RTO and No Childcare.

[Anonymous]

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.

There are 0 vans / buses for activities at our Arlington elementary. Extended Care is full for the year with a waitlist. People have already committed to sports teams, paid for a full year of dance lessons, etc. School break camps are already full for the year. Parents can make different choices in the future, it’s the mid-year change that is the issue.

Also what fantasy world do you live in where extended day is “good enough” for elementary? Travel sports start in 2nd and 3rd grade. Kids don’t magically just show up in middle school and start new hobbies and sports having never participated in anything before. No 12 yr old is rolling into beginner fencing or karate or ballet with a bunch of 7yr olds.

Oh dear God. Forget the parents doing their jobs to the stipulations of their employers. Won’t anyone think of the FENCING??!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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).

I understand your perspective, but it’s important to consider both the legal and practical implications of supervising children while working from home, especially in government roles.

Balancing work and childcare isn’t just a personal decision; it has legal and professional requirements. Telework agreements for government employees explicitly state that appropriate childcare arrangements must be in place while working. It’s illegal to manage both responsibilities simultaneously, whether you're physically supervising or just "listening in." You're expected to fully account for your work hours, with no distractions from other responsibilities.

Childcare While Teleworking: A Professional Expectation
Think of childcare the same way you would if you were in the office: the expectation is that your children are being cared for by someone else. Telework is a convenience, not a substitute for childcare. It was never intended to subsidize your childcare needs but rather to provide flexibility for where you work, not how you manage dual responsibilities.

Age Guidelines and Childcare Needs
8 years and under: Must always be in the care of a responsible person. They should never be left unsupervised in homes, cars, playgrounds, or yards.
9 to 10 years: May be left unsupervised for up to 1.5 hours during daylight and early evening hours.
11 to 12 years: May be left unsupervised for up to 3 hours during daylight and early evening hours.
13 to 15 years: May be left unsupervised for more than 3 hours but not overnight.
16 and older: May be left unsupervised overnight for 1 to 2 days with a plan in place.
These guidelines underscore that children, especially elementary-aged, require supervision. Teleworking doesn’t change that responsibility. For your role to remain compliant and effective, proper childcare arrangements must be in place, ensuring both your productivity and your children’s safety.

Listen, dummy. Y’all don’t get to gaslight us anymore about what’s illegal or ethical when it comes to Federal employment after voting that traitor back into office. Just stop.

“Dummy?” Are you 6? That person is correct. The fact that you don’t like the policy is entirely immaterial.

DP, lifelong Democrat voter, from (Bill) Clinton to Harris

[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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

[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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

Yeah. All the "but, but, but, but WHHHYYYYY?" people are driving me nuts. Why? Because it's happening that's why. Can we please focus on the reality already? It's time. I'm a Democrat, I voted for Harris, and I'm going back to the office whether I like it or not. Start communicating with your leadership ways in which you could participate to make this work for your agency and for your family. Nothing will be gained here by digging in and throwing a tantrum over why.

[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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

Yeah. All the "but, but, but, but WHHHYYYYY?" people are driving me nuts. Why? Because it's happening that's why. Can we please focus on the reality already? It's time. I'm a Democrat, I voted for Harris, and I'm going back to the office whether I like it or not. Start communicating with your leadership ways in which you could participate to make this work for your agency and for your family. Nothing will be gained here by digging in and throwing a tantrum over why.

No way. This is America. I’m not going to just go along with something like this because “it’s happening that’s why.”

RTO is pointless, bad for the environment and families and even bad for business.

[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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

Yeah. All the "but, but, but, but WHHHYYYYY?" people are driving me nuts. Why? Because it's happening that's why. Can we please focus on the reality already? It's time. I'm a Democrat, I voted for Harris, and I'm going back to the office whether I like it or not. Start communicating with your leadership ways in which you could participate to make this work for your agency and for your family. Nothing will be gained here by digging in and throwing a tantrum over why.

Agreed, with the caveat that we don’t even really know if this is happening. Right now all we know is that two loudmouths who may or may not have the president’s ear in two months are bloviating about it on twitter. By all means, get your house in order now to make a potential transition easier, but until it happens, it hasn’t happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

Yeah. All the "but, but, but, but WHHHYYYYY?" people are driving me nuts. Why? Because it's happening that's why. Can we please focus on the reality already? It's time. I'm a Democrat, I voted for Harris, and I'm going back to the office whether I like it or not. Start communicating with your leadership ways in which you could participate to make this work for your agency and for your family. Nothing will be gained here by digging in and throwing a tantrum over why.

No way. This is America. I’m not going to just go along with something like this because “it’s happening that’s why.”

RTO is pointless, bad for the environment and families and even bad for business.

Ok, so quit. Which is exactly what they want you to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

Yeah. All the "but, but, but, but WHHHYYYYY?" people are driving me nuts. Why? Because it's happening that's why. Can we please focus on the reality already? It's time. I'm a Democrat, I voted for Harris, and I'm going back to the office whether I like it or not. Start communicating with your leadership ways in which you could participate to make this work for your agency and for your family. Nothing will be gained here by digging in and throwing a tantrum over why.

Agreed, with the caveat that we don’t even really know if this is happening. Right now all we know is that two loudmouths who may or may not have the president’s ear in two months are bloviating about it on twitter. By all means, get your house in order now to make a potential transition easier, but until it happens, it hasn’t happened.

Very good point. Good idea to prepare, but who knows what it will actually look like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

Yeah. All the "but, but, but, but WHHHYYYYY?" people are driving me nuts. Why? Because it's happening that's why. Can we please focus on the reality already? It's time. I'm a Democrat, I voted for Harris, and I'm going back to the office whether I like it or not. Start communicating with your leadership ways in which you could participate to make this work for your agency and for your family. Nothing will be gained here by digging in and throwing a tantrum over why.

No way. This is America. I’m not going to just go along with something like this because “it’s happening that’s why.”

RTO is pointless, bad for the environment and families and even bad for business.

Ok, so quit. Which is exactly what they want you to do.

I’m not quitting. I won’t meet the requirement like many other employees. This is all a game and easily won.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

Yeah. All the "but, but, but, but WHHHYYYYY?" people are driving me nuts. Why? Because it's happening that's why. Can we please focus on the reality already? It's time. I'm a Democrat, I voted for Harris, and I'm going back to the office whether I like it or not. Start communicating with your leadership ways in which you could participate to make this work for your agency and for your family. Nothing will be gained here by digging in and throwing a tantrum over why.

Agreed, with the caveat that we don’t even really know if this is happening. Right now all we know is that two loudmouths who may or may not have the president’s ear in two months are bloviating about it on twitter. By all means, get your house in order now to make a potential transition easier, but until it happens, it hasn’t happened.

That’s really the point. Intent has been made clear as has lack of concern about bad outcomes for individuals. Getting your house in order is really all anyone can do. And for some, like parents with young kids and no local support systems, that might be a daunting task best handled by planning for the possibility now. I mean, it’s probably too late to save a ton of money so you can afford to be unemployed so what else are you going to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Good grief. Read the room. I'm guessing your wife SAH and cooked and cleaned in heels and pearls. You probably bought a house for practically nothing and now it's worth over a million $. It's 2024. For most people, two incomes are needed to survive now. We can't buy homes. We're limiting children to two maybe one because it's too expensive to have any more. The cost of college is ASTRONOMICAL. Give me a HUGE effin break.

Believe it or not even in 2024 if one spouse devotes effort to work they usually more than dual income and with no childcare costs. Pretty easy to make 350K to 450K if one spouse works. And saving for a house is WAY WAY easier today than ever. The stock market is up like 100 percent in last four years and RSUs and grants are way up. Even CDs and money markets are way up.

And people way richer. Kids are starting at 120K fresh out of school. My daughter who is 24 her friend makes 100K and she four girls share a three bedroom, larger room split by two girls. They have a household income of 400K at 24.

I'm sorry are you just making up sh$ to stir? We are talking fed RTO. So your magical 300-400k income is a pipe dream.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Good grief. Read the room. I'm guessing your wife SAH and cooked and cleaned in heels and pearls. You probably bought a house for practically nothing and now it's worth over a million $. It's 2024. For most people, two incomes are needed to survive now. We can't buy homes. We're limiting children to two maybe one because it's too expensive to have any more. The cost of college is ASTRONOMICAL. Give me a HUGE effin break.

Believe it or not even in 2024 if one spouse devotes effort to work they usually more than dual income and with no childcare costs. Pretty easy to make 350K to 450K if one spouse works. And saving for a house is WAY WAY easier today than ever. The stock market is up like 100 percent in last four years and RSUs and grants are way up. Even CDs and money markets are way up.

And people way richer. Kids are starting at 120K fresh out of school. My daughter who is 24 her friend makes 100K and she four girls share a three bedroom, larger room split by two girls. They have a household income of 400K at 24.

I'm sorry are you just making up sh$ to stir? We are talking fed RTO. So your magical 300-400k income is a pipe dream.

A two fed family can make $300-400K a year. But, usually with 10+ years of service.

Even in the private market though its very hard for a single income to make that much. They are dreaming.

This is all about local businesses, tax breaks/incentives for building owners, etc. It makes zero sense. Both feds and private are RTO. My husband is RTO after working from home long before covid. It sucks between the extra costs and they don't even have desks for everyone. He keeps a camping chair in the car.

[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…

I would be surprised if the school system offers it they usually contract out to private companies and they are limited to the amount of students that you can enroll in either before care or after care.
PG county does not guarantee before before care aftercare on-site in schools. We do happen to have before care and aftercare in our local elementary school but they are limited to 50 kids. In a school of 400 plus.
.it's also 30 per day to use both so 150/week and 600/mo for one kid. School hours are 8 30 to 2:40. Before care is 730-830 and 240-530. Still not enough to cover parents commuting and both having to be in 8-5.
This is reality. And this policy is not kid friendly, family friendly, climate friendly not efficient friendly. Work will not get done on flexed hours. Workers were willing to do it because they were being accommodated. Rigidity breeds rigidity.
Private busses options are more expensive.

[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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

Yeah. All the "but, but, but, but WHHHYYYYY?" people are driving me nuts. Why? Because it's happening that's why. Can we please focus on the reality already? It's time. I'm a Democrat, I voted for Harris, and I'm going back to the office whether I like it or not. Start communicating with your leadership ways in which you could participate to make this work for your agency and for your family. Nothing will be gained here by digging in and throwing a tantrum over why.

Not a current fed, but you realize that this is much easier to do if the reason for FT RTO is clear? Otherwise, it's hard to talk about how to make things work for the agency, if the policy is just arbitrary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Because you aren’t due an explanation. It’s happening. Get ready.

Yeah. All the "but, but, but, but WHHHYYYYY?" people are driving me nuts. Why? Because it's happening that's why. Can we please focus on the reality already? It's time. I'm a Democrat, I voted for Harris, and I'm going back to the office whether I like it or not. Start communicating with your leadership ways in which you could participate to make this work for your agency and for your family. Nothing will be gained here by digging in and throwing a tantrum over why.

No way. This is America. I’m not going to just go along with something like this because “it’s happening that’s why.”

RTO is pointless, bad for the environment and families and even bad for business.

Ok, so quit. Which is exactly what they want you to do.

I’m not quitting. I won’t meet the requirement like many other employees. This is all a game and easily won.

Play stupid games and win stupid prizes. I hope your family doesn’t need your salary to live on.