RTO and No Childcare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I worked around 8:15 am to 630 pm for 30 years. It is not a long day.

I was taking 704 am in every day and catching the last express train at 649pm.


Guess what had dinner with my family at 7pm, helped get kids ready for bed, had time with wife from 830 pm to around 1030 pm, got up and helped kids get ready for bus.

First 15 minutes or so at work had my coffee, bagel, read the news online. Took an hour lunch every day or ran errands at lunch that hour.

I never worked weekends, had holidays. Not exactly the end of the world. If anything I miss it.

When did you exercise? Grocery shop? Cook? Get kids to/from childcare? Fold laundry? How many of your kids sports teams did you coach? How often did you volunteer at school?

Or did you have a wife to do all that for you and you never did more than get your kids ready for the bus and eat dinner with them during the week?

Sorry but that is sad. You spent most of your life working from sun up to sun down or on a commuter bus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a bit of an outlier here in that our only kid still at home is a middle schooler so I fully remember the pre-Covid times of paying for aftercare at the parochial school our kid attends. We'll make RTO work but it comes with logistical challenges and financial tradeoffs.

For neighborhood families with younger kids in public school, there are very limited after-school options even at the beginning of the school year. Incoming kindergarten parents are often scrambling and being wait listed at places.

I live in Howard County and HCPS elementary schools offer before and aftercare for working parents. I assumed other elementary schools did as well…

That’s a shrewd economic move by Howard County. Leadership there (correctly) realizes that they are a significant commute from Baltimore and DC, but can attract UMC/MC families who work in those cities if they make it feasible. Smart.

[Anonymous]

This thread is 28 pages, and AFAICT not a single pro-RTO person has explained why it is better or necessary to have people commute to an office 5d/week where they will be on virtual calls at least half the time.

I don't know anyone who has no childcare and WFH. That's a strawman. But if you WFH, it's much easier to find and afford childcare since you don't have to account for commuting time.

This is the issue. FT RTO is being proposed solely to punish federal workers, for no other reason. And if you think that private sector employers won't see that they can also use this tactic with impunity (rather than layoffs with severance), you are an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is 28 pages, and AFAICT not a single pro-RTO person has explained why it is better or necessary to have people commute to an office 5d/week where they will be on virtual calls at least half the time.

I don't know anyone who has no childcare and WFH. That's a strawman. But if you WFH, it's much easier to find and afford childcare since you don't have to account for commuting time.

This is the issue. FT RTO is being proposed solely to punish federal workers, for no other reason. And if you think that private sector employers won't see that they can also use this tactic with impunity (rather than layoffs with severance), you are an idiot.

Lots of people have made arguments, you just disagree with them. That’s fine, but don’t pretend the arguments done exist. I will try to briefly summarize, not to argue big just to clarify: Many federal employees wouldn’t spend half their day on Teams if everyone was in person. They would be interacting with their colleagues and there is arguably some benefit to in person interaction. Also, downtown DC would benefit from a returning federal employee customer base. Finally, there is some benefit to federal managers and leaders who often find it easier to manage in person.

Again, you don’t have to agree with any of these arguments. But don’t pretend that everyone who disagrees with you is entirely mean-spirited or everyone who doesn’t adopt your views an idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is 28 pages, and AFAICT not a single pro-RTO person has explained why it is better or necessary to have people commute to an office 5d/week where they will be on virtual calls at least half the time.

I don't know anyone who has no childcare and WFH. That's a strawman. But if you WFH, it's much easier to find and afford childcare since you don't have to account for commuting time.

This is the issue. FT RTO is being proposed solely to punish federal workers, for no other reason. And if you think that private sector employers won't see that they can also use this tactic with impunity (rather than layoffs with severance), you are an idiot.

Lots of people have made arguments, you just disagree with them. That’s fine, but don’t pretend the arguments done exist. I will try to briefly summarize, not to argue big just to clarify: Many federal employees wouldn’t spend half their day on Teams if everyone was in person. They would be interacting with their colleagues and there is arguably some benefit to in person interaction. Also, downtown DC would benefit from a returning federal employee customer base. Finally, there is some benefit to federal managers and leaders who often find it easier to manage in person.

Again, you don’t have to agree with any of these arguments. But don’t pretend that everyone who disagrees with you is entirely mean-spirited or everyone who doesn’t adopt your views an idiot.

Not true as most people aren't in the office that they work with everyone. Zero benefit.

[Anonymous]

Training new hires will be easier and faster in person. However, this won’t matter if there is a hiring freeze.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is 28 pages, and AFAICT not a single pro-RTO person has explained why it is better or necessary to have people commute to an office 5d/week where they will be on virtual calls at least half the time.

I don't know anyone who has no childcare and WFH. That's a strawman. But if you WFH, it's much easier to find and afford childcare since you don't have to account for commuting time.

This is the issue. FT RTO is being proposed solely to punish federal workers, for no other reason. And if you think that private sector employers won't see that they can also use this tactic with impunity (rather than layoffs with severance), you are an idiot.

Lots of people have made arguments, you just disagree with them. That’s fine, but don’t pretend the arguments done exist. I will try to briefly summarize, not to argue big just to clarify: Many federal employees wouldn’t spend half their day on Teams if everyone was in person. They would be interacting with their colleagues and there is arguably some benefit to in person interaction. Also, downtown DC would benefit from a returning federal employee customer base. Finally, there is some benefit to federal managers and leaders who often find it easier to manage in person.

Again, you don’t have to agree with any of these arguments. But don’t pretend that everyone who disagrees with you is entirely mean-spirited or everyone who doesn’t adopt your views an idiot.

Not true as most people aren't in the office that they work with everyone. Zero benefit.

You can speak for your type of job, not for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is 28 pages, and AFAICT not a single pro-RTO person has explained why it is better or necessary to have people commute to an office 5d/week where they will be on virtual calls at least half the time.

I don't know anyone who has no childcare and WFH. That's a strawman. But if you WFH, it's much easier to find and afford childcare since you don't have to account for commuting time.

This is the issue. FT RTO is being proposed solely to punish federal workers, for no other reason. And if you think that private sector employers won't see that they can also use this tactic with impunity (rather than layoffs with severance), you are an idiot.

Maybe, but it seems likely the biggest impact will be on mothers with young children with collateral damage. So, its a misogynistic punishment, which isn’t surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kid has been working from home since well before Covid. When she and her husband decided to have kids they lined up child care first - the grandparents when the kids were babies and a preschool/daycare once they were toddlers. It never occurred to her for a second that she could watch her kids at home herself and work at the same time. It’s not fair to anyone involved.

Time to return to reality, ladies.

Ugh this is such sexist garbage. As PPs have explained the issue isn’t people trying to WAH with a toddler. It’s tacking on the commuting hours to the workday which = needing even more childcare (this is essentially a sudden pay cut — after care for 2 kids can be $700+ per month).

Also my DH works in private sector IT. He and many other *men* (and women) in his field are fully remote. My DH has enjoyed the work/life balance and being home to coach the kids sports after school, he helps cook dinner, etc.

So it’s not just “ladies” who care about being around for their kids. Sorry your daughter couldn’t find a better father for her kids if you think this way.

You all are just missing the point completely. You have been spoiled and frankly got a little lazy. Here's an idea: stop prioritizing giant houses and big yards. If lessening your commute time is so important, move close to your jobs. Bonus: it's better for the environment. These are ideas that those of us who raised children while working FT before the pandemic did. If we got through it, so can you. Just make better decisions.

This works. But what about when you have kids to educate, or you want to change jobs or you have a 2.75% mortgage rate?

Doesn’t it seem a better option for me to not have to move my laptop from office A to office B to use Microsoft Teams?

No.

That’s your prerogative but seems rather inefficient and pedantic to force employees to spend hours a week moving their laptop from one office to another with no actual benefit.

I spend 10-12 hours a week commuting to use my laptop by myself in a conference room. I don’t work with anyone in my city.

Because of this I’m looking for a new job. Why spend 10-12 hours in a car when I can spend it with my kids or exercising?

I have a low mortgage rate so simply moving would be financially foolish. I don’t think spending 100k a year to educate 2 kids is wise either. This means it’s off to a new job I go.

Blah blah blah. Enjoy your long overdue RTO. Good luck with your job hunt!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another reason why 1950s America was better.

For white mothers.
Black mothers didn’t have that privilege

So now everything sucks for all mothers. Progress!

Please use adult language. Did you even graduate from high school?

And stop having children if you can't afford to raise them. Are you a teen mom? You sound like it.

Lol. You missed by a mile. Keep playing.

Nope. They are absolutely correct. DP

You keep trying! Adorable. Open that wallet and start paying for your childcare. Enjoy your commute as you RTO!

What the hell are you talking about? I’m not going back into the office. But it’s cute that you tried.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is 28 pages, and AFAICT not a single pro-RTO person has explained why it is better or necessary to have people commute to an office 5d/week where they will be on virtual calls at least half the time.

I don't know anyone who has no childcare and WFH. That's a strawman. But if you WFH, it's much easier to find and afford childcare since you don't have to account for commuting time.

This is the issue. FT RTO is being proposed solely to punish federal workers, for no other reason. And if you think that private sector employers won't see that they can also use this tactic with impunity (rather than layoffs with severance), you are an idiot.

It doesn’t matter whether or not it’s necessary. The new administration is making it a priority, so it’s happening whether the reasoning behind it holds up or not. It also helps their cause that most people have been back in the office more than feds are and have little sympathy for this sky is falling reaction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2021, I had two kids in childcare. $600 per week. Now I have one. $500 per week.

People will have to quit. My bet is that is the design of the thing. There are fewer childcare spots now. I would be bullish on an expanded child tax credit, but I bet it doesn’t happen, rhetoric about family values aside.

No one will quit. People were paying for this before 2020, they will pay for it again.

You don’t think some people will quit or move away over a 40% increase in childcare costs, a housing boom that has made living close to work increasingly expensive, and a general increase in life stress due to commuting?

Many fed employees are like GS9 level and living outside the beltway. Ever increasing daycare bills and commuting costs may very well cause them to decide this isn’t financially worth it anymore. But you don’t really care if they get pushed out of the workforce do you?

Federal jobs are in high demand. For the few who do quit (rather than just tantrum and threaten), they’ll be easily and expeditiously replaced.

+1. I'm a fed in HR and we have hundreds of applications for every job posting, so many that we often cut them off at a certain number, or advertise for only a limited time.

Yeah you get a lot of applicants because fed jobs are supposed to be secure and offer good work/life balance.

Do you really think you’re going to get the same number of applicants if suddenly RIFs are happening and there is a strict in office requirement?

Although I don’t even think people laid off or who quit will be replaced so there will be zero applications anyway.

Your desperate clapbacks are hilarious. Even if the number of applicants drops (dubious, but let’s postulate), there will still be hundreds of applicants for every open slot. Truly, there will. Don’t you worry your little head about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is 28 pages, and AFAICT not a single pro-RTO person has explained why it is better or necessary to have people commute to an office 5d/week where they will be on virtual calls at least half the time.

I don't know anyone who has no childcare and WFH. That's a strawman. But if you WFH, it's much easier to find and afford childcare since you don't have to account for commuting time.

This is the issue. FT RTO is being proposed solely to punish federal workers, for no other reason. And if you think that private sector employers won't see that they can also use this tactic with impunity (rather than layoffs with severance), you are an idiot.

[/b]Lots of people have made arguments, you just disagree with them[b]. That’s fine, but don’t pretend the arguments done exist. I will try to briefly summarize, not to argue big just to clarify: Many federal employees wouldn’t spend half their day on Teams if everyone was in person. They would be interacting with their colleagues and there is arguably some benefit to in person interaction. Also, downtown DC would benefit from a returning federal employee customer base. Finally, there is some benefit to federal managers and leaders who often find it easier to manage in person.

Again, you don’t have to agree with any of these arguments. But don’t pretend that everyone who disagrees with you is entirely mean-spirited or everyone who doesn’t adopt your views an idiot.

But RTO isn’t being proposed for any of these reasons. Our billionaire oligarchy is coming up with ways to gut the federal workforce so they can weaken and deregulate things for their own financial gain.

I get you may not care about feds going into an office, but I can’t believe anyone wouldn’t be concerned with these people (who we did not elect and who have no qualifications for running anything related to government) wanting to come in and disrupt things willy nilly to cause chaos.

And today it’s government employees, but what is to stop them from starting new tasks forces on a whim if it suits them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other than a few months early in COVID were all daycares shut down. Never in my fed office has it been acceptable to not have daycare. Not sure why folks think they can work AND watch kids. Those are two jobs and you can't do either fully if you're trying to do both at the same time.

How are some of you this stupid?

If you have elementary aged kids (which is the situation most people in this thread are discussing), you generally don’t need to “watch” them when they get home from school - but you do need to be *available* in case there is some sort of emergency. There is absolutely zero reason why a parent can’t work effectively from a home office while their school aged kids play in the next room (or the backyard).

Then they can find a position that is WFH at hire — which clearly most of the endless complainers’ positions were not. The pandemic is over. Pandemic health-relayed concessions are over. Back to the office you go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are a lot of women employed FT in professional careers really saying they have no childcare? That's not what I've seen on DCUM. People are often talking about the extra time for commuting and difference of being out of the house. So like a 10yp may come home from school and not have childcare from 4-5pm because they can entertain themselves while parent works. But the parent may not want them actually alone in the house. It's a childcare gap. Same with the mornings before school opens - I would need beforecare to RTO and it might not be available this school year (already full). Or preschool may close at 5pm but with commute I'd get home later than that, etc.

WFH necessitates childcare if you have a real job but can be for fewer hours, or you cover the occasional days off and breaks without always taking PTO etc

OP here - I consider a childcare gap a lack of childcare. Before or after school care programs are not going to quickly sprout up.

+1
And even if kids can entertain themselves a bit or parents find programs, the kids can't magically transport themselves and they can't drive yet. So parents (all parents, dads too) need that flexibility after school. Strict RTO mean that these good employees will no longer be bending backwards to check mails and handle things after business hours.

I think you’re ranting about things you have no idea about. Kids can’t transport themselves? The aftercare programs all have buses and vans that pick up at our school. Parents don’t need to drive their kids to ballet or karate or gymnastics.

I'm so glad your data point of one is universal.

What school doesn't have that? Give us an example.

Our public elementary in DCPS definitely does want have transportation to activities.

Elementary school kids don’t need to be bused to activities. aftercare is fine.

It is fine. But it’s not great.

Being able to come right home from school to play with neighborhood friends, go to an extracurricular that they’re interested in, or even just have some free play is better. I know being out of the house 45-50 hours/week (i.e. 8-5:30/6) is tiring for many adults, I wouldn’t choose this for a young elementary kid. It is fine if it is what you have to do, but let’s not act like this is more ideal than kids getting to play soccer, learn an instrument, take tutoring classes, go to scouts meetings, etc. and having a family meal together.

if that’s your ideal AND you want both parents to work FT, you need a better plan than assuming that covid-era telework (for positions that are not actually fully remote) will last forever.

I have some millennial coworkers who had kids and bought houses way out in the burbs during covid. I feel for them but truly, they shouldn’t have counted on max telework lasting indefinitely. I also have a GenX coworker who relocated across the country during covid - at least she fully knows she’ll be terminated when they eventually catch up to her.

Please explain why they need to return to the office.

See, here’s the problem. You think you are due an explanation. You are not due an explanation. People who accepted in office jobs are now going back to in office jobs. Don’t like it? Bye.