<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: The closest thing to immortality	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/07/the-closest-thing-to-immortality/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/07/the-closest-thing-to-immortality/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 04:59:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Bill Poser		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/07/the-closest-thing-to-immortality/comment-page-1/#comment-124289</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bill Poser]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 04:59:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=23962#comment-124289</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[How many of the attorneys that died were returned to life as a result of grievance procedures?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How many of the attorneys that died were returned to life as a result of grievance procedures?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mike		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/07/the-closest-thing-to-immortality/comment-page-1/#comment-124282</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 23:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=23962#comment-124282</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Why do companies need to be more loyal than the employees are?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do companies need to be more loyal than the employees are?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: D		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2011/07/the-closest-thing-to-immortality/comment-page-1/#comment-124268</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[D]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 19:33:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=23962#comment-124268</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I agree that the federal workforce is larger than the founders intended and than is strictly necessary, but this article does not support that premise. I have an issue with the logic used here. The author takes one statistic (firings) then extrapolates to the conclusions he wants. He did the shallowest of investigations. 
He quotes a college professor and a HUD spokesman. The professor&#039;s comment is, characteristically, a generalization. I actually found the spokesman&#039;s comment believable. Apparently Dennis did not because he did not investigate the hiring process for full-time federal employment.

In my area (Seattle-ish) there are several DOD facilities. Competition for the jobs is very stiff and the hiring process is at least as onerous as the firing process. Based on the many anecdotes I have heard from close associates, 6 months to a year of investigation (and yea, probably a bloated administrative process) is typical. The application itself is incredibly long. People who don&#039;t really want the job don&#039;t apply. Folks with sketchy backgrounds don&#039;t make the cut. 
Of course the majority of firings (60%) will occur within the first 2 years! A dirtbag is easily discovered.
At my own work, we have a saying about poor performance - recalibrate or replace. But just because someone is not a good fit in one job does not mean they need to be fired. With a large, nay, vast corporation like the federal government, there is such a variety of career paths that reassignment to a better fit is not that difficult. 
Finally, I will credit some of the USA Today commenters with this one - all companies used to be like that. The question is, why are they not loyal to us, their employees now? (That&#039;s a rhetorical question - the answer probably has filled volumes.)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that the federal workforce is larger than the founders intended and than is strictly necessary, but this article does not support that premise. I have an issue with the logic used here. The author takes one statistic (firings) then extrapolates to the conclusions he wants. He did the shallowest of investigations.<br />
He quotes a college professor and a HUD spokesman. The professor&#8217;s comment is, characteristically, a generalization. I actually found the spokesman&#8217;s comment believable. Apparently Dennis did not because he did not investigate the hiring process for full-time federal employment.</p>
<p>In my area (Seattle-ish) there are several DOD facilities. Competition for the jobs is very stiff and the hiring process is at least as onerous as the firing process. Based on the many anecdotes I have heard from close associates, 6 months to a year of investigation (and yea, probably a bloated administrative process) is typical. The application itself is incredibly long. People who don&#8217;t really want the job don&#8217;t apply. Folks with sketchy backgrounds don&#8217;t make the cut.<br />
Of course the majority of firings (60%) will occur within the first 2 years! A dirtbag is easily discovered.<br />
At my own work, we have a saying about poor performance &#8211; recalibrate or replace. But just because someone is not a good fit in one job does not mean they need to be fired. With a large, nay, vast corporation like the federal government, there is such a variety of career paths that reassignment to a better fit is not that difficult.<br />
Finally, I will credit some of the USA Today commenters with this one &#8211; all companies used to be like that. The question is, why are they not loyal to us, their employees now? (That&#8217;s a rhetorical question &#8211; the answer probably has filled volumes.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
