Do you think DOGE will eliminate remote policy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back to the original question. I’m working with the Trump transition team at my agency and they have asked for telework and remote work agreements as well as lists and counts of employees with either arrangement. They are absolutely going to be targeting this in some way.

Or they want to know how, when, and where the agency’s employees are working. I get the concern, but there are certainly other possibilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to the original question. I’m working with the Trump transition team at my agency and they have asked for telework and remote work agreements as well as lists and counts of employees with either arrangement. They are absolutely going to be targeting this in some way.

Or they want to know how, when, and where the agency’s employees are working. I get the concern, but there are certainly other possibilities.

I think the incoming administration has provided enough context clues for us to feel reasonably certain about what they will do with this information.

[Anonymous]

I hope they do but not sure how it will play out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon Musk cannot single handedly do anything, and certainly not increase workdays by two hours, nor fire people who refuse to RTO, or eliminate entire federal agencies whose unions will fight this in court.

Can Trump sign an executive order limiting telework/remote work? Yes, but even that will have to be implemented within certain parameters, will be fought in court etc. no one is going to the office full time for ten hours on Jan 21. Get a grip.

Hopefully by the end of the term this will be a reality though.

Why would you be hopeful about this?

Because they hate feds.

I'm a lawyer, they don't pay me enough to work those hours, I would just quit and go to a firm for those hours.

But here's the deal: you don't want people like me to quit. Those of us who have options are also the people who get stuff done efficiently.

THIS. That last sentence is so true.

If you are a fed lawyer who only works 40 hours a week, your options in private practice likely aren't as plentiful as you think they are.

It's amazing how every single government lawyer is convinced that they can leave the government and find a higher paying job in the private sector - they are very much in demand, you see and only in the government because of the mission/benefits/family friendly schedule/hours/WTH/etc. And sure, some of you will be rock stars. But more of you will crash and burn, if you can get a job at all.

The majority of lawyers in federal government started their careers in private practice, because very few agencies hire right out of law school. It's not like we're unfamiliar with law firms.

100% this. The lawyers at my agency are so hardworking, and almost all of them came from big law (with massive pay cuts as a trade off).

If DOGE makes it miserable for them to work, the younger ones have already voiced they’re going to go back to private, and the older ones only plan to stay as long as they can to retire.

To support an earlier poster, not all fedgov lawyers (even those with prior private practice experince) will have the option to go back to biglaw. First, yes, biglaw pays more, but the incrmental benefit of the higher salary probably won't materialize until a fedgov lawyer starts working 50-60 hrs/week in fedgov. Before that, just stay and work more. Moves into biglaw are disruptive, and you are going to be expected to work 55 hours minimum (unless you get equity, which is highly, highly unlikey for all but about 1% of fedgov). And your hours are going to be monitored, and your transition to the commercial aspects of private practice will take time, etc. Don't just jump for more money. You will be a target, and from my experience, those making the jump after being in fedgov for more than 3-4 years just cannot make the transiton back.

Second, a lot of fedgov lawyers I know saw others make the jump for big paydays and think they can replicate that. Those slots are gone. Gone. And the law firms wo made those bets are still waiting to see if they pan out, so there's not a lot of appetite to do it again. Plus, a Trump adminstration just won't require the same insider expertise that usually commands the biglaw premium. And, if there is this much glut such that any significant number of fedgov lawyers will look to jump, biglaw will price accordingly.

Hey, shoot your shot, but in my personal experience hiring out of fedgov (think banking/securities), biglaw is not clamoring for this talent, and certainly isn't paying top dollar for it. And for those who do make the jump, it is more like a $600K counsel role with a wait-and-see approach to partnership. or a NEP track (whcih is the same thing, different title).

None of what you're saying is wrong. I did my time in biglaw and don't want to go back, although I'd do it if i had to because I'm the breadwinner and we have bills.

What I don't see mentioned enough is the effect on existing biglaw lawyers if the market were suddenly flooded with experienced lawyers who think $200k is a sweet salary. Even if those ex-fed lawyers ultimately are fired in a few years (and certainly never make partner) I think there would be a big temptation for firms to unload their more expensive associates and junior partners in favor of cheaper options in the short term. Somebody with 20+ years practicing can definitely do an associate's job, even in an unfamiliar area, and a smart firm would offer a lifestyle billing requirement in exchange for "low" salaries. It could potentially remake the DC law market.
(I say "would" and not "will" because I don't expect federal firings on that scale. But admittedly, they have been threatened.)

[Anonymous]

My neighbor and her husband are feds. They work from home 100%. They have no workplace to return to. Their building in DC was sold. DOGE will spend a lot of money trying to bring these people back to DC to work in person. I've talked to them, and they aren't worried about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elon Musk cannot single handedly do anything, and certainly not increase workdays by two hours, nor fire people who refuse to RTO, or eliminate entire federal agencies whose unions will fight this in court.

Can Trump sign an executive order limiting telework/remote work? Yes, but even that will have to be implemented within certain parameters, will be fought in court etc. no one is going to the office full time for ten hours on Jan 21. Get a grip.

Hopefully by the end of the term this will be a reality though.

Why would you be hopeful about this?

Because they hate feds.

I'm a lawyer, they don't pay me enough to work those hours, I would just quit and go to a firm for those hours.

But here's the deal: you don't want people like me to quit. Those of us who have options are also the people who get stuff done efficiently.

THIS. That last sentence is so true.

If you are a fed lawyer who only works 40 hours a week, your options in private practice likely aren't as plentiful as you think they are.

It's amazing how every single government lawyer is convinced that they can leave the government and find a higher paying job in the private sector - they are very much in demand, you see and only in the government because of the mission/benefits/family friendly schedule/hours/WTH/etc. And sure, some of you will be rock stars. But more of you will crash and burn, if you can get a job at all.

The majority of lawyers in federal government started their careers in private practice, because very few agencies hire right out of law school. It's not like we're unfamiliar with law firms.

100% this. The lawyers at my agency are so hardworking, and almost all of them came from big law (with massive pay cuts as a trade off).

If DOGE makes it miserable for them to work, the younger ones have already voiced they’re going to go back to private, and the older ones only plan to stay as long as they can to retire.

To support an earlier poster, not all fedgov lawyers (even those with prior private practice experince) will have the option to go back to biglaw. First, yes, biglaw pays more, but the incrmental benefit of the higher salary probably won't materialize until a fedgov lawyer starts working 50-60 hrs/week in fedgov. Before that, just stay and work more. Moves into biglaw are disruptive, and you are going to be expected to work 55 hours minimum (unless you get equity, which is highly, highly unlikey for all but about 1% of fedgov). And your hours are going to be monitored, and your transition to the commercial aspects of private practice will take time, etc. Don't just jump for more money. You will be a target, and from my experience, those making the jump after being in fedgov for more than 3-4 years just cannot make the transiton back.

Second, a lot of fedgov lawyers I know saw others make the jump for big paydays and think they can replicate that. Those slots are gone. Gone. And the law firms wo made those bets are still waiting to see if they pan out, so there's not a lot of appetite to do it again. Plus, a Trump adminstration just won't require the same insider expertise that usually commands the biglaw premium. And, if there is this much glut such that any significant number of fedgov lawyers will look to jump, biglaw will price accordingly.

Hey, shoot your shot, but in my personal experience hiring out of fedgov (think banking/securities), biglaw is not clamoring for this talent, and certainly isn't paying top dollar for it. And for those who do make the jump, it is more like a $600K counsel role with a wait-and-see approach to partnership. or a NEP track (whcih is the same thing, different title).

None of what you're saying is wrong. I did my time in biglaw and don't want to go back, although I'd do it if i had to because I'm the breadwinner and we have bills.

What I don't see mentioned enough is the effect on existing biglaw lawyers if the market were suddenly flooded with experienced lawyers who think $200k is a sweet salary. Even if those ex-fed lawyers ultimately are fired in a few years (and certainly never make partner) I think there would be a big temptation for firms to unload their more expensive associates and junior partners in favor of cheaper options in the short term. Somebody with 20+ years practicing can definitely do an associate's job, even in an unfamiliar area, and a smart firm would offer a lifestyle billing requirement in exchange for "low" salaries. It could potentially remake the DC law market.
(I say "would" and not "will" because I don't expect federal firings on that scale. But admittedly, they have been threatened.)

This isn’t how big law works. Unless you have an incredibly profitable niche speciality, they are unlikely to have interest in anyone with more than 3 to 5 years experience. There just isn’t a need.

Industry may have interest in some more experienced folks. But pay will be less.

[Anonymous]

Having worked in both big law and as a Fed, it doesn’t make sense to jump ship to Big Law for 5 to 10 hours more a week. You’ll work far more in big law, and be giving up what is still a cushy government job for a job with an expiration date in 3 to 5 years, unless you are willing to put even more time into building a client base.

[Anonymous]

I've worked in both the federal government and BigLaw, with my most recent stint in BigLaw about 7 years ago. I jumped to a BigLaw counsel spot and then jumped back into government after an embarrassingly short time. The skill sets do not transfer; firms want someone who can develop business, even if they claim that business development is not a requirement. That is not me. I want to do my job--preferably something involving really interesting research and minimal human contact--and go home to my family. I do not want to network, ever.

Not only is BigLaw unable to absorb all of the federal lawyers who claim they want to leave government, but if DOGE is able to do what it wants to do (which is unlikely), much of the legal work in the private sector will dry up. No more compliance counseling. No more SEC defense. No more merger enforcement.

[Anonymous]

What I don't see mentioned enough is the effect on existing biglaw lawyers if the market were suddenly flooded with experienced lawyers who think $200k is a sweet salary. Even if those ex-fed lawyers ultimately are fired in a few years (and certainly never make partner) I think there would be a big temptation for firms to unload their more expensive associates and junior partners in favor of cheaper options in the short term. Somebody with 20+ years practicing can definitely do an associate's job, even in an unfamiliar area, and a smart firm would offer a lifestyle billing requirement in exchange for "low" salaries. It could potentially remake the DC law market.

lol anyone who actually worked in biglaw knows how dumb this sounds. Firms aren’t to replace their associates and junior partners with feds accustomed to completely different work/life balance. If there is a mass exodus of fed attorneys at most it will drive down salaries of biglaw staff attorneys and doc reviewers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back to the original question. I’m working with the Trump transition team at my agency and they have asked for telework and remote work agreements as well as lists and counts of employees with either arrangement. They are absolutely going to be targeting this in some way.

What agency?

[Anonymous]

I’m actually okay with returning to the office (I’m in one day a week now and we have space for everyone, never relinquished any), and I’m hoping at least pre-pandemic TW schedules so I can have two days at home.

BUT I’ll be beyond pissed if my coworkers who came up with b.s. medical accommodations to remain fully remote are allowed to continue fill time remote. We have people who have claimed anxiety, sleep apnea, all kinds of nonsense and been approved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back to the original question. I’m working with the Trump transition team at my agency and they have asked for telework and remote work agreements as well as lists and counts of employees with either arrangement. They are absolutely going to be targeting this in some way.

Do you feel your agency has good data? It seems previously when Congress asked for this information, the data was crap.

[Anonymous]

I'm surprised the transition team has asked ypu for anything. We haven't had a word from them at all. We're just doing "well this is what transitions needed before" stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m actually okay with returning to the office (I’m in one day a week now and we have space for everyone, never relinquished any), and I’m hoping at least pre-pandemic TW schedules so I can have two days at home.

BUT I’ll be beyond pissed if my coworkers who came up with b.s. medical accommodations to remain fully remote are allowed to continue fill time remote. We have people who have claimed anxiety, sleep apnea, all kinds of nonsense and been approved.

If it's so easy to get an accommodation, then do it. Instead of being "beyond pissed" somebody with anxiety or sleep problems finds it healthier not to commute. Maybe you can get an accommodation for your rage problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What I don't see mentioned enough is the effect on existing biglaw lawyers if the market were suddenly flooded with experienced lawyers who think $200k is a sweet salary. Even if those ex-fed lawyers ultimately are fired in a few years (and certainly never make partner) I think there would be a big temptation for firms to unload their more expensive associates and junior partners in favor of cheaper options in the short term. Somebody with 20+ years practicing can definitely do an associate's job, even in an unfamiliar area, and a smart firm would offer a lifestyle billing requirement in exchange for "low" salaries. It could potentially remake the DC law market.

lol anyone who actually worked in biglaw knows how dumb this sounds. Firms aren’t to replace their associates and junior partners with feds accustomed to completely different work/life balance. If there is a mass exodus of fed attorneys at most it will drive down salaries of biglaw staff attorneys and doc reviewers.

You're saying firms are too hidebound to change their hiring pipeline - which is a fair point, law firms are snobby and change slowly. But if they are too previous about it, their clients will find it's pretty cheap to expand in-house operations and outsource less.