For Feds, who monitors return to work?

[Anonymous]

We're supposed to be back two days per pay period. At first management was crowing about how great this was going to be, and how we would probably expand it. Then they don't show once a week, frequently. And now they are proclaiming that we will have "maximum flexibility" due to COVID concerns. No matter that we are in HHS and CDC has determined our building to be at a "low" level of concern. I'm fortunate that it's just one day a week and I'm nearby, but honestly, I'm not getting a lot out of being in the office. Tempted to abuse the apparent laxity, though I think it could be good if we were all in on the same day.

[Anonymous]

Our timesheets require us to say whether we are in person in our office or teleworking, I’m in Admin and we are verifying for the entire agency based on when people badge in to the building and matching when they are on the network. I think leadership wants to catch people who say they are complying with the return to work policies but still at home.

[Anonymous]

We're been removing the remote video option from some meetings when everyone who is attending should be in the building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The managers. Our policy is an email when you start the day. We are supposed to add the location as part of the return to the office.

Eg. I'm starting my day and working the full tour of duty from the office today.

Been a fed for 10+ yrs and this sounds craxy to me! So infantilizing.

This really is not uncommon or onerous. My DH has been doing it for six years (in his agency that has always been primarily remote.) it is an extremely low effort way for a manager (and team) to know who is available on any given day, particularly when the culture supports a lot of flexibility and variance in when people work.

Wouldn't a manager just assume you are available on a scheduled work day?

Manager Joe, I am working today. I will breathe oxygen. I will take my required 30 minutes lunch break. I will sign off at the end of my day.

I don't get this objection. We are talking about an organization that supports fully remote work as well as extremely flexible work schedules. It asks for an email/chat message at the start of a workday. And even THAT is too much "control" for some people?

A manager wants to know who is online and working that day. They want to touch base with their employees once a day that they don't see in person more than 4 times per year. It takes ten seconds.

I'm a manager and I touch base with my people most every day. But I do that by actually touching base with them about something meaningful and relevant - either to work or to their lives. AN email at the start of the day does jack-squat to keep us connected or even to let me know who is working.
I assume my employees are online and working unless they've requested the day off. Why wouldn't I?

[Anonymous]

Our IT is running reports on in office vs what's reported on the time card. They're doing it mostly because there are a few employees that refuse to return.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The managers. Our policy is an email when you start the day. We are supposed to add the location as part of the return to the office.

Eg. I'm starting my day and working the full tour of duty from the office today.

Been a fed for 10+ yrs and this sounds craxy to me! So infantilizing.

This really is not uncommon or onerous. My DH has been doing it for six years (in his agency that has always been primarily remote.) it is an extremely low effort way for a manager (and team) to know who is available on any given day, particularly when the culture supports a lot of flexibility and variance in when people work.

Wouldn't a manager just assume you are available on a scheduled work day?

Manager Joe, I am working today. I will breathe oxygen. I will take my required 30 minutes lunch break. I will sign off at the end of my day.

I don't get this objection. We are talking about an organization that supports fully remote work as well as extremely flexible work schedules. It asks for an email/chat message at the start of a workday. And even THAT is too much "control" for some people?

A manager wants to know who is online and working that day. They want to touch base with their employees once a day that they don't see in person more than 4 times per year. It takes ten seconds.

I think you should assume people are working unless they report otherwise. It’s an utterly useless way of “touching base.”

+1. This seems really inefficient. We have a team calendar where people indicate if the days they are off so everyone knows whether a particular person is available that day.

How is entering something on a calendar more efficient than sending a chat message/email? And what if your work environment is flexible enough that you may not know in advance which days you'll be working?

I'll also note that this message is to the whole small team. It functions much more as a "good morning!" like you would say to someone if you walked by their office in the morning. It creates a sense of connection on the team. Nobody has every objected. And the chat runs all day with exchanges about work stuff and normal small chat.

My last office did this, and it was exactly how you describe it. No one cared who was logging in earliest or whatever. It was just a small way of staying connected as a team. Sometimes folks would add small talk or mention an interesting meeting they’d be in that day. Our boss made it clear this was not about tracking people, and no one got in trouble for forgetting to do it. I really don’t understand the objection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The managers. Our policy is an email when you start the day. We are supposed to add the location as part of the return to the office.

Eg. I'm starting my day and working the full tour of duty from the office today.

Been a fed for 10+ yrs and this sounds craxy to me! So infantilizing.

This really is not uncommon or onerous. My DH has been doing it for six years (in his agency that has always been primarily remote.) it is an extremely low effort way for a manager (and team) to know who is available on any given day, particularly when the culture supports a lot of flexibility and variance in when people work.

Wouldn't a manager just assume you are available on a scheduled work day?

Manager Joe, I am working today. I will breathe oxygen. I will take my required 30 minutes lunch break. I will sign off at the end of my day.

I don't get this objection. We are talking about an organization that supports fully remote work as well as extremely flexible work schedules. It asks for an email/chat message at the start of a workday. And even THAT is too much "control" for some people?

A manager wants to know who is online and working that day. They want to touch base with their employees once a day that they don't see in person more than 4 times per year. It takes ten seconds.

I think you should assume people are working unless they report otherwise. It’s an utterly useless way of “touching base.”

+1. This seems really inefficient. We have a team calendar where people indicate if the days they are off so everyone knows whether a particular person is available that day.

How is entering something on a calendar more efficient than sending a chat message/email? And what if your work environment is flexible enough that you may not know in advance which days you'll be working?

I'll also note that this message is to the whole small team. It functions much more as a "good morning!" like you would say to someone if you walked by their office in the morning. It creates a sense of connection on the team. Nobody has every objected. And the chat runs all day with exchanges about work stuff and normal small chat.

My last office did this, and it was exactly how you describe it. No one cared who was logging in earliest or whatever. It was just a small way of staying connected as a team. Sometimes folks would add small talk or mention an interesting meeting they’d be in that day. Our boss made it clear this was not about tracking people, and no one got in trouble for forgetting to do it. I really don’t understand the objection.

How would you feel if every employee had to stop by the boss’s office at the start of every day and let them know they are working? It’s the online equivalent. It’s dumb and treating adults like children. You may as well have an attendance sheet and require a bathroom pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The managers. Our policy is an email when you start the day. We are supposed to add the location as part of the return to the office.

Eg. I'm starting my day and working the full tour of duty from the office today.

Been a fed for 10+ yrs and this sounds craxy to me! So infantilizing.

This really is not uncommon or onerous. My DH has been doing it for six years (in his agency that has always been primarily remote.) it is an extremely low effort way for a manager (and team) to know who is available on any given day, particularly when the culture supports a lot of flexibility and variance in when people work.

Wouldn't a manager just assume you are available on a scheduled work day?

Manager Joe, I am working today. I will breathe oxygen. I will take my required 30 minutes lunch break. I will sign off at the end of my day.

I don't get this objection. We are talking about an organization that supports fully remote work as well as extremely flexible work schedules. It asks for an email/chat message at the start of a workday. And even THAT is too much "control" for some people?

A manager wants to know who is online and working that day. They want to touch base with their employees once a day that they don't see in person more than 4 times per year. It takes ten seconds.

I think you should assume people are working unless they report otherwise. It’s an utterly useless way of “touching base.”

+1. This seems really inefficient. We have a team calendar where people indicate if the days they are off so everyone knows whether a particular person is available that day.

How is entering something on a calendar more efficient than sending a chat message/email? And what if your work environment is flexible enough that you may not know in advance which days you'll be working?

I'll also note that this message is to the whole small team. It functions much more as a "good morning!" like you would say to someone if you walked by their office in the morning. It creates a sense of connection on the team. Nobody has every objected. And the chat runs all day with exchanges about work stuff and normal small chat.

My last office did this, and it was exactly how you describe it. No one cared who was logging in earliest or whatever. It was just a small way of staying connected as a team. Sometimes folks would add small talk or mention an interesting meeting they’d be in that day. Our boss made it clear this was not about tracking people, and no one got in trouble for forgetting to do it. I really don’t understand the objection.

Having an ongoing group chat for casual discussions is a great idea.
Requiring everyone to check in every morning is stupid and a sign of poor and defensive leadership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The managers. Our policy is an email when you start the day. We are supposed to add the location as part of the return to the office.

Eg. I'm starting my day and working the full tour of duty from the office today.

Been a fed for 10+ yrs and this sounds craxy to me! So infantilizing.

This really is not uncommon or onerous. My DH has been doing it for six years (in his agency that has always been primarily remote.) it is an extremely low effort way for a manager (and team) to know who is available on any given day, particularly when the culture supports a lot of flexibility and variance in when people work.

Wouldn't a manager just assume you are available on a scheduled work day?

Manager Joe, I am working today. I will breathe oxygen. I will take my required 30 minutes lunch break. I will sign off at the end of my day.

I don't get this objection. We are talking about an organization that supports fully remote work as well as extremely flexible work schedules. It asks for an email/chat message at the start of a workday. And even THAT is too much "control" for some people?

A manager wants to know who is online and working that day. They want to touch base with their employees once a day that they don't see in person more than 4 times per year. It takes ten seconds.

I think you should assume people are working unless they report otherwise. It’s an utterly useless way of “touching base.”

+1. This seems really inefficient. We have a team calendar where people indicate if the days they are off so everyone knows whether a particular person is available that day.

How is entering something on a calendar more efficient than sending a chat message/email? And what if your work environment is flexible enough that you may not know in advance which days you'll be working?

I'll also note that this message is to the whole small team. It functions much more as a "good morning!" like you would say to someone if you walked by their office in the morning. It creates a sense of connection on the team. Nobody has every objected. And the chat runs all day with exchanges about work stuff and normal small chat.

My last office did this, and it was exactly how you describe it. No one cared who was logging in earliest or whatever. It was just a small way of staying connected as a team. Sometimes folks would add small talk or mention an interesting meeting they’d be in that day. Our boss made it clear this was not about tracking people, and no one got in trouble for forgetting to do it. I really don’t understand the objection.

Having an ongoing group chat for casual discussions is a great idea.
Requiring everyone to check in every morning is stupid and a sign of poor and defensive leadership.

Agree with the pp. The group chat should not be co-oped to become an attendance counting tool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The managers. Our policy is an email when you start the day. We are supposed to add the location as part of the return to the office.

Eg. I'm starting my day and working the full tour of duty from the office today.

Been a fed for 10+ yrs and this sounds craxy to me! So infantilizing.

This really is not uncommon or onerous. My DH has been doing it for six years (in his agency that has always been primarily remote.) it is an extremely low effort way for a manager (and team) to know who is available on any given day, particularly when the culture supports a lot of flexibility and variance in when people work.

Wouldn't a manager just assume you are available on a scheduled work day?

Manager Joe, I am working today. I will breathe oxygen. I will take my required 30 minutes lunch break. I will sign off at the end of my day.

I don't get this objection. We are talking about an organization that supports fully remote work as well as extremely flexible work schedules. It asks for an email/chat message at the start of a workday. And even THAT is too much "control" for some people?

A manager wants to know who is online and working that day. They want to touch base with their employees once a day that they don't see in person more than 4 times per year. It takes ten seconds.

I think you should assume people are working unless they report otherwise. It’s an utterly useless way of “touching base.”

+1. This seems really inefficient. We have a team calendar where people indicate if the days they are off so everyone knows whether a particular person is available that day.

How is entering something on a calendar more efficient than sending a chat message/email? And what if your work environment is flexible enough that you may not know in advance which days you'll be working?

I'll also note that this message is to the whole small team. It functions much more as a "good morning!" like you would say to someone if you walked by their office in the morning. It creates a sense of connection on the team. Nobody has every objected. And the chat runs all day with exchanges about work stuff and normal small chat.

My last office did this, and it was exactly how you describe it. No one cared who was logging in earliest or whatever. It was just a small way of staying connected as a team. Sometimes folks would add small talk or mention an interesting meeting they’d be in that day. Our boss made it clear this was not about tracking people, and no one got in trouble for forgetting to do it. I really don’t understand the objection.

How would you feel if every employee had to stop by the boss’s office at the start of every day and let them know they are working? It’s the online equivalent. It’s dumb and treating adults like children. You may as well have an attendance sheet and require a bathroom pass.

What? As I said, the boss did not make anyone do anything. It was a cultural thing where we all said hello to each other via email during the pandemic. My coworkers and I knew our boss respected and trusted us. She actually raised the idea of dropping the emails at one point, but everyone else pushed back and said they appreciated the connectedness they created.

And yes, I did say good morning to my boss and my coworkers whenever I saw them each day in person. It wasn’t an attendance check. I’m sorry you work somewhere so hostile that you’d interpret basic cordiality as infantilizing. Some of us actually like the people we work with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:some places it is kept track of when you badge in and out.

+1

Swipe in to facility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:some places it is kept track of when you badge in and out.

+1

Swipe in to facility.

They also can tell how long you spend on a work's internet system and how long you logged in a work. I'm sure if it's 8 hours they won't care that it's not 8.5 hours, but if you're logging 5 or 6 hours in person, there's an issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The managers. Our policy is an email when you start the day. We are supposed to add the location as part of the return to the office.

Eg. I'm starting my day and working the full tour of duty from the office today.

Been a fed for 10+ yrs and this sounds craxy to me! So infantilizing.

This really is not uncommon or onerous. My DH has been doing it for six years (in his agency that has always been primarily remote.) it is an extremely low effort way for a manager (and team) to know who is available on any given day, particularly when the culture supports a lot of flexibility and variance in when people work.

Wouldn't a manager just assume you are available on a scheduled work day?

Manager Joe, I am working today. I will breathe oxygen. I will take my required 30 minutes lunch break. I will sign off at the end of my day.

I don't get this objection. We are talking about an organization that supports fully remote work as well as extremely flexible work schedules. It asks for an email/chat message at the start of a workday. And even THAT is too much "control" for some people?

A manager wants to know who is online and working that day. They want to touch base with their employees once a day that they don't see in person more than 4 times per year. It takes ten seconds.

I think you should assume people are working unless they report otherwise. It’s an utterly useless way of “touching base.”

+1. This seems really inefficient. We have a team calendar where people indicate if the days they are off so everyone knows whether a particular person is available that day.

How is entering something on a calendar more efficient than sending a chat message/email? And what if your work environment is flexible enough that you may not know in advance which days you'll be working?

I'll also note that this message is to the whole small team. It functions much more as a "good morning!" like you would say to someone if you walked by their office in the morning. It creates a sense of connection on the team. Nobody has every objected. And the chat runs all day with exchanges about work stuff and normal small chat.

My last office did this, and it was exactly how you describe it. No one cared who was logging in earliest or whatever. It was just a small way of staying connected as a team. Sometimes folks would add small talk or mention an interesting meeting they’d be in that day. Our boss made it clear this was not about tracking people, and no one got in trouble for forgetting to do it. I really don’t understand the objection.

Having an ongoing group chat for casual discussions is a great idea.
Requiring everyone to check in every morning is stupid and a sign of poor and defensive leadership.

It is so interesting that people think this is so awful. This is a close collaborative team that has been doing this everyday for years before the pandemic. Nobody has ever objected or even mentioned among themselves that it was a problem or issue. (And while they do have some quibbles with upper management, people like this manager and stay on her team for a long time.)

[Anonymous]

coming in the office should come with a pay raise

[Anonymous]

We still have all days setup in ITAS as telework. Individual team leads keep track of who is in office and who isn't. Also many people put their location in their Skype status.

All very informal.

NIH