Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Is the Government REQUIRED to Pay Workers for NOT Working?

I'm referring to the odd situation of past years, when workers would be sent home during government shutdowns - the action is referred to as a furlough - but the workers would be paid money for that time they were NOT working. In essence, a paid vacation.

From what I understand of the relevant legislation, it isn't REQUIRED for the furloughed workers to be given money for not working. In fact, since some of the staff is considered "essential", they have, in the past, been paid DOUBLE for their work - both pay for working, and pay that other workers got for not working.

I wonder whether Trump might try announcing that this practice would end - NOW - and that workers who would be furloughed in a shutdown would just lose that money.

I'll bet the Democrats, knowing how many of their supporters are working in Federal jobs, would find it REALLY IMPORTANT to find a compromise in the budget talks.

Share this post if you'd like to get people talking about the possibility.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

The pay comes from the local area...NOT the Federal government.
I worked in Washington, D.C. and, when there was a Clinton-era shutdown, they filed us all down to a basement room where there was a D.C. CITY employee who gave us papers to fill out to receive short-term "unemployment compensation" (or whatever it was actually called). Repeat: the money is NOT from the Federal Government, but rather the locality.