Will SEC escape RIFs due to large number of exits?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, that’s not correct. 42.5 hours in the office per week, with rare telework in limited circumstances.

They can’t force you to eat lunch “in the office.” Time cards merely ask you to verify 40 hours of work. Period. As long as you eat lunch before 3:00.

Not sure where everyone comes up with all these extraneous supposed rules that are neither written nor enforceable.

If you look at the CBA, it says you can’t use your lunch to shorten your day or not take lunch one day to take a longer one another day.

So, if you are in the office from 9-5, there is no way you can properly record 8 hours of work.

https://www.secunion.org/article-7-work-schedules

Well, first off, the agency has thrown the CBA out the window. They can’t pick and choose which provisions they like or don’t. Second, the CBA isn’t policy anyway (as we’ve seen with telework).

Third, I can work from 630 - 230. Then go to lunch (wherever I want). 8 hours of work done. Timecard is perfectly accurate.

Wrong. See FLSA.

They’re corresponding badge swipes to time cards. You’re required to have an unpaid lunch in the office. Swiping for only 8 hours means you’re defrauding the government of 0.5 hours/day.

You do you, but seems like a sure fire way to be on the future RIF list.

You’re just making stuff up. Nothing says that you can’t take your lunch outside the office. So you’re saying I can’t go to a nearby restaurant for lunch? Isn’t that Bowser’s whole rationale for loving RTO??

Sure you can. But you’re making stuff up if you think you can take “lunch” at 2:30 and pretend you worked 8 hours after being in the office from 6:30am (as though you didn’t eat). I suggest you reach out to OHR or OGC. Guarantee they’ll tell you it’s 8.5 hours in the office inclusive of unpaid lunch (wherever you want to take it), and you can’t use the unpaid lunch to shorten your work day by 30 min.

Nobody’s pretending. I did work from 630-2:30. Why the hell does it matter when or where I eat lunch?? The government got 8 hrs of work from me, and I was paid for 8 hrs.

You are LITERALLY saving your lunch (and breakfast?) to shorten your work day. Good luck to you!

You literally must be pretty low on the totem pole to not get this. If you have worked 8 hours in the office, you are NOT shortening your day. There is NO requirement to be in the office for 8.5 hours. There is a requirement to have 1/2 hour of unpaid lunch, which does NOT equate to being in the office for 8.5 hours. I can't help you connect the dots--critical thinking skills start at a young age and if it's not developed then, it may not develop.

Well said. I suspect that several people on this thread are HR or OGC who realized they screwed up on the time cards policy and now realize that they really can’t enforce their silly 1/2 hour lunch thing, and now resort to “well, that’s we MEANT” arguments. Sorry. If that’s what you meant, change the time card attestation. Otherwise, be quiet — you come off as desperate.

Until you actually look up your agency’s written policy on this and report back, your viewpoint is meaningless. My agency (not SEC) is very clear that the 30 minute unpaid lunch cannot be taken at the end or beginning of the day, which in effect means you have to be in the office 8.5 hrs total. While it may not be time card fraud to violate the policy, it’s definitely a different violation of agency policy.

Sec policy says nothing about beginning or end. It only says before 3.

It clearly says you have to have an 8.5 hours schedule and it says you can’t use lunch to shorten the day. It’s crystal clear no matter how many times you insist it isn’t, while refusing to provide any other explanation of what the ‘you can’t shorten the day’ provision means.

Your response that you aren’t shortening anything because you are still working 8 hours doesn’t work because you can’t have an 8 hour schedule, ie 9-5, 8-4, whatever would not approved as a schedule. The schedule you in put has to have 8.5 hours and, with that requirement, you would be shortening your day leaving after 8.

But you know this and are just being obtuse.

Odd, then, that somebody forgot to incorporate this supposed policy into the timecard.

Who cares if it is or is not in the timecard?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not SEC, but another office with lots of lawyers, and we are having the same 8 hours versus 8.5 hours argument. We collectively hate ourselves for this.

I am SEC and someone asked this at an all group meeting discussing RTO.

We were explicitly told that you could NOT take your lunch at the end of the day, so you had to there 8.5 hours.

That extra half hour can really make a difference when people are trying to figure out much more complicated school logistics with RTO, but there was no ambiguity in their response.

Whether anyone would really enforce this, who knows.

The passive voice says it all. Told by whom? Where is it written? Did they reference anything authoritative? Or were they just talking out of their butt (like many on this thread)?

OGC leadership. So, no, I don’t think they were talking out of their asses.

Again, did they cite anything for this?

the source documents are all linked in the intranet in the various timesheet/schedule options. i'm not logging in over the weekend to find it for you. however, the only circumstances where you do not need to take a 30 minute unpaid lunch mid-day is if you are working for 6 hours or less.

and no, the on-site gym is not returning.

That’s nice, but nobody here has addressed the main issue: Time cards ask you to verify that you’ve worked 8 hours. Period. If you’ve worked 8 hours (ie, you were in the office for 8 hrs), your time card is accurate. End of story.

Whether you’ve somehow violated some obscure, vague, ambiguous HR policy that’s on the intranet is another issue entirely. It’s certainly not timecard fraud.

If they really cared about this, they could easily require staff to attest that they were IN THE OFFICE FOR 8.5 HOURS on their time cards. I know several agencies that do just that. It’s not hard.

They can’t have it both ways: Say that must do X with respect to working hours, but then NOT have you attest to whether you’ve indeed done X on your time card.

Passive voice or not…

When you get approval of your schedule (different software than the timesheet program), this schedule must fit within the various options. Assuming an 8 hour day:

You must have an approved schedule covering 8.5 hours that includes core hours 10-2. You have a 30 minute break for lunch, this can be spent in or out of the office, no one cares.

The agency will pull turnstile badge data, they have been doing this for years. Between your arrival to badge in (start) and your final departure badging out, you must have 8.5 total hours, start to finish, in this example.

Timesheet still says 8 hours worked a day but if you are only in for 8 and not 8.5 total (start to finish according to the turnstile data) you are not working your approved schedule. The agency has in the past accused and fired workers for not working a full 8 hours based on turnstile badging data.

So you can get technical about it but given that you must take lunch during the day, if you do not have the full 8.5 start to finish, you risk being accused of stealing time. It’s not just the timesheet that you have to certify to, it’s also that you are working your approved schedule on a regular basis, whatever that may be.

Nonsense. Nobody attests to their “approved schedule.” They attest to their time card only. And nobody in history has been accused of “schedule fraud.”

Based on your logic, an employee who goes to lunch across the street is “stealing time” because they’re not in the office for 8.5 hours. Also based on your logic, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead worked 845 - 5:15 could also be fired for “approved schedule fraud.”

Be consistent. Do you have to be in the office for your 1/2 lunch or not? Cite a written authority that says one way or the other.

if someone is not on an approved flex schedule then yes, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead regularly worked 845 - 5:15 without an approved schedule change could be disciplined for not working their scheduled hours. fixed schedules do not allow for credit hours or varying arrival and leave times. does the SEC currently discipline folks who do this? not that i've personally seen. the only person in my management chain that would have done this retired during covid. but if you are trying to force someone out, it's an easy place to direct the microscope because your formal schedule is a signed agreement between you and your supervisor.

anyway, i really hope you don't work at the SEC because you're a complete incompetent mess.

Different agency, but we were told that fixed schedules are as described here, very strict. If you are supposed to work 9-5 (or 5:30), and instead work 8-4 (or 4:30), then you have to take an hour annual leave to cover until end of TOD.

Is this a new thing with RTO, or has that always been the case?

Because this has definitely never been the case at the SEC, and I haven’t seen anything suggesting it will be the case now — at least yet.

Yes. This has always been the case.

Disagree you can email your supervisor and ask to work varied hours that day. 9-5:30 instead of 8-4:30.

Yes. Operative part of that is supervisor notification. Some supervisors are ok with temporary schedule shifts, some want you to use credit hours, leave, etc. A manger agreeing to a temporary shift without accounting for it is a courtesy on the supervisor’s part. They could require a full accounting for the time, i.e. coming in early, earning credit hours and taking the credit hours at the end of the day.

In my time at the SEC I have never seen a supervisor want that sort of accounting, and unless orders come from above that it is necessary now, I don’t think that’s going to change as long as you are getting your work done and it is just a time shift and you aren’t getting fast and loose with the total amount of time in the office.

I have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where does it say that one must work a certain amount of time before and/or after one’s lunch period? Or that lunch must be taken before the end of one’s work?

Such a simple thing to say — if that’s what they intended. Yet they didn’t say that. I wonder why. Perhaps it’s bc that’s NOT what they intended? Maybe?

People have already provided the sec CBA link where it clearly says that.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, that’s not correct. 42.5 hours in the office per week, with rare telework in limited circumstances.

They can’t force you to eat lunch “in the office.” Time cards merely ask you to verify 40 hours of work. Period. As long as you eat lunch before 3:00.

Not sure where everyone comes up with all these extraneous supposed rules that are neither written nor enforceable.

If you look at the CBA, it says you can’t use your lunch to shorten your day or not take lunch one day to take a longer one another day.

So, if you are in the office from 9-5, there is no way you can properly record 8 hours of work.

https://www.secunion.org/article-7-work-schedules

Well, first off, the agency has thrown the CBA out the window. They can’t pick and choose which provisions they like or don’t. Second, the CBA isn’t policy anyway (as we’ve seen with telework).

Third, I can work from 630 - 230. Then go to lunch (wherever I want). 8 hours of work done. Timecard is perfectly accurate.

Wrong. See FLSA.

They’re corresponding badge swipes to time cards. You’re required to have an unpaid lunch in the office. Swiping for only 8 hours means you’re defrauding the government of 0.5 hours/day.

You do you, but seems like a sure fire way to be on the future RIF list.

You’re just making stuff up. Nothing says that you can’t take your lunch outside the office. So you’re saying I can’t go to a nearby restaurant for lunch? Isn’t that Bowser’s whole rationale for loving RTO??

Sure you can. But you’re making stuff up if you think you can take “lunch” at 2:30 and pretend you worked 8 hours after being in the office from 6:30am (as though you didn’t eat). I suggest you reach out to OHR or OGC. Guarantee they’ll tell you it’s 8.5 hours in the office inclusive of unpaid lunch (wherever you want to take it), and you can’t use the unpaid lunch to shorten your work day by 30 min.

Nobody’s pretending. I did work from 630-2:30. Why the hell does it matter when or where I eat lunch?? The government got 8 hrs of work from me, and I was paid for 8 hrs.

You are LITERALLY saving your lunch (and breakfast?) to shorten your work day. Good luck to you!

You literally must be pretty low on the totem pole to not get this. If you have worked 8 hours in the office, you are NOT shortening your day. There is NO requirement to be in the office for 8.5 hours. There is a requirement to have 1/2 hour of unpaid lunch, which does NOT equate to being in the office for 8.5 hours. I can't help you connect the dots--critical thinking skills start at a young age and if it's not developed then, it may not develop.

Well said. I suspect that several people on this thread are HR or OGC who realized they screwed up on the time cards policy and now realize that they really can’t enforce their silly 1/2 hour lunch thing, and now resort to “well, that’s we MEANT” arguments. Sorry. If that’s what you meant, change the time card attestation. Otherwise, be quiet — you come off as desperate.

Until you actually look up your agency’s written policy on this and report back, your viewpoint is meaningless. My agency (not SEC) is very clear that the 30 minute unpaid lunch cannot be taken at the end or beginning of the day, which in effect means you have to be in the office 8.5 hrs total. While it may not be time card fraud to violate the policy, it’s definitely a different violation of agency policy.

Sec policy says nothing about beginning or end. It only says before 3.

It clearly says you have to have an 8.5 hours schedule and it says you can’t use lunch to shorten the day. It’s crystal clear no matter how many times you insist it isn’t, while refusing to provide any other explanation of what the ‘you can’t shorten the day’ provision means.

Your response that you aren’t shortening anything because you are still working 8 hours doesn’t work because you can’t have an 8 hour schedule, ie 9-5, 8-4, whatever would not approved as a schedule. The schedule you in put has to have 8.5 hours and, with that requirement, you would be shortening your day leaving after 8.

But you know this and are just being obtuse.

Odd, then, that somebody forgot to incorporate this supposed policy into the timecard.

There are innumerable agency policies not in the time card. Doesn’t mean violating them can’t get you disciplined.

[Anonymous]

Amazing how the agency doesn’t need to comply with the CBA but staff does.

[Anonymous]

Agency would argue the EO only goes to the telework provision so that’s the only one they are obligated to breach to be in compliance with the EO.

Whether an EO wins over a CBA will be decided in the courts. It may not get resolved in the next four years because the unions won’t be able to get to the courts for years.

I wonder how many more people will leave this year. You’d think everyone who wasn’t willing to ride this out for at least a year would have already left under the fork or VSIP or VERA. Hopefully they offer VERA every year or so to get others to leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agency would argue the EO only goes to the telework provision so that’s the only one they are obligated to breach to be in compliance with the EO.

Whether an EO wins over a CBA will be decided in the courts. It may not get resolved in the next four years because the unions won’t be able to get to the courts for years.

I wonder how many more people will leave this year. You’d think everyone who wasn’t willing to ride this out for at least a year would have already left under the fork or VSIP or VERA. Hopefully they offer VERA every year or so to get others to leave.

What are you talking about? The EO explicitly says it only applies in accordance with applicable law! So don’t blame the EO — mgmt DECIDED to violate the CBA. They didn’t have to. The EO had nothing to do with it. The EO had more outs and loopholes than Swiss cheese.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agency would argue the EO only goes to the telework provision so that’s the only one they are obligated to breach to be in compliance with the EO.

Whether an EO wins over a CBA will be decided in the courts. It may not get resolved in the next four years because the unions won’t be able to get to the courts for years.

I wonder how many more people will leave this year. You’d think everyone who wasn’t willing to ride this out for at least a year would have already left under the fork or VSIP or VERA. Hopefully they offer VERA every year or so to get others to leave.

What are you talking about? The EO explicitly says it only applies in accordance with applicable law! So don’t blame the EO — mgmt DECIDED to violate the CBA. They didn’t have to. The EO had nothing to do with it. The EO had more outs and loopholes than Swiss cheese.

And don’t blame OPM either. The agency doesn’t answer to OPM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they could not look at our badge swipe records unless the person is on a Performance Improvement plan. Does anyone know if this has changed?

They regularly pull this data and can for any reason, at any time and without notification to you.

How do you know?

You swipe into and out of the building- they have always had it. In addition, if you have a SEC iPhone, they could be tracking your phone.

Probably easier just to track Internet network data from employee laptops. When are they signed on via the SEC network vs. a home/other network?

Yes - they are also doing this. I am a SEC employee- my spouse is an SES at another federal agency and at login locations- please RTO and work onsite- don’t put your self or your manager at risk.

[Anonymous]

I don’t want to jump in on this ridiculously petty discussion but I think if you leave before 3 on your schedule then you can use lunch to shorten your day.

A good question for my supervisor and not strangers on the internet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agency would argue the EO only goes to the telework provision so that’s the only one they are obligated to breach to be in compliance with the EO.

Whether an EO wins over a CBA will be decided in the courts. It may not get resolved in the next four years because the unions won’t be able to get to the courts for years.

I wonder how many more people will leave this year. You’d think everyone who wasn’t willing to ride this out for at least a year would have already left under the fork or VSIP or VERA. Hopefully they offer VERA every year or so to get others to leave.

What are you talking about? The EO explicitly says it only applies in accordance with applicable law! So don’t blame the EO — mgmt DECIDED to violate the CBA. They didn’t have to. The EO had nothing to do with it. The EO had more outs and loopholes than Swiss cheese.

To say the EO had nothing to do with RTO is absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want to jump in on this ridiculously petty discussion but I think if you leave before 3 on your schedule then you can use lunch to shorten your day.

A good question for my supervisor and not strangers on the internet.

If you are talking about the SEC, it explicitly says you can’t do this.

But no harm asking your supervisor, but on this issue s/he really doesn’t have the authority to give flexibility in the way they may have on other issues. If (and this is a big if), the agency decided to look at badge data and saw you always left after 8 hours, I doubt it would matter that your supervisor said it was ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want to jump in on this ridiculously petty discussion but I think if you leave before 3 on your schedule then you can use lunch to shorten your day.

A good question for my supervisor and not strangers on the internet.

If you are talking about the SEC, it explicitly says you can’t do this.

But no harm asking your supervisor, but on this issue s/he really doesn’t have the authority to give flexibility in the way they may have on other issues. If (and this is a big if), the agency decided to look at badge data and saw you always left after 8 hours, I doubt it would matter that your supervisor said it was ok.

It’ll be interesting to see the agency discipline someone for working 8 hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want to jump in on this ridiculously petty discussion but I think if you leave before 3 on your schedule then you can use lunch to shorten your day.

A good question for my supervisor and not strangers on the internet.

If you are talking about the SEC, it explicitly says you can’t do this.

But no harm asking your supervisor, but on this issue s/he really doesn’t have the authority to give flexibility in the way they may have on other issues. If (and this is a big if), the agency decided to look at badge data and saw you always left after 8 hours, I doubt it would matter that your supervisor said it was ok.

It’ll be interesting to see the agency discipline someone for working 8 hours.

You don’t think they would discipline someone for working 8 hours from home come 4/14?

Working 8 hours doesn’t mean you are in compliance as to other aspects of policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want to jump in on this ridiculously petty discussion but I think if you leave before 3 on your schedule then you can use lunch to shorten your day.

A good question for my supervisor and not strangers on the internet.

Who actually gets to work at 7am? Honestly that is a very disruptive schedule and the best case for not allowing the day to end even earlier. it’s kind of a joke that key staff are unavailable for meetings during normal business hours.