DMV Feds only - is your agency still struggling with WFH policy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rumor is fdic is going back to 3x a week in office

- xoxo gossip girl

It’s going to be a big fight with the union.

Arbitrator may cut it down to 2x a week in the office....yayyyy

I heard 5 days a pay period.

4 would be better. Consistent weekly schedule. 2 days in, 3 days out.

Once a pay period would be better

Hey I’m all for ad-hoc and letting managers figure out what works for their particular teams, but government is bad at this.

[Anonymous]

State already has about 40-50% of Main State-based employees reporting on any given day. I'm surprised by how much FTT is still being allowed at other agencies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have gone back into the office one day a week. Most people are following through.

On the plus side this has fixed the lack of parking problem my agency in the suburbs was having. And, we don't have people hoteling in cubicles in the hallways any more. Most people shared an office pre pandemic, so now coworkers arrange their days so they are in their shared office by themselves.

Can they choose which day they want to come in?

Yes, most office mates work it out among themselves and their supervisor. Sometimes I have to go in on different day to take care of work responsibilities, and let my manager know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rumor is fdic is going back to 3x a week in office

- xoxo gossip girl

It’s going to be a big fight with the union.

Arbitrator may cut it down to 2x a week in the office....yayyyy

I heard 5 days a pay period.

4 would be better. Consistent weekly schedule. 2 days in, 3 days out.

Once a pay period would be better

Hey I’m all for ad-hoc and letting managers figure out what works for their particular teams, but government is bad at this.

NP and that is one of the annoying things about govt that individual work units cannot make customized arrangements, it has to be a ine size fits all kinda thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again: it’s not the responsibility of federal workers to support downtown “restaurants.”

Maybe not, but it is the responsibility of the federal government to care about the variability of restaurants in our economy.

You’re a civil servant….so that means you.

Unless you’re paying for my lunch you have no business telling me how to spend my money. Why don’t you go into DC every day to buy your meals, if you’re that concerned?

I’m not telling you how to spend your money. I’m telling you why the government cares. You work for the Government so you’re one of the affected employees. The argument that it is not the responsibility of federal employees to support downtown is moot because you work for the entity designed to care. If you don’t, that’s fine, but it’s not an invalid reason for the employer even if the employee doesn’t like it.


Your reaction is disproportionate.

You sound like the idiot business owner who goes around lecturing people about their supposed obligation to others when it serves you, even though you would not feel the slightest obligation to your own employees the next time you lay them all off because you'd rather keep making your boat payments.

I’m a career Federal staff level employee who has not worked for a private company since I was a temp in 2001 looking for a job. But you’re obviously really good at this game so keep playing it. Now tell me how I’m a loser because I’m not a manager. The most ridiculous part of this post is that I would never buy a boat.

What’s most comical is that you probably ARE a manager. A manager who is completely out of touch with the workforce and wondering why he can’t retain mid-level professional staff. Show them the money or let them work at home at least 50%—it’s simple.

Or maybe you don’t want the mid level staff to stay. It is definitely easier to manage people who can’t see how horrible you are. It’s not better for the US taxpayer though.

What??

Okay, I’m not playing anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rumor is fdic is going back to 3x a week in office

- xoxo gossip girl

It’s going to be a big fight with the union.

Arbitrator may cut it down to 2x a week in the office....yayyyy

I heard 5 days a pay period.

4 would be better. Consistent weekly schedule. 2 days in, 3 days out.

Once a pay period would be better

Hey I’m all for ad-hoc and letting managers figure out what works for their particular teams, but government is bad at this.

NP and that is one of the annoying things about govt that individual work units cannot make customized arrangements, it has to be a ine size fits all kinda thing.

Well one issue with the ad hoc is that it only works if you have a good manager because nasty ones will force what they want onto you. Although, honestly, they’d be bad all around anyway.

[Anonymous]

Its a s#%t show at USAID

[Anonymous]

If they are going to get rid of telework and want people in the office then they need to get rid of video conferencing. Technology evolved and now we don’t need to be in the office because of video calls. Cat is out of the bag. If you want butts in seats, then senior management needs to have video conferencing removed from all laptops.

Yes this would be stupid, ridiculous and inefficient but it would make office necessary again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they are going to get rid of telework and want people in the office then they need to get rid of video conferencing. Technology evolved and now we don’t need to be in the office because of video calls. Cat is out of the bag. If you want butts in seats, then senior management needs to have video conferencing removed from all laptops.

Yes this would be stupid, ridiculous and inefficient but it would make office necessary again.

At my agency, those things are easy and considered trivial matters. Since govt agencies are funding driven (vs. profit driven like private sectors), no one really cares but that. Maybe your office is different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again: it’s not the responsibility of federal workers to support downtown “restaurants.”

Maybe not, but it is the responsibility of the federal government to care about the variability of restaurants in our economy.

You’re a civil servant….so that means you.

Unless you’re paying for my lunch you have no business telling me how to spend my money. Why don’t you go into DC every day to buy your meals, if you’re that concerned?

I’m not telling you how to spend your money. I’m telling you why the government cares. You work for the Government so you’re one of the affected employees. The argument that it is not the responsibility of federal employees to support downtown is moot because you work for the entity designed to care. If you don’t, that’s fine, but it’s not an invalid reason for the employer even if the employee doesn’t like it.


Your reaction is disproportionate.

You sound like the idiot business owner who goes around lecturing people about their supposed obligation to others when it serves you, even though you would not feel the slightest obligation to your own employees the next time you lay them all off because you'd rather keep making your boat payments.

I’m a career Federal staff level employee who has not worked for a private company since I was a temp in 2001 looking for a job. But you’re obviously really good at this game so keep playing it. Now tell me how I’m a loser because I’m not a manager. The most ridiculous part of this post is that I would never buy a boat.

Hill staffer?

Figures. Putting feds back in their offices full time is not the best way to move DC forward economically. There are lots of ways to move forward that don’t involve making people engage in pointless and expensive commutes, that harm the environment and make it hard to retain and attract talent. DC is too damn expensive to live near for most new employees. You probably bought your home 20 years ago and live in a nice area. Telework is staying, get used to it and be more creative. If you want feds back in DC full time they need huge raises and better working conditions. That’s what the private sector offers in exchange for the sacrifice’s employees make to put butts in seats.

No, I am not a Hill staffer and was never a Hill Staffer.

You are really bad at this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rumor is fdic is going back to 3x a week in office

- xoxo gossip girl

It’s going to be a big fight with the union.

Arbitrator may cut it down to 2x a week in the office....yayyyy

I heard 5 days a pay period.

4 would be better. Consistent weekly schedule. 2 days in, 3 days out.

I’d like this schedule too, with flexibility to move the days around. That’s actually the schedule I’d most prefer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My group in my agency has been far remote and local remote since the pandemic. Even changed our SF-50s to reflect our home duty stations. But more recently the word is no immediate changes anticipated. So we’re in a holding pattern.

Similar here. My agency established a remote work policy for certain job categories, with management approval. I am 100% remote from NE DC, my duty station is my home address. Others in my office moved out of the area.

We are not in a holding pattern though. The policy is on the books official and we have hired and are continuing to interview remote workers around the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My group in my agency has been far remote and local remote since the pandemic. Even changed our SF-50s to reflect our home duty stations. But more recently the word is no immediate changes anticipated. So we’re in a holding pattern.

Similar here. My agency established a remote work policy for certain job categories, with management approval. I am 100% remote from NE DC, my duty station is my home address. Others in my office moved out of the area.

We are not in a holding pattern though. The policy is on the books official and we have hired and are continuing to interview remote workers around the country.

My SF-50 also has my home address but I’m sure that will change when whatever is coming is implemented.

[Anonymous]

My agency has gone back to prepandemic levels and everyone is quitting. There are entire departments that are only at half capacity. Everyone is doing two or three times their work prior to the pandemic, but the agency head thinks it’s going great and they’re happy to “lose the fat”. The reality is that those that are quitting are the top talent and the dregs who can’t find another job are sticking around. I don’t mind coming in and enjoy my job, but even I am looking for other opportunities. Morale is in the toilet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My agency has gone back to prepandemic levels and everyone is quitting. There are entire departments that are only at half capacity. Everyone is doing two or three times their work prior to the pandemic, but the agency head thinks it’s going great and they’re happy to “lose the fat”. The reality is that those that are quitting are the top talent and the dregs who can’t find another job are sticking around. I don’t mind coming in and enjoy my job, but even I am looking for other opportunities. Morale is in the toilet.

This is my issue too. I’m looking forward to being in but I feel the lost morale will make it terrible.