Jump to content


Photo

Voluntary Transfers


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_leaderofthetards_*

Guest_leaderofthetards_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 May 2012 - 06:46 AM

I’m sure all of you have heard about the Republican’s ‘War on women’. Well, once again, ATF has met the challenge and topped that. And of course ATF doesn’t like to discriminate. ATF has a war on the entire family. They have managed to throw grandma and the children under the bus too. And let’s not forget ATF’s favorite group; single parents and children with special needs. Yep, right under the bus with grandma they go. Let’s give ATF a standing ovation for this one, they’ve hit a home run.

Oh yeah sure, they will tell you there is a Hardship Board. Well, let’s look at who comprises this Board. If I’m not mistaken, it’s DADs or better. Those of you who love your families tend to AVOID transfers. Not this group. They will grab ANY transfer that brings a shiny title. Let me give you my favorite example; let’s call him SAC B. LaFart. This man was proud of the fact that he did not have a college degree. His claim to fame was that he had been a police officer; let’s say in the city of Detroit. He didn’t need no stinkin degree to rise to the level of SAC; he just had to transfer. He crisscrossed the country picking up titles. Now, what happened to his family? Several of them joined the Navy, one so young that SAC LaFart had to sign papers to get him in, and one was missing for a period of time and no one knew where he was. Even SAC LaFart’s trusty sidekick, Alice the Administrative Assistant, expressed shock that one of his children was unaccounted for. Wouldn’t this stop the average person in their tracks? Not SAC B. LaFart. He just transfered to HQ, then to the Southwest, not caring where his family would land.

Now picture a SAC like LaFart sitting at his desk and reading a memo from one of his employees needing a hardship transfer. Under ATF’s ‘War on Families’, this SAC can just say, “no, I need this body”. That’s the only reason he needs to say, “no”. This SAC doesn’t care about Grandma and Grandpa, or a child with special needs, and who gives a damn about a working wife. This SAC also remembers all those transfers he himself made, never considering his own family.

Now the employee’s request goes to the Hardship Board. Remember, this Board is sitting in HQ and they have probably transfered more than the SAC who denied the request in the first place. Oh yeah, here’s a real sympathetic group of people. But don’t worry, they don’t have to make any tough decisions. They only have to look at the memo from the SAC. Does the SAC say, “no”? Why yes he does. HARDSHIP DENIED. At ATF, one individual can destroy an employee, their wife, their children, and on a really good day, they can even get Grandma and Grandpa.

Now let’s flip this coin over and look at what happens when your beloved SAC wants a transfer. For example, let’s look at a female SAC with an aging mother. Let’s call her Virginia O’BetterThanYou. This female SAC was in HQ. She wanted to be in the area where her mother was. No Hardship Board for SAC O’BetterThanYou. Oh hell no. And we would be remiss if we left out SAC Kelvin Crenshit. He gets a transfer from Seattle to HQ to pick up that AD title. SAC Crenshit stays in HQ just long enough to screw up. He then gets to go back to Seattle where his family is. But oooops, Bob is sitting in his chair. Now, ATF has to send Bob down to Texas. Did anybody in HQ have the courage to say, “NO” to SAC Crenshit? Oh hell no. But how many times has SAC Crenshit said, “no” to his employees’ hardships?

Kelvin has his own special ‘War on Families’. The one that stands out from all of them is when he PROUDLY fired a young agent who merely wanted to be present for the birth of his first child. The agent’s brand new wife was still in Chicago where she was honoring a teaching contract and couldn’t leave the area yet. A concept foreign to SAC Crenshit. This young agent requested a hardship transfer so he could raise his child with his family, and his wife could continue working. SAC Crenshit said, “NO”. This young, soon-to-be father arranged a hardship detail so he could at least be present for the birth. He made this arrangment without the blessing of SAC Crenshit, our buddy, Father of the Year. Well, SAC Crenshit was blind with rage over this (we have the emails to prove it). So while the young agent was driving from Seattle to Chicago, SAC Crenshit worked diligently with the OCC to have him fired. Stand up and take a bow Kelvin. You too Steve Martin for letting Kelvin do it. Also, let’s not leave out Andy Travor. Hey Andy, it’s good to be back in Denver with your family isn’t it?

These three SES managers did not lose a night’s sleep over their role in effecting the termination of a brand new father. And just so everyone knows, there was no misconduct, no performance issues, and no “lack of candor” on the part of this agent. The agent was just leaving Seattle with the assurance from your old buddy, Marianne Ketels, that he had permission from Carson Carroll, DAD, to begin a detail in Chicago. Kelvin designated this young man AWOL while he was driving.

Brandon and Jones, this young father and former agent may be in YOUR past and not worthy of looking back at, but he isn’t in ours. Especially since your ‘War on Families’ continues to this day.

You people make me sick.

#2 Retired and loving it

Retired and loving it

    Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts
  • LocationDown South

Posted 15 April 2012 - 07:14 PM

Worker, sadly the money doesn't come out of their pockets and they have zero accountability which is exactly the reason that they didn't give a shit yesterday and they won't give a shit tomorrow.


A very accurate assessment Leader. They just don't give a shit. None of the higher level management in ATF gives a rat's ass about the future of ATF.

#3 Guest_leaderofthetards_*

Guest_leaderofthetards_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 April 2012 - 06:21 PM

Worker, sadly the money doesn't come out of their pockets and they have zero accountability which is exactly the reason that they didn't give a shit yesterday and they won't give a shit tomorrow.

Leaders need to keep in mind that if ATF employees do not get what they want from ATF, they will leave ATF for another agency who will benefit from the money ATF spent to train and equip the former ATF employee as well as the loss of experience. This is in addition to the damage to ATFs reputation with potential new employees, the public, the congress, and others. A good private company tries to retain its best and brightest for these reasons. Govt leaders need to remeber that if the training and equipping costs were coming out of their own pockets they would work harder to save money on good employees.



#4 GoodWorker

GoodWorker

    Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 15 April 2012 - 05:19 PM

The policy you reference has been on again off again. We have seen NO suggestion that such a policy is or has been implemented with any consistency. If Mr. Jones said it is so, and its NOT being implemented, CONTACT one of the FAAP committee members or Francis Neely at FLEOA. The Senior leadership is saying much but DOING nothing.


Leaders need to keep in mind that if ATF employees do not get what they want from ATF, they will leave ATF for another agency who will benefit from the money ATF spent to train and equip the former ATF employee as well as the loss of experience. This is in addition to the damage to ATFs reputation with potential new employees, the public, the congress, and others. A good private company tries to retain its best and brightest for these reasons. Govt leaders need to remeber that if the training and equipping costs were coming out of their own pockets they would work harder to save money on good employees.

#5 Retired and loving it

Retired and loving it

    Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts
  • LocationDown South

Posted 15 April 2012 - 12:17 PM

Zorro, my experience is that they are not being approved. The same old reason is given -- "staffing". There are just a bunch of really lazy SAcs who don't want to have the irritation of haveing to fill a job if someone is approved for a voluntary transfer. They are going to have to start doing that at some point as people I lknow say that they are lookig at other agencies.

ATF has come down a long, long, long, long, way

#6 VINCENT A CEFALU

VINCENT A CEFALU

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 598 posts
  • LocationSAN FRANCISCO

Posted 15 April 2012 - 09:51 AM

The policy you reference has been on again off again. We have seen NO suggestion that such a policy is or has been implemented with any consistency. If Mr. Jones said it is so, and its NOT being implemented, CONTACT one of the FAAP committee members or Francis Neely at FLEOA. The Senior leadership is saying much but DOING nothing.

Does anyone know of voluntary transfers being approved? So far, I have heard nothing promising about this despite Mr.Jones going to the trouble of breathing life into a dead order. When a transfer request is approved by both involved SACs and gets a manual override @ 99 NY, it appears there may be a breakdown like Mr. Jones concocted this order as window dressing or someone at HQ is torpedoing his initiative and as per SOP killing morale among some good employees (re: Changecast #2 creating unecessary distractions).

For those interested observers outside the agency, I am referring to geographical assignment changes that an employee would theoretically be allowed to finance from personal funds - no cost to the taxpayers (unlike managers caught in unethical or unlawful conduct who get moved at taxpayer expense and most likely reap a financial benefit). This policy was killed off, then brought back when B Todd Jones came on board.

Does anyone have some positive news to report on this policy (PLEASE)?


<!-- isHtml:1 --><!-- isHtml:1 -->

#7 Zorro

Zorro

    Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 190 posts
  • LocationOld California

Posted 14 April 2012 - 06:52 PM

Does anyone know of voluntary transfers being approved? So far, I have heard nothing promising about this despite Mr.Jones going to the trouble of breathing life into a dead order. When a transfer request is approved by both involved SACs and gets a manual override @ 99 NY, it appears there may be a breakdown like Mr. Jones concocted this order as window dressing or someone at HQ is torpedoing his initiative and as per SOP killing morale among some good employees (re: Changecast #2 creating unecessary distractions).

For those interested observers outside the agency, I am referring to geographical assignment changes that an employee would theoretically be allowed to finance from personal funds - no cost to the taxpayers (unlike managers caught in unethical or unlawful conduct who get moved at taxpayer expense and most likely reap a financial benefit). This policy was killed off, then brought back when B Todd Jones came on board.

Does anyone have some positive news to report on this policy (PLEASE)?
The views and opinions expressed by the author are just that. They are not the official opinion of anyone anywhere in any capacity.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users