Trump calls 50,000 federal employees back to work, won't pay them

The problem with quitting is that you do not get unemployment compensation. If you get fired, you can file for unemployment and begin to receive some compensation, so you have something coming in. You may have to defend yourself in court / arbitration as to why you got fired, but officials usually rule in favor of the ex-employee anyway.

1 Like

I get it. It sucks.

But I would suggest caution about comparing that admittedly sucky situation to the one faced by our black brothers and sisters for 250 years in this country.

It isn’t the same. Not even close. And suggesting it is the same is a pretty bad look in my opinion.

Where did I make any mention of slavery ? I was responding to your suggestion that they quit their jobs as a choice. Quitting vs firing has consequences, and I am simply pointing them out.

5 Likes

You responded to my comment about not invoking the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery.

Slavery is what we are talking about.

The comment folks have been making about the 13th Amendment was specifically not comparing this to slavery, but pointing out that it is literally government-mandated work without compensation, which certainly sounds like the involuntary servitude also mentioned in that amendment:
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States,

10 Likes
  1. It might be useful for folks to remember the distinction between slavery and chattel slavery. Not all slavery is like old-timey American slavery; that was a particularly horrendous manifestation of the practice.

  2. There are plenty of slaves in modern America, they just aren’t chattel slaves. They’re in the prisons.

  3. Comparing the current situation of unpaid federal workers to slavery is somewhat misguided and distasteful. Workers that are free to quit their jobs are not experiencing involuntary servitude. Comparing the plight of unpaid prison guards to slavery is particularly dodgy.

10 Likes

Disagree- you may think it “certainly sounds like… involuntary servitude” but I do not.

Being able to quit a job voluntarily certainly sounds nothing like involuntary.

Good gracious- it took all of 3 weeks for privileged white people to play a “HELP I’M BEING OPPRESSED” card they never had.

Literally all of this.

Exactly, it’s very much up for debate. I personally agree that in the end, involuntary servitude is more along the lines of prison labor than being called into work when you don’t want to. But I think people are trying to stick up for the 800,000 federal workers being screwed over, and hoping to find a legal silver bullet in the constitution. I’d suggest that you are the one bringing race into this, which is not a good idea. Nobody here is trying to suggest that white people are enduring the same thing black slaves did. Nobody.

2 Likes

People should use a different tactic to “stick up for federal workers” than “it’s just like slavery!” because to do so is distasteful.

“Involuntary servitude” does not always mean “slavery”.

It is coerced work, which does cover what we consider historical slavery, but also covers much less severe conditions. People complaining about coerced work are not necessarily saying they are historical slaves.

You are reducing a broad definition to its most extreme example. Coerced work is unconstitutional, at less severe levels than historical slavery, and that’s a good thing for people.

What’s going to happen is that the federal government will be sued, and a judge will decide if work was coerced, under the actual broad definition. The judge will not look for old-timey shackles. But if it’s decided that there’s unconstitutional coerced work, then that’s that.

9 Likes

They are not. Again, that’s not the part of the amendment they are referring to. They are specifically and repeatedly calling out the “involuntary servitude” phrase and making sure to clarify that they are not calling federal workers slaves.

6 Likes

Great, you got me with semantics. They are still not being “coerced” to work in the same way that a federal prisoner is coerced to work, nor a victim of sex trafficking is coerced to work. The federal employee can quit. The young girl who is forced into sex work can’t. That’s why the comparison is distasteful.

Great, again semantics. And again, you are still wrong- someone who can quit a job voluntarily is by definition unable to be working involuntarily. To compare the plight of federal workers to actual people who are coerced into involuntary servitude is distasteful.

You think you are winning with grammar, but you’re just demonstrating your tone deafness.

I’m not using “grammar”, I’m explaining that nobody is talking about slavery but you. The folks talking about the 13th Amendment are calling out a completely different phrase in it, which you’ve finally figured out. Please refer back to the post in which I am agreeing with you, fully, that involuntary servitude is more akin to prison labor, and does not apply here. I hope you understand.

9 Likes

It’s the constitution, it’s not a little grammar book.

Prisoners are f’d over in that amendment. That’s doesn’t mean everyone else should give up a constitutional protection.

Justice isn’t a zero sum game. Protecting some workers isn’t a bad outcome, even if you can “what about…” worse scenarios.

“Stop complaining! Other people have it worse!” is not a particularly smart take here. Luckily, it’s not you that makes the decision about whether it’s a coercive working environment. Again, the federal government will be sued and someone will decide how the constitution applies here.

6 Likes

I agree. I will say that quitting a job on a moments notice for people living from paycheck to paycheck (as well as not getting paid for more than a week) has serious consequences for people and we shouldn’t ignore that (even if we don’t call it slavery). I’d suspect that many people don’t feel like quitting is actual a viable option, because it’s 6 on one hand half dozen on their other…

8 Likes

No. This is not at all what has been said in any of the comments of this thread, this is a straw man. This is a derail.

This looks much more like a semantic debate than the one you are referencing.
People have made clear what they are not saying, that should be enough to move on unless you want to start a new thread to avoid derailing this conversation.

8 Likes

Random question (just curious as a non US resident so i don’t know the detail)

This pay freeze due to the shutdown: When it’s fixed eventually, do the employees recieve the pay they missed backdated, or are they literally losing paychecks for this?

Option #1 is terrible
Option #2 is catastrophic, and no sane gov employee should come into work if this is the case…

1 Like

Meanwhile, you’re adeptly demonstrating your tone policing skills.

9 Likes

Congress passed a bill to ensure back pay to government workers affected by the shutdown, and McConnell has said Trump will sign it, but I’ll believe that when I see it.

9 Likes