Should the Senate agree to fund backpay to furloughed workers or not?

Yes. Unlike the other stupid stunts the House has pulled recently, this is a perfectly common sense measure, and the currently furloughed workers are definitely major victims in this fight. It will also help the economy with the promise of the millions of dollars in lost wages being made up. I can understand Reid being angry that it’s not simply part of a reopening CR, but I doubt he’ll oppose it. At the very least the optics would be horrendous.

If any of them hope to be reelected, they would be stupid not to.

I say yes. Look at the harm that would be caused if they didn’t.

Then again, when has the Senate cared how much harm they inflict?

@Seek_Kolinahr Sadly, no matter how unpopular a politician is, historically, incumbents win at least 90% of the time.

The Senate isn’t the problem, the House is.
And the House voted 407–0 to backpay the workers.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/us/politics/house-gop-to-take-up-pay-issue-for-workers.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

I wonder if union members get paid when they strike? I know it isn’t the same, but when unions strike there are members who don’t agree with striking and have to go along. As far as politicians being reelected, if a government employee is electing Republicans into office they need to start thinking about how republicans function lately. By lately I mean in the last 30 years, but especially the last 15. That party has become ridiculous. There are people in the
party who are not ridiculous, but they let the off the deep end “base” control things. i don’t get it.

I really am on the fence. I think they will get paid, don’t they always? But, if they have not worked maybe they shouldn’t. Many government employees have continued to work and they should get paid.

That seems like they would be paid for days they had off, effectively being rewarded by taxpayers for not working. That is a bad precedent.
If the back pay came from congressional salaries then I would be all for it.

Yes. Not working during the shutdown isn’t the workers’ fault, it’s Congress’.

@JLeslie: When unions strike, they don’t get paid by the employer but sometimes the unions have a strike fund where members get some payment.

There are two ways you can look at it (and I can see both viewpoints): One is workers are on standby, probably showed up to work and were told by the employer that they cannot work, which is not the employees’ fault and therefore they should get paid.

The other is that there are employees who are not getting paid and still working (like the police that were involved in that shootout with the unarmed woman the other day). If all employees were then granted back pay, how do the ones that actually showed up and did work be differentiated from the ones who stayed home (although they were presumably ready and able to work, they probably spent their days in coffee shops or whatever)?

I bet they would all like back pay, and we may view it as they should not be punished for a screw up of the government, and maybe they shouldn’t, but what of the ones who are still working without pay?

Yes, a union strike is very different from your employer not letting you do your job. It is worker initiated.

@jca – they could be offered additional paid vacation time, to be used within 12 months of the furlough.

Not saying it’s a great idea, but aneasily doable oone.

@Seek_Kolinahr: Yes, there are a bunch of ways to rectify the situation.

Where I work there have been several times in the past few years where bad storms made it almost impossible to come to work. In addition, emergency situations were declared where they asked the public to stay off the roads. Officially, the job I work for was not closed. A few workers did try to come to work, and did, for various reasons (not wanting to use a vacation day, having something important at work that they felt needed to get done, etc.). Then the big question becomes: if they grant us the day off (in other words, say it was ok that you took the day off and you’ll get paid), what happens to those who woke up very early, cleaned off their cars, risked life and limb and dealt with road closures, etc. to get to work? It’s an ongoing issue, as storms are more frequent and worse and worse now.

Yes. By not doing the job they are well paid to do, Congress has caused these workers to become idle and possibly suffer economic hardship through no fault of their own—not to mention the hardships inflicted on many taxpayers by the interruption of services. If fair compensation to idled federal workers causes an uproar among taxpayers, so be it. Just remember where to lay the blame.

Yes. These furloughed workers did not ask for this time off. They have no clue how long they will be without work/pay. I imagine even if they started looking for other work, it will be difficult since they can be told to return at any time. How many employers do you think will want to hire them given those terms?

Hopefully all the furloughed workers can go to the bank and ask for stays of foreclosure because of the back pay they’ll receive

Yes, they should get paid for the time they were off. The Congress should have set aside their own pay as well.

@jca Like I said, I think those who worked should get paid. Especially if they actually had to report to duty. My dad had a stent put in this past Friday. I just found out yesterday. They decided he needed an angiogram on Thursday and he was having the procedure down Friday and when they saw the angiogram they immediately did a stent. All done at Bethesday Naval Hospital while they all technically were on furlough, not being paid. But, the hospital is going to continue to run, medical staff still shows up. They should be paid. Another friend of mine worked an hour or two from home during the shut down and also did a few toursit things with her husband during the day, took a long nap one day, she probably should not be paid. She enjoyed her time off. Even if she did a little work, it isn’t uncommon for people to keep up with emails here and there, and that sort of thing even while on vacation. Makes coming back to work easier. The suggestion of comp time for the future seems reasonable to me. Or, even no pay at all for people like her. When I worked I would have been happy for days off now and then, even if unpaid. A few times I took unpaid time, as long as I could get it approved.

Of course they should. And furthermore, every member of congress should have to pay back any pay they received during the shutdown and be banned from reelection.
Or even better, all the back-pay for the workers should come out those politicians’ pockets, deducted directly from their bank accounts.
With 800.000 people to pay, that should drive some of those armchair farter politicians into bankruptcy, as it should.

Why do we feel federal workers are so muych different than anybody else? They can’t be fired, layed off, or furloughed. Of course the rest of can but for some reason a federal worker can not. If they worked, they will be paid, if not they shouldn’t. It is the federal government that created this regardless who you blame, why should the federal government be exempt from the consequences? Yet another example of the entitlement mentality and a lack of responsibility for thier own actions.

@JLeslie And what happens to these people out of work, with no hope of pay when this last longer and longer. A few days off may not be a huge issue, but I imagine a full month of no work/pay would be a big deal. They did not ask for this time off and probably did not plan for it. Also, a lot of those workers at Bethesda are active duty and they are getting paid.

@Seaofclouds Oh, if active duty is getting paid, then indeed you are right. My dad had told me the doctors were on furlough, but he could be wrong. The doctors definitely would be active duty.

@Jax I tend to agree with you. All of us are subject to repercussions our employer makes.

Isn’t it good that some workers came to work when some whack job decided to ram her car into the White House barricades? Do you think they should get paid?

I would imagine they are union workers working under a contract. The contract most likely specifies that if they are ready to work, report to a workplace and are turned away, they can get paid. Then they will be eligible for back pay.

The ones who worked may get time and a half or something. It’s probably all spelled out clearly in their contract, as they are civil servants.