f8lee Loc: New Mexico

And I was merely pointing out that none ever have been, despite huge failures in their work efforts. THat's the precise problem of bureaucrats - they hang on forever. TO them, the election kerfuffle is pleasant white noise, as it distracts from them as being the root of some real problems in the gub'ment.

I'm no lawyer, so I cannot comment as to whether they can, in fact, legally be fired (much like the useless scumbag teachers at the LA or NYC school districts whose unions prevent them from being fired, leaving them in so-called "rubber rooms" where they take their pay but do no teaching). But given the lack of firings from very high profile areas where not only a private enterprise but the government entity that approved whatever went wrong is culpable, only the private enterprise workers are removed.

Call it noise if you wish to minimize the reality, but it seems to me people ought to be aware of why so many things are so f'd up.

rick_n_wv Loc: Charleston WV

Possible but really hard.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/10/18/hardly-any-federal-employees-are-fired-for-poor-performance-that-could-be-a-good-sign-report-says/

f8lee Loc: New Mexico

Finny - only a bureaucrat could make a statement like "not removing poor performers could be a good thing", as if that makes any sense to rational people.

More like - "by keeping more people employed at the government teat, regardless of their effectiveness, we can keep employment rates high - yay!"

Shocking that the leftist WaPo (owned by the venerable Mr Bezos) doesn't call this kind of thinking into question, but rather presents it as if it makes sense.