OPM Guidance on COVID-19

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would everyone who can't possible take any sick leave do if they were sick with something else? Wouldn't you have to take an advance, LWOP, vacation?

Honestly, probably apply for for the voluntary leave transfer program, but now the program is going to get flooded with requests.

Also, it?s one thing to use up my leave (or advance leave) for my own and my children?s health. But being essentially forced to use leave because of quarantines in order to save older people seems unfair. Why should I burn up my accrued leave because of a virus that isn?t even likely to harm my family? The older people can use their leave to stay home, they have use or lose any way

It?s not just to save older white collar workers. It?s to save the 60 year old admin who is raising her grandkids or the 60 year old cleaner whose family abroad is dependent on her remitting her wages.

The lack of understanding of public health measures is really troubling here, and shows the need for much, much better communication. Mandatory telework and school closures are NOT quarantines. They are social distancing measures to slow the spread of the virus. The reason to slow the spread of the virus is not "just" for 60+ year olds. It's to keep the medical system from being completely overwhelmed ... which would mean that NOBODY could get ANY emergency care. Break your leg? Get cancer? Kid has a bad croup attack and needs medicines? Good luck with that while the hospitals are dealing with thousands of COVID19 patients.

But what is the end goal? It will be months before a vaccine is available- say you implement all these draconian measures to slow the spread- for how long? And who's to say as soon as you turn everyone loose again that the transmissions doesn't just resume again?

NP: The goal is to flatten the infection rate curve. If *everyone* gets this at the same time, our hospitals will be completely overrun with the serious cases. If we can spread out the infections until there is a vaccine and we know more about the virus and treatment, the hospitals are much less likely to have to turn people away. This will also lower the mortality rate.

Also, "Draconian?" Seriously? Working from home is Draconian?

Sure for you, not a big deal.. You get to work in your PJs and eat ice cream. But everything has consequences. Feds work from home ----> small businesses that depend on their business lay off workers. So now people are out of jobs just to slow the spread.

Are you trolling? Health and safety is a higher priority than jobs.

You'd really be ok losing YOUR job over this?

Right. People are going apoplectic about potentially having to take LWOP, which would mean they have a job to come back to, but are fine with lots of folks in the private sector losing their jobs.

It’s not “fine” for people in the private sector to lose jobs, but it is better than dying. Is this in dispute?

The problem is the people losing their jobs are by and large a different demographic than those who will die. You’re asking younger workers to lose pay (or worse their jobs) due to massive school/business shutdowns in order to save (mostly) older people from crippling our healthcare system. As a millennial, I feel like I’ve been screwed so many times. Graduated during a recession then started a family in recent years depleting my leave balance. I don’t want to start a generational war, but I sort of feel like society owes this younger generation instead of asking all of us to take massive financial hits to save the boomers, who by the way have largely voted for policies that have led to high student loans and people having to work in the gig economy without sick leave/health insurance. So I, for one, am willing to quarantine myself if needed to help save lives, but I’m not willing to sacrifice my family’s financial stability.

I am so sick and tired of millennial kids saying this. Nobody owes you nothing dumba$$. Make your own life.

The name calling makes you look real mature, boomer.

[Anonymous]

Had three trips coming up, three weeks in a row, and employer just called it. We went around and around and finally decided that we have to do our part in helping to not spread this and stay out. We already telework full time so I’m all set now.

[Anonymous]

I just want to know if my agency will actually expect me to be able to effectively telework while I’m, apparently, also going to be essentially homeschooling my children??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just want to know if my agency will actually expect me to be able to effectively telework while I’m, apparently, also going to be essentially homeschooling my children??

Homeschooling is amazingly efficient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would everyone who can't possible take any sick leave do if they were sick with something else? Wouldn't you have to take an advance, LWOP, vacation?

Honestly, probably apply for for the voluntary leave transfer program, but now the program is going to get flooded with requests.

Also, it?s one thing to use up my leave (or advance leave) for my own and my children?s health. But being essentially forced to use leave because of quarantines in order to save older people seems unfair. Why should I burn up my accrued leave because of a virus that isn?t even likely to harm my family? The older people can use their leave to stay home, they have use or lose any way

It?s not just to save older white collar workers. It?s to save the 60 year old admin who is raising her grandkids or the 60 year old cleaner whose family abroad is dependent on her remitting her wages.

The lack of understanding of public health measures is really troubling here, and shows the need for much, much better communication. Mandatory telework and school closures are NOT quarantines. They are social distancing measures to slow the spread of the virus. The reason to slow the spread of the virus is not "just" for 60+ year olds. It's to keep the medical system from being completely overwhelmed ... which would mean that NOBODY could get ANY emergency care. Break your leg? Get cancer? Kid has a bad croup attack and needs medicines? Good luck with that while the hospitals are dealing with thousands of COVID19 patients.

But what is the end goal? It will be months before a vaccine is available- say you implement all these draconian measures to slow the spread- for how long? And who's to say as soon as you turn everyone loose again that the transmissions doesn't just resume again?

NP: The goal is to flatten the infection rate curve. If *everyone* gets this at the same time, our hospitals will be completely overrun with the serious cases. If we can spread out the infections until there is a vaccine and we know more about the virus and treatment, the hospitals are much less likely to have to turn people away. This will also lower the mortality rate.

Also, "Draconian?" Seriously? Working from home is Draconian?

Sure for you, not a big deal.. You get to work in your PJs and eat ice cream. But everything has consequences. Feds work from home ----> small businesses that depend on their business lay off workers. So now people are out of jobs just to slow the spread.

Are you trolling? Health and safety is a higher priority than jobs.

You'd really be ok losing YOUR job over this?

Right. People are going apoplectic about potentially having to take LWOP, which would mean they have a job to come back to, but are fine with lots of folks in the private sector losing their jobs.

It’s not “fine” for people in the private sector to lose jobs, but it is better than dying. Is this in dispute?

The problem is the people losing their jobs are by and large a different demographic than those who will die. You’re asking younger workers to lose pay (or worse their jobs) due to massive school/business shutdowns in order to save (mostly) older people from crippling our healthcare system. As a millennial, I feel like I’ve been screwed so many times. Graduated during a recession then started a family in recent years depleting my leave balance. I don’t want to start a generational war, but I sort of feel like society owes this younger generation instead of asking all of us to take massive financial hits to save the boomers, who by the way have largely voted for policies that have led to high student loans and people having to work in the gig economy without sick leave/health insurance. So I, for one, am willing to quarantine myself if needed to help save lives, but I’m not willing to sacrifice my family’s financial stability.

My grandparents were born in 1916/1917 before the Spanish flu hit. No vaccines and plenty of quarantining. Dozens of their peers lost parents, aunts, uncles, siblings. They experienced the Stock Market Crash of 1929 as kids and World War II when starting their own families. They had it rough and not once did I hear them say they were owed anything. They saw the greater need for society in the sacrifices they were asked to make. We have lost that greater sense of community as a society. Maybe one silver lining is that this pandemic shows our vulnerability and may help bring that cohesion back. Many of us Gen-Xers started our careers during a recession too. You aren't the first in line for having setbacks. I think we need strong fiscal policy to ensure vulnerable citizens aren't devastated by this pandemic. But your calculating way of minimizing other people's lives is grotesque. I have no doubt that by the time your are 45, you will reread those words and shudder.

Use this as an opportunity to agitate for the things society needs - universal health care, sick leave and maternity leave. Your current approach is equivalent to a death panel.

Since I don’t have a registered profile, you can’t read my earlier posts, but I have been a loud advocate on here that we need a financial safety net for those without paid leave/an adequate balance of paid leaven or who will be severely financially affected by quarantines. My response was to those who are essentially saying “too bad” without any empathy for those of us who are facing potential hardship. I’m pointing out the inequity of expecting workers without paid leave or large leave balances (who by and large tend to be younger than the largely retired over 60 crowd) to take a huge financial hit for a generation largely responsible for voting into power people who have enacted policies that do not include a social safety net. I don’t think we can have a quarantine (or large spread social isolation) to protect the older generation without also having a financial support put in place for the working demographic. If you think that is equivalent to a “death panel” then you have poor reading comprehension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just want to know if my agency will actually expect me to be able to effectively telework while I’m, apparently, also going to be essentially homeschooling my children??

Nope! Instead you are expected to use up your vacation and advance more so you're in the hole as long as this goes on. Ah, such generous federal benefits!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want to know if my agency will actually expect me to be able to effectively telework while I’m, apparently, also going to be essentially homeschooling my children??

Nope! Instead you are expected to use up your vacation and advance more so you're in the hole as long as this goes on. Ah, such generous federal benefits!

And then the feds who are taking unpaid leave will have to stop paying their daycares, house cleaners, lawn people, etc. so we can collapse the whole local economy thanks to the party who loves “trickle down economics” only for the wealthy.

[Anonymous]

my agency has limited “non-essential” travel but my office has been going around in circles for the last week trying to define “essential”. It’s driving me bonkers that management can’t seem to figure this out. Supposed to travel next week and just want to know already!

[Anonymous]

My agency is moving to a 2 team system where only half of each office works in person at any given time and no mixing between teams. Assume it will be announced officially sometime soon; in planning stages now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want to know if my agency will actually expect me to be able to effectively telework while I’m, apparently, also going to be essentially homeschooling my children??

Nope! Instead you are expected to use up your vacation and advance more so you're in the hole as long as this goes on. Ah, such generous federal benefits!

Yeah, it’s actually against Federal telework policy to telework with kids under your supervision... My agency said don’t ask don’t tell will be the name of the game here unless new regs come out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What would everyone who can't possible take any sick leave do if they were sick with something else? Wouldn't you have to take an advance, LWOP, vacation?

Honestly, probably apply for for the voluntary leave transfer program, but now the program is going to get flooded with requests.

Also, it?s one thing to use up my leave (or advance leave) for my own and my children?s health. But being essentially forced to use leave because of quarantines in order to save older people seems unfair. Why should I burn up my accrued leave because of a virus that isn?t even likely to harm my family? The older people can use their leave to stay home, they have use or lose any way

It?s not just to save older white collar workers. It?s to save the 60 year old admin who is raising her grandkids or the 60 year old cleaner whose family abroad is dependent on her remitting her wages.

The lack of understanding of public health measures is really troubling here, and shows the need for much, much better communication. Mandatory telework and school closures are NOT quarantines. They are social distancing measures to slow the spread of the virus. The reason to slow the spread of the virus is not "just" for 60+ year olds. It's to keep the medical system from being completely overwhelmed ... which would mean that NOBODY could get ANY emergency care. Break your leg? Get cancer? Kid has a bad croup attack and needs medicines? Good luck with that while the hospitals are dealing with thousands of COVID19 patients.

But what is the end goal? It will be months before a vaccine is available- say you implement all these draconian measures to slow the spread- for how long? And who's to say as soon as you turn everyone loose again that the transmissions doesn't just resume again?

NP: The goal is to flatten the infection rate curve. If *everyone* gets this at the same time, our hospitals will be completely overrun with the serious cases. If we can spread out the infections until there is a vaccine and we know more about the virus and treatment, the hospitals are much less likely to have to turn people away. This will also lower the mortality rate.

Also, "Draconian?" Seriously? Working from home is Draconian?

Sure for you, not a big deal.. You get to work in your PJs and eat ice cream. But everything has consequences. Feds work from home ----> small businesses that depend on their business lay off workers. So now people are out of jobs just to slow the spread.

Are you trolling? Health and safety is a higher priority than jobs.

You'd really be ok losing YOUR job over this?

Right. People are going apoplectic about potentially having to take LWOP, which would mean they have a job to come back to, but are fine with lots of folks in the private sector losing their jobs.

It’s not “fine” for people in the private sector to lose jobs, but it is better than dying. Is this in dispute?

The problem is the people losing their jobs are by and large a different demographic than those who will die. You’re asking younger workers to lose pay (or worse their jobs) due to massive school/business shutdowns in order to save (mostly) older people from crippling our healthcare system. As a millennial, I feel like I’ve been screwed so many times. Graduated during a recession then started a family in recent years depleting my leave balance. I don’t want to start a generational war, but I sort of feel like society owes this younger generation instead of asking all of us to take massive financial hits to save the boomers, who by the way have largely voted for policies that have led to high student loans and people having to work in the gig economy without sick leave/health insurance. So I, for one, am willing to quarantine myself if needed to help save lives, but I’m not willing to sacrifice my family’s financial stability.

My grandparents were born in 1916/1917 before the Spanish flu hit. No vaccines and plenty of quarantining. Dozens of their peers lost parents, aunts, uncles, siblings. They experienced the Stock Market Crash of 1929 as kids and World War II when starting their own families. They had it rough and not once did I hear them say they were owed anything. They saw the greater need for society in the sacrifices they were asked to make. We have lost that greater sense of community as a society. Maybe one silver lining is that this pandemic shows our vulnerability and may help bring that cohesion back. Many of us Gen-Xers started our careers during a recession too. You aren't the first in line for having setbacks. I think we need strong fiscal policy to ensure vulnerable citizens aren't devastated by this pandemic. But your calculating way of minimizing other people's lives is grotesque. I have no doubt that by the time your are 45, you will reread those words and shudder.

Use this as an opportunity to agitate for the things society needs - universal health care, sick leave and maternity leave. Your current approach is equivalent to a death panel.

+1 Well said.

[Anonymous]

My grandfather lost 6 siblings in the Spanish flu. 6! These pandemics are not a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:my agency has limited “non-essential” travel but my office has been going around in circles for the last week trying to define “essential”. It’s driving me bonkers that management can’t seem to figure this out. Supposed to travel next week and just want to know already!

I think ultimately OPM is going to have to call the shots rather than each agency doing this piecemeal. We are having a telework drill next week, however DH predicts we will all be teleworking by then anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just want to know if my agency will actually expect me to be able to effectively telework while I’m, apparently, also going to be essentially homeschooling my children??

DON’T ASK DON’T TELL!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want to know if my agency will actually expect me to be able to effectively telework while I’m, apparently, also going to be essentially homeschooling my children??

DON’T ASK DON’T TELL!

If your child is old enough for school they do not need constant supervision (like a toddler). No it will not be great but I think you will get into a routine. Start working as easily as possible in the am. Stock some self serve breakfast items. Take them outside over your lunch time. Of course you will take breaks when they need attention. Hopefully you can schedule some work time when a spouse is home or after bed time. To think they need your full attention focused on their schooling is not reasonable.