Biden wants RTO

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:RTO is BS. I say that as at work we were talking about improving morale.

Now we work from home Tuesday’s and Thursday’s and Friday is unofficially Jeans and Sneakers and long lunch and leave at 3-4pm

The people with no child care, near retirement, long commutes, people with second jobs, lazy people want more WFH to improve morale.

How does that accomplish anything?

The people who work wanted better training, free lunch, better promotion opportunities, greater access sr. Mgt, more meaningful work.

I mean next week Monday a Holiday, Tuesday WFH, Wed in office, Thursday WFH and Friday jeans and sneakers leave early. So more off is better?





Working from home or wearing jeans doesn't mean you're getting a day off.


In fantasy land. Ok so it has been proven WFH do 18 percent less work. They on average work 6 hours a day. And no commute.

So it is sleep in, get kids in bus, check email at 8-9 while sipping coffee, off to gym, come back, move mouse around, off to supermarket or Starbucks or lunch with GFs, move mouse around, kids off bus, make snacks, check email. Around 8pm one last check email to to make it look like you work 12 hours a day.

Or worse my friends boss has two part time jobs, single mom with kids. Her calendar is booked 6-7 hours a day with her other jobs and kids stuff. She works tops 1-3 hours a week.

WFH is vacation


Maybe in your world. My spouse checks their email when they wake up at 6, take the kids to school by 7:30 and start work and go non-stop till 4/5-8, still checking email before bed. Breaks for walking the dog and and sometimes picking up a kid from school but that's 10 minutes. Plus, work on weekends. If they go into the office, with commute, they do 8 hours, sometimes 9. Commute is 90 minutes each way. So, the lost productivity is because of the commute (though they often are on calls on the commute too).
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Managers - you cannot reason with most of these people, they want to be obstinate and unreasonable. Our only hope is an EO or law that forces people back to their offices again. Three years of conversations and listening have been fruitless and they are more intransigent. Stop engaging with these folks, there is a reason none of them have been promoted into management.


That sounds terrible. It may be more beneficial to you if you consider DCUM as an unfiltered input from your staff.


+1. There's plenty of poor managers out there, one reason why I left my last position. I was lower level with a handful of others in the same position. We had access to 6 managers. The one manager I most appreciated took the time to authentically check in every so often- just took a few seconds usually (hey, how are you doing? Is everything going ok?), was very approachable at other times. When things needed to be changed, gave us the freedom to work out a solution with the others affected. Unfortunately that one left.

The worst managers (several described here, not all describe one person) acted like we were invisible, were inauthentic, talked down to us, hid in their office all day, gave preferential assignments to buddies, had poor communication- we weren't kept in the big picture loop unless it directly related to our position and even then sometimes we were still kept out of the loop!, and unilaterally made changes without asking for our input that didn't really make sense with the finite details they weren't aware of because they never checked in with us.

The rest were somewhere in between.

Overall, it fed a vibe of lack of respect, like we weren't valued. I'm not asking for a participation trophy, but just to be respected as a person and contributor to the team. Even though I loved the work itself, the dysfunctional management ruined it for me.

https://hbr.org/2018/07/do-your-employees-feel-respected
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Managers - you cannot reason with most of these people, they want to be obstinate and unreasonable. Our only hope is an EO or law that forces people back to their offices again. Three years of conversations and listening have been fruitless and they are more intransigent. Stop engaging with these folks, there is a reason none of them have been promoted into management.


Oh goodness. Spoken like a true manager.


Yes. In my experience, those in government who can’t “do” - manage. And by manage, they just watch what everyone else is doing and sign time cards. Excuse me if the people doing the damn work want to participate in a discussion about how it gets done.

Yes, I am screaming into the void. No, I don’t mind being in the office a couple of days a week—if you make it worth my time!!! Schedule a team meeting, add some things to the day with things you’d like to accomplish as a team, don’t just use it as an opportunity to count heads and track hours. Manager my ass.
Anonymous
In an ideal world, I would work in the office 2 days per week, on the same day as other team members. However, our physical space does not permit that. I don't see the point of coming in in shifts to work with others on teams. We need a new space with 8 offices (one for each team member) if we are going to RTO more often. We cannot sit in cubes or in the open due to the confidential nature of some of our work.
Anonymous
You all are going back and forth about RTO/TW benefits for the employee/company that don’t matter. This is why the Fed will push RTO. This is what matters. The rest is a smoke screen.

https://www.alxnow.com/2023/08/31/notes-patent-and-trademark-office-downsizing-puts-alexandrias-largest-landlord-in-hot-water/

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Managers - you cannot reason with most of these people, they want to be obstinate and unreasonable. Our only hope is an EO or law that forces people back to their offices again. Three years of conversations and listening have been fruitless and they are more intransigent. Stop engaging with these folks, there is a reason none of them have been promoted into management.


That sounds terrible. It may be more beneficial to you if you consider DCUM as an unfiltered input from your staff.


+1. There's plenty of poor managers out there, one reason why I left my last position. I was lower level with a handful of others in the same position. We had access to 6 managers. The one manager I most appreciated took the time to authentically check in every so often- just took a few seconds usually (hey, how are you doing? Is everything going ok?), was very approachable at other times. When things needed to be changed, gave us the freedom to work out a solution with the others affected. Unfortunately that one left.

The worst managers (several described here, not all describe one person) acted like we were invisible, were inauthentic, talked down to us, hid in their office all day, gave preferential assignments to buddies, had poor communication- we weren't kept in the big picture loop unless it directly related to our position and even then sometimes we were still kept out of the loop!, and unilaterally made changes without asking for our input that didn't really make sense with the finite details they weren't aware of because they never checked in with us.

The rest were somewhere in between.

Overall, it fed a vibe of lack of respect, like we weren't valued. I'm not asking for a participation trophy, but just to be respected as a person and contributor to the team. Even though I loved the work itself, the dysfunctional management ruined it for me.

https://hbr.org/2018/07/do-your-employees-feel-respected


Relatively new manager here - thank you, PP, this is really helpful (and I guess thank you on behalf of my team, too).
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:During the pandemic all these downtown businesses got lavish bailouts like PPP, etc. And now years later they still want even more subsidies? The world has moved on and nobody with a computer needs to commute anymore. Time for these laggards to adjust, or else we should also bring back the horse and carriage industry - fair is fair.


Let me try this..

"During the pandemic these downtown workers got extreme flexibilities to stay at home and even got checks in the mail from the government with no strings attached. And now years later they still want these benefits? The world has moved on and there is no need to stay separated at home anymore. Time for people to adjust, or else we should all keep movie theaters and restaurants and churches closed- fair is fair."


Here, lets try this:

Workers in the US and around the world have effectively shown that they can successfully work from home. It isn't employees responsibility to support failing businesses who refuse to change their business model to reflect the changes. Likewise, some people have immune compromised family members and forcing them back into the office, can greatly impact that family members health. If an employee is under preforming, they should be terminated.


NP. I disagree with your premise. WFH 100% was an extreme struggle in the beginning, then we limped along and eventually got better at it. But then as time wore on, it got harder again. New employees came on and basically crashed and burned. They had no contacts, couldn't reach people, couldn't get their work done and didn't integrate well. People just don't network well remotely. Almost 4 years later, about 30% of our office is new hires since 2020. We don't have adequate fed collaboration tools. And the ones we do have? They're FOIAable. Who wants new reporters reading every chat they wrote to coworkers?

Fed managers also have pretty much no tools to get their employees to get their work done remotely. I did put people on PIPs but it was a full time job. Whereas in person PIPs are much easier to manage. Fed managers can't see if their employees are working. We often have long term deliverables. Bob says he's working SO hard (and even shows a few docs/pages complete)! But then completely drops the ball and you don't find out until certain drafts are due.

So to say that feds should RTO, it's not the same as private sector RTO. Private sector can fire very easily.


np, I see what you are saying and i don't disagree with some of it but... training new staff is your job, not mine. why should i spend two hours every day just because you didn't plan your job correctly? Your entire second paragraph is, again, your job too. The fact you are unable to handle your staff, shouldn't be my problem. you need to move on from "i have to SEE you to MANAGE you" approach. Those days are done and gone.


+1 to the part about the second paragraph. The PP sounds like a terrible manager. Seriously it's not that hard to set deliverables and deadlines and in person or remote shouldn't make a difference. If performance isn't up to par PIP and then terminate them. I also don't believe that these underperformed will all of a sudden become acceptable performers in the office. It's been my experience that good workers do good work wherever they decide to work.


I'm an excellent manager actually. Some differences: in office, employees stopped by and asked me more questions. When they got stuck they just asked. Remotely, they just sit on it and don't ask questions. I've even made myself available daily for "office hours" and they are afraid to ask. Our jobs are difficult and very technical. For my newest hire, I have a weekly meeting just with her, but it's still not enough. She lets things sit until our weekly meeting (there are team meetings as well, this one meeting is just us).

I'm not asking to see them to manage them. It's more the other way around. They can't work effectively unless they learn teamwork. And the way federal offices are set up (and our lack of collaboration tools), teamwork remotely isn't easy. As a manager I'm there to help them achieve their tasks and provide expert advice.

The guy that I fired was actually a good performer in office, but during the pandemic he just stopped doing work at all. I think he just couldn't focus at home.

I personally do a great job remotely, but I'm at a high enough level that I don't need any more networking. I know how to get my job done. Not all feds are at that level or have been in their jobs long enough. The feds who are at my level though, aren't sharing their expertise or knowledge.


I’m shocked that in 2023 your direct reports feel more comfortable physically going into your office/cube to ask a question versus asking you in a chat. Most younger people are very accustomed to electronic communications. What you describe is highly unusual and it’s also incredibly inefficient.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:RTO is BS. I say that as at work we were talking about improving morale.

Now we work from home Tuesday’s and Thursday’s and Friday is unofficially Jeans and Sneakers and long lunch and leave at 3-4pm

The people with no child care, near retirement, long commutes, people with second jobs, lazy people want more WFH to improve morale.

How does that accomplish anything?

The people who work wanted better training, free lunch, better promotion opportunities, greater access sr. Mgt, more meaningful work.

I mean next week Monday a Holiday, Tuesday WFH, Wed in office, Thursday WFH and Friday jeans and sneakers leave early. So more off is better?





Working from home or wearing jeans doesn't mean you're getting a day off.


In fantasy land. Ok so it has been proven WFH do 18 percent less work. They on average work 6 hours a day. And no commute.

So it is sleep in, get kids in bus, check email at 8-9 while sipping coffee, off to gym, come back, move mouse around, off to supermarket or Starbucks or lunch with GFs, move mouse around, kids off bus, make snacks, check email. Around 8pm one last check email to to make it look like you work 12 hours a day.

Or worse my friends boss has two part time jobs, single mom with kids. Her calendar is booked 6-7 hours a day with her other jobs and kids stuff. She works tops 1-3 hours a week.

WFH is vacation


Its more like
work 6-7 (1h)
kid wakes at 7, help them with dress/teeth/dressing, walk them to school
back to work 830-200 (5.5h)
walk and pickup kid 2-3
3-430 work (1.5h)

I am available and logged in for 8 hours. I meet my deliverables and start working before most, available during core hours, and work into normal afternoon hours. My lunch is 2-3.

My DH works in DC and has an hour drive to/from. He leaves at 530 to get to work at 6 and is back at 330/4. So if I did not work from home, I would not be getting in until 9 or later since my commute is also 45-60minutes and I cant drop my kid off before 8am. I don't get paid enough for an au pair or nanny and I am not sure what the point of a "family friendly" workplace is that pays less than market rate because they are "family friendly" if my kids have to be raised by someone else/all care outsourced/act like I dont have a family.

WFH allows me to give the best of what's available to everyone from everyone who needs me. My job doesnt miss out on productivity/engagement and I dont miss out on time with my kid.

6-7am I catch up with whatever happened after 430. 830-2 I do my main workload. 3-430 is remainders and stragglers. I am available for meetings outside of these times with notice and no one has issues scheduling meetings with me.

I do grocery pickup only, make Nespresso each morning, and have a home gym so I am not at starbucks or spincycle or the grocery store. That 2-3 off time includes prepping a post-school snack.

Ive got the best of both worlds right now and that means I am committed to my job and company and also loyal. They want me to travel, great. They need a meeting at 530 for a west coast program, sure thing. I need to cover and double my workload while my supervisor is traveling or on a 2 week vacation, can do boss. If I am commuting 2 hours per day and dont see my family, you would get half of me because the other half is dreaming of WAH/a new job/ etc.





Thanks for your detailed schedule, but putting your kids in before care and / or aftercare and tag teaming the drop offs and pick ups with your husband does not mean other people are raising your children. It’s what we did before COVID and we can do it again.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:During the pandemic all these downtown businesses got lavish bailouts like PPP, etc. And now years later they still want even more subsidies? The world has moved on and nobody with a computer needs to commute anymore. Time for these laggards to adjust, or else we should also bring back the horse and carriage industry - fair is fair.


Let me try this..

"During the pandemic these downtown workers got extreme flexibilities to stay at home and even got checks in the mail from the government with no strings attached. And now years later they still want these benefits? The world has moved on and there is no need to stay separated at home anymore. Time for people to adjust, or else we should all keep movie theaters and restaurants and churches closed- fair is fair."


Here, lets try this:

Workers in the US and around the world have effectively shown that they can successfully work from home. It isn't employees responsibility to support failing businesses who refuse to change their business model to reflect the changes. Likewise, some people have immune compromised family members and forcing them back into the office, can greatly impact that family members health. If an employee is under preforming, they should be terminated.


NP. I disagree with your premise. WFH 100% was an extreme struggle in the beginning, then we limped along and eventually got better at it. But then as time wore on, it got harder again. New employees came on and basically crashed and burned. They had no contacts, couldn't reach people, couldn't get their work done and didn't integrate well. People just don't network well remotely. Almost 4 years later, about 30% of our office is new hires since 2020. We don't have adequate fed collaboration tools. And the ones we do have? They're FOIAable. Who wants new reporters reading every chat they wrote to coworkers?

Fed managers also have pretty much no tools to get their employees to get their work done remotely. I did put people on PIPs but it was a full time job. Whereas in person PIPs are much easier to manage. Fed managers can't see if their employees are working. We often have long term deliverables. Bob says he's working SO hard (and even shows a few docs/pages complete)! But then completely drops the ball and you don't find out until certain drafts are due.

So to say that feds should RTO, it's not the same as private sector RTO. Private sector can fire very easily.


np, I see what you are saying and i don't disagree with some of it but... training new staff is your job, not mine. why should i spend two hours every day just because you didn't plan your job correctly? Your entire second paragraph is, again, your job too. The fact you are unable to handle your staff, shouldn't be my problem. you need to move on from "i have to SEE you to MANAGE you" approach. Those days are done and gone.


+1 to the part about the second paragraph. The PP sounds like a terrible manager. Seriously it's not that hard to set deliverables and deadlines and in person or remote shouldn't make a difference. If performance isn't up to par PIP and then terminate them. I also don't believe that these underperformed will all of a sudden become acceptable performers in the office. It's been my experience that good workers do good work wherever they decide to work.


I'm an excellent manager actually. Some differences: in office, employees stopped by and asked me more questions. When they got stuck they just asked. Remotely, they just sit on it and don't ask questions. I've even made myself available daily for "office hours" and they are afraid to ask. Our jobs are difficult and very technical. For my newest hire, I have a weekly meeting just with her, but it's still not enough. She lets things sit until our weekly meeting (there are team meetings as well, this one meeting is just us).

I'm not asking to see them to manage them. It's more the other way around. They can't work effectively unless they learn teamwork. And the way federal offices are set up (and our lack of collaboration tools), teamwork remotely isn't easy. As a manager I'm there to help them achieve their tasks and provide expert advice.

The guy that I fired was actually a good performer in office, but during the pandemic he just stopped doing work at all. I think he just couldn't focus at home.

I personally do a great job remotely, but I'm at a high enough level that I don't need any more networking. I know how to get my job done. Not all feds are at that level or have been in their jobs long enough. The feds who are at my level though, aren't sharing their expertise or knowledge.


I’m shocked that in 2023 your direct reports feel more comfortable physically going into your office/cube to ask a question versus asking you in a chat. Most younger people are very accustomed to electronic communications. What you describe is highly unusual and it’s also incredibly inefficient.


Eh, depends on how young. Drafting emails makes my college age kids nervous. I think while they are very used to electronic communications, it’s in an informal setting. First learning to communicate in a formal setting can be daunting and writing requests is always harder.

My kids vastly prefer office hours. Maybe it will be different after a few years in the office. But they also hate the idea of TW generally as a result of virtual schooling.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:RTO is BS. I say that as at work we were talking about improving morale.

Now we work from home Tuesday’s and Thursday’s and Friday is unofficially Jeans and Sneakers and long lunch and leave at 3-4pm

The people with no child care, near retirement, long commutes, people with second jobs, lazy people want more WFH to improve morale.

How does that accomplish anything?

The people who work wanted better training, free lunch, better promotion opportunities, greater access sr. Mgt, more meaningful work.

I mean next week Monday a Holiday, Tuesday WFH, Wed in office, Thursday WFH and Friday jeans and sneakers leave early. So more off is better?





Working from home or wearing jeans doesn't mean you're getting a day off.


In fantasy land. Ok so it has been proven WFH do 18 percent less work. They on average work 6 hours a day. And no commute.

So it is sleep in, get kids in bus, check email at 8-9 while sipping coffee, off to gym, come back, move mouse around, off to supermarket or Starbucks or lunch with GFs, move mouse around, kids off bus, make snacks, check email. Around 8pm one last check email to to make it look like you work 12 hours a day.

Or worse my friends boss has two part time jobs, single mom with kids. Her calendar is booked 6-7 hours a day with her other jobs and kids stuff. She works tops 1-3 hours a week.

WFH is vacation


Its more like
work 6-7 (1h)
kid wakes at 7, help them with dress/teeth/dressing, walk them to school
back to work 830-200 (5.5h)
walk and pickup kid 2-3
3-430 work (1.5h)

I am available and logged in for 8 hours. I meet my deliverables and start working before most, available during core hours, and work into normal afternoon hours. My lunch is 2-3.

My DH works in DC and has an hour drive to/from. He leaves at 530 to get to work at 6 and is back at 330/4. So if I did not work from home, I would not be getting in until 9 or later since my commute is also 45-60minutes and I cant drop my kid off before 8am. I don't get paid enough for an au pair or nanny and I am not sure what the point of a "family friendly" workplace is that pays less than market rate because they are "family friendly" if my kids have to be raised by someone else/all care outsourced/act like I dont have a family.

WFH allows me to give the best of what's available to everyone from everyone who needs me. My job doesnt miss out on productivity/engagement and I dont miss out on time with my kid.

6-7am I catch up with whatever happened after 430. 830-2 I do my main workload. 3-430 is remainders and stragglers. I am available for meetings outside of these times with notice and no one has issues scheduling meetings with me.

I do grocery pickup only, make Nespresso each morning, and have a home gym so I am not at starbucks or spincycle or the grocery store. That 2-3 off time includes prepping a post-school snack.

Ive got the best of both worlds right now and that means I am committed to my job and company and also loyal. They want me to travel, great. They need a meeting at 530 for a west coast program, sure thing. I need to cover and double my workload while my supervisor is traveling or on a 2 week vacation, can do boss. If I am commuting 2 hours per day and dont see my family, you would get half of me because the other half is dreaming of WAH/a new job/ etc.





Thanks for your detailed schedule, but putting your kids in before care and / or aftercare and tag teaming the drop offs and pick ups with your husband does not mean other people are raising your children. It’s what we did before COVID and we can do it again.


Okay sure. But if you have a decent commute and work in an office 5x a week then you’re spending very very little time with your children. Especially if they are young.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:During the pandemic all these downtown businesses got lavish bailouts like PPP, etc. And now years later they still want even more subsidies? The world has moved on and nobody with a computer needs to commute anymore. Time for these laggards to adjust, or else we should also bring back the horse and carriage industry - fair is fair.


Let me try this..

"During the pandemic these downtown workers got extreme flexibilities to stay at home and even got checks in the mail from the government with no strings attached. And now years later they still want these benefits? The world has moved on and there is no need to stay separated at home anymore. Time for people to adjust, or else we should all keep movie theaters and restaurants and churches closed- fair is fair."


Here, lets try this:

Workers in the US and around the world have effectively shown that they can successfully work from home. It isn't employees responsibility to support failing businesses who refuse to change their business model to reflect the changes. Likewise, some people have immune compromised family members and forcing them back into the office, can greatly impact that family members health. If an employee is under preforming, they should be terminated.


NP. I disagree with your premise. WFH 100% was an extreme struggle in the beginning, then we limped along and eventually got better at it. But then as time wore on, it got harder again. New employees came on and basically crashed and burned. They had no contacts, couldn't reach people, couldn't get their work done and didn't integrate well. People just don't network well remotely. Almost 4 years later, about 30% of our office is new hires since 2020. We don't have adequate fed collaboration tools. And the ones we do have? They're FOIAable. Who wants new reporters reading every chat they wrote to coworkers?

Fed managers also have pretty much no tools to get their employees to get their work done remotely. I did put people on PIPs but it was a full time job. Whereas in person PIPs are much easier to manage. Fed managers can't see if their employees are working. We often have long term deliverables. Bob says he's working SO hard (and even shows a few docs/pages complete)! But then completely drops the ball and you don't find out until certain drafts are due.

So to say that feds should RTO, it's not the same as private sector RTO. Private sector can fire very easily.


np, I see what you are saying and i don't disagree with some of it but... training new staff is your job, not mine. why should i spend two hours every day just because you didn't plan your job correctly? Your entire second paragraph is, again, your job too. The fact you are unable to handle your staff, shouldn't be my problem. you need to move on from "i have to SEE you to MANAGE you" approach. Those days are done and gone.


+1 to the part about the second paragraph. The PP sounds like a terrible manager. Seriously it's not that hard to set deliverables and deadlines and in person or remote shouldn't make a difference. If performance isn't up to par PIP and then terminate them. I also don't believe that these underperformed will all of a sudden become acceptable performers in the office. It's been my experience that good workers do good work wherever they decide to work.


I'm an excellent manager actually. Some differences: in office, employees stopped by and asked me more questions. When they got stuck they just asked. Remotely, they just sit on it and don't ask questions. I've even made myself available daily for "office hours" and they are afraid to ask. Our jobs are difficult and very technical. For my newest hire, I have a weekly meeting just with her, but it's still not enough. She lets things sit until our weekly meeting (there are team meetings as well, this one meeting is just us).

I'm not asking to see them to manage them. It's more the other way around. They can't work effectively unless they learn teamwork. And the way federal offices are set up (and our lack of collaboration tools), teamwork remotely isn't easy. As a manager I'm there to help them achieve their tasks and provide expert advice.

The guy that I fired was actually a good performer in office, but during the pandemic he just stopped doing work at all. I think he just couldn't focus at home.

I personally do a great job remotely, but I'm at a high enough level that I don't need any more networking. I know how to get my job done. Not all feds are at that level or have been in their jobs long enough. The feds who are at my level though, aren't sharing their expertise or knowledge.


I’m shocked that in 2023 your direct reports feel more comfortable physically going into your office/cube to ask a question versus asking you in a chat. Most younger people are very accustomed to electronic communications. What you describe is highly unusual and it’s also incredibly inefficient.


Eh, depends on how young. Drafting emails makes my college age kids nervous. I think while they are very used to electronic communications, it’s in an informal setting. First learning to communicate in a formal setting can be daunting and writing requests is always harder.

My kids vastly prefer office hours. Maybe it will be different after a few years in the office. But they also hate the idea of TW generally as a result of virtual schooling.


Very strange! Sounds like you’re not hiring quality people if they are nervous drafting emails. This doesn’t sound like it has much to do with WFH.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:RTO is BS. I say that as at work we were talking about improving morale.

Now we work from home Tuesday’s and Thursday’s and Friday is unofficially Jeans and Sneakers and long lunch and leave at 3-4pm

The people with no child care, near retirement, long commutes, people with second jobs, lazy people want more WFH to improve morale.

How does that accomplish anything?

The people who work wanted better training, free lunch, better promotion opportunities, greater access sr. Mgt, more meaningful work.

I mean next week Monday a Holiday, Tuesday WFH, Wed in office, Thursday WFH and Friday jeans and sneakers leave early. So more off is better?





Working from home or wearing jeans doesn't mean you're getting a day off.


In fantasy land. Ok so it has been proven WFH do 18 percent less work. They on average work 6 hours a day. And no commute.

So it is sleep in, get kids in bus, check email at 8-9 while sipping coffee, off to gym, come back, move mouse around, off to supermarket or Starbucks or lunch with GFs, move mouse around, kids off bus, make snacks, check email. Around 8pm one last check email to to make it look like you work 12 hours a day.

Or worse my friends boss has two part time jobs, single mom with kids. Her calendar is booked 6-7 hours a day with her other jobs and kids stuff. She works tops 1-3 hours a week.

WFH is vacation


RTO schedule
Arrive 9 am. Clock in. Walk to the deli to grab breakfast. Eat breakfast at desk while checking email.

10 am catch up with the early arrivers on the office gossip. Make the rounds to each office. Talk about last night's games and reality shows.

11 am coffee break.

11:30,, answer some emails, personal and work. Schedule your appointments. Browse Washington Post and NYT.

12:30 lunch. Run errands. Stretch it to 90 minutes cause you couldn't find parking. Pick up takeout.

2 PM lunch at desk.

2:30 emails.

3PM call Dh or DW, make sure kids are home safe. Pay online bills, take care of other personal stuff.

3:30 last rounds. Go office to office to catch up on gossip.

4:30 last check of emails. Return business calls late on the day hoping to just leave a VM and punt to tomorrow.

Leave 5 PM on the dot.


This isn’t how any decent employee works. Someone like this wouldn’t last long in my department.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:RTO is BS. I say that as at work we were talking about improving morale.

Now we work from home Tuesday’s and Thursday’s and Friday is unofficially Jeans and Sneakers and long lunch and leave at 3-4pm

The people with no child care, near retirement, long commutes, people with second jobs, lazy people want more WFH to improve morale.

How does that accomplish anything?

The people who work wanted better training, free lunch, better promotion opportunities, greater access sr. Mgt, more meaningful work.

I mean next week Monday a Holiday, Tuesday WFH, Wed in office, Thursday WFH and Friday jeans and sneakers leave early. So more off is better?





Working from home or wearing jeans doesn't mean you're getting a day off.


In fantasy land. Ok so it has been proven WFH do 18 percent less work. They on average work 6 hours a day. And no commute.

So it is sleep in, get kids in bus, check email at 8-9 while sipping coffee, off to gym, come back, move mouse around, off to supermarket or Starbucks or lunch with GFs, move mouse around, kids off bus, make snacks, check email. Around 8pm one last check email to to make it look like you work 12 hours a day.

Or worse my friends boss has two part time jobs, single mom with kids. Her calendar is booked 6-7 hours a day with her other jobs and kids stuff. She works tops 1-3 hours a week.

WFH is vacation


Its more like
work 6-7 (1h)
kid wakes at 7, help them with dress/teeth/dressing, walk them to school
back to work 830-200 (5.5h)
walk and pickup kid 2-3
3-430 work (1.5h)

I am available and logged in for 8 hours. I meet my deliverables and start working before most, available during core hours, and work into normal afternoon hours. My lunch is 2-3.

My DH works in DC and has an hour drive to/from. He leaves at 530 to get to work at 6 and is back at 330/4. So if I did not work from home, I would not be getting in until 9 or later since my commute is also 45-60minutes and I cant drop my kid off before 8am. I don't get paid enough for an au pair or nanny and I am not sure what the point of a "family friendly" workplace is that pays less than market rate because they are "family friendly" if my kids have to be raised by someone else/all care outsourced/act like I dont have a family.

WFH allows me to give the best of what's available to everyone from everyone who needs me. My job doesnt miss out on productivity/engagement and I dont miss out on time with my kid.

6-7am I catch up with whatever happened after 430. 830-2 I do my main workload. 3-430 is remainders and stragglers. I am available for meetings outside of these times with notice and no one has issues scheduling meetings with me.

I do grocery pickup only, make Nespresso each morning, and have a home gym so I am not at starbucks or spincycle or the grocery store. That 2-3 off time includes prepping a post-school snack.

Ive got the best of both worlds right now and that means I am committed to my job and company and also loyal. They want me to travel, great. They need a meeting at 530 for a west coast program, sure thing. I need to cover and double my workload while my supervisor is traveling or on a 2 week vacation, can do boss. If I am commuting 2 hours per day and dont see my family, you would get half of me because the other half is dreaming of WAH/a new job/ etc.


What did you do pre-pandemic? Also how do you manage 2-3 for lunch? That’s prime meeting time in my office. It doesn’t sound like you are a fed.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:During the pandemic all these downtown businesses got lavish bailouts like PPP, etc. And now years later they still want even more subsidies? The world has moved on and nobody with a computer needs to commute anymore. Time for these laggards to adjust, or else we should also bring back the horse and carriage industry - fair is fair.


Let me try this..

"During the pandemic these downtown workers got extreme flexibilities to stay at home and even got checks in the mail from the government with no strings attached. And now years later they still want these benefits? The world has moved on and there is no need to stay separated at home anymore. Time for people to adjust, or else we should all keep movie theaters and restaurants and churches closed- fair is fair."


Here, lets try this:

Workers in the US and around the world have effectively shown that they can successfully work from home. It isn't employees responsibility to support failing businesses who refuse to change their business model to reflect the changes. Likewise, some people have immune compromised family members and forcing them back into the office, can greatly impact that family members health. If an employee is under preforming, they should be terminated.


NP. I disagree with your premise. WFH 100% was an extreme struggle in the beginning, then we limped along and eventually got better at it. But then as time wore on, it got harder again. New employees came on and basically crashed and burned. They had no contacts, couldn't reach people, couldn't get their work done and didn't integrate well. People just don't network well remotely. Almost 4 years later, about 30% of our office is new hires since 2020. We don't have adequate fed collaboration tools. And the ones we do have? They're FOIAable. Who wants new reporters reading every chat they wrote to coworkers?

Fed managers also have pretty much no tools to get their employees to get their work done remotely. I did put people on PIPs but it was a full time job. Whereas in person PIPs are much easier to manage. Fed managers can't see if their employees are working. We often have long term deliverables. Bob says he's working SO hard (and even shows a few docs/pages complete)! But then completely drops the ball and you don't find out until certain drafts are due.

So to say that feds should RTO, it's not the same as private sector RTO. Private sector can fire very easily.


np, I see what you are saying and i don't disagree with some of it but... training new staff is your job, not mine. why should i spend two hours every day just because you didn't plan your job correctly? Your entire second paragraph is, again, your job too. The fact you are unable to handle your staff, shouldn't be my problem. you need to move on from "i have to SEE you to MANAGE you" approach. Those days are done and gone.


+1 to the part about the second paragraph. The PP sounds like a terrible manager. Seriously it's not that hard to set deliverables and deadlines and in person or remote shouldn't make a difference. If performance isn't up to par PIP and then terminate them. I also don't believe that these underperformed will all of a sudden become acceptable performers in the office. It's been my experience that good workers do good work wherever they decide to work.


I'm an excellent manager actually. Some differences: in office, employees stopped by and asked me more questions. When they got stuck they just asked. Remotely, they just sit on it and don't ask questions. I've even made myself available daily for "office hours" and they are afraid to ask. Our jobs are difficult and very technical. For my newest hire, I have a weekly meeting just with her, but it's still not enough. She lets things sit until our weekly meeting (there are team meetings as well, this one meeting is just us).

I'm not asking to see them to manage them. It's more the other way around. They can't work effectively unless they learn teamwork. And the way federal offices are set up (and our lack of collaboration tools), teamwork remotely isn't easy. As a manager I'm there to help them achieve their tasks and provide expert advice.

The guy that I fired was actually a good performer in office, but during the pandemic he just stopped doing work at all. I think he just couldn't focus at home.

I personally do a great job remotely, but I'm at a high enough level that I don't need any more networking. I know how to get my job done. Not all feds are at that level or have been in their jobs long enough. The feds who are at my level though, aren't sharing their expertise or knowledge.


I’m shocked that in 2023 your direct reports feel more comfortable physically going into your office/cube to ask a question versus asking you in a chat. Most younger people are very accustomed to electronic communications. What you describe is highly unusual and it’s also incredibly inefficient.


Eh, depends on how young. Drafting emails makes my college age kids nervous. I think while they are very used to electronic communications, it’s in an informal setting. First learning to communicate in a formal setting can be daunting and writing requests is always harder.

My kids vastly prefer office hours. Maybe it will be different after a few years in the office. But they also hate the idea of TW generally as a result of virtual schooling.


Very strange! Sounds like you’re not hiring quality people if they are nervous drafting emails. This doesn’t sound like it has much to do with WFH.


PP you response is indicative of why sometimes in person communications are better. Time for you to RTO.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:During the pandemic all these downtown businesses got lavish bailouts like PPP, etc. And now years later they still want even more subsidies? The world has moved on and nobody with a computer needs to commute anymore. Time for these laggards to adjust, or else we should also bring back the horse and carriage industry - fair is fair.


Let me try this..

"During the pandemic these downtown workers got extreme flexibilities to stay at home and even got checks in the mail from the government with no strings attached. And now years later they still want these benefits? The world has moved on and there is no need to stay separated at home anymore. Time for people to adjust, or else we should all keep movie theaters and restaurants and churches closed- fair is fair."


Here, lets try this:

Workers in the US and around the world have effectively shown that they can successfully work from home. It isn't employees responsibility to support failing businesses who refuse to change their business model to reflect the changes. Likewise, some people have immune compromised family members and forcing them back into the office, can greatly impact that family members health. If an employee is under preforming, they should be terminated.


NP. I disagree with your premise. WFH 100% was an extreme struggle in the beginning, then we limped along and eventually got better at it. But then as time wore on, it got harder again. New employees came on and basically crashed and burned. They had no contacts, couldn't reach people, couldn't get their work done and didn't integrate well. People just don't network well remotely. Almost 4 years later, about 30% of our office is new hires since 2020. We don't have adequate fed collaboration tools. And the ones we do have? They're FOIAable. Who wants new reporters reading every chat they wrote to coworkers?

Fed managers also have pretty much no tools to get their employees to get their work done remotely. I did put people on PIPs but it was a full time job. Whereas in person PIPs are much easier to manage. Fed managers can't see if their employees are working. We often have long term deliverables. Bob says he's working SO hard (and even shows a few docs/pages complete)! But then completely drops the ball and you don't find out until certain drafts are due.

So to say that feds should RTO, it's not the same as private sector RTO. Private sector can fire very easily.


np, I see what you are saying and i don't disagree with some of it but... training new staff is your job, not mine. why should i spend two hours every day just because you didn't plan your job correctly? Your entire second paragraph is, again, your job too. The fact you are unable to handle your staff, shouldn't be my problem. you need to move on from "i have to SEE you to MANAGE you" approach. Those days are done and gone.


+1 to the part about the second paragraph. The PP sounds like a terrible manager. Seriously it's not that hard to set deliverables and deadlines and in person or remote shouldn't make a difference. If performance isn't up to par PIP and then terminate them. I also don't believe that these underperformed will all of a sudden become acceptable performers in the office. It's been my experience that good workers do good work wherever they decide to work.


I'm an excellent manager actually. Some differences: in office, employees stopped by and asked me more questions. When they got stuck they just asked. Remotely, they just sit on it and don't ask questions. I've even made myself available daily for "office hours" and they are afraid to ask. Our jobs are difficult and very technical. For my newest hire, I have a weekly meeting just with her, but it's still not enough. She lets things sit until our weekly meeting (there are team meetings as well, this one meeting is just us).

I'm not asking to see them to manage them. It's more the other way around. They can't work effectively unless they learn teamwork. And the way federal offices are set up (and our lack of collaboration tools), teamwork remotely isn't easy. As a manager I'm there to help them achieve their tasks and provide expert advice.

The guy that I fired was actually a good performer in office, but during the pandemic he just stopped doing work at all. I think he just couldn't focus at home.

I personally do a great job remotely, but I'm at a high enough level that I don't need any more networking. I know how to get my job done. Not all feds are at that level or have been in their jobs long enough. The feds who are at my level though, aren't sharing their expertise or knowledge.


I’m shocked that in 2023 your direct reports feel more comfortable physically going into your office/cube to ask a question versus asking you in a chat. Most younger people are very accustomed to electronic communications. What you describe is highly unusual and it’s also incredibly inefficient.


Eh, depends on how young. Drafting emails makes my college age kids nervous. I think while they are very used to electronic communications, it’s in an informal setting. First learning to communicate in a formal setting can be daunting and writing requests is always harder.

My kids vastly prefer office hours. Maybe it will be different after a few years in the office. But they also hate the idea of TW generally as a result of virtual schooling.


Older manager here with teenage kids. All of the above is what I see at work and at home. This whole thing about younger people liking technology and utilizing collaboration tools is not what I have experienced either. And, it is also not as if every new person we bring on, is young. I’ve hired people from their twenties through fifties.
post reply Forum Index » Jobs and Careers
Message Quick Reply
Go to: