This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

Remember the letter-writer whose coworkers had way more money than her but constantly expected her to shell out cash for meals and gifts? Here’s the update.

Thanks for posting my letter and for your advice a while back. I have a somewhat unsatisfying update.

The gift-giving has slowed down considerably, presumably because the federal workplace isn’t exactly festive at the moment. However, the original issue recently showed up in a different form. Our office admin offered to put together (what I understood to be) a no-host happy hour as a send-off event for a colleague who recently got DOGE’d. (Note: I understood it to be a no-host event because that is the norm for our field. In fact, when I first arrived they held a welcome happy hour for me, and everybody, including me, paid their own bill.) I truthfully mentioned that I had a schedule conflict that would have caused me to only be able to stay a few minutes and she told me how important it was that I show up for the laid-off coworker and at least come say goodbye. I saw her point and showed my face.

I was the second person to arrive at the venue. The first person to arrive (the same colleague from my last letter who is always declaring “let’s just split it!” and “Jane doesn’t have to pay, we’ll all cover her”) had already ordered a spread of appetizers and a bottle of her own favorite spirit. I mentioned that I wouldn’t be ordering anything because I had to rush out right away. Once the rest of the group had arrived and the server took orders, I again announced, “Nothing for me, since I have to leave early.”

Over the weekend, the same lady copied me to an email explaining that the bill had come to nearly $400 and assigning us all a portion that we’d need to send her. Apparently, she put the whole thing on her credit card and is looking to be reimbursed. I didn’t respond since I obviously racked up $0 of this outrageous bill. Seriously, how many $6 cocktails and $7 flatbreads could six humans possibly have ordered in 120 minutes?? Anyway, my husband told me that in times like these, it’s more important than ever to be viewed as a team player lest I be added to the “chopping block,” which is our name for the Elon-requested list of of individuals whose jobs can safely be cut. So, on Monday I reached out to her and reminded her that I didn’t order/consume anything but could still chip in a bit for team spirit. She responded with a fixed amount that she expected each attendee to pay — about twice the amount I had in mind — and followed up saying, “I know this feels unfair since you didn’t eat, but since we hosted Bob, you can think of it as your portion of the cost of his going-away party.”

First of all, we as a team, absolutely did not agree to “host” a going-away party for Bob. And at any rate, that’s not how any of this works. I do not know why this one person gets to just invent this nonsense reimbursement system in which she pays what she wants and assigns the rest of us to cover the rest regardless of our actual consumption. She eventually followed up with a second email to me only saying, “Of course, if you prefer not to contribute, I understand,” to which I projected some snark that may or may not have been intended. I Venmo’d her the amount I was comfortable with and vowed to never spend any time with these folks outside the office ever, ever again. This may not be an issue much longer as I’m informed that my entire office is slated to get DOGE’d in the next couple of weeks. Some folks are being reassigned and some are being axed entirely.

My takeaway from the happy hour experience is that my team’s earlier behavior had nothing to do with rich people being out of touch with most people’s spending-related norms and simply needing me to bring it to their attention. Since: (1) my colleague was fully aware that I didn’t eat or drink, but still spelled out that I need to pay 1/5 of the bill, and (2) remarked that it may “seem unfair” for me to subsidize everyone else’s excesses and encouraged me to view it a different way as though I am the one with a perception problem, it seems to me that it was always a matter of unreasonable people feeling entitled to my money.

Beef tallow, also known as rendered beef fat, is trending among beauty and health influencers. Here is everything you need to know about the by-product.

Q: What is beef tallow used for?

A: Cooking, skincare, and fixing squeaky cows. 

Q: Why should I cook with it?

A: To crisp up those soft, supple arteries. 

Q: Where can I get beef tallow?

A: Nail a metal tap into the side of a cow and let the liquid run into a bucket.

Q: Is it true that RFK Jr. cooked his Thanksgiving turkey in tallow?

A: No, but he did cook his Thanksgiving mountain lion in tallow.

Q: What are the benefits of eating beef tallow?

A: You can rest easy knowing that no part of your meal was made without animal suffering. 

Q: What is the main benefit of using beef tallow as a facial moisturizer?

A: It helps grow your tradwife TikTok account. 

Q: Will it really make my skin look better?

A: Have you ever seen a cow with acne?

Q: How do I apply it?

A: Just lie down under the deep fryer at your local Carl’s Jr. and let gravity do the rest. 

The post What To Know About Beef Tallow appeared first on The Onion.

by Stephen Engelberg

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. This story was originally published in our Dispatches newsletter; sign up to receive notes from our journalists.

In late October, ProPublica published one of its most prophetic stories in our history. You can be forgiven if you missed it at the time. There was a lot going on in the days before the election, and the headlines were dominated by seemingly consequential issues like the racist humor of a comedian who addressed Donald Trump’s rally at Madison Square Garden.

But if you weren’t among the several hundred thousand people who read our story, “‘Put Them in Trauma’: Inside a Key MAGA Leader’s Plans for a New Trump Agenda,” in real time, you may have seen it referenced since Trump took office in January.

The story drew on private recordings of a series of speeches given in 2023 and 2024 by Russell Vought obtained by our colleagues at Documented, a news site with a remarkable knack for uncovering information powerful interests would prefer remained secret.

Vought, a self-described Christian nationalist who served as the director of the Office of Management and Budget in Trump’s first term, was known for his provocative public pronouncements. But he went even further in private, envisaging a Trump presidency in which regulatory agencies would be shut down and career civil servants would be too depressed to get out of bed.

“We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected,” Vought said in one recording. “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can't do all of the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so.

“We want to put them in trauma.”

Vought spoke openly about the ongoing planning to defund independent federal agencies and demonize government scientists. “We have detailed agency plans,” he said. “We are writing the actual executive orders. We are writing the actual regulations now, and we are sorting out the legal authorities for all of what President Trump is running on.”

Vought argued that the radical steps were necessary because Trump’s opponents were themselves attempting to end democracy. “The stark reality in America is that we are in the late stages of a complete Marxist takeover of the country,” he said in one speech. “Our adversaries already hold the weapons of the government apparatus, and they have aimed it at us. And they are going to continue to aim it until they no longer have to win elections.”

It’s hard to imagine a more prescient piece of journalism. The story captured, as few did, the breadth and ferocity of the coming attack on the federal government. Vought has returned to his post as the budget office’s director, and his plans for eviscerating entire agencies and decimating the morale of federal workers have turned into reality. Trump 47 looks very different from Trump 45, just as Vought told his audiences that it would.

So why didn’t this story drive more of a national conversation when it appeared?

As a news organization that tries to spur change by bringing new facts to light, we think about this question a lot. Our job at ProPublica is to both get the story and get it into the heads of a critical mass of citizens and elected officials.

I’ve been an investigative reporter and editor for nearly three decades, and I still struggle to predict which of our stories will catalyze national conversations. Our 2018 story about the recording of a young girl in a immigration detention center prompted the Trump administration to end its policy of family separation at the border. Many other powerful stories fail to break through.

Part of the problem, of course, is the proliferation of media. Every day, dozens of important-sounding stories vie for readers’ attention along with the flood of posts on social media and texts from friends and colleagues. And that’s not to mention all the podcasts and multipart dramas on Netflix and HBO.

This was an issue long before Trump and his allies adopted a “flood the zone” strategy with multiple norm-challenging actions, but it seems even more acute right now.

It is often said of journalists that we write the rough draft of history. But our work differs from historians in a crucial aspect: Scholars typically are chronicling events after the outcome is clear. As journalists, we face a tougher challenge as we try to find the stories in the cacophony of daily events that tell us something about where we’re going.

A lot of what we do as reporters is akin to squinting through opaque windows at events unfolding in a very dimly lit room. We can see who is inside and how they’re moving, but our lack of context often prevents us from understanding what’s really happening. We default to assuming that the future will be roughly like the past, guessing that, say, Trump 47 will be roughly like Trump 45 with fewer guardrails.

Vought could not have been clearer that this was not the case, and he had the credentials that should have made what he was saying entirely credible. After all, Vought was the author of the plan in Trump’s first term to make it easier to fire large numbers of civil servants. He was a key member of Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation project that described in copious detail how a second Trump administration might unfold.

Still, there was at least one data point that perhaps prevented readers from viewing his speeches as predictive as they turned out to be. As our story made clear, Vought despises the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, a core Republican ally in bringing conservative voices into the judiciary and federal law enforcement. We quoted him as asserting that “the vaunted so-called Federalist Society and originalist judges” were serving as a “Praetorian Guard” for the Democrats.

That view would seem to make him something of a fringe thinker in MAGA world, which relied on the Federalist Society to pick the judges who make up the conservative supermajority on the high court.

Things look different today. Seen against the backdrop of recent events, Vought’s disdain for the rule-of-law scruples of Federalist Society legal thinkers seems entirely in line with Trump’s recent post suggesting a federal judge shouldn’t have authority over his administration.

Just a few weeks ago, Danielle Sassoon, one of the Federalist Society’s bright lights, a Yale Law graduate who had clerked for conservative icon Antonin Scalia, resigned as acting U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York rather than carry out orders from the Trump Justice Department. In refusing to drop the corruption case against New York Mayor Eric Adams, Sassoon wrote that she understood her duty as a prosecutor to mean “enforcing the law impartially, and that includes prosecuting a validly returned indictment regardless of whether its dismissal would be politically advantageous, to the defendant or those that appointed me.”

Many years ago, a New York Times investigative reporter and I were discussing a story we had worked on that had been sharply and justifiably criticized as new facts emerged. “I can be fair and accurate,” he said. “But fair, accurate and prescient is beyond me.”

It seems appropriate to give Vought the last word since the worldview he described has proven so accurate. What sounded grandiose in the preelection days seems today like a reasonable summary of the path Trump and his allies have chosen.

“We are here in the year of 2024, a year that very well [could] — and I believe it will — rival 1776 and 1860 for the complexity and the uncertainty of the forces arrayed against us,” Vought said, citing the years when the colonies declared independence from Britain and the first state seceded over President Abraham Lincoln’s election.

“God put us here for such a time as this.”

I’m not sure about the role of the almighty in ProPublica’s work in the coming years. But we feel equally strongly that we’re here for a “time such as this.”

Today's links

• Ray Nayler's "Where the Axe Is Buried": Escape from the Larry Ellison future.
• Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
• Object permanence: 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2024
• Upcoming appearances: Where to find me.
• Recent appearances: Where I've been.
• Latest books: You keep readin' em, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Upcoming books: Like I said, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Colophon: All the rest.

---

Ray Nayler's "Where the Axe Is Buried" (permalink)

Ray Nayler's Where the Axe Is Buried is an intense, claustrophobic novel of a world run by "rational" AIs that purport to solve all of our squishy political problems with empirical, neutral mathematics:

https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374615369/wheretheaxeisburied/

In Naylor's world, we there are two blocs. "The west," where the heads of state have been replaced with chatbots called "PMs." These PMs propose policy to tame, rubberstamp legislatures, creating jobs programs, setting monetary and environmental policies, and ruling on other tricky areas where it's nearly impossible to make everyone happy. These countries are said to be "rationalized," and they are peaceful and moderately prosperous, and have finally tackled the seemingly intractable problems of decarbonization, extreme poverty, and political instability.

In "the Republic" – a thinly veiled version of Russia – the state is ruled by an immortal tyrant who periodically has his consciousness decanted into a blank body after his own body falls apart. The state maintains the fiction that each president is a new person, manufacturing families, friends, teachers and political comrades who can attest to the new president's long history in the country. People in the Republic pretend to believe this story, but in practice, everyone knows that it's the same mind running the country, albeit sometimes with ill-advised modifications, such as an overclocking module that runs the president's mind at triple human speeds.

The Republic is a totalitarian nightmare of ubiquitous surveillance and social control, in which every movement and word is monitored, and where social credit scores are adjusted continuously to reflect the political compliance of each citizen. Low social credit scores mean fewer rations, a proscribed circle of places you can go, reduced access to medical care, and social exclusion. The Republic has crushed every popular uprising, acting on the key realization that the only way to cling to power is to refuse to yield it, even (especially) if that means murdering every single person who takes part in a street demonstration against the government.

By contrast, the western states with their chatbot PMs are more open – at least superficially. However, the "rationalized" systems use less obvious – but no less inescapable – soft forms of control that limit the social mobility, career chances, and moment-to-moment and day-to-day lives of the people who live there. As one character who ventures from the Republic to London notes, it is a strange relief to be continuously monitored by cameras there to keep you safe and figure out how to manipulate you into buying things, rather than being continuously monitored by cameras seeking a way to punish you.

The tale opens on the eve of the collapse of these two systems, as the current president of the Republic's body starts to reject the neural connectome that was implanted into its vat-grown brain, even as the world's PMs start to sabotage their states, triggering massive civil unrest that brings the west to its knees, one country after another.

This is the backdrop for a birchpunk^† tale of AI skulduggery, lethal robot insects, radical literature, swamp-traversing mechas, and political intrigue that flits around a giant cast of characters, creating a dizzying, in-the-round tour of Nayler's paranoid world.

^† Russian-inflected cyberpunk with Baba Yaga motifs and nihilistic Russian novel vibes

And what a paranoid world it is! Nayler's world shows two different versions of Oracle boss (and would-be Tiktok owner) Larry Ellison, who keeps pumping his vision of an AI-driven surveillance state where everyone is continuously observed, recorded and judged by AIs so we are all on our "best behavior":

https://fortune.com/2024/09/17/oracle-larry-ellison-surveillance-state-police-ai/

This batshit idea from one of tech's worst billionaires is a perfect foil for a work of first-rate science fiction like Where the Axe Is Buried, which provides an emotional flythrough of how such a world would obliterate the authentic self, authentic relationships, and human happiness.

Where the Axe Is Buried conjures up that world beautifully, really capturing the deadly hopelessness of a life where the order is fixed for all eternity, thanks to the flawless execution of perfect, machine-generated power plays. But Axe shows how the embers of hope smolder long after they should have been extinguished, and how they are always ready to be kindled into a roaring, system-consuming wildfire.

---

Hey look at this (permalink)

• The President just illegally fired me https://x.com/BedoyaFTC/status/1902105345545113607/photo/1

• FTC Removes Posts Critical of Amazon, Microsoft, and AI Companies https://www.wired.com/story/federal-trade-commission-removed-blogs-critical-of-ai-amazon-microsoft/

• Apple loses German antitrust fight, faces greater scrutiny https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-loses-german-antitrust-appeal-opening-door-greater-controls-2025-03-18/

---

Object permanence (permalink)

#20yrsago Godwin’s Law analog for porn and file-sharing https://web.archive.org/web/20050321011557/http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/000784.html

#15yrsago James Randi is gay https://archive.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/914-how-to-say-it.html

#10yrsago Windows 10 announcement: certified hardware can lock out competing OSes https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/03/windows-10-to-make-the-secure-boot-alt-os-lock-out-a-reality/

#5yrsago Marc Davis's Haunted Mansion https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/21/most-dangerous-ghost/#most-dangerous-ghost

#5yrsago Pandemic stimulus, realpolitik edition https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/21/most-dangerous-ghost/#peoples-bailout

#5yrsago After the crisis, a program for transformative change https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/21/most-dangerous-ghost/#disaster-socialism

#5yrsago Don't Look for the Helpers https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/21/most-dangerous-ghost/#elite-panic

#5yrsago UK emergency science panel predicts mass altruism https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/21/most-dangerous-ghost/#covered-dishes

#1yrago Why Millennials aren't leaving Tiktok https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/21/involuntary-die-hards/#evacuate-the-platforms

---

Upcoming appearances (permalink)

• San Diego: Picks and Shovels at Mysterious Galaxy, Mar 24
  https://www.mystgalaxy.com/32425Doctorow

• Virtual: Picks and Shovels at Imagine! Belfast, Mar 24
  https://youtube.com/live/SXhEh8yU1M0

• Chicago: Picks and Shovels with Peter Sagal, Apr 2
  https://exileinbookville.com/events/44853

• Chicago: ABA Techshow, Apr 3
  https://www.techshow.com/

• Bloomington: Picks and Shovels at Morgenstern, Apr 4
  https://morgensternbooks.com/event/2025-04-04/author-event-cory-doctorow

• Pittsburgh: Picks and Shovels at White Whale Books, May 15
  https://whitewhalebookstore.com/events/20250515

• Pittsburgh: PyCon, May 16
  https://us.pycon.org/2025/schedule/

• PDX: Teardown 2025, Jun 20-22
  https://www.crowdsupply.com/teardown/portland-2025

• PDX: Picks and Shovels at Barnes and Noble, Jun 20
  https://stores.barnesandnoble.com/event/9780062183697-0

• New Orleans: DeepSouthCon63, Oct 10-12, 2025
  http://www.contraflowscifi.org/

---

Recent appearances (permalink)

• How to Destroy Our Tech Overlords (Homeless Romantic)
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epma2B0wjzU

• Organized Money
  https://audio.buzzsprout.com/6f5ly01qcx6ijokbvoamr794ht81

• Did Nothing Wrong
  https://www.didnothingwrongpod.com/p/episode-168-cory-doctorow

---

Latest books (permalink)

• • Picks and Shovels: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about the heroic era of the PC, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2025 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250865908/picksandshovels).
• The Bezzle: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about prison-tech and other grifts, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2024 (the-bezzle.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3062/Available_Feb_20th%3A_The_Bezzle_HB.html#/).

• "The Lost Cause:" a solarpunk novel of hope in the climate emergency, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), November 2023 (http://lost-cause.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3007/Pre-Order_Signed_Copies%3A_The_Lost_Cause_HB.html#/)

• "The Internet Con": A nonfiction book about interoperability and Big Tech (Verso) September 2023 (http://seizethemeansofcomputation.org). Signed copies at Book Soup (https://www.booksoup.com/book/9781804291245).

• "Red Team Blues": "A grabby, compulsive thriller that will leave you knowing more about how the world works than you did before." Tor Books http://redteamblues.com. Signed copies at Dark Delicacies (US): and Forbidden Planet (UK): https://forbiddenplanet.com/385004-red-team-blues-signed-edition-hardcover/.

• "Chokepoint Capitalism: How to Beat Big Tech, Tame Big Content, and Get Artists Paid, with Rebecca Giblin", on how to unrig the markets for creative labor, Beacon Press/Scribe 2022 https://chokepointcapitalism.com

• "Attack Surface": The third Little Brother novel, a standalone technothriller for adults. The Washington Post called it "a political cyberthriller, vigorous, bold and savvy about the limits of revolution and resistance." Order signed, personalized copies from Dark Delicacies https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1840/Available_Now%3A_Attack_Surface.html

• "How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism": an anti-monopoly pamphlet analyzing the true harms of surveillance capitalism and proposing a solution. https://onezero.medium.com/how-to-destroy-surveillance-capitalism-8135e6744d59?sk=f6cd10e54e20a07d4c6d0f3ac011af6b) (signed copies: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2024/Available_Now%3A__How_to_Destroy_Surveillance_Capitalism.html)

• "Little Brother/Homeland": A reissue omnibus edition with a new introduction by Edward Snowden: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250774583; personalized/signed copies here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1750/July%3A__Little_Brother_%26_Homeland.html

• "Poesy the Monster Slayer" a picture book about monsters, bedtime, gender, and kicking ass. Order here: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781626723627. Get a personalized, signed copy here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2682/Corey_Doctorow%3A_Poesy_the_Monster_Slayer_HB.html#/.

---

Upcoming books (permalink)

• Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, October 7 2025
  https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374619329/enshittification/

• Unauthorized Bread: a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, 2026

• Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

• The Memex Method, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2026

---

Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing:

• Enshittification: a nonfiction book about platform decay for Farrar, Straus, Giroux. Status: second pass edit underway (readaloud)

• A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING

• Picks and Shovels, a Martin Hench noir thriller about the heroic era of the PC. FORTHCOMING TOR BOOKS FEB 2025

Latest podcast: With Great Power Came No Responsibility: How Enshittification Conquered the 21st Century and How We Can Overthrow It https://craphound.com/news/2025/02/26/with-great-power-came-no-responsibility-how-enshittification-conquered-the-21st-century-and-how-we-can-overthrow-it/

---

This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.

---

How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Twitter (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://twitter.com/doctorow

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

ISSN: 3066-764X

Some parts of Texas are expected to see fewer bluebonnets than usual this year because of drought. But the Houston area should have them in abundance, according to a University of Texas horticulturist.

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. Is swiping on a coworker on a dating app grounds for an HR meeting?

Asking for a friend: They absent-mindedly swiped on a coworker in a dating app (whom they asked out once two years earlier). Said coworker was uncomfortable with that and went to HR, and they all had a sit-down about leaving said coworker alone.

I am all for not harassing people you work with romantically, but I am also conflicted — is swiping right on a coworker on Bumble or Tinder grounds for an HR intervention?

They are both on a dating app, after all — a place where you are opening up yourself to these kinds of interactions explicitly. And then the interaction has to be mutual anyway — both people need to “initiate” conversation here, without knowing if the other person has done so. (Apparently in this case their coworker was paying for premium rights to see who was swiping on them, and spoke with HR without initiating.)

Dating apps also location-based, and so a lot of coworkers might show up there. Having worked at a 500-person office, I probably have swiped on several without realizing! A lot of people also use these by quickly swiping, not necessarily making a researched decision every time.

I might be utterly off-base here, but I want to be sure not to alienate people I work with. What would be the correct etiquette here?

This doesn’t sound like someone who reported a coworker to HR simply for swiping right on them on a dating app. Their perspective is likely that the coworker had already asked them out and been told no, now they’re making another overture, and they work together so it’s extra aggravating that they weren’t respecting the original no.

It still could have been overkill to involve HR — but so much of this depends on how your friend handled the original rejection and how they’ve treated the coworker since then.

Related:
I matched with a coworker on a dating site
if you’re thinking of asking a coworker on a date…

2. Our bosses gave a perk to their spouses instead of to other employees

Our company is very small, three joint owners and three employees.

Our company has a business relationship with another company, and as a result they’ve offered tickets to the F1 Grand Prix in our area this year. Both bosses immediately planned to use the tickets on both themselves (this is understandable) and then both of their spouses. My question is about the latter — is it actually appropriate for them to share this perk with spouses instead of employees? It just struck me as a bit weird and self-interested for the initial instinct to be to share it with their spouses, who are unaffiliated with the company in any way outside of being their romantic partners, instead of with the very few employees they actually have.

I would love to have some insight on whether or not this is appropriate or normal behavior, as I don’t know if I should speak up and say that it bothered me that romantic partners who don’t work here were going to be seeing perks that employees are not.

It’s definitely a thing that happens with certain perks. It varies by company, but in a lot of workplaces there isn’t an automatic assumption that this sort of perk will distributed equitably, or that executives’ spouses won’t be included ahead of employees. You see it particularly with tickets, but you also see it with dinners out and trips (where spouses might be included too)

I don’t think it’s an outrage that warrants complaining about it, but it’s also not particularly gracious of the owners, and it’s something really good leaders wouldn’t do. Good leaders see that kind of gift as an opportunity to reward people, build morale, and make them feel like a valued part of the team (and that’s true even if the tickets were specifically a thank-you to the owners for choosing to give their business to the other company).

But while I don’t think you should complain, per se, there’s also nothing wrong with asking if employees can be included the next time something like that is offered.

3. My manager is from a country at war with mine

I am living in Europe but I have a lot of family in Ukraine. My job just hired a new line manager for my team, an external hire. Today was their first day on the job and we had a team meeting where we were all being introduced for the first time. After a round of introductions, they said, “I noticed that there are multiple people from Ukraine on the team. I am from Russia, I wonder how that will go.” My internal reaction was, “Yes, I wonder as well, and I really wish this wasn’t sprung up on me in a team meeting.” Obviously, we should all treat people as individuals, I don’t know what their position is on the war, and good for them for noticing the inherent trickiness of the situation. But they didn’t follow up with any explicit comments about what they believe, and even just that makes me worried about how I’d have to phrase things about them. My job has been happy with my performance so far but there has been periodic impact on my day-to-day work when family and friends had various losses, injuries, and close calls that affected me as well, and I generally gave context to my manager about what was going on without thinking too hard about how to phrase it.

Do you think my company should have done anything differently (other than not hiring a good candidate, which seems unreasonable)? Are there things that I should consider for dealing with this? In the past all my managers checked in with me on how things were going and while I don’t rant about my personal life, I haven’t had to worry about saying something controversial before, I guess I had the good luck of working with people who had similar views on political events that affected me personally.

It would have been odd if your company had done anything differently. People aren’t their countries, and there’s no reason to assume anything either way about the new hire’s stance; the only thing it makes sense to assume is that they’ll behave professionally no matter what political differences they might have with team mates (on anything, not just this). If that turns out not to be the case, that’s something you’d need to escalate, but that would be an aberration, not something anyone should go in expecting will happen.

The new hire’s comment was a little awkward, but it actually doesn’t reveal much and likely was borne out of feeling awkward about things themself.

I think, too, that if you’re affected by something affecting your family’s safety, it’s still fine to share that! It’s likely to go better if everyone proceeds from the assumption that all involved are decent people with empathy for others. If that turns out not to be the case, you’ll find out soon enough (and is something you’d need to escalate, per my first paragraph), but don’t ascribe that to them prematurely.

I hope your family is safe.

4. How to say “this was your idea” to my manager

I have a new skip-level boss who is making me insane. There are a number of ways she’s not good at managing and working for her is incredibly unpleasant, so I’m trying to get out even though I love my job. In the meantime, I need to survive a recurring dynamic.

“Andrea” will tell me to create a spreadsheet showing X, Y, and Z information. All this is available in our reporting system, but she wants it in a spreadsheet format. Then she’ll tell me to add on A and B. This will take me days to create. I’ll send it to her, and then wake up with comments all over the sheet: “Why are we reporting on B?” “How did you define X?” “What is this A column?”

The answer to all of those is… you asked me for it. You told me you wanted to see B so there it is. X is defined as exactly what you told me to pull. Column A is the column that you said you needed. I feel like either I’m stupid because I can’t understand why this keeps happening, or she’s forgetting what she asked for. She is unpleasant and does not take feedback well, so I am very hesitant to name the dynamic; my direct manager is kind but not able to shield me.

What’s a professional script for “I have no idea why you wanted this, but you asked for it so I gave it to you” when I get asked about things like this?

Start preempting the question when you initially send the work. For example, when you send her a spreadsheet with edits she requested, write this in the email: “You asked me yesterday to add A and B to the C spreadsheet, so I’ve done that here. A is defined as ___ and B is defined as ___. Please let me know if you want me to do it differently.”

If you miss the chance to do that and end up getting questioned later about why you did something she asked you to do, it’s fine to say, “My understanding from your feedback on Tuesday was that you wanted me to add A and B. Did I misunderstand what you were looking for?” Say this neutrally, like you’re genuinely curious if you misunderstood something, not with a subtext of “how do you not remember this?”

You can also try shooting her a quick summary of your take-aways when she requests things from you. For example: “To recap, I’ll add A and B to the C spreadsheet, defining A as ___ and B as ___, and will have it back to you tomorrow.”

5. Should I list myself as currently employed?

I am/was a federal probationary employee (i.e., I have less than a year of government service). Just over a month ago, I was swept up in the mass termination of probationary employees across the federal government. This week, I was reinstated as part of a temporary restraining order in a court case challenging the legality of that mass termination. However, in the intervening month, my entire unit was subjected to a reduction in force (also of questionable legality and about to face legal challenge). Therefore, when I was reinstated, I was immediately placed on paid administrative leave, which will continue until the reduction in force takes full effect and I am completely separated from federal service (in the absence of legal intervention).

I am of course applying for other jobs, but now that I’ve been reinstated, I don’t know how to represent or how much to explain my current circumstances in application documents. How do I list my employment status while I’m on paid administrative leave? Do I just use “present” as the end date of my government service and leave it at that? Or should I list the date I was terminated, which was the last time I did any substantive work as a government employee? If I list myself as presently employed, do I need to explain in my cover letter why I’m looking for alternate employment after less than a year on the job? Or do employers understand why federal employees are all searching for jobs at this point, regardless of their exact circumstances?

You’re still legally an employee there, so go ahead and list your employment as “to present” (so “May 2024 – present” or whatever). That’s reasonable to do regardless, and it’s especially reasonable given how much uncertainty is surrounding all of this.

You don’t need to explain the situation in your cover letter — hiring managers know — but it’s also fine to allude to it in a single sentence if you want to; just don’t use any more cover letter real estate on it than that. (More about that here.)

WASHINGTON—Despite the risks to national security from revealing such confidential information, the Pew Research Center released a study Thursday proving that 93% of individuals with one earbud in are receiving top-secret commands from HQ. “Nearly every person you see in public wearing a single earbud is currently undertaking a clandestine mission on behalf of an undisclosed government agency,” the report read in part, going on to state that the increase in persons wearing one earbud was directly correlated to the decrease in access to phone booths where agents would have previously accepted their assignments. “The man on the bus bobbing his head to “music” is actually carrying out a covert hit via a directive from headquarters. Same with the woman at the grocery store engaging in a “phone call” with her “sister.” These operatives are highly skilled at blending in with the public while they wait for confirmation that Operation Sidewinder is a go. Then they move into position and take out their target.” While a spokesperson for the Defense Department dismissed the findings as “total fiction,” the study also found that the Pentagon is the No. 1 purchaser of earbuds in the country.

The post Study: 93% Of Individuals With One Earbud In Receiving Top-Secret Commands From HQ appeared first on The Onion.

I guess this is going to become a theme for who knows how long. For reasons I cannot begin to understand, the Trump administration’s distaste for any criticism of itself, as well as any politics it does not agree with, is resulting in many in corporate America folding into alignment with those desires. Whether it’s the capitulation to an anti-DEI stance or an exit from any kind of political entanglements, the general stance appears to be that all the boots must be licked as thoroughly as possible.

That puts companies like Ben & Jerry’s, famous for its social stances, in a tough spot. The company has not been shy about criticizing the Trump team, going all the way back to the first administration. Nor has it been shy about taking moral stances on conflicts around the world, with one such stance notably resulting in some level of backing from its parent company, Unilever.

While Ben & Jerry’s has decades of activism as part of its corporate tradition, Unilever appears to have tried to stamp that out starting in 2025. The parent company refused to allow B&J to issue corporate statements criticizing the Trump administration on matters of politics. This resulted in a lawsuit against Unilever, with B&J claiming that Unilever is contractually obligated to allow for B&J’s independent ability to make those statements as part of the acquisition. This ramped up even further more recently with the news that Unilever terminated B&J CEO David Stever as a result of his activism.

In an amended complaint filed Tuesday in New York, lawyers for the ice cream brand said that rules stemming from its 2000 merger “protects Ben & Jerry’s interests by precluding the unilateral removal of its CEO,” but Unilever did just that — “removing and replacing” CEO David Stever by not following the proper protocols and said it was because of the brand’s continued comments on progressive issues.

The lawsuit said that Unilever’s motive for the removal of Stever was due to his “commitment to Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Essential Brand Integrity … rather than any genuine concerns regarding his performance history.”

This elective censorship in order to appease ranking politicians ought to scare the hell out of everybody. Whatever you might think about B&J’s opinions on politics, we surely don’t want to foster an ecosystem of feigned group-think. The only thing that changed between 2024 and 2025 was the new presidential administration. The stances by B&J haven’t changed. The company’s desire to speak on those stances hasn’t changed. The type of rhetoric in those desired statements haven’t changed.

This is purely about Unilever deciding, counter-contractually as alleged, that it wants to bow at the altar of Donald Trump. And the tactics from Unilever appears to be decidedly heavy-handed.

Ben & Jerry’s initial lawsuit, filed in November 2024, alleged Unilever silenced its attempts to publicly support Palestinian refugees and resolutions to end military aid to Israel, where the company had done business since 1987.

It also alleged that Unilever threatened to dismantle Ben & Jerry’s board and sue members because the company’s management and board planned to issue a statement calling for “peace” and a “permanent and immediate ceasefire.”

This is a marriage of the free market and free speech, ideals that the conservative party in America has long championed. If people don’t like B&J’s politics, they’re free to buy a different brand of ice cream. If Unilever doesn’t like those politics, but are disallowed contractually from censoring them, then Unilever can sell the company to someone else, which is reportedly exactly what Unilever is doing.

If corporate America is simply going to rollover based on the whims of every change in administration, that kind of whipsawing on corporate stances is going to get real confusing, real fast. If this is only being done with this administration out of fear, which I believe is the case, that should be setting off all kinds of alarm bells.

And if the so-called speech-champions can’t be bothered to get out of bed to advocate for speech protections they don’t agree with, then we can cease calling them champions of speech, full stop.

Lawmakers, who are preempting locals on lot sizes in new subdivisions, have been eyeing ways to allow more homes to be built as the state faces a shortage.

The attorney general office’s lawsuit is based on an undercover video published in February by a conservative activist group.

Harvard announced that undergraduate tuition will be free for students of families who make annual incomes of $200,000 or less, a move intended to make the prestigious institution “affordable to more students than ever.” What do you think?

The post Harvard Announces Free Tuition For Families Making Under $200,000 appeared first on The Onion.

The Trump administration is seeking to deport the Palestinian activist and Columbia graduate for his alleged role in 2024 protests.

The Houston-Galveston Area Council’s $700,000 study is exploring long-term safety and mobility improvements for Washington Avenue, but critics fear that a fast-tracked repaving project could reinforce its current car-centric design.

Harris County Precinct 4 Commissioner Lesley Briones announced Wednesday the successful completion of 50 miles of sidewalks around schools in the Alief, Cypress-Fairbanks and Katy school districts. During a ceremonial ribbon cutting near Alief ISD's Taylor and Kerr high schools, Briones said she’s proud of what they’ve accomplished with the “Pathways to Progress” project.

OTTAWA – As US President Trump’s unilaterally-launched trade war continues, Canadians have struck back with counter-tariffs on a valued American item: the little Canadian flag patches Americans put on their luggage while travelling abroad. The 200% counter-tariff are expected to severely impact US citizens’ ability to pass as Canadians while visiting other countries. This will […]

The post Canada places 200% tariff on little Canadian flags Americans wear while travelling appeared first on The Beaverton.

Boise, ‘Merica – Local skimmer of news articles John Lougthrow recently exclaimed he was ‘amped’ for Canada to become the 49th state of the currently 50 United States of America. “Hard to believe they weren’t already Americans,” explained Lougthrow. “I mean, they already speak our language, and they vote for our president. I don’t know […]

The post Uninformed American excited for Canada to become “49th state” appeared first on The Beaverton.

Patrick says the measure will shut down the dangerous THC products business. The House’s proposal would tighten oversight of the industry without a full ban.

“President Trump’s promised immigration crackdown is here. Over the past two weeks, his administration has pushed against the limits of executive power—and surpassed them, critics say—to kick more people out of the country.”
— New York Times

For far too long, Democrats have been suppressing free speech. They’ve tried to cancel right-wing pundits under the guise of “hate speech” or “shouting fire in a crowded theater” simply for voicing perfectly reasonable opinions like “Jews control the weather” or “the COVID vaccine makes your penis fall off.”

We Republicans, on the other hand, are free-speech absolutists who would never try to cancel someone for sharing their beliefs. Unless you disagree with us, in which case, you’re obviously a terrorist.

Democrats have a long history of violating the First Amendment. Under their repressive 1984-esque rule, people could be kicked off social media for nothing more than the thought crime of being a self-avowed Nazi. Thankfully, now that Republicans control the government and most major media platforms, everyone’s constitutional right to freedom of speech is protected.

Assuming you aren’t using that constitutional right to peacefully protest the war in Gaza, of course, in which case, we will detain you without a trial, strip away your legal status, kick you out of the country, and force your pregnant wife to deliver her baby alone. But that’s a much gentler punishment than being banned from posting on a website.

Some might say it’s unconstitutional to arrest and deport people without due process just because they expressed an opinion we don’t like. But it’s important to remember that we are only arresting and deporting terrorists. And terrorists don’t have constitutional rights. How do we define “terrorist”? A terrorist is anyone we think is bad. Thus, by the transitive property, it follows that anyone we think is bad does not have constitutional rights. That said, if Mike Myers doesn’t keep his mouth shut, we’ll be deporting him next. His impersonation of Elon Musk on SNL was comedic terrorism.

Of course, our crackdown on terrorism won’t just be limited to speech. Democrats were so busy implementing totalitarian cultural Marxism (preventing white supremacists from holding recruitment rallies at college campuses) that they went completely soft on crime. That’s why we’re rounding up suspected Venezuelan gang members, whom we’ve also labeled terrorists, and deporting them without a trial. And if it sounds to you like we’re doing that without legal precedent, you’re wrong. We’re using the same statute we used to detain Japanese Americans in concentration camps during WWII. So we’re confident our approach is legally and morally sound.

For those asking—no, we are not disclosing the names of those terrorists or providing any evidence of their crimes. And yes, for all you know, those Venezuelan gang members may not be Venezuelan, or even gang members. But you’re just going to have to trust us when we tell you that they’re bad hombres. Even if they’re technically neither bad nor hombres. In fact, we have reason to suspect that Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may herself be a Venezuelan gang member, and we are fully prepared to deport her. Just because she’s a US citizen doesn’t mean we can’t pick a Latin American country at random and ship her there.

A policy where we can harass, question, and detain anyone without trial under the guise of terrorism might seem as if we could use it to make anyone whose views we disagree with disappear, even US citizens. But don’t worry, as long as you never peacefully protest, write an article, or text your friend that meme of Elon Musk and Donald Trump where they look like Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels in Dumb and Dumber, then you have nothing to fear.

Besides, there are plenty of Americans we would never go after. Like the brave freedom fighters who took a self-guided walking tour of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. They’re not terrorists; they’re patriots.

The move to bring back laid off probationary employees comes after two federal judges deemed the terminations illegal.

Edwards unsuccessfully ran for the seat twice last year. She faced off against U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee in the 2024 Democratic primary. Jackson Lee won the primary but died before the general election, opening the party’s nomination anew

Edwards launched her third bid for the seat in less than two years. She previously waged an unsuccessful Democratic primary challenge to the late U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, then lost a bid to replace Jackson Lee on the ballot in the 2024 general election to the late U.S. Rep. Sylvester Turner.

In brief: A robust front will bring much drier air into the Houston region today, and a couple of chilly nights in the upper 40s. After that Houston will likely experience warmer weather for the rest of March: think 80s with some humidity rather than the 70s we’ve had for much of the month. Summer is not here, but it is on the horizon.

Wednesday

Temperatures across much of the metro area this morning are in the range of 65 to 70 degrees, which is rather warm for mid-March. It’s also fairly sticky outside. However, this will end later this morning, as a fairly strong front moves into the area. We’ll feel this both in the form of northwesterly winds, gusting up to 20 or 25 mph, as well as much drier air. As skies clear out later today, with the drier air, expect high temperatures in the vicinity of 80 degrees.

Unfortunately for rodeo-goers, those winds will not let up much this evening. In fact, they should peak during the overnight hours, perhaps gusting up to about 30 mph. So be prepared for that. Temperatures after the show will be in the 60s, before lows tonight ultimately drop into the mid- to upper 40s for much of the metro area away from the coast.

Thursday

This will be a sunny and pleasant day, with low humidity and highs of around 70 degrees. During the morning hours, at least, we should still see some modestly gusty winds. However by the afternoon these winds will likely slacken. Thursday night will be chilly again, with much of the region likely dropping into the upper 40s. Will this be the last time that parts of the Houston region get into the 40s this season? I think that’s quite possible.

Friday

Expect a sunny, pleasant day with highs in the mid-70s. Winds will turn southerly, gusting at times up to 20 mph. Expect overnight lows to only reach about 60 degrees with the warmer, southerly flow.

Saturday

The first half of the weekend brings more sunshine, with highs around 80 degrees. Dewpoints should still be in the 50s, so it will not feel too humid outside. Yet. Lows on Saturday night only drop into the mid-60s.

Sunday, Monday, and next week

With a more humid flow, expect temperatures to reach into the lower- to mid-80s on Sunday with likely increasing cloudiness. The question then is to what extent a slug of drier air will slide down from the northeast into the region. This is known as a “backdoor” front because instead of blowing down from the northwest, it edges in from the northeast. It’s likely that this system will generate a decent chance of rain, perhaps on the order of 50 percent during the period of Sunday afternoon through Monday morning. Accumulations don’t look that high, probably on the order of tenths of an inch.

Temperatures on Monday and Tuesday will depend on the extent to which the backdoor opens, and the amount of cooler and drier air that moves in. Perhaps we’ll have a couple of days in the 70s, with lows in the upper 50s. Maybe it will be a tad warmer. Most of the rest of next week should see highs in the 80s, however, with a decent amount of humidity. So it goes in Houston as we get nearer the end of March: fewer fronts and more humidity.

This post was written by Alison Green and published on Ask a Manager.

A reader writes:

I’m wondering whether a good boss should ever show impatience.

One of my employees, Jane, does a good job. I’ve given her a lot of (well-deserved) praise in public and private, and she’s said she’s happy in her work. However, she made a serious error the other day and when I brought it up with her, she shrugged and said it couldn’t be helped. I confess that my tone got impatient and I said something like, “No, we need to fix this because otherwise X.” I wasn’t shouting or otherwise being a jerk, but I definitely sounded impatient.

I could see she was surprised, probably because I am usually cheerful and mellow. We worked together in the moment and found a solution. But later that same day, I noticed she was teary at her desk and I asked what was wrong. She could only shake her head and so I said, “Okay, I’ll leave you alone but let me know if you want to take a break or something.”

Today I was meeting with another manager and she said, “I want to tell you something.” Evidently she too noticed that Jane was not okay and asked what was wrong. Jane answered that I’d been disrespectful to her, and that she needed to be respected at work or else she’d quit.

The other manager was really good about bringing it up with me, phrasing it in terms of, “I know you weren’t horrible to her and she was being oversensitive, I am just letting you know. Maybe just say it more gently next time.” I was taken aback because it never even occurred to me that I had upset her!

I found myself thinking that as I was going through my career, I have had a lot of harsh bosses who would shout and make demeaning comments. I didn’t think that saying something impatiently would even register with someone. Am I so inured now that I’m inadvertently perpetuating some of these negative patterns? The fact is, I’m responsible for the department’s work so if I point out a serious mistake, that needs to be taken seriously, not shrugged off. However, this has made me really question myself. Am I often upsetting people without even realizing it? Should I be more careful about sounding impatient or brusque while I am in this role?

I answer this question over at Inc. today, where I’m revisiting letters that have been buried in the archives here from years ago (and sometimes updating/expanding my answers to them). You can read it here.

President Donald Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act for the first time since it was used to intern Japanese immigrants during WWII, granting himself sweeping authority to deport non-citizens without giving them the opportunity to go before a judge. What do you think?

The post Trump Invokes Law Used To Justify Japanese Internment Camps appeared first on The Onion.

It’s best to view Elon Musk’s DOGE as an attack. While right wing propaganda (and gullible media outlets and politicians) frame DOGE as a “cost saving” effort at “improving government efficiency,” that’s just flimsy-ass cover for its real purpose: the dismantling of corporate oversight, environmental guard rails, consumer protection, civil rights, and the social safety net by weird zealots.

But DOGE is also just an incompetently run clown show.

There were already widespread concerns about Musk’s tween 4chan brats having widespread access to sensitive public information with no real oversight. But the randos that make up Trump and Musk’s rotating orbit of drooling sycophants also appear to be accessing this data using all manner of unsecured personal devices They couldn’t even launch the DOGE website competently with proper security.

Now there’s reporting out of the New York Times suggesting that Musk is casually integrating Starlink systems into the White House telecom network for no coherent reason outside of the fact it gives the illusion that it’s helping:

“Starlink, the satellite internet service operated by Elon Musk’s SpaceX, is now accessible across the White House campus. It is the latest installation of the Wi-Fi network across the government since Mr. Musk joined the Trump administration as an unpaid adviser.”

The New York Times falsely calls this a “Wi-Fi” network, when Starlink is Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite network. And in a complex as wired as the White House, there’s really no coherent reason to install it. The White House network is rife with gigabit capable fiber and gigabit-capable Wi-Fi that can far exceed anything Starlink delivers. Starlink would be a clearly inferior, slower, connectivity option.

According to the NY Times, one of Musk’s DOGE brats from X just decided one day to install a Starlink terminal on the White House roof, tripping security alarms and setting off a confrontation with Secret Service. All, purportedly, to “improve internet access” at probably one of the most well-connected buildings in the world.

There are only a few reasons to do this. One, is as a marketing stunt to help advertise Starlink as a miracle fix to a nonexistent problem. Two is to have a communications backchannel for stuff you don’t want tracked by any sort of White House network logging technologies. But even then, there are suggestions the Starlink traffic isn’t encrypted, creating a huge security risk:

“It was also unclear if Starlink communications were encrypted. At a minimum, the system allows for a network separate from existing White House servers that people on the grounds are able to use, keeping that data separate.”

It’s very rare, weird, and very dangerous to just mindlessly intermingle a private, and potentially unencrypted telecom connectivity option with existing White House systems and workflows, as numerous IT folks on Bluesky were quick to note:

And slapping a nontransparent comms channel on the roof of the White House so you and your weird authoritarian buddies can giggle about your illegal and unpopular dismantling of government functions is pretty far afield from all the “full transparency” they promised.

Again, if you don’t have any respect for the function of governance, you’re not going to be particularly careful as you and your earlobe nibbling tweens go about dismantling it. And if you have no shame or ethics, you also think nothing of leveraging your unelected influence to use the White House as a glorified marketing stunt. And if you’re incompetent, you’re going to be incompetent.

All very much in character for the fake government agency run by the fake super-genius engineer tasked with fake innovation and efficiency improvements.

by Andy Kroll

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

On Feb. 20, nearly 7,000 probationary employees at the Internal Revenue Service began receiving an unsigned letter telling them that they had been fired for poor performance.

Trump administration lawyers insist that the IRS and other federal agencies have acted within their authority when they ordered waves of mass terminations since Trump took office. But according to previously unreported emails obtained by ProPublica, a top lawyer at the IRS warned administration officials that the performance-related language in his agency’s termination letter was “a false statement” that amounted to “fraud” if the agency kept the language in the letter.

The emails reveal that in the hours before the IRS sent out its Feb. 20 termination letter, a fierce dispute played out at the agency’s highest levels.

Joseph Rillotta, a senior IRS lawyer, wrote that “no one” at the IRS had taken into account the performance of the probationary workers set to be fired. Rillotta urged that the language be struck from the draft termination letter.

If the falsehood wasn’t removed, Rillotta said he would file a report with the inspector general for the IRS.

Excerpt of an email written by IRS lawyer Joseph Rillotta (Obtained by ProPublica)

No one appeared to respond to Rillotta’s first email. In a follow-up email, he said he was “pleading with you to remove the clause,” adding: “It is not an immaterial false statement, because it is designed to improve the government’s posture in litigation (to the detriment of the employees that we are terminating today).”

Because it was not true, he wrote, “That renders it, as I see it, an anticipatory fraud on tribunals of jurisdiction over these employment actions.”

Rillotta was again ignored. The IRS sent out the Feb. 20 termination notice with the disputed language in it, according to copies received by fired workers who shared them with ProPublica. The notice said the decision to fire the workers had taken “into account your performance” as well as administration guidance and “current mission needs.”

Excerpt of a termination notice sent to probationary employees at the IRS (Obtained by ProPublica)

In fact, many of the employees had received laudatory reviews with no hint of any concerns.

Soon afterward, the inspector general for the IRS took preliminary steps to look into the matter, according to a person familiar with the effort who wasn’t authorized to speak with reporters. This person said they told the investigator that they agreed with Rillotta that the performance rationale was false.

Michelle Bercovici, a lawyer who represents federal workers, told ProPublica that Rillotta’s ignored warnings should make it easier for plaintiffs to show that the mass firings were “arbitrary and capricious,” the legal standard needed to invalidate a federal agency’s action. She added that the emails could also help plaintiffs recover attorneys’ fees from the government.

“When an agency acts based on false information, not only does it set the action up for being overturned,” she said. “It also means the agency is not going to have many defenses to its actions and could be liable for fees.”

Spokespeople for the Treasury Department and IRS did not respond to requests for comment. An Office of Personnel Management spokesperson referred ProPublica to a revised memorandum stating that OPM “is not directing agencies to take any specific performance-based actions regarding probationary employees.”

The terminations at the tax agency were among the deep cuts to federal agencies by the Trump administration and its Department of Government Efficiency, led by the billionaire Trump adviser Elon Musk.

Multiple federal lawsuits are now challenging the Trump administration’s mass firings. Last week, two federal judges temporarily blocked the IRS and other firings, but the lawsuits continue.

The issue of whether the performance rationale was legitimate has been central to the suits. One suit, brought by a group of labor unions, advocacy groups and other parties in California federal court, alleges that OPM directed the probationary firings and so “perpetrated one of the most massive employment frauds in the history of this country, telling tens of thousands of workers that they are being fired for performance reasons, when they most certainly were not.”

In response, administration lawyers denied that OPM directed agencies to fire probationary workers based on performance or misconduct. Instead, the filing says, “OPM reminded agencies of the importance of the probationary period in evaluating applicants’ continued employment and directed agencies to identify all employees on probationary periods and promptly determine whether those employees should be retained at the agency.”

The plaintiffs later expanded that suit to include the Treasury Department, which oversees the IRS, as one of the defendants. In mid-March, Judge William Alsup issued a preliminary injunction in the case, saying the administration’s probationary firings were based on “a lie.” Alsup ordered several federal agencies, including the Treasury, to reinstate thousands of fired employees. The Trump administration has appealed Alsup’s ruling.

Another suit, filed in Maryland federal court by nearly two dozen Democratic state attorneys general, also claims that the IRS mass firings were unlawful and should be reversed. (In that case, administration lawyers asserted that the mass firings were lawful.)

Court filings in both cases have partially revealed how the administration chose to make the legally questionable decision to fire probationary workers en masse on performance grounds..

At the IRS, the plan to fire probationary employees began in early February, according to an affidavit filed in the Maryland case.

A high-ranking Treasury Department official instructed a senior IRS personnel employee named Traci DiMartini to identify all probationary IRS employees and fire them “based on performance,” according to an affidavit DiMartini later filed in court.

DiMartini had “never heard of mass probationary employee firings,” she stated in her affidavit.

Excerpt of an affidavit filed in federal court by IRS human capital employee Traci DiMartini

When DiMartini asked the Treasury Department official why they were firing so many probationary employees, she was told that the order came from OPM, which was staffed by Trump appointees and members of DOGE.

In her affidavit, DiMartini confirmed what Rillotta wrote in his emails — that it was false to say probationary employees were fired for performance. DiMartini’s office “did not review or consider” any probationary employees’ job performance or conduct. Nor did the Treasury Department. “I know this because this fact was discussed openly in meetings,” DiMartini stated in her affidavit.

Excerpt of an affidavit DiMartini filed in federal court

According to DiMartini’s affidavit, OPM drafted the IRS mass-termination letter. While Treasury officials made several changes to it, the IRS’s personnel office where DiMartini worked “was not permitted to make any changes to the letter,” DiMartini’s affidavit said.

DiMartini refused to sign the mass-termination letter, according to her affidavit. The then-acting commissioner of the IRS, Douglas O’Donnell, also refused to sign the letter.

When thousands of affected IRS employees finally received the letter, it arrived from a generic email account. No agency official’s name appeared anywhere in the document.

Do you have any information we should know about the IRS, DOGE or the Trump administration’s mass firings? Andy Kroll can be reached by email at andy.kroll@propublica.org and by Signal or WhatsApp at 202-215-6203.

“San Francisco Pride loses $300,000 after sponsors drop out: ‘The tone has changed in this country.’” — Them, 3/17/25

Dear Queer Organization,

This isn’t an easy letter to write, but after so many years together, we owe you honesty and transparency, so we will say this as plainly as we can: We, a multinational corporation, will no longer be funding your pride parade or any of its associated homosexual activities. We know that for years we donated funds, shamelessly appropriated rainbow branding for the month of June, and gave away countless branded T-shirts at pride parades, but now, we think it’s best that we go our separate ways.

We realize everyone says this, but it’s not you, it’s us—well, it’s not so much us as it is our shareholders who demand that we take any action, regardless of its inhumanity, so long as it leads to profits. In fact, the shareholders have helped us understand that we’re in different places. Your rights are being threatened in new and unprecedented ways. And us? Well, we’re just ready to try new things.

Maybe we’ll experiment with some kind of hellish AI chatbot. Maybe we’ll give our C suite a raise while keeping employee wages flat. Maybe we’ll do some performative fascist bootlicking in the form of eliminating programs aimed at bolstering diversity within our organization—the point is, it’s time for us to spread our wings and fly.

We want you to know that this doesn’t take away the incredible times we’ve had together. Remember that year we featured a single attractive white gay couple chastely holding hands in one of our ads? It was you and us against the world. And what about when you and your community spent millions of dollars on our products over years and years, believing that we were somehow more ethical and equitable than our competitors? And—gosh—we’ll never forget that time our corporate account tweeted “What’s tea?” and someone replied “Mother.” We were unstoppable together!

We think we owe it to each other to be radically honest. We’ll go first: You are a marginalized community, and as a bloodthirsty corporation desperate for profits, we’re just being honest when we say you will never be enough for us. We need to be with customers that are—how do we say this?—less… politically inconvenient? Less… likely to upset the conservative oligarchs sitting on our board of directors? You know what we mean.

We’ve been talking to the shareholders a lot—and before you say anything, because we know you guys never liked each other—they’ve actually been really supportive through this whole thing. They were saying that you were a suppressive presence in our life. Like, you never even tried getting into a single one of our hobbies. Would it have killed you to try price gouging even once?

Listen, we loved “us.” We loved counting you as a profitable demographic. We loved publicly performing our allyship in the loudest way possible, and we love how that ultimately hollow performance distracted from all the FTC regulations we must keep breaking to remain profitable. But the fact is, that time in our life is over. It’s dead. And it’s never coming back. Unless, of course, the political and cultural landscape radically changes in a few years, which is why we’d love to find a way to stay friends.

We really do want to stay in touch. We’d love for us to find a way to be part of each other’s lives. We don’t want you to think we’re just abandoning you at the exact moment when allyship would actually count for something tangible in this world.

Sure, that’s what this is, but we don’t want you to think that.

Sincerely,
A Multinational Corporation

Today's links

• You can't save an institution by betraying its mission: Supporters will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no supporters.
• Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
• Object permanence: 2005, 2015, 2020, 2024
• Upcoming appearances: Where to find me.
• Recent appearances: Where I've been.
• Latest books: You keep readin' em, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Upcoming books: Like I said, I'll keep writin' 'em.
• Colophon: All the rest.

---

You can't save an institution by betraying its mission (permalink)

Paula Le Dieu is one of the smartest, most committed archivists I know. Many years ago, she shared a neat analogy with me about the paywalling of public archives, a phenomenon that has become rampant as public institutions have been pushed to seek private funding to close the gaps left by swingeing cuts.

Closing up these archives in order to give these new "investors" a chance to make their money back is pitched as just "good business." But – as Paula pointed out – this isn't how business works at all! If you are an early-stage investor to a startup, providing patient capital in its early stages, then later investors don't get to zero out your shares. If a museum or public broadcaster is a business, then the public is the early investor, and their share is access. Taking away free access is tantamount to wiping out our investment.

But of course, public institutions aren't businesses, and they don't exist to make profits. They exist to serve the public interest. If your public health system, public education system, public archives, public museum or public parks are making a profit, then something is desperately wrong.

Managers of these public institutions forget this lesson at their peril. Every public institution eventually faces an existential funding crisis, and when that crisis strikes, the only thing that will save you is public support. Back in 2014, I got to speak to a group of curators about this when I keynoted the Museums and the Web conference in Florence:

https://mwf2014.museumsandtheweb.com/paper/glam-and-the-free-world/index.html

Since then, I've had many chances to talk with Paula about her views on archiving in these apocalyptic times. She's come up with a crisp formulation of the point I tried to make in that speech – when archives trade access off for preservation, they sign their own death warrants. As I said in my speech, if you don't maximize public access to your archive, then there will come a day when they take away your funding and the public won't care because you locked them out of their own collection. When that happens, all your careful preservation work will be used to prepare the auction catalog for the sale of your collection to the "philanthropic" billionaires who insisted that you lock up the collection in the first place. Your meticulous documentation will become the manifest for a shipping container full of formerly public treasures that will henceforth reside in a lightless, climate-controlled warehouse in the Geneva Freeport.

My conversations with Paula came back to me this weekend when I listened to Corey Rubin talking with Brooke Gladstone on NPR's On the Media, about the universities that are seeking to avert Trump's attacks by sacrificing students and faculty who spoke out against Israel's genocidal attacks on Palestine:

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/articles/mahmoud-khalil-and-a-new-red-scare-plus-press-freedom-under-threat

From Columbia's complicity in the kidnapping of green card holder Mahmoud Khalil, a grad student now held in immigration detention in Louisiana; to Yale professor Helyeh Doutaghi, suspended because an AI-driven pro-Israel site hallucinated a connection between her and Hamas:

https://coreyrobin.com/2025/03/15/mccarthyism-at-yale-then-and-now/

These institutions – and others, like the LA Children's Hospital, which halted gender-affirming care for trans kids – aren't merely "complying in advance." They are betraying their mission in order to save their bacon:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-02-04/childrens-hospital-to-stop-initiating-hormonal-therapy-for-trans-patients-under-19

This will come back to bite them in the ass. This is like firefighters doing a bit of arson on the side to make ends meet, and thinking that the townsfolk will continue to vote to maintain their budget.

I get it: it's damned easy to convince yourself that you need to destroy the village to save it. By "living to fight another day," you will get more chances to serve the public. Rationalization is a hell of a drug:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/28/microincentives-and-enshittification/

Trump and his fascist movement wont't let up on their assault against institutions that support free inquiry, care, justice and openness. Rolling over for them now will not keep you safe tomorrow. But with every betrayal, these institutions alienate more and more of the public, without whose support they are ultimately doomed. Supporters will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no supporters.

(Image: AJ Suresh, CC BY 2.0, modified)

---

Hey look at this (permalink)

• Wired is dropping paywalls for FOIA-based reporting. Others should follow https://freedom.press/issues/wired-is-dropping-paywalls-for-foia-based-reporting-others-should-follow/

• GIMP 3.0 Released https://testing.gimp.org/news/2025/03/16/gimp-3-0-released/

• Cell phone bans in schools don't work, new study finds https://www.usermag.co/p/cellphone-bans-in-schools-dont-work

---

Object permanence (permalink)

#20yrsago Yahoo! bought Flickr! https://web.archive.org/web/20050328011033/http://blog.flickr.com/flickrblog/2005/03/yahoo_actually_.html

#10yrsago Suspicious people, American Airlines edition https://flickr.com/photos/doctorow/16690196059/

#5yrsago Republican senators told us everything was fine as they secretly panic-sold their stocks https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/20/pluralistic-20-mar-2020/#senate-selloff

#5yrsago Right to Repair during pandemics https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/20/pluralistic-20-mar-2020/#r2r

#5yrsago Judge overturns terrible copyright decision against Katy Perry https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/20/pluralistic-20-mar-2020/#fair-use

#5yrsago Patent trolls spin their shakedown of covid testing tech https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/20/pluralistic-20-mar-2020/#pandemic-profiteers

#5yrsago Dafoe's plague diaries https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/20/pluralistic-20-mar-2020/#dafoe-knew

#5yrsago Open source hardware ventilator enters testing https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/20/pluralistic-20-mar-2020/#oshw-breathing

#5yrsago Ifixit's new database of med-tech repair guides https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/20/pluralistic-20-mar-2020/#youfixit

#5yrsago Simon Pegg's coronavirus Sean of the Dead remake https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/20/pluralistic-20-mar-2020/#the-plan

#5yrsago Trump is outbidding state agencies for medical supplies https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/20/pluralistic-20-mar-2020/#heckuvajob-brownie

#1yrago Working class Dems who campaign on economics beat Trumpists in elections https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/20/actual-material-conditions/#bread-and-butter

---

Upcoming appearances (permalink)

• San Diego: Picks and Shovels at Mysterious Galaxy, Mar 24
  https://www.mystgalaxy.com/32425Doctorow

• Virtual: Picks and Shovels at Imagine! Belfast, Mar 24
  https://youtube.com/live/SXhEh8yU1M0

• Chicago: Picks and Shovels with Peter Sagal, Apr 2
  https://exileinbookville.com/events/44853

• Chicago: ABA Techshow, Apr 3
  https://www.techshow.com/

• Bloomington: Picks and Shovels at Morgenstern, Apr 4
  https://morgensternbooks.com/event/2025-04-04/author-event-cory-doctorow

• Pittsburgh: Picks and Shovels at White Whale Books, May 15
  https://whitewhalebookstore.com/events/20250515

• Pittsburgh: PyCon, May 16
  https://us.pycon.org/2025/schedule/

• PDX: Teardown 2025, Jun 20-22
  https://www.crowdsupply.com/teardown/portland-2025

• PDX: Picks and Shovels at Barnes and Noble, Jun 20
  https://stores.barnesandnoble.com/event/9780062183697-0

• New Orleans: DeepSouthCon63, Oct 10-12, 2025
  http://www.contraflowscifi.org/

---

Recent appearances (permalink)

• The internet that could have been was ruined by billionaires (Real News Network)
  https://therealnews.com/the-internet-that-could-have-been-was-ruined-by-billionaires

• Organized Money
  https://audio.buzzsprout.com/6f5ly01qcx6ijokbvoamr794ht81

• Did Nothing Wrong
  https://www.didnothingwrongpod.com/p/episode-168-cory-doctorow

---

Latest books (permalink)

• • Picks and Shovels: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about the heroic era of the PC, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2025 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250865908/picksandshovels).
• The Bezzle: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about prison-tech and other grifts, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), February 2024 (the-bezzle.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3062/Available_Feb_20th%3A_The_Bezzle_HB.html#/).

• "The Lost Cause:" a solarpunk novel of hope in the climate emergency, Tor Books (US), Head of Zeus (UK), November 2023 (http://lost-cause.org). Signed, personalized copies at Dark Delicacies (https://www.darkdel.com/store/p3007/Pre-Order_Signed_Copies%3A_The_Lost_Cause_HB.html#/)

• "The Internet Con": A nonfiction book about interoperability and Big Tech (Verso) September 2023 (http://seizethemeansofcomputation.org). Signed copies at Book Soup (https://www.booksoup.com/book/9781804291245).

• "Red Team Blues": "A grabby, compulsive thriller that will leave you knowing more about how the world works than you did before." Tor Books http://redteamblues.com. Signed copies at Dark Delicacies (US): and Forbidden Planet (UK): https://forbiddenplanet.com/385004-red-team-blues-signed-edition-hardcover/.

• "Chokepoint Capitalism: How to Beat Big Tech, Tame Big Content, and Get Artists Paid, with Rebecca Giblin", on how to unrig the markets for creative labor, Beacon Press/Scribe 2022 https://chokepointcapitalism.com

• "Attack Surface": The third Little Brother novel, a standalone technothriller for adults. The Washington Post called it "a political cyberthriller, vigorous, bold and savvy about the limits of revolution and resistance." Order signed, personalized copies from Dark Delicacies https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1840/Available_Now%3A_Attack_Surface.html

• "How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism": an anti-monopoly pamphlet analyzing the true harms of surveillance capitalism and proposing a solution. https://onezero.medium.com/how-to-destroy-surveillance-capitalism-8135e6744d59?sk=f6cd10e54e20a07d4c6d0f3ac011af6b) (signed copies: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2024/Available_Now%3A__How_to_Destroy_Surveillance_Capitalism.html)

• "Little Brother/Homeland": A reissue omnibus edition with a new introduction by Edward Snowden: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250774583; personalized/signed copies here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p1750/July%3A__Little_Brother_%26_Homeland.html

• "Poesy the Monster Slayer" a picture book about monsters, bedtime, gender, and kicking ass. Order here: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781626723627. Get a personalized, signed copy here: https://www.darkdel.com/store/p2682/Corey_Doctorow%3A_Poesy_the_Monster_Slayer_HB.html#/.

---

Upcoming books (permalink)

• Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, October 7 2025
  https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374619329/enshittification/

• Unauthorized Bread: a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, 2026

• Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

• The Memex Method, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2026

---

Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing:

• Enshittification: a nonfiction book about platform decay for Farrar, Straus, Giroux. Status: second pass edit underway (readaloud)

• A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING

• Picks and Shovels, a Martin Hench noir thriller about the heroic era of the PC. FORTHCOMING TOR BOOKS FEB 2025

Latest podcast: With Great Power Came No Responsibility: How Enshittification Conquered the 21st Century and How We Can Overthrow It https://craphound.com/news/2025/02/26/with-great-power-came-no-responsibility-how-enshittification-conquered-the-21st-century-and-how-we-can-overthrow-it/

---

This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.

---

How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Twitter (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://twitter.com/doctorow

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

ISSN: 3066-764X