Bloomberg hits out at federal worker WFH in WP editorial

[Anonymous]

I think his most interesting point is that taxpayers are captive to the work and service of civil servants, which is not the case in private industry. Essentially, if civil servants slack at home, the taxpayer must accept it, but if the same service was provided in the private sector, consumers could choose another company. This means that it’s important for government executives to ensure that taxpayers are getting a fair deal. Bloomberg believes that federal employees should return to their offices more DOW.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/billionaire-mike-bloomberg-tired-remote-142725479.html

[Anonymous]

That’s nice that he ha an opinion.

[Anonymous]

Who cares what he thinks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who cares what he thinks?

Instead of shrugging, what’s your response to his argument?

[Anonymous]

The article conflates numerous issues.

One is that the government is paying for empty office space. 100% agree with that complaint. Consolidate.

Another is that the lack of employees commuting downtown harms local businesses. While that is true, it is a nearly zero sum game where somewhere else is benefiting from WFH.

The final big complaint seems to be that there is no oversight of federal employees and they could be slacking at home. The problem with this argument is that all jobs should have some sort of criteria/deliverable/etc that defines how the employee is doing, regardless of where they are sitting. Bloomberg just assumes that the workforce is less efficient working from home, but that hasn’t been proven at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The article conflates numerous issues.

One is that the government is paying for empty office space. 100% agree with that complaint. Consolidate.

Another is that the lack of employees commuting downtown harms local businesses. While that is true, it is a nearly zero sum game where somewhere else is benefiting from WFH.

The final big complaint seems to be that there is no oversight of federal employees and they could be slacking at home. The problem with this argument is that all jobs should have some sort of criteria/deliverable/etc that defines how the employee is doing, regardless of where they are sitting. Bloomberg just assumes that the workforce is less efficient working from home, but that hasn’t been proven at all.

If you read DCUM posts, you know there’s a problem. If you know people who work at agencies, you know there is a problem. If you try to get service at some government offices, you know there’s a problem. There is a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article conflates numerous issues.

One is that the government is paying for empty office space. 100% agree with that complaint. Consolidate.

Another is that the lack of employees commuting downtown harms local businesses. While that is true, it is a nearly zero sum game where somewhere else is benefiting from WFH.

The final big complaint seems to be that there is no oversight of federal employees and they could be slacking at home. The problem with this argument is that all jobs should have some sort of criteria/deliverable/etc that defines how the employee is doing, regardless of where they are sitting. Bloomberg just assumes that the workforce is less efficient working from home, but that hasn’t been proven at all.

If you read DCUM posts, you know there’s a problem. If you know people who work at agencies, you know there is a problem. If you try to get service at some government offices, you know there’s a problem. There is a problem.

This isn’t a coherent argument - it’s just repeating a phrase.

I work at a fed agency and there were slackers before and there are now. Location of work doesn’t matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article conflates numerous issues.

One is that the government is paying for empty office space. 100% agree with that complaint. Consolidate.

Another is that the lack of employees commuting downtown harms local businesses. While that is true, it is a nearly zero sum game where somewhere else is benefiting from WFH.

The final big complaint seems to be that there is no oversight of federal employees and they could be slacking at home. The problem with this argument is that all jobs should have some sort of criteria/deliverable/etc that defines how the employee is doing, regardless of where they are sitting. Bloomberg just assumes that the workforce is less efficient working from home, but that hasn’t been proven at all.

If you read DCUM posts, you know there’s a problem. If you know people who work at agencies, you know there is a problem. If you try to get service at some government offices, you know there’s a problem. There is a problem.

This isn’t a coherent argument - it’s just repeating a phrase.

I work at a fed agency and there were slackers before and there are now. Location of work doesn’t matter.

Agreed plenty of people (in private too) slack in the office. My worst contributing colleague is one of the few that still goes in to the office. I guess he likes to chat

[Anonymous]

So I worked for Bloomberg LP. They monitored everything you did — badge in and out, logged keystrokes on the terminal, etc etc etc.

They provided free food/snacks to keep you chained to your desk. That was the model.

Mike is a smart guy but the irony is most of his employees were journalists and they couldn’t really do their jobs from their desks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I worked for Bloomberg LP. They monitored everything you did — badge in and out, logged keystrokes on the terminal, etc etc etc.

They provided free food/snacks to keep you chained to your desk. That was the model.

Mike is a smart guy but the irony is most of his employees were journalists and they couldn’t really do their jobs from their desks.

Most of his employees are not journalists

i doubt you worked at Bloomberg if you think the majority of employees are Tom Keene or Javier blas

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The article conflates numerous issues.

One is that the government is paying for empty office space. 100% agree with that complaint. Consolidate.

Another is that the lack of employees commuting downtown harms local businesses. While that is true, it is a nearly zero sum game where somewhere else is benefiting from WFH.

The final big complaint seems to be that there is no oversight of federal employees and they could be slacking at home. The problem with this argument is that all jobs should have some sort of criteria/deliverable/etc that defines how the employee is doing, regardless of where they are sitting. Bloomberg just assumes that the workforce is less efficient working from home, but that hasn’t been proven at all.

My agency has gotten rid of much office space. They can not pull everyone back at this point.

[Anonymous]

I'm a contractor but the agency that I support has NEVER had enough room for all of its employees. We've been hybrid remote for years before Covid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article conflates numerous issues.

One is that the government is paying for empty office space. 100% agree with that complaint. Consolidate.

Another is that the lack of employees commuting downtown harms local businesses. While that is true, it is a nearly zero sum game where somewhere else is benefiting from WFH.

The final big complaint seems to be that there is no oversight of federal employees and they could be slacking at home. The problem with this argument is that all jobs should have some sort of criteria/deliverable/etc that defines how the employee is doing, regardless of where they are sitting. Bloomberg just assumes that the workforce is less efficient working from home, but that hasn’t been proven at all.

If you read DCUM posts, you know there’s a problem. If you know people who work at agencies, you know there is a problem. If you try to get service at some government offices, you know there’s a problem. There is a problem.

No, there isn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I worked for Bloomberg LP. They monitored everything you did — badge in and out, logged keystrokes on the terminal, etc etc etc.

They provided free food/snacks to keep you chained to your desk. That was the model.

Mike is a smart guy but the irony is most of his employees were journalists and they couldn’t really do their jobs from their desks.

Most of his employees are not journalists

i doubt you worked at Bloomberg if you think the majority of employees are Tom Keene or Javier blas

The newsrooms have like nearly 3,000 journalists. Granted, that includes editors and desk jockies but it also includes reporters who go to where the news happens. And sales people; we lost four people on 9/11 in the towers.

Tom Keane was a columnist/gadfly/radio host when I was there. No clue what he does now.

I see Ted Merz just left.

[Anonymous]

I love how there’s absolutely zero data cited to support that people are less productive at home than in an office. And let’s be real, plenty of people can slack off in person too if they want. The bottom line is having managerial oversight and actual metrics people are expected to meet. Which isn’t news to anyone.

I can’t believe this stupid puff piece got published.