Random Rants 76: Argh! Augh! Ahhh!

[hobbsyoyo]

You bring up a good point though. I thought it would be somewhat simple to pass such a law if there was the political will to do it (obviously after Trump is gone) but now I don't have any clue how it would work.

 

[Lexicus]

You bring up a good point though. I thought it would be somewhat simple to pass such a law if there was the political will to do it (obviously after Trump is gone) but now I don't have any clue how it would work.

Exactly my concern. I have no idea how it would work either.

 

[MaryKB]

How do things like our military, or Congress' salaries and health insurance and such, get paid for during a shutdown? Surely you could extend whatever's covering them to other federal employees?

 

[Phrossack]

How do things like our military, or Congress' salaries and health insurance and such, get paid for during a shutdown? Surely you could extend whatever's covering them to other federal employees?

IIRC those are specifically exempted--of course the people who make the rules are also exempt from following them! And as long as there's a party hostile to the very concept of federal employees and that party has any power, that sadly won't happen.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

How do things like our military, or Congress' salaries and health insurance and such, get paid for during a shutdown? Surely you could extend whatever's covering them to other federal employees?

There's actually no such thing as a shutdown. We experience partial shutdowns. In the ideal world, there would be an appropriations bill that would lay out all the funding for all the departments and off we would go, but in the real world we get piecemeal bills; a bill to fund the department of defense, another to fund this, another to fund that, on and on. If congress were confronted with "this is it, one appropriations bill, work it out or everything shuts down there is pretty much no way they would allow it to shut down, because not paying the military is regarded as national suicide. Any time there's a shutdown there is going to be, at the very least, an 'interim spending bill' to fund the military. I don't know exactly what department they themselves are funded through, but it is also never part of any shutdown stalemates.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

@Phrossack - That's not quite it.

There are laws stating critical people have to work during a shutdown but nothing states they have to be paid. That some departments were still paying people was because partial spending bills had already been passed which covered those departments before the shutdown. Absent that, there would have been even more people not working and not getting paid in addition to more people working without pay.

Trump also took illegal actions to reclassify lots of people as critical to force them to work unpaid, which is why IRS workers were called back in on an unpaid basis half way through the shutdown. Trump was trying to have his cake and eat it too - shut down the government to get what he wants but forcing people to work for free to keep tax returns moving and other government functions people were pissed about.

There have been rumblings of Congress opening investigations on this but it will probably get lost in the turmoil of the next shutdown or whatever dumpster fire Trump lights next.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The funding bill that kept DoD funded in this instance was coincidental. No one saw this shutdown coming but they just happened to pass that spending bill before Trump pulled the plug on the government. I wonder how things would have played out if that had not happened first. It would have given the Democrats even more leverage.

The Coast Guard was not paid in this shut down, for reference.

 

[Lexicus]

I just did a bit of reading and it looks like the bills on the table would basically automatically continue either the existing CR (continuing resolution) or slightly altered version of it if Congress cannot agree to a new CR.

I'm not sure that would end shutdowns for once and for all time. Ultimately they are a consequence of the Constitutional machinery, and there will always be some people who argue that shutdowns are a healthy outcome if one side tries to get too big for its britches and won't compromise.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

The funding bill that kept DoD funded in this instance was coincidental. No one saw this shutdown coming but they just happened to pass that spending bill before Trump pulled the plug on the government. I wonder how things would have played out if that had not happened first. It would have given the Democrats even more leverage.

The Coast Guard was not paid in this shut down, for reference.

If the DoD funding hadn't already been passed it would have gone through anyway. All the "I'm shutting it down" bluster aside, when the DoD funding bill hit his desk Trump would have quietly signed it and that would have been that. Although there have been shutdowns before where instead of a full DoD funding bill they just passed an emergency measure to pay the actual military. The Coast Guard being funded through DHS instead of DoD adds an interesting wrinkle, to be sure. There were, and still are, a lot of people asking why even in the hardest shutdowns there have been bills to cover military paychecks but this time there was no bill to cover Coast Guard paychecks. Navy people make fun of the Coast Guard, but most people do consider them to be 'military.'

Joke:

Spoiler :

Why does the Coast Guard have a height requirement when the navy doesn't?

Spoiler :

They want people who can wade back to shore in an emergency.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

They don't get paid during the shutdown, but get the money retroactively with the next paycheck, don't they?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

They don't get paid during the shutdown, but get the money retroactively with the next paycheck, don't they?

Not a given. Congress has to pass a bill confirming this. And even when they do, they typically don't pay contractors and some other assorted lots of government employees.

In addition, there have been hiccups in the back pay schemes which meant people got less than they were entitled to and got the money late (on top of the month-long shutdown pay stop).

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Well, that Is crazy. Here that would mean a strike easily. Can't public workers go on strike there?

 

[Broken_Erika]

Only commies strike!

 

[Lexicus]

Well, that Is crazy. Here that would mean a strike easily. Can't public workers go on strike there?

Not legally:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Service_Labor-Management_Relations_Statute

 

[Timsup2nothin]

When public workers who were deemed critical went on strike Reagan fired them all. There was no apparent difficulty with replacing them, and "fired from my government job for striking" was not a great resume builder. Final score; Government 1, Organized Labor 0.

 

[Lexicus]

Of course, the mere hint of work stoppages by the flight attendants and air traffic controllers this time around ended the shutdown in a matter of hours.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Of course, the mere hint of work stoppages by the flight attendants and air traffic controllers this time around ended the shutdown in a matter of hours.

Certainly a difference between a strike and a lockout. I'd call the shutdown much closer to a lockout situation than it is to a strike. Could be they tied the score though.

 

[Lexicus]

I used the phrase "work stoppage" instead of strike because putting your foot down on "we don't have enough staff to safely do our jobs" is not the same as a strike.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Not legally:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Service_Labor-Management_Relations_Statute

Well that is even crazier.

"Another important difference is although the NLRA allows private sector employees to engage in "concerted action," like workplace strikes, the Statute does not grant this right to federal employees. In fact, the Statute specifically excludes from the definition of "employee" those persons who engage in a workplace strike. It specifies that it is an unfair labor practice for labor unions to call or participate in a strike or a work stoppage that interferes with the operation of a federal agency."

Because shutdowning the whole administration because the big man wants to construct an absurd wall is perfectly fair i guess. What the common American think about public workers. Would support them in case of strike?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I used the phrase "work stoppage" instead of strike because putting your foot down on "we don't have enough staff to safely do our jobs" is not the same as a strike.

Agreed. And 'we aren't paying but come to work anyway' isn't exactly a lockout either, but it seemed more akin to that than a strike.

I'm glad the ATCs stepped up there, but I still have more sympathy for the Coast Guard. It may seem "too extreme to seriously consider" but an air traffic controller could respond to "you aren't getting paid but you are a critical employee so you have to come to work" with "well, I quit, so now I'm not an employee at all, critical or otherwise." The Coast Guard would call that "going AWOL" and throw you in prison.