USCIS lays off over 1000 contractors due to financial shortfalls

[PhillyNatz 39]

1 hour ago, user555 said:

Your title is misleading and false. USCIS did not lay off anyone. They talked about a potential layoff for some contractors and it did not occur. Those 1,000 contractors were not laid off on May 29. USCIS has around 20,000 employees and contractors with a budget of a little more than $4 billion per year. They were requesting a loan of $600 million per year. A bailout is usually used for a bankruptcy. Again, they are not in debt or facing bankruptcy. The article mentions that USCIS does not want to take drastic actions. What would actions be? Furloughing employees. They don't want to do that. If applications drop by a certain amount, they don't need as many employees. Once applications pick back up again, they can bring the employees back. They want a loan so they don't have to furlough some of their employees.

They asked for a bailout, which you are insisting they did not. In order to prove your point you're going into a diatribe that I am unable to decipher. If you think they did not ask for a bailout, OK.

[user555 195]

11 hours ago, PhillyNatz said:

They asked for a bailout, which you are insisting they did not. In order to prove your point you're going into a diatribe that I am unable to decipher. If you think they did not ask for a bailout, OK.

Again, your claim is false and misleading. A diatribe is a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something. Where am I attacking you or something? I am explaining the facts. Please englighten me how this is forceful and bitter. USCIS did not lay anyone off at the Kansas City facility. A government bailout is usually used to provide financial assistance to a failing company or organization to prevent them from going into bankruptcy or from ceasing to operate.  USCIS is not failing and is not going into bankruptcy. They are requesting a loan that is about 12% of their total budget for this year so they won't have to furlough employees. Since they derive 97% of their budget from application fees, they have had a little bit of a drop this year. With less applications, they receive less money, and they don't need as many employees and contractors. My initail claim was that they don't need a loan. They want a loan so they don't have to furlough some of their employees. However, if they don't receive a loan from Congress, they'll furlough some employees, and when applications start increasing and money starts coming in, they can bring those employees back. Which facts do you disagree with?

[TBoneTX 43,058]

The bickering stops now, please.

 

VJ Moderation

[onek 306]

Agree, the title is misleading. There were no lay offs. The title should be corrected or this thread should be blocked from further comments. 

[TBoneTX 43,058]

Thread has run its course and is now closed to further comment.