Why are they going in to work at all if they aren't being paid? Are they covered by some kind of special security law that means they need to keep working in the shutdown?
"Hundreds of Transportation Security Administration officers, who are required to work without paychecks through the partial government shutdown..."
Edit to add info, answer the followup question and less snark...
Yes, they're considered to be essential but they aren't getting paid because the 2019 TSA budget wasn't approved yet. Some other dept's were approved already and do have budget, etc. As usual with a big org like that, it depends. But the original article sure doesn't explain why.
"Excepted employees include employees who are performing emergency work involving the safety of human life or the protection of property or performing certain other types of excepted work."
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/furlough...
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/employee-relations...
But the short answer seems to be (from a cursory skim) that they are considered AWOL and that this is a reprimand/PIP/firing kind of situation. Same thing as just not showing up for work. They're not allowed to use previously accrued sick days or leave during a special situation like this. Obviously if it happens at a large enough scale, they probably won't just fire everyone, but there's a certain amount of game theory going on here to be sure. If SOME people don't show up, maybe management will let it slide, if LOTS of people don't show up, who gets in trouble?
Living paycheck to paycheck is difficult and anxiety-inducing. It's awful how the livelihoods of people all over the country are subject to the whims of elected officials.
Edited: for clarity
In particular, if a TSA worker successfully finds another job to replace the income they can't get from the TSA, they should quit, rather than misrepresent their situation to later cash in on paid sick leave.
EDIT: reworded triple negative
1: Note not a lawyer, and just assuming these would be criminal actions.
on edit: made text italic on accident, removed formatting.
What's that like compared to other jobs?
At any rate I did not say they were bad people, despite working for the TSA, I pointed out that the particular action would be technically fraud (I believe) and if caught would probably be punished as such. Thus, although I did not say this flat out, I am wondering if it is actually happening all that much.
So the reason I phrased my comment about fraud in the form of a question, is because I believe it would rather easily be caught out. I am as a matter of principle reluctant to classify groups of people as being just stupider than I in such an obvious fashion.
Finally I've certainly been poorer in my life than any employee of the TSA currently is, and probably poorer than almost all of them have ever been, and even if I am not poor now I do not need any lessons on the matter.
NOTE: The parent comment was changed, without noting change in comment, which of course makes most of this comment seem somewhat off-kilter. I have edited and put in this note.
however the reaction I got to what I considered a relatively simple observation has put me out of sorts.
on edit: parent comment now has noted its edit, although I still believe the edit changed significantly the nature of the comment, and not just clarified it.
on edit: just woke up when I wrote this, changed worked to lived because otherwise did not make sense.
It's not really up to them, though.
Folks deemed "essential" like security screeners, the Coast Guard, etc. are expected to still come to work. Non-essential employees are furloughed, and it's actually illegal for them to volunteer their time.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/23/gove...
> Natter noted that the Anti-Deficiency Act, the 129-year-old law that forces the government to shut down without an appropriation from Congress, also makes it illegal for furloughed workers to volunteer — even though many end up getting paid whether they work for not. "It really ought to be rewritten to be more relevant for the 21st century," he said.
That's strange, most of the ones I know do so with frustration and resentment. Perhaps you're referring to a different, more amicable government?
They'll make a stubborn show of defiance but in due course some deal will be struck and some defections will occur because holding the government hostage to fund a wall to keep the Mexicans out is insane. Trump may be willing to fight to the bitter end for that but I guarantee no career Republican politician is.