HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Editorials & Other Articles (Forum) » Cabinet Secretary (Elaine... » Reply #4

Response to Bfd (Original post)

Mon Oct 1, 2018, 04:35 PM

4. Who spends 290 hours having lunch and going to the doctor?

If she had some serious health issues (which it’s OUR RIGHT to know about, since WE are her employers and WE pay her salary and she’s supposed to be “working for US”), then why should she be a Cabinet-level department head? If she has to spend that much time going to the doctor, why can’t we know whether she’s suffering some serious ailment that might disqualify her from full-time employment?

290 hours? I just did the math. Divide 290 by 8 - like an 8-hour work day. And you get 36.25. I think that means 36 8-hour days. 36 work days. Gee whiz. What’s that in work weeks? If you assume FIVE 8-hour work days per work week, five into 36 is seven (with change). Seven weeks. In less than TWO years on the job? SUPPOSEDLY on the job? Sounds like a pretty cushy job to me. That doesn’t count weekends or an assumed two-week vacation for each or two years.

And she hasn’t been on the job for two full years. Her employment didn’t start til January 31st of LAST YEAR. Which means she’s been on the job for 20 months. That’s not even two full years. And already she’s enjoyed 7 weeks “vacation”? I guess you’re entitled to a month off per year when you’re a Cabinet-level Secretary?

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Please login to view edit histories.