Here's a crazy idea. What if when the government had what they call a reduction in force,

otherwise known as layoffs, they actually reduced the force by eliminating employees who aren't doing a great job?

I'm Scott Out with Bill Whittle and Steven Green. This episode of Right Angles brought to you by the members at

Bill Whittle.com. And gentlemen, that's not how it's been done.

When they do a reduction in force, there's a formula that they use to calculate who gets laid off,

and a lot of it has to do with seniority, not with job performance.

However, the Office of Personnel Management has apparently entered a proposed rule change in the Federal

Register last week that was published last week that would govern how federal agencies implement

reduction in forces.

And this would weigh heavily as the primary characteristic Steve Green, the merit of the employee, him or herself.

In other words, they take a look at job evaluations during the last several years and other

kinds of recognition that that person has received for work done on the job and use that to

evaluate whether this person gets to stay or go. And let me throw in one more thing

that kind of surprised me about this story in the Washington Post. You remember when Doge was,

you know, allegedly purging the government of all those people? Turns out 90% of that reduction

in force was people who voluntarily left. They took buyouts.

So it wasn't people who got canned. It was people who said, ah, this would be a good time.

But anyway, Steve, what do you think of the possibility here? Now, it's just going in the, you know,

it's a proposed rule rule the possibility that we might

actually reduce the size of government by getting rid of the people who aren't doing a great

job yeah incentives how do they work we know how they work in the private sector you got to

perform or you you get can i mean okay it doesn't apply here to what we do.

...