What is your federal agency telling you re: RTO? (No other rants/comments!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

I'm a supervisor and I honestly don't care.

Take the deal and come to work or quit. I'm sick and tired of the entitlement from other federal workers. Democracy goes both ways. We all sat through years of DEI training and the other craziness during the Biden years that a lot of us disagreed with. I remember sitting in training and having some GS14 patronize us and tell us if we disagreed with DEI then we were racist. Hope she likes unemployment and all the other people who joined in enjoy their commutes.

"Elections have consequences" - Barrack Hussein Obama

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the new RTO order against the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010?

I also have this question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

I'm a supervisor and I honestly don't care.

Take the deal and come to work or quit. I'm sick and tired of the entitlement from other federal workers. Democracy goes both ways. We all sat through years of DEI training and the other craziness during the Biden years that a lot of us disagreed with. I remember sitting in training and having some GS14 patronize us and tell us if we disagreed with DEI then we were racist. Hope she likes unemployment and all the other people who joined in enjoy their commutes.

"Elections have consequences" - Barrack Hussein Obama

Where do you work?

We have 1 hour a year about hiring and and accommodations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the new RTO order against the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010?

I also have this question.

Me too. I haven't done the research. But, my agency was *required* by Congress to implement telework around that time.

[Anonymous]

I’m a supervisor, and out email came out at 4:30. Everyone back to the office as of 8 am Monday, with some exemptions listed. My agency is in person, but we let some people telework from time to time. I have one employee with a TW agreement, and I texted them to make sure that they were planning to come in on Monday. Our HR is also still trying to parse through everything so at this point in time you follow the guidance as written. Our HR also helpfully pointed out that in the event of a weather event we don’t have to work from home because all TW agreements are suspended. I find that kind of amusing because in my agency it’s mostly the HR types who have the kind of work that can be done from home so they are pissed on everyone’s behalf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

I'm a supervisor and I honestly don't care.

Take the deal and come to work or quit. I'm sick and tired of the entitlement from other federal workers. Democracy goes both ways. We all sat through years of DEI training and the other craziness during the Biden years that a lot of us disagreed with. I remember sitting in training and having some GS14 patronize us and tell us if we disagreed with DEI then we were racist. Hope she likes unemployment and all the other people who joined in enjoy their commutes.

"Elections have consequences" - Barrack Hussein Obama

Where do you work?

We have 1 hour a year about hiring and and accommodations.

For the DoD.

We literally had monthly meetings to discuss why "insert racist white person idea" here. And it was an "open discussion" which meant it was open season for any left wing nut job to spout off the latest crazy theory. If you dared to speak up against any of it then you'd be shunned at work so obviously everyone who disagreed kept quiet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the new RTO order against the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010?

No. Because the act doesn't mean you have to allow it beyond situational.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's BS that people who have been working remotely for 10+ years are now just expected to uproot their lives over night. It's down right cruel and stressful. Gives no thought to people's actual lives. Removing flexibility in the workplace for remote work is absolutely going to cost productivity when people aren't able to use the perfectly good work stations in their homes, and instead have to take time off.

But people hired under remote job announcements are exempt.

I was hired remote and I'm certainly not.

It’s also not in our guidance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

I'm a supervisor and I honestly don't care.

Take the deal and come to work or quit. I'm sick and tired of the entitlement from other federal workers. Democracy goes both ways. We all sat through years of DEI training and the other craziness during the Biden years that a lot of us disagreed with. I remember sitting in training and having some GS14 patronize us and tell us if we disagreed with DEI then we were racist. Hope she likes unemployment and all the other people who joined in enjoy their commutes.

"Elections have consequences" - Barrack Hussein Obama

Where do you work?

We have 1 hour a year about hiring and and accommodations.

For the DoD.

We literally had monthly meetings to discuss why "insert racist white person idea" here. And it was an "open discussion" which meant it was open season for any left wing nut job to spout off the latest crazy theory. If you dared to speak up against any of it then you'd be shunned at work so obviously everyone who disagreed kept quiet.

I guess we didn’t have white racist people saying something racist monthly to discuss. Sounds like that’s a division issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

I'm a supervisor and I honestly don't care.

Take the deal and come to work or quit. I'm sick and tired of the entitlement from other federal workers. Democracy goes both ways. We all sat through years of DEI training and the other craziness during the Biden years that a lot of us disagreed with. I remember sitting in training and having some GS14 patronize us and tell us if we disagreed with DEI then we were racist. Hope she likes unemployment and all the other people who joined in enjoy their commutes.

"Elections have consequences" - Barrack Hussein Obama

Where do you work?

We have 1 hour a year about hiring and and accommodations.

For the DoD.

We literally had monthly meetings to discuss why "insert racist white person idea" here. And it was an "open discussion" which meant it was open season for any left wing nut job to spout off the latest crazy theory. If you dared to speak up against any of it then you'd be shunned at work so obviously everyone who disagreed kept quiet.

I guess we didn’t have white racist people saying something racist monthly to discuss. Sounds like that’s a division issue.

Or we could just focus on our jobs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The plan for those that are remote is to end their agreement. It is literally spelled out in the EO. They will do this by RIF.

It's easy for an agency to delete billets and reassign them elsewhere. This gets around all the red tape for government relocation of the employee. If you are remote then you should be worried and doing everything you can to get back to your duty station if you value your job.

No one should believe trump and musk are going to let anyone slide and stay remote.

Where is that spelled out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The plan for those that are remote is to end their agreement. It is literally spelled out in the EO. They will do this by RIF.

It's easy for an agency to delete billets and reassign them elsewhere. This gets around all the red tape for government relocation of the employee. If you are remote then you should be worried and doing everything you can to get back to your duty station if you value your job.

No one should believe trump and musk are going to let anyone slide and stay remote.

Where is that spelled out?

Read the EO. It directs agencies to end all remote work arrangements. That’s almost a direct quote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

I'm a supervisor and I honestly don't care.

Take the deal and come to work or quit. I'm sick and tired of the entitlement from other federal workers. Democracy goes both ways. We all sat through years of DEI training and the other craziness during the Biden years that a lot of us disagreed with. I remember sitting in training and having some GS14 patronize us and tell us if we disagreed with DEI then we were racist. Hope she likes unemployment and all the other people who joined in enjoy their commutes.

"Elections have consequences" - Barrack Hussein Obama

Where do you work?

We have 1 hour a year about hiring and and accommodations.

For the DoD.

We literally had monthly meetings to discuss why "insert racist white person idea" here. And it was an "open discussion" which meant it was open season for any left wing nut job to spout off the latest crazy theory. If you dared to speak up against any of it then you'd be shunned at work so obviously everyone who disagreed kept quiet.

I guess we didn’t have white racist people saying something racist monthly to discuss. Sounds like that’s a division issue.

Or we could just focus on our jobs

One hour a year to ensure my deaf employee has their accommodation is focusing on my job. Learning about the advancement every year in technologies is worth the hour.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The plan for those that are remote is to end their agreement. It is literally spelled out in the EO. They will do this by RIF.

It's easy for an agency to delete billets and reassign them elsewhere. This gets around all the red tape for government relocation of the employee. If you are remote then you should be worried and doing everything you can to get back to your duty station if you value your job.

No one should believe trump and musk are going to let anyone slide and stay remote.

Where is that spelled out?

The EO literally says to end remote work.

The political appointments will find a way to get rid of these remote people one way or another. Work from home fed employees are public enemy number 1 for this administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t the new RTO order against the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010?

No. Because the act doesn't mean you have to allow it beyond situational.

No, that’s not a correct interpretation. The law “authorizes federal employees to telework to the maximum extent possible without compromising agency operations and performance.” That’s a different issue than situation / recurring. And it conflicts with OPM’s memo.