CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › brightpuma › Posts

Posts by brightpuma

215 posts shown.

Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Sam Wright21 said:Exactly what I was getting at. People on Facebook were all over the place regarding the location—like Vera being totally clueless about that little house plot on Sunset Blvd / Hollywood Blvd. There’s zero space there. But hey, building permits last, right? Just another legacy left behind by those crooks.

Yeah, they should probably start revoking permits the day they're issued. Can you imagine the circus? The media meltdown would be endless.🙄

Regarding "my project!" (😍), they've clearly shown they don't recognize any investment that actually benefits anyone.

I'd say they recognize a wolf in sheep's clothing the second they see who's footing the bill.

Rachel Barrett8 said:That's how construction outside of downtown LA should look—projects like yours.

Now I'm looking at yet another new building on Bužanov. It looks sleek and modern, sure, but not a single tree in sight.
Just sterile and pointless, just like the others... way too oversized.
Honestly, I don't see how anyone plans to stop this total destruction of our urban spaces.

It isn't really an issue with New York City; it's about the inspectors and agencies like them. You get your permit based on the actual design.
There's been this pattern for years now: build a place showing green space or just planning for it, then once they get the occupancy permit, they pave it over for more parking.
At that point, it's not City Hall's problem anymore—it's on the inspectors (who we all know who they work for) to show up and force them to restore it to the original plan.

Take that same Brooklyn area you guys mentioned. You have streets where front yards are mandatory, yet everyone just pours concrete over them.
Which means someone needs to step up (since these officials won't check themselves) and report it so they can force people to fix it.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Rachel Barrett8 said:Let's be real here: you can't accomplish much in just one year. We have to be honest about that.
But at the same time, within a single year, a certain policy should start taking shape. It should show us a clear direction of where things are headed. And looking at the situation right now? It isn't doing that. We need to call it what it is.

But hey, it's all pretty standard stuff... when you come from the stock market with zero experience, you end up in the Mayor's office. Meanwhile, an MTA driver actually needs at least two years of driving experience—even if those two years were spent exclusively hauling potatoes.

I'd totally get where you're coming from if he were the only one, or at least one of the few. But the reality is, most of our politicians jump into high-level roles without a single day of actual experience.🤷
Man, I guess this is just the best we can hope for. What else am I supposed to say?
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
granitefox16 said:I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.

I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.

I wouldn't have an issue with this logic if you were all part of BM365 and Bandić was still mayor. But the problem starts when you claim to be voters and supporters for a party whose actual platform promised to empower local district councils and neighborhood boards. I don't recall reading anywhere that they'd suddenly start screwing over those boards for the "greater good." Or maybe we aren't reading the same manifesto?

The second issue is that you clearly don't understand how things actually get put on the New York City Council agenda. You can't just cherry-pick the opinions you like from the district councils to include in a proposal while tossing the ones you don't like in the trash.

Maybe you could if you were part of the Republican Party and BM365.

After the total mess with waste management and funneling cash to their own little clubs, now we're moving on to trampling democracy and basic procedures...
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.

I wouldn't have an issue with this logic if you were all part of BM365 and Bandić was still mayor. But the problem starts when you claim to be voters and supporters for a party whose actual platform promised to empower local district councils and neighborhood boards. I don't recall reading anywhere that they'd suddenly start screwing over those boards for the "greater good." Or maybe we aren't reading the same manifesto?

The second issue is that you clearly don't understand how things actually get put on the New York City Council agenda. You can't just cherry-pick the opinions you like from the district councils to include in a proposal while tossing the ones you don't like in the trash.

Maybe you could if you were part of the Republican Party and BM365.

After the total mess with waste management and funneling cash to their own little clubs, now we're moving on to trampling democracy and basic procedures...
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.

I wouldn't have an issue with this logic if you were all part of BM365 and Bandić was still mayor. But the problem starts when you claim to be voters and supporters for a party whose actual platform promised to empower local district councils and neighborhood boards. I don't recall reading anywhere that they'd suddenly start screwing over those boards for the "greater good." Or maybe we aren't reading the same manifesto?

The second issue is that you clearly don't understand how things actually get put on the New York City Council agenda. You can't just cherry-pick the opinions you like from the district councils to include in a proposal while tossing the ones you don't like in the trash.

Maybe you could if you were part of the Republican Party and BM365.

After the total mess with waste management and funneling cash to their own little clubs, now we're moving on to trampling democracy and basic procedures...
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.

I wouldn't have an issue with this logic if you were all part of BM365 and Bandić was still mayor. But the problem starts when you claim to be voters and supporters for a party whose actual platform promised to empower local district councils and neighborhood boards. I don't recall reading anywhere that they'd suddenly start screwing over those boards for the "greater good." Or maybe we aren't reading the same manifesto?

The second issue is that you clearly don't understand how things actually get put on the New York City Council agenda. You can't just cherry-pick the opinions you like from the district councils to include in a proposal while tossing the ones you don't like in the trash.

Maybe you could if you were part of the Republican Party and BM365.

After the total mess with waste management and funneling cash to their own little clubs, now we're moving on to trampling democracy and basic procedures...
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.

I wouldn't have an issue with this logic if you were all part of BM365 and Bandić was still mayor. But the problem starts when you claim to be voters and supporters for a party whose actual platform promised to empower local district councils and neighborhood boards. I don't recall reading anywhere that they'd suddenly start screwing over those boards for the "greater good." Or maybe we aren't reading the same manifesto?

The second issue is that you clearly don't understand how things actually get put on the New York City Council agenda. You can't just cherry-pick the opinions you like from the district councils to include in a proposal while tossing the ones you don't like in the trash.

Maybe you could if you were part of the Republican Party and BM365.

After the total mess with waste management and funneling cash to their own little clubs, now we're moving on to trampling democracy and basic procedures...

I wouldn't have an issue with this logic if you were all part of BM365 and Bandić was still mayor. But the problem starts when you claim to be voters and supporters for a party whose actual platform promised to empower local district councils and neighborhood boards. I don't recall reading anywhere that they'd suddenly start screwing over those boards for the "greater good." Or maybe we aren't reading the same manifesto?

The second issue is that you clearly don't understand how things actually get put on the New York City Council agenda. You can't just cherry-pick the opinions you like from the district councils to include in a proposal while tossing the ones you don't like in the trash.

Maybe you could if you were part of the Republican Party and BM365.

After the total mess with waste management and funneling cash to their own little clubs, now we're moving on to trampling democracy and basic procedures...
Empowering them doesn't mean the DoD and the VA suddenly become the sole decision-makers overnight. It just means there'll be more flow from the bottom up, with the DoD and the VA acting as the primary drivers and initiators.

The second issue here is that you guys just don't get how the New York City Council agenda actually works. You can't just cherry-pick the neighborhood council opinions you like and toss them into a proposal while ignoring the ones you don't. That's not how it functions.

If the rule is that every single opinion has to be on the agenda? Then I'm all for it.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
granitefox16 said:Exactly.

Whatever anyone thinks about Željka Markić, she hasn't broken any laws. Sitting next to Barish and those other crooks would be a total slap in the face, but honestly, these guys are struggling with more than just ethics—they clearly don't even understand how democracy works.

Yesterday in the assembly, they were debating opening a construction waste dump near Resnick. Get this: the proposal includes an opinion from the Downtown district saying they aren't against opening a dump in Brooklyn... 🤣...but in that same damn proposal, there's zero mention of the Brooklyn council's opinion, even though they're actually against the plan... even the local representatives from the Democratic Party were against it.

It's all just a way to strip power from the lower levels and ignore the actual local councils and neighborhood boards.
🙏

Even Bandić wouldn't have thought of something this shady—just straight-up erasing the council's opinion because they're standing in the way of what you want to push through.
🙏

Exactly.

Whatever anyone thinks about Željka Markić, she hasn't broken any laws. Sitting next to Barish and those other crooks would be a total slap in the face, but honestly, these guys are struggling with more than just ethics—they clearly don't even understand how democracy works.

Yesterday in the assembly, they were debating opening a construction waste dump near Resnick. Get this: the proposal includes an opinion from the Downtown district saying they aren't against opening a dump in Brooklyn... 🤣...but in that same damn proposal, there's zero mention of the Brooklyn council's opinion, even though they're actually against the plan... even the local representatives from the Democratic Party were against it.

It's all just a way to strip power from the lower levels and ignore the actual local councils and neighborhood boards.
🙏

Even Bandić wouldn't have thought of something this shady—just straight-up erasing the council's opinion because they're standing in the way of what you want to push through.
🙏
I don't know how much their opinion actually matters. Maybe they left it out because they knew they were against it and didn't want to make it obvious.

Besides, if their input was truly decisive (or should be), nothing would ever get built. Locals are always going to fight these things.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Nicholas King said:Not a chance.

You've got a point there. One's behind bars and the other's halfway across the world dodging the law.😬

The only way he's grabbing coffee with them every Saturday is if all three happen to be in prison at the exact same time.😬
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Paul Reyes5 said:Huge projects like this... they don't just happen in a vacuum, you know? They require backing from various federal departments and the courts, since everything is tied together at the national level. So, when New York City puts forward a proposal for a genuinely solid project, a department like the Department of Commerce can basically just step in and say:
I mean, I guess we’re looking at some incomplete documentation here, which—honestly—is just par for the course lately, isn't it? It’s like everyone expects things to just magically click into place without actually doing the legwork, and maybe that's just my cynical take, but it feels like we're constantly tripping over missing paperwork because nobody bothered to double-check the files before hitting send.
I mean, if you really sit down and look at the big picture, I guess it’s pretty obvious that this project isn't exactly a matter of strategic importance, or at least that's how it feels to me. It just doesn't seem to carry that kind of weight, you know? Maybe I'm overthinking it, but it honestly feels like a bit of a non-issue in the grand scheme of things.

And then, I guess, you eventually hit one of those annoying little roadblocks where everything just grinds to a halt because some official needs to verify a document or a certification, or whatever. It’s always something like that, isn't it? Just a sudden, frustrating stall in the whole process while they double-check some piece of paper.
I mean, I'm fully aware that this is going to be a massive uphill battle, honestly. But, if a platform like We Can! manages to actually pull off winning a few terms in a row, things would probably start looking a whole lot better around here, I guess. 🙂

So, imagine this scenario: you’re a landowner, right? And then out of nowhere, the city comes knocking on your door with an offer to buy your plot. Now, I guess most people would see that as a golden opportunity, but let's be honest—some folks just get a little too excited when they sense a payday. They start thinking they can squeeze the city for some ridiculous, inflated price way above what the property is actually worth on the market. It’s that classic move where someone sees a chance to get greedy and tries to play hardball. But what’s the actual move there? In my opinion, a sensible, level-headed administration—you know, the kind that isn't looking to burn through taxpayer money—would probably just walk away from a deal like that. If a citizen wants to be greedy, maybe the city just decides it's not worth the headache and moves on.

I guess if you look at the crowd over at the Democratic Party, you’ll notice there’s a massive influx of young people who are, frankly, incredibly well-educated. They’re all pretty much tethered to one another through social media and endless Zoom calls, which I suppose is just how things work now. For most of them, this is probably the very first political organization they've ever actually engaged with in their lives. It feels like that initial period of finding your footing and figuring out the ropes is just a natural part of any political movement maturing, I mean, it's basically just a growing pain you have to go through.

I guess I’m just one of those people who happens to be more patient than most, if that makes any sense. I mean, look, I get it—the sanitation crews have to take sick days, they need their vacation time, all that. But let’s be real here for a second; it isn't exactly rocket science to call in sick for five working days and somehow perfectly stitch that together with a four-day weekend. It happens, I suppose.

Look, I get it—being a critic is easy, and honestly, sometimes it's necessary. But I feel like people forget that you have to actually account for the institutional heavyweights and the bureaucratic machinery that essentially gives the green light to these kinds of projects in the first place. It’s not just about whether an idea is good or bad in a vacuum; there are massive structural factors at play that dictate what actually moves forward.

So, if you actually wanted to, say, fix a railroad crossing—not that anyone’s really rushing to do that—you’d need a whole circus of bureaucracy involved. I mean, you’d need the relevant federal agencies, the courts, and probably some handful of random government bureaus just to get the ball rolling. You'd definitely be looking at the Department of Commerce and whatever funding they've earmarked through the European Union. But honestly, even all that wouldn't matter if you didn't have the citizens stepping up, too. You'd need people willing to actually organize themselves, maybe start some petitions, or find those rare enthusiasts who actually bother to show up to neighborhood association meetings. Though, I guess even those local reps were elected under some completely different set of rules ages ago, so everything is kind of a mess anyway.

Real improvements require this whole mosaic of different players actually pulling in the same direction, I guess. And look, that isn't just some pathetic, empty platitude—it really does have to be that way if we want anything to change. There’s an entire network of streets across New York City that have been systematically neglected for ages, and honestly, it's a mess. It takes time, you know? We can't exactly just roll up, throw out some scaffolding, grab a bucket of paint, and start slapping color on private property facades whenever we feel like it. That's just not how things work here.🙂

I guess we just need to have a little more patience and focus on the continuity of the mandates we've already secured. You have to remember, at the end of the day, we’re talking about people who are fundamentally decent and morally upright. Just think about the folks living right there in your own neighborhood in New York City. I can personally vouch for them—there isn't a single cruel, deceitful, or malicious soul among them. They're just well-bred, approachable, cultured, and sensible people, really.
You really need some serious political seasoning for this kind of thing—that specific knack for handling opponents who, out of nowhere, decide they’re suddenly the world's leading experts on protecting children or saving the environment.🍿 I mean, honestly, it just feels totally unnatural to me. I guess they’ve probably never actually bothered to pick up a single piece of corn, rice, or a chestnut from the ground just to take a good look at it, you know? It seems unlikely they'd ever get that close to the actual stuff.😁

Don't let it get you down, honestly. I mean, look at this place—it’s basically just a playground where various special interest groups come in to shout whatever their handlers told them to say, which is kind of predictable if you think about it. But as far as we're concerned, our support for the movement is completely organic. We aren't taking orders from some shadowy power center or following a script handed down by some political machine; we’re just doing our own thing here, naturally.

It’s funny, looking back at how much nonsense and outright deception they used to spread about us. They were always pushing this narrative that we were just puppets being funded by some shadowy elite, sent in specifically to dismantle traditional values here in America. It was all such a massive setup, honestly. I mean, if that were actually true, wouldn't we basically have billions of dollars sitting there just waiting to be spent? We could just rebuild everything from scratch and rule forever without ever having to touch the city budget or deal with any of those annoying little problems that keep popping up. But no, that wasn't the case. Instead, they rely entirely on the municipal budget and those various European Union funds.

So now we’ve got these self-proclaimed champions of the children appearing out of nowhere—you know, the ones who claim to be all about protecting kids and ensuring every little face is beaming with joy while they frolic through freshly mowed lawns looking for butterflies or whatever, all while parents watch on, supposedly moved to tears by how fast they’re growing up. It’s funny, really, because suddenly they didn't seem to care one bit about the terrible food being served in our schools and daycare centers, or the crumbling infrastructure, or those depressing schoolyards and playgrounds. They weren't exactly jumping to fix the lack of soap and paper towels, the dilapidated bathrooms, the cracked floor tiles, the busted parquet, the ancient desks and chairs, or the total state of the gymnasiums... but, oh, look at that, now they’ve all developed this sudden, overwhelming maternal instinct for the youth. 😁 People haven't exactly suffered from collective amnesia since 2022, you know. 😁

Personally, I think Mayor Eric Adams is actually a breath of fresh air in this political mess, especially when you consider him and his team. 😉

Remember those regulars from the local neighborhood board? They're at it again. Basically, they blocked a project she was trying to push through, so now suddenly "We Can" and Eric Adams are public enemy number one. Apparently, they're even worse than Bandic.

briskviper362 said:And I'm actually pretty happy about that.

And I'm actually pretty happy about that.
Maybe he'll just take that Insignia he thinks he's too good for—the one he still uses every now and then. I guess that would just count as being paid in kind, similar to everyone else who has access to a company vehicle 24/7, and that's that. I mean, obviously, nobody is actually going to demand he pay back any money he wasn't supposed to have and just go back to how things were before.
Maybe he'll just take that Insignia he thinks he's too good for—the one he still uses every now and then. I guess that would just count as being paid in kind, similar to everyone else who has access to a company vehicle 24/7, and that's that. I mean, obviously, nobody is actually going to demand he pay back any money he wasn't supposed to have and just go back to how things were before.
Which part of that "then they'll just take an official car" line actually implies anything else? I don't get why you felt the need to throw in an "or."
That official one is probably going to run a bit more expensive.

Assumption 2

Your attempt at analysis is interesting. It reminds me of the old days when kids from Brooklyn would go looking for fights with kids from Queens or try to sell bricks on the corner.

That narrative of yours—about the good guys who weren't part of Bandić's crew and are now
getting screwed—is pretty predictable.

In a real company, you know who does quality work. Fanaticism doesn't play a role in job descriptions or compensation packages.

The loudest Bandić supporters probably just had different types of employment contracts, which is why they were so vocal. No employer is going to protect people who openly discredit them.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Assumption 2

Your attempt at analysis is interesting. It reminds me of the old days when kids from Brooklyn would go looking for fights with kids from Queens or try to sell bricks on the corner.

That narrative of yours—about the good guys who weren't part of Bandić's crew and are now
getting screwed—is pretty predictable.

In a real company, you know who does quality work. Fanaticism doesn't play a role in job descriptions or compensation packages.

The loudest Bandić supporters probably just had different types of employment contracts, which is why they were so vocal. No employer is going to protect people who openly discredit them.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Which part of that "then they'll just take an official car" line actually implies anything else? I don't get why you felt the need to throw in an "or."
That official one is probably going to run a bit more expensive.

I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Look, I never said those people should get any special treatment when it comes to "sharing" executive roles, so please stop putting words in my mouth. I never suggested they should have an advantage whatsoever.

In my experience, generational employment actually results in high-quality workers who truly care about their jobs and how they perform them, simply because they feel a sense of responsibility toward the older generations who paved the way before them. We can talk all we want about nepotism or whatever scandal is hitting the headlines at a public corporation, but that’s just how it works. You see countless examples of this in the capitalist world too, especially in massive manufacturing giants like Ford, John Deere, or Mack...

Think about a grandfather who was a conductor, a father in administration, and then a son who grew up in the city, eventually becoming a mid-level manager who spoke about the company's history with genuine pride. Together, they put over a hundred years of service into the MTA, and just a year ago, the son retired. He was one of the last people I knew who actually gave a damn about the system.

And sure, those days are ancient history. It started sliding downhill once the holding company was formed, and now the whole thing is just in a freefall.

Your attitude toward the employees at the holding company is nothing more than a copy-paste of the current administration's rhetoric, and frankly, the results of this "reform"—and how these people are treated—will reflect exactly that.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

I see where you're coming from, I really do, but that's just not how things work here. Out of eleven openings for department heads, only five were filled, and not one single person was picked from within the municipal conglomerate. All eleven applicants were internal candidates, so do you honestly believe every single one of them was so incompetent that they weren't qualified? It seems they'd much rather grab someone off a job board and hand them an operational leadership role than promote anyone from the inside.
And what about those other six vacancies? They were just canceled. That's the textbook definition of playing favorites, except this time it's the interests of the new administration. They'd rather have nobody in charge than someone from the old guard. They went looking desperately for outside talent, but it turns out there simply wasn't a pool of experts willing to jump in and satisfy the whims of the new political party.

I can't speak to those with "different" contracts, but I don't think it's quite what you're suggesting, because during the first wave, they managed to shake off a good chunk of the cronies, and now everyone who survived that initial purge is slowly trickling out. It's not even about their current contracts, since the crew is actually landing new ones and even moving into management roles.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Look, I never said those people should get any special treatment when it comes to "sharing" executive roles, so please stop putting words in my mouth. I never suggested they should have an advantage whatsoever.

In my experience, generational employment actually results in high-quality workers who truly care about their jobs and how they perform them, simply because they feel a sense of responsibility toward the older generations who paved the way before them. We can talk all we want about nepotism or whatever scandal is hitting the headlines at a public corporation, but that’s just how it works. You see countless examples of this in the capitalist world too, especially in massive manufacturing giants like Ford, John Deere, or Mack...

Think about a grandfather who was a conductor, a father in administration, and then a son who grew up in the city, eventually becoming a mid-level manager who spoke about the company's history with genuine pride. Together, they put over a hundred years of service into the MTA, and just a year ago, the son retired. He was one of the last people I knew who actually gave a damn about the system.

And sure, those days are ancient history. It started sliding downhill once the holding company was formed, and now the whole thing is just in a freefall.

Your attitude toward the employees at the holding company is nothing more than a copy-paste of the current administration's rhetoric, and frankly, the results of this "reform"—and how these people are treated—will reflect exactly that.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Look, I never said those people should get any special treatment when it comes to "sharing" executive roles, so please stop putting words in my mouth. I never suggested they should have an advantage whatsoever.

In my experience, generational employment actually results in high-quality workers who truly care about their jobs and how they perform them, simply because they feel a sense of responsibility toward the older generations who paved the way before them. We can talk all we want about nepotism or whatever scandal is hitting the headlines at a public corporation, but that’s just how it works. You see countless examples of this in the capitalist world too, especially in massive manufacturing giants like Ford, John Deere, or Mack...

Think about a grandfather who was a conductor, a father in administration, and then a son who grew up in the city, eventually becoming a mid-level manager who spoke about the company's history with genuine pride. Together, they put over a hundred years of service into the MTA, and just a year ago, the son retired. He was one of the last people I knew who actually gave a damn about the system.

And sure, those days are ancient history. It started sliding downhill once the holding company was formed, and now the whole thing is just in a freefall.

Your attitude toward the employees at the holding company is nothing more than a copy-paste of the current administration's rhetoric, and frankly, the results of this "reform"—and how these people are treated—will reflect exactly that.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Believe it or not, the seats are empty and there aren't even any Vanguard execs stepping in. How does anything get done? You just have board members assigned to certain sectors delegating tasks down to whoever happens to be in that department, with no actual directors in place to manage the chaos.

Since I haven't worked for government agencies or big municipal companies before, this caught my eye. Do they really have to post public job openings for director positions? Is there a specific law that stops them from just promoting someone internally without a formal process? And more importantly, who is actually doing the job right now while these postings are canceled? I guess some Vanguard director is probably covering, because I doubt they're incompetent enough to leave essential roles vacant until the process finishes. Why not just give those people who are clearly good enough for Vanguard a shot at being directors?

It feels pretty discouraging if someone who works hard and stays dedicated can't be promoted, and instead has to compete in a public search against whoever happens to be passing by. It's almost like a calculated move to kill any motivation or ambition and push talented people toward the private sector. It’s like a slap in the face to everyone in the system, essentially telling them they just aren't good enough.
Exactly. People don't even realize that even in systems like this, there are folks who genuinely care about their work. There are people for whom working at, say, Central Park or the MTA means everything because their grandfathers, fathers, or mothers worked there too, and they feel a deep sense of responsibility to uphold that legacy. I know plenty of them. Of course, you have the opposite type of people, just like everywhere else. But treating dedicated employees this way is fatal; as I mentioned before, we've seen people leaving the roster lately against their will, but we're also seeing the frontline staff—drivers who can make much better money in the private sector or outside the USA—just walking away. In the last few weeks, even the administrative staff have been quitting voluntarily, taking lower-paying jobs outside the system because they see which way the wind is blowing. By the end of autumn, anyone with one foot out the door is going to vanish, because the ones who actually know how to do the job, the ones who roll up their sleeves and get things done, are already scrambling to find an exit.

It’s a tragedy to watch, seeing the healthy parts of the administration and the core operations just crumble away.
Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Look, if you're considering bringing him onto your team, just remember—you aren't under any obligation to do it. It's entirely up to you.

It honestly feels a bit off when you see someone who’s actually putting in the work—someone truly dedicated and doing a great job—get passed over for a promotion. Instead of just being moved up, they’re forced to go through some formal public job posting process where anyone off the street can apply and throw their hat in the ring. It’s a strange way to handle talent.

What does any of that have to do with anything? 😵
If you've actually put in the work and stayed on top of things, that’s going to count for a lot when you're up against someone who just drifted in off the street.

Man... let’s just keep the nepotism coming, shall we? 🎉
I remember what that jerk from the MTA said a few years back—he was talking about pushing through some new regulation so that employees' family members would get priority when it comes to hiring.
You’d really take it to the next level, wouldn't you? Giving priority to all those people who only landed their jobs through family connections when it comes to handing out director roles... man, that's a pro move right there. 👍

I honestly don't doubt for a second that you know plenty of people like that, mostly because that's exactly the type of crowd that runs the show over at City Hall. It wouldn't even surprise me if you had some kind of ancestral connection to the inner workings of the New York City administration yourself.
But honestly, you've got to face the music at some point—it's time to accept that window has completely slammed shut.
Look, I never said those people should get any special treatment when it comes to "sharing" executive roles, so please stop putting words in my mouth. I never suggested they should have an advantage whatsoever.

In my experience, generational employment actually results in high-quality workers who truly care about their jobs and how they perform them, simply because they feel a sense of responsibility toward the older generations who paved the way before them. We can talk all we want about nepotism or whatever scandal is hitting the headlines at a public corporation, but that’s just how it works. You see countless examples of this in the capitalist world too, especially in massive manufacturing giants like Ford, John Deere, or Mack...

Think about a grandfather who was a conductor, a father in administration, and then a son who grew up in the city, eventually becoming a mid-level manager who spoke about the company's history with genuine pride. Together, they put over a hundred years of service into the MTA, and just a year ago, the son retired. He was one of the last people I knew who actually gave a damn about the system.

And sure, those days are ancient history. It started sliding downhill once the holding company was formed, and now the whole thing is just in a freefall.

Your attitude toward the employees at the holding company is nothing more than a copy-paste of the current administration's rhetoric, and frankly, the results of this "reform"—and how these people are treated—will reflect exactly that.
Look, I never said those people should get any special treatment when it comes to "sharing" executive roles, so please stop putting words in my mouth. I never suggested they should have an advantage whatsoever.

In my experience, generational employment actually results in high-quality workers who truly care about their jobs and how they perform them, simply because they feel a sense of responsibility toward the older generations who paved the way before them. We can talk all we want about nepotism or whatever scandal is hitting the headlines at a public corporation, but that’s just how it works. You see countless examples of this in the capitalist world too, especially in massive manufacturing giants like Ford, John Deere, or Mack...

Think about a grandfather who was a conductor, a father in administration, and then a son who grew up in the city, eventually becoming a mid-level manager who spoke about the company's history with genuine pride. Together, they put over a hundred years of service into the MTA, and just a year ago, the son retired. He was one of the last people I knew who actually gave a damn about the system.

And sure, those days are ancient history. It started sliding downhill once the holding company was formed, and now the whole thing is just in a freefall.

Your attitude toward the employees at the holding company is nothing more than a copy-paste of the current administration's rhetoric, and frankly, the results of this "reform"—and how these people are treated—will reflect exactly that.
I don't know. Are you speaking from actual experience here, or just an idealized version of how those kinds of companies work?
I worked at a place like that once—where both parents and their kids were on the payroll. You'd think that would build some loyalty, right? But it doesn't. They don't actually treat the business as "theirs" in a way that makes them care about its success. Instead, they see it as "theirs" in the sense that they expect the company to take care of them. And honestly? That’s usually where the motivation ends.

I agree with you. There are definitely people in these systems who actually know what they’re doing and aren't corrupt. But they're usually lower down the ladder. Directors and executives? They're almost always political appointees chosen for their connections. You find the real talent at the mid-management level—heads of smaller teams or niche departments. They actually have the skills. And let's be real, you can't just take someone who managed a five-person team and expect them to run a department of a thousand people overnight. It doesn't work like that.

Especially if his former department was part of that larger division. If nothing else, you'll constantly be dealing with accusations of playing favorites or seeking revenge. You can pick up production processes pretty quickly; the key is just having the right foundation to build on from day one.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Sam Wright21 said:Their platform claims they’re focused on strengthening local governance, but honestly, it feels like just another hollow promise designed to sound meaningful to the average voter.

It’s just not right, and Eric Adams was completely justified in calling out this practice. A standard probationary period is perfectly normal; I mean, surely you don't actually believe that every single person working there is being brought on through temporary, short-term contracts?

Yeah, I actually think they are. 🙂
They work on one-year contracts, and half of that is just a trial period. From what I've heard, that's pretty much the standard for all those government agencies and municipal conglomerates.
After that first year, some people get extended for another year, while others finally land a permanent role. It really just depends on the specific company.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
briskviper362 said:Berkshire Hathaway just posted a job opening for the Sanitation Department:

The catch is they’re only offering fixed-term contracts for a year. Honestly, do they really think even ten people will apply given the current pay and working conditions?

The reality on the ground is that anyone with half a brain is jumping ship from Berkshire Hathaway. An employee at IT Corp left for a private firm two weeks ago, two lawyers handed in their resignations to go private, and a colleague I worked with for twelve years just quit on his own accord... and none of these folks were even on that infamous list. And let's be real, hasn't that "list" been revised at least four times already? You want to know the kicker? Most of the bureaucrats who caused this whole mess are staying right where they are, keeping their cozy jobs or moving to similar ones. The very people who were loudly championing the former mayor—who held all those management positions—were at the top of the list in the first few versions, weren't they? Well, they aren't anymore.

But you know what happened instead? Both husband and wife ended up unemployed—he was in operations, she was in admin, both in their late fifties.

And get this: every single person who was fired has filed a lawsuit—every single one. The result? People are actually getting letters in the mail telling them to come back to work because their termination is being rescinded. Can you believe that? They put you on a list, shame you, tell you you're redundant, hand you a pink slip after you've had a couple of drinks, and then suddenly they send you a formal letter saying they actually want you back.

It’s a total circus.

Oh, and to top it off, New York City Road hasn't produced a single pound of asphalt because they're out of bitumen, and at this rate, even funeral services might be canceled soon since appointments are already being scrapped.

I think this is actually pretty standard. Before joining this firm, I worked for two government agencies, and both times I started on a contract before moving to permanent status. I mean, who hires people for permanent roles—especially in public sectors—before seeing how they actually perform?

Everyone who can leave the conglomerate is leaving. An IT professional jumped ship to a private firm two weeks ago, two lawyers quit for private practice, and a colleague I worked with for twelve years just resigned... And none of them were even on that famous layoff list. By the way, did you know that "list" has been revised at least four times already? And get this: most of the bureaucrats causing all this drama will keep their jobs or find similar ones. Those who spent all their time defending Bloomberg's administration and held management roles were at the top of the list during the first few versions. Now? They aren't.

From what I've seen, IT professionals working in government or public entities are either incompetent or unmotivated. There isn't really a third option.
This situation probably forced him to look elsewhere, though he wouldn't have otherwise. Maybe that's for the best.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Sam Wright21 said:They claim the era of embezzlement is over, though I find myself skeptical. All I see are these pointless, vanity projects being greenlit and billed at triple the actual cost. It’s a stroke of luck that Eric Adams actually turned out to be as competent as he boasted and is sticking to his platform, but somehow, that seems to have become an afterthought to him lately.

Man, all he really needed was one successful project under his belt. Then everyone would be praising him regardless of whatever other crap he pulled. 👍

Even if he does pull something off, until someone else comes along who has to be bribed or pushed just to get a single project approved, Eric Adams will remain persona non grata.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Rachel Barrett8 said:Look, nobody is disputing that Eric Adams inherited a mess.

But these problems have been staring us in the face for years. If you know anything about New York City, you realize he’s signed up for a job like Sisyphus, not a cozy gig at a coffee shop in Chicago.

In my opinion, the preparation was totally lacking.

That’s all fair... but I keep asking, what exactly could he have done differently? Like, NYC has to start mandatory recycling because that’s the commitment made.

It’s not like he went looking for this trouble; he just had to deal with it. There isn't even the infrastructure in place yet—that's the work that needs to start. And he couldn't exactly file permits before he was actually Mayor.

He could have scoped out the general requirements since he had partial access to the City's files, but honestly, a lot of things were just sitting there waiting for him to take office. He couldn't really prepare much before then.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Rachel Barrett8 said:Maybe Eric Adams could be better, but only if he were running a city like Austin or Zurich.
It’s easy to act on those big visions when you're dealing with a wealthy society and highly organized urban centers.

Take the whole waste management thing—the shredders or the bags.
You go out, buy all these shredders, start separating the waste, and then what? You just dump the whole mess onto a landfill that you previously claimed needed to be shut down.

It’s pure chaos.

And what else is he supposed to do with it? What's the actual alternative to that landfill RIGHT NOW?

Nothing’s been done for years. It’s not like you can just pull a sorting facility or an incinerator out of your pocket and flip a switch.
And we’re back to the same old problem—even if they started today, getting permits would take forever.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Rachel Barrett8 said:But Eric Adams is actively pushing for those exact kinds of policies. He’s acting like a politician who wants to manage every single tiny detail of his constituents' lives—health, childcare, holidays, festivals, minority rights, preschools, parks, park benches, air quality, recycling, the 15-minute city concept, cheap cable cars, and so much more.

In reality, Eric Adams just repackaged Bernie Sanders' old playbook, just with a "cleaner," greener coat of paint.
What kind of outcome can we honestly expect from that?

Look... I was hoping, and I still hope, that things could be better.

Take the municipal recycling shredders, for example. He claimed the City had the capacity to handle this internally without outsourcing it. So, he went out and bought the machinery to make it happen.
But the machines are just sitting there. They haven't even started because they're stuck waiting on permits—we're talking over a year now.
So what am I supposed to say? That he was wrong? That he should have gone a different way?

And then people turn around and bash him for it. They miss the real issue: a broken system where you're stalled for a year because of a single piece of paperwork that probably should've been cleared in a month.
We could argue, "Oh, he should have prepared for that." But honestly, how do you prepare for that? Is every decision he makes going to be delayed by a year or two? It’s not that we won't see results; it's that the results will be held hostage by endless red tape.

What can anyone actually accomplish in a four-year term when the parameters are set like this?
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Christian Foster38 said:Look, before we go around branding every single judge in the country a criminal, maybe it’d be a good idea if people actually sat down and read the court ruling itself—instead of just blindly trusting some hit piece written by a journalist who probably barely finished middle school because their editor told them to.

On another note, if you want my two cents, I think Eric Adams is completely out of touch with reality. He honestly doesn't seem to have any clue why people even bothered voting for him in the first place.
The whole point was to crack down on corruption within city hall, finally fix the trash situation, and stop all that nepotism-driven urban planning nonsense.
But instead, he’s wasting everyone's time obsessing over stripping rights from stay-at-home moms, Pride parades, gender ideology, and all that other absolute bullshit.

ermm.. one of the reasons he was elected was to get rid of—or at least change—the way things are run. 😁

And if "fixing corruption" means he has to come up with wild, creative ways to bail out his buddies or make people wait over a year for waste management permits, then yeah, nothing's going to change. The system is literally designed to prevent change.

At that point, it's like I said before: just lock the doors and turn out the lights. We're done for.
On one hand, the system is rigged to keep things exactly as they are, making any real progress nearly impossible. On the other, people expect instant results, so when things don't move fast enough, they get frustrated and just give up.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Christian Foster38 said:Alright. So we’re all in agreement here—he went after the preschool teachers because he figured they’d be the easiest targets. But man, did he blow it.

It isn't about finding an easy target; it's about what makes sense logically.

A handful of people are sitting on funds that could actually be redirected toward building new preschools and fixing the childcare shortage.
And you wouldn't even need some massive, complicated contract overhaul—just a simple change to one specific policy.
But hey, that would only work if we lived in a country where the courts actually functioned properly, rather than just rubber-stamping whatever the administration wants instead of following the law.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Christian Foster38 said:Quincey:
I can't quite wrap my head around what Dukkai is trying to pull here—it feels like one of those half-baked ideas that sounds deep until you actually sit with it for more than five seconds. It’s all very "vague concept meets pseudo-intellectualism," isn't it? Honestly, I've seen this kind of thing before where someone tries to dress up a basic observation in fancy language just to feel important. It lacks any real substance. kaže:
Look, you can’t just expect people to work for free—it’s not like that works in the real world. Most people who actually get things done want a paycheck at the end of the day. You can't exactly go out there, start opening up childcare centers, and hiring staff while telling everyone, "Hey, don't worry about the money right now; I'll pay you once the government subsidies kick in or some other policy change finally happens." That's just not how reality functions.

Sure, you could "create" revenue that way. Just hike up the cost of everything in New York City and see how fast you suddenly find the budget to build a new preschool.
Or, you know, what we actually need is a massive audit of all that city-owned property—just a total overhaul. We should be looking at how much of it is being handed out for basically nothing, letting people use public assets for pennies on the dollar. It’s high time we hike those lease rates and rents up to actual, honest-to-god market value.
But honestly, you just stepped right on a much bigger, louder sore spot than any of those mothers or daycare teachers could ever hope to trigger.

Look, if that property was signed away on 99-year leases that can't be canceled without massive penalties, how are you supposed to fix it without losing a fortune?

And if they made sure those contracts are ironclad, don't you think those big, influential groups made sure their space couldn't just be snatched away overnight? 🙂
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Christian Foster38 said:Look, you can't just snap your fingers and have a fully staffed preschool ready by tomorrow morning—not like how he tried to pull a stunt by lifting that restriction.
Besides, let him find the money elsewhere. Or better yet, let him actually grow the economy. That’s literally why we voted him in.

Sure you can't, but usually, people actually want to get paid for their work. You can't just start building daycares and hiring staff only to tell them, "Hey, I'll pay you once the mandate ends or gets relaxed or whatever."

He could definitely generate revenue. Look, he could just hike up prices for everything in New York City and see how fast those daycare funds roll in. Though, I have a feeling people wouldn't be too thrilled about that.
He tried cutting back on unnecessary expenses, but it's not working. Judging by the reactions here, people would probably rather see money spent on the NYPD than on building schools.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Jeffrey Long said:Eric Adams' inner circle just can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that he’s the one actually pulling the strings behind this policy reversal. He was the one insisting the measure was legally sound all along. He even went as far as calling anyone suggesting an alternative rollout nothing more than incompetent amateurs. ☕

Those sycophants missed the forest for the trees; even CNN was tearing these so-called "mitigation efforts" to pieces. To quote them, there's zero space left in daycare centers, the transition period is way too tight, and the job placement and retraining programs are practically non-existent. 🙏 🙏 🙏

Now, we're just sitting here waiting for the budget to crater—specifically on the revenue side—along with a massive freeze on Zillow's income streams. 🍿

Are you part of some cult? Because based on how little you know about this, it’s the only logical explanation. In reality, both social security credits and pension contributions are being tracked. 😉

Man, this is honestly disgusting.

Sure, who cares if one cow dies, as long as two of the neighbor's cows die too, right? 👍

I asked you before: what actually are these offsetting measures? What would they even look like? Why would current users want to accept them? How long would the whole thing even take?

Because if the process of scaling back the policy involves offsets that just delay the cost over ten years, you haven't really achieved anything.
Especially if a new administration comes in and just reverses everything again.

God, it feels like the country won't dig itself out of this mess for 30 years because of this exact attitude. Just let everything burn to the ground, as long as "our guys" are the ones in charge. 🙄
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
Christian Foster38 said:unknown

A truly smart move would be to stop adding new parents to the system altogether—just let the current ones ride until their benefits run out. In the meantime, put that money toward actually building more daycare centers and expanding capacity.
Increasing the birth rate is in the national interest. I thought that was common sense, but apparently not.

Sure, but the whole point was to redirect those funds toward building more daycares. If we don't do that, where does the money come from? You'll just have to pull it from somewhere else to pay for new facilities.
Which basically means you're shortchanging one group of people just so 5,000 others can get childcare subsidies.
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
rowdytinker3 said:It’s honestly pathetic when you listen to some guy like unknown spout his nonsense and then actually start clapping for him. 🙏 🙏

Look, he basically set them up to collect a fat paycheck for the next decade without lifting a finger. Not really surprising, is it? ☕
Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4 in Political Scene ·
driftingtinker said:Then I roll by the underpass around 9:00 AM this morning and it’s totally deserted. I guess I'm just lost.

By the way, are you some kind of media professional outside of this forum? You've got that specific writing style that screams journalist.

Thankfully, no. Just IT.

Colleague 🙂