Federal Reserve RTO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is depressing. I used to work for the Fed, and I thought the staff was better than this. The answer to RTO is to form a union or strategically use leave to cover it? Thank goodness the Chair is more dedicated to the mission than those in it for an easy paycheck. Really, really disappointing.

Wow. Newsflash - you can be a union supporter AND support “the missiom.” There is a reason every single other financial agency has a union and it’s not that Fed workers are somehow more dedicated to the “mission.” Unless your view is that the “mission” means employees shouldn’t care about the terms and conditions of their employment.

I don’t understand why any of them have a union. As a PP said, unions are typically found where workers are abused and cannot effectively negotiate for themselves. I wouldn’t characterize $300k, a pension, a 401k, and lots of vacation and sick time for 40 hours of work in an individual office with a door as being abused. Also, the Fed has been VERY generous with WFH, including massive tolerance for parents with young children at home, during the pandemic. Your work conditions and pay are beyond compare for what you do.

They have a union to establish the terms and conditions of employment in a way that uses their collective influence and does not rest on the arbitrary whims of a manager. Not too hard to understand! Unions also protect against retaliation and unfair discipline - very important to maintain examiner integrity.

(Also - who is getting 300k?)

I have a couple of very close friends at the Fed, and we are very open about discussing compensation, and while they have tons of experience, they're not making anything close to 300K even with the sweet bonus. It's funny that figure keeps getting tossed around like everyone at the Fed is making that much.

Let me google that for you:
https://www.federalreserve.gov/careers-salary.htm
Now, I don't know how many people are at the top of the scale or close to it ($275) but I'd guess that more than a few attorneys and economists with long tenure are there.

Imagine what that kind of money could buy you in Kansas. We all need Fed jobs. Sign me up for this scam!

The board salaries aren’t much higher than the Kansas City RB salaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is depressing. I used to work for the Fed, and I thought the staff was better than this. The answer to RTO is to form a union or strategically use leave to cover it? Thank goodness the Chair is more dedicated to the mission than those in it for an easy paycheck. Really, really disappointing.

Wow. Newsflash - you can be a union supporter AND support “the missiom.” There is a reason every single other financial agency has a union and it’s not that Fed workers are somehow more dedicated to the “mission.” Unless your view is that the “mission” means employees shouldn’t care about the terms and conditions of their employment.

I don’t understand why any of them have a union. As a PP said, unions are typically found where workers are abused and cannot effectively negotiate for themselves. I wouldn’t characterize $300k, a pension, a 401k, and lots of vacation and sick time for 40 hours of work in an individual office with a door as being abused. Also, the Fed has been VERY generous with WFH, including massive tolerance for parents with young children at home, during the pandemic. Your work conditions and pay are beyond compare for what you do.

They have a union to establish the terms and conditions of employment in a way that uses their collective influence and does not rest on the arbitrary whims of a manager. Not too hard to understand! Unions also protect against retaliation and unfair discipline - very important to maintain examiner integrity.

(Also - who is getting 300k?)

I have a couple of very close friends at the Fed, and we are very open about discussing compensation, and while they have tons of experience, they're not making anything close to 300K even with the sweet bonus. It's funny that figure keeps getting tossed around like everyone at the Fed is making that much.

Let me google that for you:
https://www.federalreserve.gov/careers-salary.htm
Now, I don't know how many people are at the top of the scale or close to it ($275) but I'd guess that more than a few attorneys and economists with long tenure are there.

Imagine what that kind of money could buy you in Kansas. We all need Fed jobs. Sign me up for this scam!

The board salaries aren’t much higher than the Kansas City RB salaries.

Wrong. Salaries, bonuses, and benefits for the same work are significantly different at KC and the Board. If a Board employee takes a RB job and keeps their same salary, they typically have to assume more responsibility. For example, a senior analyst at the Board will become a manager at a RB. Or, a manager at the Board will become an AVP at a RB. And, those are not just title changes; they are large changes in responsibility. OP wants to have it both ways. On the one hand, pay and COL discrepancies are a barrier to DC hires, yet the RBs and the Board pay nearly the same? Both can't be true.

[Anonymous]

I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

I, a moderate who has voted for both parties, have been shocked to hear my “liberal” friends make jokes about having to go to an office so small businesses owners could stay in business. As if the federal government has no responsibility to care about them.

This is why people are hypocrites. They’re just some NIMBY jerks.

[Anonymous]

Totally agree about the community concerns. A prominent example is Metro (the subway). Federal government employees form the core of Metro ridership, which most/all agencies subsidize through employee vouchers. Without federal government employee ridership, Metro will need significant changes. For those who want to learn more, a simple google search on metro and federal government employees provides plenty of data and headlines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

Oh yes I am sure you are a BIG supporter of community development! Give me a break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree about the community concerns. A prominent example is Metro (the subway). Federal government employees form the core of Metro ridership, which most/all agencies subsidize through employee vouchers. Without federal government employee ridership, Metro will need significant changes. For those who want to learn more, a simple google search on metro and federal government employees provides plenty of data and headlines.

Metro is already back to pre-pandemic levels Tues-Th. Spare me your crocodile tears for “community concerns.” Perhaps to help metro we should get rid of parking and definitely parking subsidies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

I, a moderate who has voted for both parties, have been shocked to hear my “liberal” friends make jokes about having to go to an office so small businesses owners could stay in business. As if the federal government has no responsibility to care about them.

This is why people are hypocrites. They’re just some NIMBY jerks.

Yeah no, try again. I can support small business in my neighborhood when I WFH. “Maintaing shitty DC lunch counters downtown” is not part of the federal mission. I could equally say that the community minded thing is to reduce pollution by minimizing commutes with WFH. Or that with the additional 2 hr/day, federal workers are now able to contribute to their actual communities through volunteering and being active in schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree about the community concerns. A prominent example is Metro (the subway). Federal government employees form the core of Metro ridership, which most/all agencies subsidize through employee vouchers. Without federal government employee ridership, Metro will need significant changes. For those who want to learn more, a simple google search on metro and federal government employees provides plenty of data and headlines.

Metro is already back to pre-pandemic levels Tues-Th. Spare me your crocodile tears for “community concerns.” Perhaps to help metro we should get rid of parking and definitely parking subsidies?

You're confusing hybrid with remote. What you really want - as revealed upthread - is remote. Hybrid is essentially the old standard. And, as you say, it supports the metro area. Remote does not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

I, a moderate who has voted for both parties, have been shocked to hear my “liberal” friends make jokes about having to go to an office so small businesses owners could stay in business. As if the federal government has no responsibility to care about them.

This is why people are hypocrites. They’re just some NIMBY jerks.

Not the person you responded to, but, again, you're making the case for hybrid - essentially the pre-pandemic standard - not remote. As you say, when time is spent between your local community and downtown, both benefit.

Yeah no, try again. I can support small business in my neighborhood when I WFH. “Maintaing shitty DC lunch counters downtown” is not part of the federal mission. I could equally say that the community minded thing is to reduce pollution by minimizing commutes with WFH. Or that with the additional 2 hr/day, federal workers are now able to contribute to their actual communities through volunteering and being active in schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

I, a moderate who has voted for both parties, have been shocked to hear my “liberal” friends make jokes about having to go to an office so small businesses owners could stay in business. As if the federal government has no responsibility to care about them.

This is why people are hypocrites. They’re just some NIMBY jerks.

Yeah no, try again. I can support small business in my neighborhood when I WFH. “Maintaing shitty DC lunch counters downtown” is not part of the federal mission. I could equally say that the community minded thing is to reduce pollution by minimizing commutes with WFH. Or that with the additional 2 hr/day, federal workers are now able to contribute to their actual communities through volunteering and being active in schools.

Not the person you responded to, but, again, you're making the case for hybrid - essentially the pre-pandemic standard - not remote. As you say, when time is spent between your local community and downtown, both benefit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

Oh yes I am sure you are a BIG supporter of community development! Give me a break.

Your argument would be stronger if you addressed the concern, not the poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

I, a moderate who has voted for both parties, have been shocked to hear my “liberal” friends make jokes about having to go to an office so small businesses owners could stay in business. As if the federal government has no responsibility to care about them.

This is why people are hypocrites. They’re just some NIMBY jerks.

Yeah no, try again. I can support small business in my neighborhood when I WFH. “Maintaing shitty DC lunch counters downtown” is not part of the federal mission. I could equally say that the community minded thing is to reduce pollution by minimizing commutes with WFH. Or that with the additional 2 hr/day, federal workers are now able to contribute to their actual communities through volunteering and being active in schools.

Not the person you responded to, but, again, you're making the case for hybrid - essentially the pre-pandemic standard - not remote. As you say, when time is spent between your local community and downtown, both benefit.

They also make the case that people will gencerslly volunteer in schools when they are not commuting which is a big leap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

Why does the community have to be DC? Other communities matter too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really shocked and saddened by the movement to gut DC of DC-based positions. Typically, supporters of unions are strong community activists.

Federal government jobs are the core of DC employment. Yes, DC employment is somewhat diversified, but even many private firms are here because federal government functions are here. Perhaps, OP and their ilk represent a few jobs, but they are setting a dangerous precedent.In fact, they are using the CFPB as precedent for what they want. This is not about a few workers who want to take their goodies and leave DC. It is about a few people who want to start a trend to gut the area of its bedrock employment and economic well-being.

And, remember, a community is about more than home prices, it is also about local governments, schools, and small businesses. It is so highly ironic that both the CFPB and the Fed have a community development mandate, and yet, their staff are leading the charge to gut their own community.

This whole thread seems very employee focused with little concern about the institutions of government and the Metro area. What is a country to do when even its own stewards sit ready to undermine it?

Why does the community have to be DC? Other communities matter too.

Because DC is where the jobs have been, and therefore, much investment has been made on their behalf. Subways, airports, etc. are not transportable. Also, there are large human and physical “networks” that support an industry, which are not easily disassembled and moved elsewhere. If you don’t like DC, why don’t you change jobs and move? Why do you need to take a DC-based job elsewhere? If you went to Broadway and asked to perform your role virtually, they’d laugh at you.