SEC CBA - how long?

[Anonymous]

There are numerous other agencies that have announced exemptions for BU employees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So managers now have to RTO AND just got their extra TSP match cancelled to boot (a significant pay cut)? Expect an exodus. Who will take their place?

Seriously, when a manager retires/leaves, which BU staff will apply to take the position?

What is the extra tsp match?

[Anonymous]

It’s hilarious picturing SEC management in meetings all week drafting a memo for only them to be stuck working in the office!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The notice calling managers backs states that it is “interim” guidance.

This. The easy thing to do now is to call the managers in. We all knew that. The hard part is what to do with BU. I suspect they are working on it. Given the deadline to report to OPM by Friday, it was foreseeable that the announcement for management was forthcoming but that they need more time to workout BU situation. Don’t celebrate just yet. I suspect the other shoe will eventually drop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So managers now have to RTO AND just got their extra TSP match cancelled to boot (a significant pay cut)? Expect an exodus. Who will take their place?

Seriously, when a manager retires/leaves, which BU staff will apply to take the position?

What is the extra tsp match?

There is no extra TSP match. Union killed that idea.

[Anonymous]

I agree. It’s a bad look for SEC to be one of the only agencies not returning to work. Especially since the agreement is only once a week they have to be in office. Maybe if they were 2 or 3 days now in office it wouldn’t stand out as much. But going in once a week in 2025 when all the other federal workers are working 5 days a week will not go unnoticed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree. It’s a bad look for SEC to be one of the only agencies not returning to work. Especially since the agreement is only once a week they have to be in office. Maybe if they were 2 or 3 days now in office it wouldn’t stand out as much. But going in once a week in 2025 when all the other federal workers are working 5 days a week will not go unnoticed.

The SEC and the other financial regulators are tiny, no one will notice or care. The point is headcount reduction so if you can impact the vast majority of agencies that's all they care about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. It’s a bad look for SEC to be one of the only agencies not returning to work. Especially since the agreement is only once a week they have to be in office. Maybe if they were 2 or 3 days now in office it wouldn’t stand out as much. But going in once a week in 2025 when all the other federal workers are working 5 days a week will not go unnoticed.

The SEC and the other financial regulators are tiny, no one will notice or care. The point is headcount reduction so if you can impact the vast majority of agencies that's all they care about.

Public perception isn’t the only thing at play. You think the Chair will thumb his nose at the EO? I don’t think so. He’ll either need or want to show that he toed the line, even if there is a legal challenge. Because then he can say that he tried to do something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree. It’s a bad look for SEC to be one of the only agencies not returning to work. Especially since the agreement is only once a week they have to be in office. Maybe if they were 2 or 3 days now in office it wouldn’t stand out as much. But going in once a week in 2025 when all the other federal workers are working 5 days a week will not go unnoticed.

Why are you always haunting these threads telling people it’s “a bad look” to be unhappy about an employment benefit getting arbitrarily clawed back? This is not a campaign website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. It’s a bad look for SEC to be one of the only agencies not returning to work. Especially since the agreement is only once a week they have to be in office. Maybe if they were 2 or 3 days now in office it wouldn’t stand out as much. But going in once a week in 2025 when all the other federal workers are working 5 days a week will not go unnoticed.

The SEC and the other financial regulators are tiny, no one will notice or care. The point is headcount reduction so if you can impact the vast majority of agencies that's all they care about.

Public perception isn’t the only thing at play. You think the Chair will thumb his nose at the EO? I don’t think so. He’ll either need or want to show that he toed the line, even if there is a legal challenge. Because then he can say that he tried to do something.

Um, ordering everyone outside the bargaining unit back full time is not “thumbing his nose” at the presidential memo (not an EO, by the way). The PM has tons of wiggle room for agency decision-making, and the OPM guidance to the memo makes clear that agencies must comply consistent with applicable law and subject to collective bargaining inflations. Every agency has different CBA obligations, and has different needs and employees. Look at USPTO, for example. Enough with this nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. It’s a bad look for SEC to be one of the only agencies not returning to work. Especially since the agreement is only once a week they have to be in office. Maybe if they were 2 or 3 days now in office it wouldn’t stand out as much. But going in once a week in 2025 when all the other federal workers are working 5 days a week will not go unnoticed.

The SEC and the other financial regulators are tiny, no one will notice or care. The point is headcount reduction so if you can impact the vast majority of agencies that's all they care about.

Public perception isn’t the only thing at play. You think the Chair will thumb his nose at the EO? I don’t think so. He’ll either need or want to show that he toed the line, even if there is a legal challenge. Because then he can say that he tried to do something.

Um, ordering everyone outside the bargaining unit back full time is not “thumbing his nose” at the presidential memo (not an EO, by the way). The PM has tons of wiggle room for agency decision-making, and the OPM guidance to the memo makes clear that agencies must comply consistent with applicable law and subject to collective bargaining inflations. Every agency has different CBA obligations, and has different needs and employees. Look at USPTO, for example. Enough with this nonsense.

collective bargaining obligations*

[Anonymous]

I agree other shoe will drop. This was SEC mgmt's initial attempt at complying with the OPM memo. OPM is reviewing how each agency complied. OPM will likely want to be more aggressive in challenging the CBA, and will instruct SEC mgmt to do so.

[Anonymous]

Also very, VERY, unfair to NBU members. Plenty of non-managers are NBU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also very, VERY, unfair to NBU members. Plenty of non-managers are NBU.

Yup, anyone in HR, a chunk of GC that does employment and labor stuff, probably others.

[Anonymous]

Please please do not compare the SEC to the USPTO. The pto has been teleworking way before the pandemic because it is a production based job. It’s meant for telework because if you don’t meet production you are fired. Nobody is upset that people working full time remotely on production is teleworking.

But the SEC being the unicorn agency that now gets paid more and has telework rights when the rest of the GS workforce is working 5 days a week will not fly.

Political appointees at sec will not be okay with their staff working from home as they commute every day.

Sec is not a small agency. It is a powerful agency that has name recognition. Elon also was sued recently.Elon and Charlie Kirk’s of the world aren’t going to be persuaded that SEC is the unicorn that can telework for a few more years.

This was interim guidance. We will see what the real decision will be on return to work. Nobody knows yet so prematurely celebrating is just that - premature.