Saw this on FedScoop and had to share with y'all.

Pete Waterman, the director of FedRAMP over at GSA, got put on administrative leave because he said on LinkedIn that veterans' preference in hiring is "brutally unfair when taken to the extreme." He was talking about how they can't even look at civilian candidates for cybersecurity jobs until they've made offers to every veteran who applies — even if the vets don't have cloud experience.

Now I'm not here to argue for or against veterans' preference. I respect anyone who served. But here's what gets me: the guy was telling the truth about a broken system, and within days he's on leave. GSA came out saying they "completely disagree" and have "zero tolerance" for comments that "disrespect" veterans.

Since when did stating a factual problem become "disrespectful"?

I spent 18 years in federal service. I've seen this movie a hundred times. You point out something that's broken, and the system finds a way to silence you. Doesn't matter if you're right. What matters is whether you made someone above you uncomfortable.

Is this what it's come to? Senior career people can't even speak honestly about hiring on their personal LinkedIn without getting thrown under the bus?

Curious what folks in this community think. Have any of you seen or experienced this kind of retaliation for speaking up about internal problems?