Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

After 'coding error' triggers firings, top NIH scientists called back to work

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 318 posts

Re: After 'coding error' triggers firings, top NIH scientists called back to work

#171

Post by Cthulhu_ »

barbarr wrote: post #11

Is there any proof that they're coding errors? A simpler explanation, to me at least, is that they first blanket fired people by dubious criteria, and are now using this as an excuse to backpedal when they realize they've cut something important.

Doesn't matter if it's coding error or not, the blame lies with the people executing the firings and those ordering them; blaming it on code is a way to shirk responsibilities.

I get that within a software development project, blaming on individuals isn't a healthy way to deal with bugs, but this extends beyond just loss of revenue or uptime and well into personal tragedies.

Re: After 'coding error' triggers firings, top NIH scientists called back to work

#172

Post by dmurray »

Terr_ wrote: post #80
jmward01 wrote: post #50

The obvious methodology at work here is 'fire everyone then hopefully re-hire only what is blindingly obviously needed'. There are many, many problems with this approach in a business setting but even more from a governmental setting. The first, and what should be obvious to anyone with an ounce of empathy, is that these are real people who's lives are being toyed with. It isn't like you are trying out a new business…

Also, it's completely destroying an incredibly valuable asset: The reputation of being a stable long-term employer! (This is possibly their corrupt intent.) The immediate "savings" reduced workforce (even assuming the same level of work gets done) can easily be obliterated by the long-term damage of needing to pay more to attract equally-qualified applicants away from the private sector. Some quick napkin-math just t…

The saved money and the payroll for new money are both in dollars per year, not one-time costs. So the additional premium needs to be 10%, not 5%, to erase the benefits, and it doesn't matter how many years you look at.

(I'm ignoring one-time costs like severance pay and signing/relocation bonuses which I don't think were the point of your message, and also the elasticity effect where you can pay existing workers the same even if it costs more to hire new ones. And I agree with your point in general that this is not a sensible way to save money, I just think your numbers are wrong).

Re: After 'coding error' triggers firings, top NIH scientists called back to work

#173

Post by HeatrayEnjoyer »

fastball wrote: post #156
Terr_ wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, it's completely destroying an incredibly valuable asset: The reputation of being a stable long-term employer! (This is possibly their corrupt intent.) The immediate "savings" reduced workforce (even assuming the same level of work gets done) can easily be obliterated by the long-term damage of needing to pay more to attract equally-qualified applicants away from the private sector. Some quick napkin-math just t…

Do we actually want "I just want a stable job" people being a significant part of the federal governments workforce? I generally wouldn't want those people to work for my company, so not sure why I'd want them to work in my government.

Do you want to attract talent or people who take anything they can get? People who know what they're worth aren't going to waste investing their time into an employer who can't even guarantee that they'll still have a job next week.

Mundane government employees are some of the most dedicated workers I've met. There's a deep array of jobs that aren't flashy but are foundational and depend on staff who can build up long institutional knowledge.

Re: After 'coding error' triggers firings, top NIH scientists called back to work

#174

Post by imgabe »

linkregister wrote: post #163
imgabe wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The first, and what should be obvious to anyone with an ounce of empathy, is that these are real people who's lives are being toyed with. It isn't like you are trying out a new business process. You are literally playing with entire lives here as if they are disposable things. This alone makes what is happening inhumane. This makes no sense. It is not a life, it is a job. The person isn't dead. They get a generous…

I mostly agree with your position. However there are a couple of issues that make federal government work distinct from ordinary business. 1. Fired federal workers typically do not get a severance. Those impacted by the recent reductions in force are not receiving severance packages. 2. Government salaries are usually uncompetitive compared to the private sector; the major difference is the value of the pension. Leav…

> Fired federal workers typically do not get a severance. Those impacted by the recent reductions in force are not receiving severance packages.

Not true: https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/pay-admi...

This is separate from the deferred resignation plan DOGE was offering. Under that plan employees voluntarily resigned and continued being employed for approximately 8 months, with full pay and benefits and no duties. They were free to go get another job during that time. That is more generous than most layoffs.

The pension / relocation are real issues, but if you work in a job that has a demand in the private sector (e.g. Treasury department going to finance), the increased pay from the private sector often more than makes up for the loss of the pension.

Re: After 'coding error' triggers firings, top NIH scientists called back to work

#175

Post by esalman »

sollewitt wrote: post #57
jmward01 wrote: post #50

The obvious methodology at work here is 'fire everyone then hopefully re-hire only what is blindingly obviously needed'. There are many, many problems with this approach in a business setting but even more from a governmental setting. The first, and what should be obvious to anyone with an ounce of empathy, is that these are real people who's lives are being toyed with. It isn't like you are trying out a new business…

A beloved Terry Pratchett character defines evil as when you treat people like things.

US government is used to doing this with non-us persons. I guess that's partly why there's no real pushback against this practice this time.

Re: After 'coding error' triggers firings, top NIH scientists called back to work

#176

Post by loktarogar »

fastball wrote: post #156
Terr_ wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, it's completely destroying an incredibly valuable asset: The reputation of being a stable long-term employer! (This is possibly their corrupt intent.) The immediate "savings" reduced workforce (even assuming the same level of work gets done) can easily be obliterated by the long-term damage of needing to pay more to attract equally-qualified applicants away from the private sector. Some quick napkin-math just t…

Do we actually want "I just want a stable job" people being a significant part of the federal governments workforce? I generally wouldn't want those people to work for my company, so not sure why I'd want them to work in my government.

> Do we actually want "I just want a stable job" people being a significant part of the federal governments workforce?

Yes, if you can't offer someone market rates then you need to offer them other things to fill that void. Stability is one of them, and is actually a good thing in government, when politics is so volatile. If the workforce is fired every time a new party comes into power, you don't have a stable government.

Working with those constraints, you _can_ improve things, by building better systems and processes, that better use the resources you have. That's far better long term, but it's not as fast and does not generate headlines for DOGE.

Re: After 'coding error' triggers firings, top NIH scientists called back to work

#178

Post by autoexec »

rafaelmn wrote: post #158
jmward01 wrote: post #50

The obvious methodology at work here is 'fire everyone then hopefully re-hire only what is blindingly obviously needed'. There are many, many problems with this approach in a business setting but even more from a governmental setting. The first, and what should be obvious to anyone with an ounce of empathy, is that these are real people who's lives are being toyed with. It isn't like you are trying out a new business…

>It is about total benefit to society, period. Money is the best tool we have to measure that. Sure it has pathological cases, but overall it's the least bad version to assign value. In the government case it's much worse at this since it's not voluntary and measuring aggregate government services vs. tax. The consumption/price is completely unrelated, etc. >I know of several people that are 'employed' but net negati…

Money is a terrible tool to measure the value of government services for society. Nobody gets rich delivering mail to remote locations, or providing food assistance, or managing forests, or letting people borrow books for free, but doing those things provides an invaluable service. There are many things we want from government that shouldn't make money. That doesn't mean that they aren't worthwhile or that they are inefficient. An efficient government isn't one that spends less money, it's one that does the best job providing services for the people.

> If we are heading towards an economy with labour shortage

We aren't. Especially not with the nation's largest employer hemorrhaging workers. Companies are doing everything in their power to replace workers with AI and machines as quickly as they can. There is an endless supply of immigrants who'd love nothing more than to live and work in the US.

Government workers are not employed with "useless skillsets" either. Every single job in the government will involve skills that can be applied elsewhere.

Re: After 'coding error' triggers firings, top NIH scientists called back to work

#179

Post by sour-taste »

garyfirestorm wrote: post #19
barbarr wrote: post #11

Is there any proof that they're coding errors? A simpler explanation, to me at least, is that they first blanket fired people by dubious criteria, and are now using this as an excuse to backpedal when they realize they've cut something important.

It’s purely political. “… fix the broken systems left to us by the Biden administration.…”

This was pretty insane to me. Like, whatever systems you're claiming Biden screwed up were 100% guaranteed untouched since the last trump admin. IT in the government moves slooooooow.
Post reply on HN