

Why I almost remained a government employee and why I did not - marmot1101
http://blog.joshorr.us/2013/04/5-reasons-i-almost-remained-government.html

======
steven777400
As a government IT employee, I agree with all points listed.

In particular, the most major issue for me on the positive side is stability,
and the most negative issue is lack of growth.

I interviewed at Microsoft (as a courtesy to a friend who works there), and
one of the interviewers was genuinely curious about life in the government. I
told him that, barring severe budget issues or personal lawlessness, I could
not be fired or demoted. But, I'm also at the top of my scale, which means I
can't be promoted either. It doesn't matter much what I do (or don't), I can't
go up, I can't go down. I'm just "here".

In some sense, that's supremely freeing. I can put in exactly as much effort
as I feel comfortable with, learn new technologies and techniques right up
until I don't feel like it anymore, and so on.

On the other hand, I'm kind of a lazy guy who works better when there is a
boot up my rear. I know in the private sector I would learn a lot more, and
grow professionally a lot more, because there is always that "up or out"
mentality. You can't stagnate and survive in most businesses.

With more modern government employees, some of his advantages are lessened.
For example, our retirement plan is a traditional defined contribution plan,
which invests in a stock portfolio of our choosing. Likewise, our time off is
two weeks per year plus federal holidays. Neither of these seems more
"generous" than the average established private industry, although I don't
have direct experience so I'm not sure. Startups of course I wouldn't expect
retirement plans and more than the minimum time off.

Also the more money part would be nice, with the possibility of things like
bonuses. For comparison, Microsoft offered me $110K/year base salary,
presumably with the opportunity to earn a bonus on top of that. My current
government position pays $84K/year fixed, no opportunity for bonus.

That's almost a 50% raise by making a lateral move into private industry, plus
then there is further opportunity for advancement once there. (I didn't make
the move because of the whole toxic environment/sinking ship, among other
considerations.)

~~~
benjarrell
I always laugh and think of this [1] when I read about government employees. I
worked at a state university for 10 years, I am much happier in the private
sector.

1\.
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RjzC1Dgh17A#t=13s)

~~~
616c
I work a private university, and I somehow doubt a private one is remarkably
better in terms of politicking.

------
incision
As I've surely alluded to on HN in the past, I have too much experience with
Government work.

I generally consider most of the list of positives as negatives.

 _1\. Huge sense of purpose._

Makes it even more frustrating when work which would serve the people is
dashed due to petty internal politics and vanity projects.

 _2\. Stability / 3. Pension_

Widespread complacency about performance from entrenched employees and extreme
defensiveness born from the knowledge that they can't hope to go anywhere else
and reap the same wage/benefits.

When a place is full of people whose primary goal is to last long enough to
retire with a pension or simply collect a stable check any perceived threat to
the status quo, much less real change is out of the question.

 _4\. Time off_

Scheduling becomes a nightmare as someone or other is always off. Absolutely
nothing gets done from the second week of November to the third week of
January.

Most senior employees are gone at least 5 weeks a year.

When someone does finally retire, the position might be held up a year or more
as they burn off accrued leave.

 _5\. Big fish, small pond. Government tends to promote from within for most
positions._

This compounds number 2 and 3 as the complacent culture of caring only for the
next check and retirement exists from the top down.

Towers of management are created as moving up becomes the only/most effective
way to increase salary at longevity.

~~~
mjn
> Most senior employees are gone at least 5 weeks a year.

Isn't this the case everywhere? I know we're a bit spoiled in Denmark with
_everyone_ getting at least seven weeks off by law, whether you're senior
engineering staff or a janitor (10 statutory holidays plus 5 weeks of movable
holiday).

But I thought in the U.S., senior professional staff at least got 4+ weeks,
and were encouraged to take it. When I was growing up (in Chicago) my dad
worked for a big engineering firm, and while he started with only 2 weeks a
year of vacation, it went up with seniority to a max of 6 weeks once he was at
the senior engineering ranks. It was quite useful from a work/life balance
perspective, since it enabled us to take family trips to relatives in Greece
for 3-4 weeks at a time, without which I would neither know my relatives there
nor be able to speak anything approaching fluent Greek. My brother works for a
Valley hardware company and gets something like 4-5 weeks as well, so I
thought it was still a fairly standard perk if you had an upper-middle-class
professional job. In fact to me it's one of the defining features of being on
the upper side of middle-class, that you can both afford and are allowed take
a few weeks of vacation each year.

~~~
incision
I realized I probably should have been more specific about that.

It's not really the amount of leave that's a problem, rather how leave in
general is used/abused to compound other problems in the government culture.

Big project coming due in 6 months? Several people who should be accountable
to deliver major parts of the effort are scheduled for leave on the due date.

Need to backfill someone who will be gone for 4 solid weeks during a busy
period? Sorry, you can't bring on a short-duration contractor, only FTEs are
allowed perform this completely generic role.

So you've decided to be a bold manager and take issue with any of this? The
grievance is already in the inter-office mail.

I have to imagine (hope) that where accountability exists, the bottom line
matters or employees are invested producing something these things wouldn't
occur.

 _> In fact to me it's one of the defining features of being on the upper side
of middle-class, that you can both afford and are allowed take a few weeks of
vacation each year._

You don't have to be upper or even middle class, even within the hierarchy of
the organizational layers. It's often just a matter of having seniority within
your job description.

------
futhey
From my experience, Government work is broken, and it takes a very special
type of person to consider it for the long haul. Once you complete your
training, you're usually worth double your salary on the open market, or more.

However, few industries really continue to invest in their people the way
government does. I had the ability to go anywhere, learn anything, and do
anything at any time, and I loved it.

------
ytNumbers
Site Advisor has flagged this blog as risky.

------
BadCRC
two spaces after every period.

~~~
IbJacked
For.

