Are you suggesting that no agency has made changes to the onsite work requirements since the initial email came out? |
Wow. The anti-semitism on this thread is quite something. And not a good something. |
All it takes is an EO from President Biden. This isn’t important to the President. Also, I believe the House passed something related to federal employee RTO and the Senate refused to take it up. This latest outburst by Zients is a nothing burger. |
Taxpayers prefer accountability. |
If the agencies did what you are suggesting this latest whining from Zients is unnecessary and therefore moot. |
I’m sure some have, but many managers have been exercising discretion as to how often their employees need to be in the office. At this point it’s been 4 years, if you’ve been working from home 4 days a week that entire time it’s hard to make a persuasive argument that you now need to be in the office 3 days a week. If your position is truly forward facing or is dependent on in person collaboration, you have long since been back in the office the majority of the time. |
What I'm saying is that what happened is exactly what the emails said- some agencies made a change, but not all did. He is encouraging the rest to follow suit. |
The WH wants employees back in the buildings 5 days per pay period, some agencies have met this target and many have not. OMB is monitoring the data on badge swipes bi-weekly. They are having conversations about all of this privately, they are also putting out some of this information publicly. Seems like some of you don’t understand the strategy. |
Yes— if the president had a cabinet meeting (or picked up the phone) and said this is a priority to me for the following reasons that does seem different. But doesn’t that seem unlikely? And it’s unlikely for the same reason that Zients’ memo is dumb. |
It honestly does not at all seem that unlikely. This is politics and the CoS job is to take the hit. The president is up for reelection and doesn't want to directly piss off the federal workforce. He absolutely does want to appease opponents where he can, and boost the economy where he can. The President has every reason to be thrilled if there was a dramatic increase in onsite federal work. |
How do you know that the President hasn’t had a cabinet meeting or picked up the phone to say exactly this, and that the current emails and articles aren’t part of the implementation of that plan? |
That makes no sense. If your secretary wants more RTO a memo from Zients doesn’t change anything— it’s up to the Secretary to figure out how to accomplish that. If there are bargaining issues about RTO the memo doesn’t make them go away. Employees aren’t going to say “oh well since it’s not just the Secretary but the WH CoS who wants us in the office we will gladly return”. |
Lol. You’re the one who said it was an OPM rule when it isn’t. That’s not my fault. WH staffers across successive admins have poorly understood how the government works and thought that the WH has unilateral power to do whatever it wants with agencies. It hasn’t worked out well for the admins or anyone else. Agencies, including agency heads, have legal authorities. Collective bargaining and other agreements have legal power. Employees’ work relationships are with their agency. Implementation happens at an agency level. OPM recognizes all of this. Biden has been pushing for RTO for two years. If they had a better tool (at least one that doesn’t have many more downsides than upsides) they would have used it by now. So they are stuck with nagging agency heads through an email. And, as was my original point in all of this, agency heads and their staff can proceed however they see fit. Which has been non-implementation. Just read this: https://www.politico.com/newsletters/west-wing-playbook/2023/11/10/bidens-wfh-headache-00126632 |
The fact that there has not been a hint of suggestion that has happened seems like strong evidence it hasn’t. (I’m not suggesting Zients is somehow going rogue, just that this is not coming from Biden) The suggestion that this is all an elaborate scheme because Biden wants credit for forcing feds back to work but not blame for forcing feds back to work seems pretty unlikely to me. But in any case my point was simply that agency head could put less weight on what Zients says than what the President says— I’m not trying to prove what has actually happened. |
+1 |