Biden wants RTO

[Anonymous]

[mastodon]

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

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).

You prove my point. Checking email is not work. That is goofing off. Walking dog, picking up kids. Once again out of touch. Real Work should be 8am to 630 pm in office five days a week with lunch at desk minutes on good days. That is Goldman, Chase, big law, big 4. When I worked in person at a major investment bank I hit 50 hours on Thursday and I still have to do a vacation Day of wanted off Friday.

Back in 2002 huge project I was in office physically 3,000 hours. In 2021 I wfh around 700-800 hours

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[mastodon]

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

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).

You prove my point. Checking email is not work. That is goofing off. Walking dog, picking up kids. Once again out of touch. Real Work should be 8am to 630 pm in office five days a week with lunch at desk minutes on good days. That is Goldman, Chase, big law, big 4. When I worked in person at a major investment bank I hit 50 hours on Thursday and I still have to do a vacation Day of wanted off Friday.

Back in 2002 huge project I was in office physically 3,000 hours. In 2021 I wfh around 700-800 hours

You were paid the big bucks to go with those hours. What are you moaning about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[mastodon]

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

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).

You prove my point. Checking email is not work. That is goofing off. Walking dog, picking up kids. Once again out of touch. Real Work should be 8am to 630 pm in office five days a week with lunch at desk minutes on good days. That is Goldman, Chase, big law, big 4. When I worked in person at a major investment bank I hit 50 hours on Thursday and I still have to do a vacation Day of wanted off Friday.

Back in 2002 huge project I was in office physically 3,000 hours. In 2021 I wfh around 700-800 hours

You don’t understand the difference between a government job that can be solely performed using a laptop and a person working on a trading desk at Goldman or a person waiting for in-person pitchbook feedback at chase??

[Anonymous]

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.

+1

The smart places have since adapted (e.g. creating a daily delivery lunch special within a certain radius) or created in-person draws like wifi, a table with kids toys/puzzles, etc.

Trying to turn back time on telework to save the restaurant industry is the liberal equivalent of the coal industry trying to move us backward regarding energy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Childish bickering is shameful folks. You are not in 3rd grade.

Thanks room mom. Unfortunately this issue negatively affects thousands of federal workers and we now see the reasoning behind RTO is to simply appease the moneyed class at the expense of labor.

You don't have to like the reason; you just have to comply with it. Do you fight your management like this whenever they decide on something work related that you disagree with? Or is this somewhat "special"?

This is a very dangerous line of thinking. I’m skeptical of anyone who doesn’t want individual employees to think for themselves. If everyone just complied we’d never have fair labor laws, parental leave, etc. This is spoken like an abusive manager or employer who want everyone to just shut up and do what is to their (employer’s) advantage.

[Anonymous]

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.

+1

The smart places have since adapted (e.g. creating a daily delivery lunch special within a certain radius) or created in-person draws like wifi, a table with kids toys/puzzles, etc.

Trying to turn back time on telework to save the restaurant industry is the liberal equivalent of the coal industry trying to move us backward regarding energy.

+2. You just can't get some people to understand that the work culture has changed or even get them to understand what the concept of a work culture even is.

[Anonymous]

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.

Actually it's not. Welcoming new staff is everyone's job. I even assign different tasks to each one of my employees to train the new employee on. This lets them all meet the new employee too. Most of what my new hires struggle with is meeting contacts (needed for their jobs) in other divisions. I don't manage those other divisions and can't force them to play well in the sandbox.

So then make a RTO plan that is based on actual need, not just some arbitrary schedule that is clearly being swayed by external economic interests.

For instance, we have new hires onboarding on X date. We need 2 people on-site from X date - X date for training/mentoring and we will be doing a large group all hands meeting on X date.

My DH is private sector at a large organization and this is how his office works. He actually doesn’t mind the days he goes in because he knows he will see people he works with and there is a defined reason to be in-person. It’s a nice break from being at home and isn’t just forced RTO because the powers that be need him to buy a sandwich. In fact his office usually caters lunch and even sends packaged snacks/treats home, which obviously government can’t do. But this goes more to the point that private sector RTO is not comparable to fed gov RTO in that benefits and perks are better with private offices.

The thing most people are objecting to is the broad spectrum everyone must be in office 2-3 days/week regardless of work tasks, and then sitting in a cubicle (or small office if you’re lucky) in some old decrepit federal building just to call into a Teams meeting you could have taken from the comfort of your nice home office seems punitive and like it’s about something beyond accomplishing job duties.

During the pandemic my agency actually asked for volunteers to handle certain in-office workloads (that we knew truly could not be done virtually) and we had sufficient coverage. Those people went on to be given monetary awards, which is 100% appropriate. Everyone was ok with it because it wasn’t an arbitrary across the board decision.

[Anonymous]

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.

Have you ever thought about the fact that some (many of us) don’t want to become managers? I have 3 kids including 1 with special needs. I am a high performer with excellent performance reviews, but at the end of the day I’m just here for the flexibility and benefits. Despite encouragement to try for a management role, I have declined to pursue that path. I would rather do substantive work than deal with timesheets and performance issues. Not to mention with pay compression, moving into a managerial position is becoming an increasingly less appealing career path. So no wonder we keep ending up with only these unhappy managers who are the only ones who want to move up to these positions for minimal pay increase.

They can’t seem to adapt to the new more virtual work environment so they blame it on the workers who are busy carrying out the agency’s mission while insulting us for not wanting their-important manager position and blaming us for their inability to train new hires.

Maybe you need to look in the mirror when trying to figure out why you’re struggling at your job.

[Anonymous]

*their self-important

[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.

Have you ever thought about the fact that some (many of us) don’t want to become managers? I have 3 kids including 1 with special needs. I am a high performer with excellent performance reviews, but at the end of the day I’m just here for the flexibility and benefits. Despite encouragement to try for a management role, I have declined to pursue that path. I would rather do substantive work than deal with timesheets and performance issues. Not to mention with pay compression, moving into a managerial position is becoming an increasingly less appealing career path. So no wonder we keep ending up with only these unhappy managers who are the only ones who want to move up to these positions for minimal pay increase.

They can’t seem to adapt to the new more virtual work environment so they blame it on the workers who are busy carrying out the agency’s mission while insulting us for not wanting their-important manager position and blaming us for their inability to train new hires.

Maybe you need to look in the mirror when trying to figure out why you’re struggling at your job.

You are making the manager’s point, obstinate and unreasonable. Hopefully a RTO edict comes down at some point so they don’t have to keep arguing with people like you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[mastodon]

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

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).

You prove my point. Checking email is not work. That is goofing off. Walking dog, picking up kids. Once again out of touch. Real Work should be 8am to 630 pm in office five days a week with lunch at desk minutes on good days. That is Goldman, Chase, big law, big 4. When I worked in person at a major investment bank I hit 50 hours on Thursday and I still have to do a vacation Day of wanted off Friday.

Back in 2002 huge project I was in office physically 3,000 hours. In 2021 I wfh around 700-800 hours

Great! Let’s pay feds equivalent to these employers if we’re going to expect similar work hours.

It’s insane to me whenever anyone cites private sector work expectations without being honest about the pay differential. I make 140k as a gov attorney which is a fraction of what my big law friends make. I made that choice for the work life balance. I don’t want to work 50 hour weeks and be chained to a desk, and certainly wouldn’t do so for $140k in today’s economy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[mastodon]

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

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).

You prove my point. Checking email is not work. That is goofing off. Walking dog, picking up kids. Once again out of touch. Real Work should be 8am to 630 pm in office five days a week with lunch at desk minutes on good days. That is Goldman, Chase, big law, big 4. When I worked in person at a major investment bank I hit 50 hours on Thursday and I still have to do a vacation Day of wanted off Friday.

Back in 2002 huge project I was in office physically 3,000 hours. In 2021 I wfh around 700-800 hours

Great! Let’s pay feds equivalent to these employers if we’re going to expect similar work hours.

It’s insane to me whenever anyone cites private sector work expectations without being honest about the pay differential. I make 140k as a gov attorney which is a fraction of what my big law friends make. I made that choice for the work life balance. I don’t want to work 50 hour weeks and be chained to a desk, and certainly wouldn’t do so for $140k in today’s economy.

I also joined the government partially for work life balance. For the first 15 years of my federal career I was in the office around 4 days a week, now they’re asking me to come back 2-3 days. Still just 40 hours a week for my GS14 salary. I understand it’s not ideal but all of the people in the past 80 pages of threads saying everyone would leave and this is intolerable sound kind of crazy to me. It’s still a good deal with work life balance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[mastodon]

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

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).

You prove my point. Checking email is not work. That is goofing off. Walking dog, picking up kids. Once again out of touch. Real Work should be 8am to 630 pm in office five days a week with lunch at desk minutes on good days. That is Goldman, Chase, big law, big 4. When I worked in person at a major investment bank I hit 50 hours on Thursday and I still have to do a vacation Day of wanted off Friday.

Back in 2002 huge project I was in office physically 3,000 hours. In 2021 I wfh around 700-800 hours

LOL. You expect me to believe that you never billed the time you spent reading your email? What a liar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[mastodon]

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

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).

You prove my point. Checking email is not work. That is goofing off. Walking dog, picking up kids. Once again out of touch. Real Work should be 8am to 630 pm in office five days a week with lunch at desk minutes on good days. That is Goldman, Chase, big law, big 4. When I worked in person at a major investment bank I hit 50 hours on Thursday and I still have to do a vacation Day of wanted off Friday.

Back in 2002 huge project I was in office physically 3,000 hours. In 2021 I wfh around 700-800 hours

Oh I didn't get that memo. More than 70% of our work is via emails. It was like this even before Covid, no different now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Childish bickering is shameful folks. You are not in 3rd grade.

Thanks room mom. Unfortunately this issue negatively affects thousands of federal workers and we now see the reasoning behind RTO is to simply appease the moneyed class at the expense of labor.

You don't have to like the reason; you just have to comply with it. Do you fight your management like this whenever they decide on something work related that you disagree with? Or is this somewhat "special"?

This is a very dangerous line of thinking. I’m skeptical of anyone who doesn’t want individual employees to think for themselves. If everyone just complied we’d never have fair labor laws, parental leave, etc. This is spoken like an abusive manager or employer who want everyone to just shut up and do what is to their (employer’s) advantage.

I hear you but you are really stretching it.