the former and current federal employees will have to wait a little longer.
Why? The Justice Department attorneys and many of the other employees working on processing the payments are now furloughed, sent home without pay during yet another government shutdown.
Read the story. They were paid. These are additional damages on top of that pay to compensate for the delay in pay. Follow the stories back for more details.
Unlike furloughed workers, employees who reported to work during the shutdown were guaranteed retroactive pay. However, the plaintiffs in Martin et. al. v. The United States argue because the excepted workers faced hardships during the shutdown, such as an inability to pay bills on time, they should receive extra compensation.
People really, truly, should stop spreading the idea that employees that work might not be paid for those hours. It is not true, and it muddies the waters and reduces the credibility of the side claiming it.
Contractors that work may not be paid and contractors not working not being paid are the main complaints I have heard.
Posts
not to beat a dead horse, but sure, have that discussion
After they get the government back up and running. Not a second before.
This usually doesn't happen, presumably, because shutdowns don't usually last long enough to disrupt pay. Since this one will, we may see another class action suit and another award like this unless the applicable law has been changed in the interim. Since the same principle will apply.
So, since this got BOTP'd, I'll state clearly again: every last employee who works during this furlough will be paid for every hour worked, full stop. Suggesting anything else is spreading misinformation, and harmful. Even using language to intentionally insinuate otherwise is harmful. The actual situation is bad enough, there is no need to distort it.
I’d fund the wall in exchange for at least one of comprehensive progressive immigration reform, comprehensive gun control, or Medicare for All, plus funding the government on Democratic budgetary terms for a year, plus permanently removing the potential for future shutdowns via that auto debt ceiling raise thing so we don’t do this again next year
And then I’d go out and say the money exists but no brick will ever be laid, and if it is we’ll tear it down after 2020.
But this is so outlandish as to not even matter. It’s like saying “we’ll fund the wall if Trump resigns and confesses.” The wall is not of infinite negative value and there are theoretical deals that would be worth it, but those deals cannot exist within our current situation and with our current president negotiating.
1) That'd require Trump to know exactly what he's ranting about. Those facts are simply not in evidence.
2) By being nebulous about what he's ranting about (in this case CBS/MSNBC "Fake News!"), he allows his base to wishcast it. If he gets into specifics, then his base can only think it's about that one thing. By being vague, it allows his base to think it's about the thing they care most about. For the ProLifers, he's ranting about abortions. For the 2Aers, he's ranting about gun control. For the racists, he's ranting about the immigrants. Being specific risks his base thinking it's not about "them". Being vague means they can think he's talking directly to them, and saying exactly what they want to hear.
Then they told him to go home for the time being thanks to the shut down. My guy has been working his ass off for literal years to get this kind of job, I'm really peeved on his behalf this is happening after all this time. What should have been a celebration is now a waiting game for this shut down to end.
He seems to be taking it well, I think he's just stoked we can play some games in the meantime
Most I've talked to don't know where the Rio Grande is. When educating them, I ask if they are OK walling off the river and giving it to Mexico. Nope. We will build the wall on the other side of the river in that case, they say. They don't care about anything expect building it.
I think the Democrats are just letting it carry on because this is becoming self-evident to various Republican senators and others, who are from places that rely on ports/airport security for many reasons. Going to really hurt them a lot the longer this farce continues.
Also I am amazed that Trumps statements about how he could shoot someone and he wouldn't lose his base's support seem to be more and more true constantly. That anyone could have watched that TV address and not come to the conclusion he's an utterly unhinged loon is just beyond my understanding at this point. He tells the most obvious and easily contradicted lies, yet never seems to budge that 30%ish group of people in any way against him. I'm not even convinced failing to get the wall will do anything to his base as long as he comes up with some lie.
Now the rest of the Republicans? It's obvious they're the ones hoping the democrats cave, because any repercussions will be taken out on the GOP rank and file - not Trump.
The problem here is once Republicans give Democrats a bunch of shit they want in exchange for a rather paltry amount of money, the public perception of the shutdown will turn on the Dems. It will now be, "the Republicans gave the Dems a lot of things, why are the Dems refusing to open the government?"
For us, we understand the monument to racism/you don't negotiate with terrorists, for the public at large, they'll see the Republicans compromising and the Democrats crossing their arms and being petulant.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Unless what's given is so lopsided in favor of the Democrats (Medicare for All, DACA, DC and PR Statehood, AND Trump's impeachment), that the Republican base would revolt over, the response is "That's definitely worth considering. Open up the government without condition, and we can negotiate."
There's simply no political point behind trying to negotiate on other things while the government is shut down. The only reason the Republicans in the above article are trying, is because they want to be able to give Trump a win. And it'll just encourage the petulant pissbaby and his bootlicks in the Senate, to do the exact same thing next time.
The next threat of a shutdown should be able to be met with "Fuck you. We didn't negotiate then, we won't negotiate now. This is on you.". If Democrats give a fucking inch on anything beyond a clean CR, they're admitting that shutting down the government is a viable negotiating tactic. And that strategy needs to be fucking strangled right now.
I thought back pay had to be approved by Congress. Is that not true?
You can't give someone a pirate ship in one game, and then take it back in the next game. It's rude.
Congress (and the President) have to approve this.
Anybody who’s currently working as “Essential” is guaranteed to get paid.
It’s the approval part that I think most of us are thinking might not be so easy this time.
That's how it's been in the past, there's always a chance it won't be that way this time.
I don't dispute any of that, but it's an incomplete picture that doesn't account for those furloughed (i.e., not working) who still have to pay rent and buy groceries, or that close to half of federal workers aren't federal employees, but contractors who get paid (or don't) by the terms of their contracts. Or the literally millions who depend on indirect income, such as HUD subsidies or SNAP to pay rent or feed their families. Or the fact that the promise of receiving back pay at some point in the future will not help with bills arriving today. In a very real sense, many people will not get paid this week, and many won't at all.
first full missed paycheck
In the past, furloughed and essential employees were retroactively paid for their employment during the shutdown period. Generally, they're still salaried employees and they're still employed, it's just illegal to pay them and illegal to have them work for free (unless they're deemed essential).
In every previous shutdown, the employees have been granted this retroactive pay. It is very likely that this would be the case with this shutdown, but it's no guarantee. Although, it is basically a guarantee that if that backpay were not approved, the government would get sued and have to pay it anyway (at least to essential employees but almost definitely for furloughed employees).
On a different tangent, Trump and the Republicans are likely wasting far more than $5.7 billion with the shutdown for how long it's been going due to the economic impact of non-functioning departments and lost work that will end up paid anyway.
As far as caving on the wall, the Dems might be able to pull a Spinal Tap and agree to one as long as it's but a few inches high.
All of this is true and correct. Essential workers must be paid by law, it’s guaranteed. Furloughed workers may or may not be paid; but traditionally have been through separate legislation.
But the “working without pay” rhetoric muddies the waters, leads some to believe that pay for working essential employees isn’t guaranteed, and just one page ago a poster linked a story and implied workers might wait years for that pay. Which was simply a misreading of the article.
We need to be crystal clear that workers who are essential and working are guaranteed by law to be paid. Because just one page ago somebody was claiming otherwise.
That’s not at all intended to minimize the uncertainty being faced by furloughed employers or the harm to contractors. But it’s a point of fact that must be kept clear. Literally nobody is working for free. Their pay is delayed until the shutdown ends, but it is absolutely guaranteed.
Heh. Slip it into a revised bill changing 30' to 30". See if the chucklefucks notice.
“Don’t give up. Don’t allow it to happen. If there’s a concrete wall in front of you, go through it, go over it, go around it, but get to the other side of that wall.”
Inquisitor77: Rius, you are Sisyphus and melee Wizard is your boulder
Tube: This must be what it felt like to be an Iraqi when Saddam was killed
Bookish Stickers - Mrs. Rius' Etsy shop with bumper stickers and vinyl decals.
See, the bolded here is an example of the problem. The "at least to essential employees" bit has no place in this sentence, because there is no approval process whatsoever to paying them, nor would any suit ever be involved. They simply get paid once the shutdown ends, by current law. These kinds of statements add ambiguity to that, where there isn't any. Talking about people "working without pay" does as well...delayed pay can fit within "without pay" but many may take the implication differently. "Working for free" (seen here and elsewhere) is even worse...delayed pay doesn't fit within that. Currently working employees have zero uncertainty whatsoever about if they will get paid, at least if they've listened to the many briefings they've been given. It's solely about when. But there's a lot of confusion among those discussing the shutdown, here and elsewhere, about whether theres a chance that the guys guarding Trump might have to do so for free. They will not. Ever. Period. Every last employee working is guaranteed, 100%, to be paid by law. The only way they don't get paid is if the government never resumes and the republic crumbles.
Yes. There are. The one guarantee is that essential workers who show up will be paid when the shutdown ends. It's a 100% legal obligation under current law.
If no spending bill is approved current levels are simply continued
Yes, in our hearts that's how we want it to be. But think with your head and you know the moment the Republicans come out with a compromise, the narrative changes and becomes "The Republicans compromised, why are the Democrats now refusing?" It sucks, but once again the media narrative will force the Democrats to be the adults in the room.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
The question is will those who did not work be paid. That has been the norm, but I do not believe that is codified in law.
No. Last page somebody once again questioned whether essential workers would get paid, including linking a (misinterpreted) article suggesting they may not.
This page, in response to my underlining that working employees are guaranteed to get paid, somebody notes that there are “no guarantees.” And a bunch of people clicked agree. Also, the quote I just bolded.
It’s a confusion that persists. A question that keeps getting asked.
Edit: To the other point, those that are not working do not get paid under current law. It’s specifically codified that they do not. It will require specific new legislation to pay them.
I think they also realize if their voters don't get their refunds in a timely fashion than what minor bump they could have seen from the tax changes is going to be washed away in a sea of anger at the govt dicking over getting them their refund in the first place.
On the plus side I think the american people are realizing that nobody but trump and mcconnell have any actual power to back up any deal made so random senators throwing stuff out there means jack shit. We have seen this story before and it leads nowhere unless it comes from trump directly and even then it's probably not worth the paper it is written on.
That guarantee is functionally meaningless. Folks in this situation in 2013 did get paid eventually (partially in 2014 and fully during a 2017 legal case), but saying that getting paid money you need for your mortgage in a trickle effect one or four years down the line is literally the same thing as not getting paid when you need to meet your mortgage today.
As a state government employee, who works with many federal employee folks, both myself and my friend group have been on various sides of state and federal shutdowns and furloughs. None of them are set in stone and even if they choose to honor payment for the employees working now, there are a great many ways that directors and section leads can fudge the numbers or withhold partial amounts of payment within the law to maintain unit solvency (and the government doesn't always just flood those units with the money from the shutdown, often they don't receive it immediately but in irregular chunks over the duration of the year).
And for the lions share of folks on furlough, who are not deemed essential, they are very likely to not get paid and cannot count of congress and the president being magnanimous (even if historical precedent says they will be). It only takes once for that not to happen.
So, yes. No shutdown is the same as the last one until it is. And so far, it isn't and won't be until its over and it happens.
To be clear, on the bolded, they were paid their full hourly/salary rate immediately after the shutdown, and the “completely” part you refer to was damages in addition to that, right?
Is the case you’re referring to the one I linked a story on last page? Because if so, that seems to be what happened.
https://m.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2019/01/25k-feds-still-await-court-ordered-payout-2013-shutdown/154042/
This case is about additional damages for the delay, not the direct pay owed.
It's an incomplete version. Most employees were paid on the next paycheck, but a substantial amount were not. The final payments for the missed time reached the entirety of employees affected by summer of the following year (with the shutdown occurring in October), so just shy of a full year. Some contractors and employees were only partially repaid, and while the settlement in 2017 paid the majority of those affected a settlement, it also was used and considered compensation for funding that had been withheld to a number of employees, meaning that even with the settlement they never received their full benefits and pay due to this day.
I find it odd that not one of the ten or so articles I just read on the case mention this, nor does the 2017 ruling (which I just read through). I suppose I may be missing something. Do you have any source for this? I’m relying on the briefings I’ve received, the OPM guidance available from their site, and every other source I’ve read that implies excepted workers were paid in a timely fashion once the shutdown ended.
However, I’ll admit this wouldn’t be the first time I’ve been wrong. It happens.
Edit: also note that I’m talking solely about federal employees; contractors are another matter.
Contractors that work may not be paid and contractors not working not being paid are the main complaints I have heard.