Decentralization of fed govt begins: HHS employees eligible for permanent remote work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we talk about a mass exodus, read the agreement carefully.

The condition for granting remote work is "The employee’s duties require less than 16 hours per bi-weekly pay period at the agency worksite."

And you know who gets to decide that? Management. There is nothing in there about clear criteria for when "duties require."

I think maybe wait and see how many people actually get approved.

Eh. For HHS, who needs to go to the worksite except for people in a lab? They're office jobs.

I'm not taking a position on what jobs require onsite presence. I'm just pointing out that management has full discretion to make the call. And we know that MANY organizations have decided that "office jobs" still require a certain amount of onsite presence.

I wouldn't expect the floodgates to open based on this union agreement.

And those managers will lose employees to other offices in HHS where WFH will be permanent. Good luck for those dumb managers. The floodgates will be opening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The NTEU just won what looks like permanent WFH for eligible HHS employees:

https://www.nteu.org/~/media/Files/nteu/docs/public/hhs/2022/102622hhs-workplace-flexibilities-mou.pdf?la=en

And here they said this would never happen. How many people will now immediately be thinking about ditching the DMV because of traffic, HCOL, rising crime, etc.? HHS is a huge employer, especially in MoCo. How badly could MoCo get hammered if people flee since MoCo relies so much on govt jobs because the county just cannot grow its economy? If govt workers start fleeing en masse due to permanent remote work, this may make Thrive 2050 an awful idea.

There are so many implications here given that the HHS may be letting the cat out of the bag for other agencies to follow suit. So many areas of the country to potentially move to with far lower costs for families and better schools.

MoCo is definitely screwed. NIH is the single largest employer, private or public, with 17,000+ employees.
https://commerce.maryland.gov/Documents/ResearchDocument/MajorEmployersInMontgomeryCounty.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we talk about a mass exodus, read the agreement carefully.

The condition for granting remote work is "The employee’s duties require less than 16 hours per bi-weekly pay period at the agency worksite."

And you know who gets to decide that? Management. There is nothing in there about clear criteria for when "duties require."

I think maybe wait and see how many people actually get approved.

Eh. For HHS, who needs to go to the worksite except for people in a lab? They're office jobs.

I'm not taking a position on what jobs require onsite presence. I'm just pointing out that management has full discretion to make the call. And we know that MANY organizations have decided that "office jobs" still require a certain amount of onsite presence.

I wouldn't expect the floodgates to open based on this union agreement.

NIH is a lot different than most federal agencies, because it relies on a lot of people with PhDs who may also have spouses with PhDs. This opens up the potential for them to hire and retain highly qualified people who do highly technical work that mostly involves solitary analytical work and report writing who may otherwise be constrained to apply for and/or work at NIH because perhaps their spouse is pursuing a teaching career at UC Berkeley or something. NIH has always had looser barriers to employment and engagement with academic and industry than other agencies. I can see a lot of NIH technical employees leave the area as a result, which would create a further drag on the county’s small biotech sector. The Bay Area, Seattle, and Boston are poised to benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NTEU just won what looks like permanent WFH for eligible HHS employees:

https://www.nteu.org/~/media/Files/nteu/docs/public/hhs/2022/102622hhs-workplace-flexibilities-mou.pdf?la=en

And here they said this would never happen. How many people will now immediately be thinking about ditching the DMV because of traffic, HCOL, rising crime, etc.? HHS is a huge employer, especially in MoCo. How badly could MoCo get hammered if people flee since MoCo relies so much on govt jobs because the county just cannot grow its economy? If govt workers start fleeing en masse due to permanent remote work, this may make Thrive 2050 an awful idea.

There are so many implications here given that the HHS may be letting the cat out of the bag for other agencies to follow suit. So many areas of the country to potentially move to with far lower costs for families and better schools.

MoCo is definitely screwed. NIH is the single largest employer, private or public, with 17,000+ employees.
https://commerce.maryland.gov/Documents/ResearchDocument/MajorEmployersInMontgomeryCounty.pdf

Yup, exactly my thoughts too. NIH could be significantly impacted, and many are now free to move outta MoCo for lower costs of living.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we talk about a mass exodus, read the agreement carefully.

The condition for granting remote work is "The employee’s duties require less than 16 hours per bi-weekly pay period at the agency worksite."

And you know who gets to decide that? Management. There is nothing in there about clear criteria for when "duties require."

I think maybe wait and see how many people actually get approved.

Eh. For HHS, who needs to go to the worksite except for people in a lab? They're office jobs.

I'm not taking a position on what jobs require onsite presence. I'm just pointing out that management has full discretion to make the call. And we know that MANY organizations have decided that "office jobs" still require a certain amount of onsite presence.

I wouldn't expect the floodgates to open based on this union agreement.

NIH is a lot different than most federal agencies, because it relies on a lot of people with PhDs who may also have spouses with PhDs. This opens up the potential for them to hire and retain highly qualified people who do highly technical work that mostly involves solitary analytical work and report writing who may otherwise be constrained to apply for and/or work at NIH because perhaps their spouse is pursuing a teaching career at UC Berkeley or something. NIH has always had looser barriers to employment and engagement with academic and industry than other agencies. I can see a lot of NIH technical employees leave the area as a result, which would create a further drag on the county’s small biotech sector. The Bay Area, Seattle, and Boston are poised to benefit.

I could see some folks leaving because of two body problems, but just like you pointed out, the places these people might want to move are almost never places that are cheaper than the DMV.

PhDs don't, as a rule, want to be out in the country. They want to be around other PhDs. Ask anyone who works at a rural university how much harder they have to work to recruit good candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone likes living out in the country. I tried it for several years. It was not for me.

LOL. The choice here is not DMV vs "the country" necessarily.
There are lots of other metro areas to live in that have a lower cost of living and far less traffic that the DMV.

Traffic doesn’t matter so much if you work from home. We work from home and can get most of our errands done in under two miles, our kids can walk to their schools and we can easily get into the city for sports and entertainment. There are areas with a lower cost of living but it’s not that much lower any longer. The trade off is often lower-rated schools, less access to good doctors, a fraction of academic and cultural opportunities, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we talk about a mass exodus, read the agreement carefully.

The condition for granting remote work is "The employee’s duties require less than 16 hours per bi-weekly pay period at the agency worksite."

And you know who gets to decide that? Management. There is nothing in there about clear criteria for when "duties require."

I think maybe wait and see how many people actually get approved.

Eh. For HHS, who needs to go to the worksite except for people in a lab? They're office jobs.

I'm not taking a position on what jobs require onsite presence. I'm just pointing out that management has full discretion to make the call. And we know that MANY organizations have decided that "office jobs" still require a certain amount of onsite presence.

I wouldn't expect the floodgates to open based on this union agreement.

NIH is a lot different than most federal agencies, because it relies on a lot of people with PhDs who may also have spouses with PhDs. This opens up the potential for them to hire and retain highly qualified people who do highly technical work that mostly involves solitary analytical work and report writing who may otherwise be constrained to apply for and/or work at NIH because perhaps their spouse is pursuing a teaching career at UC Berkeley or something. NIH has always had looser barriers to employment and engagement with academic and industry than other agencies. I can see a lot of NIH technical employees leave the area as a result, which would create a further drag on the county’s small biotech sector. The Bay Area, Seattle, and Boston are poised to benefit.

Not just NIH, but other HHS agencies as well. Once back to work in person was announced, almost 20% of my division left for 100% remote in the biopharm industry, and received raises on top of remote. It's hard to find people with Masters or PhDs to work for fed salaries these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we talk about a mass exodus, read the agreement carefully.

The condition for granting remote work is "The employee’s duties require less than 16 hours per bi-weekly pay period at the agency worksite."

And you know who gets to decide that? Management. There is nothing in there about clear criteria for when "duties require."

I think maybe wait and see how many people actually get approved.

Eh. For HHS, who needs to go to the worksite except for people in a lab? They're office jobs.

I'm not taking a position on what jobs require onsite presence. I'm just pointing out that management has full discretion to make the call. And we know that MANY organizations have decided that "office jobs" still require a certain amount of onsite presence.

I wouldn't expect the floodgates to open based on this union agreement.

NIH is a lot different than most federal agencies, because it relies on a lot of people with PhDs who may also have spouses with PhDs. This opens up the potential for them to hire and retain highly qualified people who do highly technical work that mostly involves solitary analytical work and report writing who may otherwise be constrained to apply for and/or work at NIH because perhaps their spouse is pursuing a teaching career at UC Berkeley or something. NIH has always had looser barriers to employment and engagement with academic and industry than other agencies. I can see a lot of NIH technical employees leave the area as a result, which would create a further drag on the county’s small biotech sector. The Bay Area, Seattle, and Boston are poised to benefit.

I could see some folks leaving because of two body problems, but just like you pointed out, the places these people might want to move are almost never places that are cheaper than the DMV.

PhDs don't, as a rule, want to be out in the country. They want to be around other PhDs. Ask anyone who works at a rural university how much harder they have to work to recruit good candidates.

It’s not just the two body problem. They would also certainly prefer to be in larger biotech job centers as it would facilitate better career growth. Montgomery County does not have a research university. Montgomery County does not have physical presence of many large pharma/biotech firms. I think the only real research hospital is NIH. The locations of all of these things have been intentionally dispersed throughout the county, including Gaithersburg, Rockville and now east County, instead of centralized around the NIH and Bethesda so there are no strong agglomeration effects. I think it will be a real problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone likes living out in the country. I tried it for several years. It was not for me.

LOL. The choice here is not DMV vs "the country" necessarily.
There are lots of other metro areas to live in that have a lower cost of living and far less traffic that the DMV.

Traffic doesn’t matter so much if you work from home. We work from home and can get most of our errands done in under two miles, our kids can walk to their schools and we can easily get into the city for sports and entertainment. There are areas with a lower cost of living but it’s not that much lower any longer. The trade off is often lower-rated schools, less access to good doctors, a fraction of academic and cultural opportunities, etc.

Taxes matter though. Just by moving outta MoCo you can save a ton on taxes. Plenty of other areas in MD with everything you mention, plus better schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we talk about a mass exodus, read the agreement carefully.

The condition for granting remote work is "The employee’s duties require less than 16 hours per bi-weekly pay period at the agency worksite."

And you know who gets to decide that? Management. There is nothing in there about clear criteria for when "duties require."

I think maybe wait and see how many people actually get approved.

Eh. For HHS, who needs to go to the worksite except for people in a lab? They're office jobs.

I'm not taking a position on what jobs require onsite presence. I'm just pointing out that management has full discretion to make the call. And we know that MANY organizations have decided that "office jobs" still require a certain amount of onsite presence.

I wouldn't expect the floodgates to open based on this union agreement.

NIH is a lot different than most federal agencies, because it relies on a lot of people with PhDs who may also have spouses with PhDs. This opens up the potential for them to hire and retain highly qualified people who do highly technical work that mostly involves solitary analytical work and report writing who may otherwise be constrained to apply for and/or work at NIH because perhaps their spouse is pursuing a teaching career at UC Berkeley or something. NIH has always had looser barriers to employment and engagement with academic and industry than other agencies. I can see a lot of NIH technical employees leave the area as a result, which would create a further drag on the county’s small biotech sector. The Bay Area, Seattle, and Boston are poised to benefit.

? The cost of living in the Bay Area (and probably Boston) is much much higher than in DC. They may leave for CA for the weather, but not for the col.

-former Bay Area resident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone likes living out in the country. I tried it for several years. It was not for me.

LOL. The choice here is not DMV vs "the country" necessarily.
There are lots of other metro areas to live in that have a lower cost of living and far less traffic that the DMV.

Traffic doesn’t matter so much if you work from home. We work from home and can get most of our errands done in under two miles, our kids can walk to their schools and we can easily get into the city for sports and entertainment. There are areas with a lower cost of living but it’s not that much lower any longer. The trade off is often lower-rated schools, less access to good doctors, a fraction of academic and cultural opportunities, etc.

Taxes matter though. Just by moving outta MoCo you can save a ton on taxes. Plenty of other areas in MD with everything you mention, plus better schools.

? every county in MD has county taxes, and MoCo isn't even the highest. And MoCo has the best schools in MD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we talk about a mass exodus, read the agreement carefully.

The condition for granting remote work is "The employee’s duties require less than 16 hours per bi-weekly pay period at the agency worksite."

And you know who gets to decide that? Management. There is nothing in there about clear criteria for when "duties require."

I think maybe wait and see how many people actually get approved.

Eh. For HHS, who needs to go to the worksite except for people in a lab? They're office jobs.

I'm not taking a position on what jobs require onsite presence. I'm just pointing out that management has full discretion to make the call. And we know that MANY organizations have decided that "office jobs" still require a certain amount of onsite presence.

I wouldn't expect the floodgates to open based on this union agreement.

NIH is a lot different than most federal agencies, because it relies on a lot of people with PhDs who may also have spouses with PhDs. This opens up the potential for them to hire and retain highly qualified people who do highly technical work that mostly involves solitary analytical work and report writing who may otherwise be constrained to apply for and/or work at NIH because perhaps their spouse is pursuing a teaching career at UC Berkeley or something. NIH has always had looser barriers to employment and engagement with academic and industry than other agencies. I can see a lot of NIH technical employees leave the area as a result, which would create a further drag on the county’s small biotech sector. The Bay Area, Seattle, and Boston are poised to benefit.

? The cost of living in the Bay Area (and probably Boston) is much much higher than in DC. They may leave for CA for the weather, but not for the col.

-former Bay Area resident.

You would leave for the job opportunities/career growth and accept the higher COL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we talk about a mass exodus, read the agreement carefully.

The condition for granting remote work is "The employee’s duties require less than 16 hours per bi-weekly pay period at the agency worksite."

And you know who gets to decide that? Management. There is nothing in there about clear criteria for when "duties require."

I think maybe wait and see how many people actually get approved.

Eh. For HHS, who needs to go to the worksite except for people in a lab? They're office jobs.

I'm not taking a position on what jobs require onsite presence. I'm just pointing out that management has full discretion to make the call. And we know that MANY organizations have decided that "office jobs" still require a certain amount of onsite presence.

I wouldn't expect the floodgates to open based on this union agreement.

NIH is a lot different than most federal agencies, because it relies on a lot of people with PhDs who may also have spouses with PhDs. This opens up the potential for them to hire and retain highly qualified people who do highly technical work that mostly involves solitary analytical work and report writing who may otherwise be constrained to apply for and/or work at NIH because perhaps their spouse is pursuing a teaching career at UC Berkeley or something. NIH has always had looser barriers to employment and engagement with academic and industry than other agencies. I can see a lot of NIH technical employees leave the area as a result, which would create a further drag on the county’s small biotech sector. The Bay Area, Seattle, and Boston are poised to benefit.

? The cost of living in the Bay Area (and probably Boston) is much much higher than in DC. They may leave for CA for the weather, but not for the col.

-former Bay Area resident.

You would leave for the job opportunities/career growth and accept the higher COL.

no, many would not. In fact, many turn down the move because of the insane col.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we talk about a mass exodus, read the agreement carefully.

The condition for granting remote work is "The employee’s duties require less than 16 hours per bi-weekly pay period at the agency worksite."

And you know who gets to decide that? Management. There is nothing in there about clear criteria for when "duties require."

I think maybe wait and see how many people actually get approved.

Eh. For HHS, who needs to go to the worksite except for people in a lab? They're office jobs.

I'm not taking a position on what jobs require onsite presence. I'm just pointing out that management has full discretion to make the call. And we know that MANY organizations have decided that "office jobs" still require a certain amount of onsite presence.

I wouldn't expect the floodgates to open based on this union agreement.

NIH is a lot different than most federal agencies, because it relies on a lot of people with PhDs who may also have spouses with PhDs. This opens up the potential for them to hire and retain highly qualified people who do highly technical work that mostly involves solitary analytical work and report writing who may otherwise be constrained to apply for and/or work at NIH because perhaps their spouse is pursuing a teaching career at UC Berkeley or something. NIH has always had looser barriers to employment and engagement with academic and industry than other agencies. I can see a lot of NIH technical employees leave the area as a result, which would create a further drag on the county’s small biotech sector. The Bay Area, Seattle, and Boston are poised to benefit.

? The cost of living in the Bay Area (and probably Boston) is much much higher than in DC. They may leave for CA for the weather, but not for the col.

-former Bay Area resident.

You would leave for the job opportunities/career growth and accept the higher COL.

no, many would not. In fact, many turn down the move because of the insane col.

Not all decisions are that simple. If one spouse is underemployed, which is common, then the wage gains the household could receive by moving could offset COL difference. But the DMV is also a high COL area. The main different between the two is what you value for QOL: do you value more space or better weather/lifestyle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not everyone likes living out in the country. I tried it for several years. It was not for me.

LOL. The choice here is not DMV vs "the country" necessarily.
There are lots of other metro areas to live in that have a lower cost of living and far less traffic that the DMV.

Traffic doesn’t matter so much if you work from home. We work from home and can get most of our errands done in under two miles, our kids can walk to their schools and we can easily get into the city for sports and entertainment. There are areas with a lower cost of living but it’s not that much lower any longer. The trade off is often lower-rated schools, less access to good doctors, a fraction of academic and cultural opportunities, etc.

Taxes matter though. Just by moving outta MoCo you can save a ton on taxes. Plenty of other areas in MD with everything you mention, plus better schools.

? every county in MD has county taxes, and MoCo isn't even the highest. And MoCo has the best schools in MD.

MoCo is tied for the highest income taxes in the state. MoCo's property taxes are high because you need to consider property taxes relative the price of homes. There are other areas to move that are cheaper and have better schools. MoCo no longer has the best schools, they're going down the toilet. Besides, MD is just one option. Plenty of areas of the country to move where even more savings are possible to signficantly reduced tax burdens, lower COL, and less traffic. Traffic still does matter in day to day life. It is annoying as hell getting stuck in yet another traffic jam on a random Tuesday evening on 495.