We do enjoy these two very enthusiastic dogs!
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
i L i n d
Ian Lind • Now online daily from Old Kahala
We do enjoy these two very enthusiastic dogs!
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
your cute video made me chuckle!
I noticed they passed the bill (which was vetoed) that would prohibit a civil servant (ie. administrative staff) from serving in an exempt position without losing the right to return the previous position
this just strikes me as odd that a well-seasoned administrative assistant couldn’t serve an administration directly without being punished
this just seems counter-productive to running a government as every new administration needs the immediate help of seasoned veterans
who are they trying to punish?
Actually, I think it’s intended to preserve the integrity of the civil service.
The whole civil service system was meant to shield public business from the ebb and flow of politics, the old “reward your friends and punish your enemies” approach to hiring, promotion, etc.
If it’s easy for high-ranking civil service employees to jump back and forth into political appointee positions, it undermines that central goal.
So the bill isn’t trying to punish. It is–as I understand the issue–trying to protect the professional staff from the winds of politics.
Just seems like the best chance for reform in government to come from within.
The voters often elect a new leader to “fix” things. To “fix” things, the new administration would be most effective if it identified the most respected and accomplished staff within the department or agency and brought them into the administration. It might be hard to recruit these folks if it means they lose their long term civil service seniority and protection.