This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I can't help but perceive this as being a way to get federal workers to give up their retirement benefits but I am not a legal expert. You can read the full email here. Relevant paragraph:
Is the implication of that last clause that ones' benefits ("including but not limited to retirement accruals") will not be maintained post-resignation date? "Give up whatever pension you've earned for 8 months pay" sounds less good I think? Although that probably depends on how much you've accrued. There's also a federal law that restricts how long agencies can put employees on administrative leave to no more than 10 days per year.
So by law you're probably going to have to work most of the time beyond when you've accepted this offer through the actual resignation. Logistically it seems like people who accept will be getting paid out as if they were working (a biweekly check or whatever) rather than as a lump sum. The deal seems to be "keep working for 8 months and then quit." I guess the idea is your agency cuts back your duties in a way that is not legally "leave?" Seems like the only way this could work.
This is clearly not what it means, although Reddit is awash with some pretty insane conspiracy theories at the moment.
It just means that, even though you will not be working, you continue to accrue retirement benefits during the 8 month period as if you had worked.
My point, and what I assume workers would be concerned about, is that you don't get certain parts of your retirement (specifically the Basic Benefit Plan) if you resign your position with the government (as opposed to retiring). The OPM page on the Federal Employee Retirement System specifies:
So you get 8 months of pay but you don't get your post-retirement annuity (unless you get another job with the government and retire through that).
FERS should be a moderate part of a good retirement plan, for anyone saving for retirement their TSP (the government's version of a 401(k) plan should be the lion's share of retirement benefits. FERS is 1% per year of your highest income years average salary. CRS was the true government pension and most current workers started after it was phased out.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link