RTO EO is up

[Anonymous]

This EO is so dumb. It’s almost too vague. OPM will have to issue guidance in order for agencies to implement otherwise there will be disparate ways in which this is interpreted. The only thing I’m hinging on in retaining even 1 day of TW is that this doesn’t seem to override the TW Act of 2010 but perhaps and agency head could decide to bypass it and abolish TW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about bargaining contracts and ADA accommodations!

It says exceptions as deemed necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reads to me that it only affects the departments and not the independent agencies. I agree that the wording on "remote work" is an interesting choice of words since that doesn't necessarily mean "telework."

I'm willing to go in so will wait and see.

How do you get that? I’m at an independent regulatory agency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting they only addressed remote work vs telework. What is it like 10% of people are remote? Seems like a small group to go after vs targeting TW.

I think that depends how you parse it.

take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements and require employees to return to work in-person at their respective duty stations on a full-time basis--meaning require those remote work employees to return in person

OR

take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements --end full remote work
AND require [ALL] employees to return to work in-person at their respective duty stations on a full-time basis

Either way, the "as soon as practicable," "allow necessary exemptions," and "comply with applicable laws" leaves a lot of discretion.

This exactly. I love lawyers and the attention to language.

[Anonymous]

Bottom line is there is a huge amount of agency discretion here, and ultimately it will depend on how much your agency head wants to do away with telework. If they are not on board this leaves ample room for them to do very little.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So how about if you have a reasonable accommodation to remote work?

That would seem to fall under the "applicable laws".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The worst part is that it explicitly says return full time

But that apparently only refers to 'remote workers', not teleworkers. Or could only refer to remote workers, depending on how you read it.

But also, they have to 'return to their duty stations'? Remote workers' homes are their duty stations....so I guess they just...keep working at home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line is there is a huge amount of agency discretion here, and ultimately it will depend on how much your agency head wants to do away with telework. If they are not on board this leaves ample room for them to do very little.

+1 I am not worried to be back 100% of the time since there is no space for that. I am ok with 50% of the time.

[Anonymous]

OPM tomorrow:

"We trust that the Executive Branch knows the difference between remote work and telework, and also that they know that remote workers' duty stations are their homes. As such we interpret this EO to refer to just remote workers, and it requires remote workers to maintain their home duty stations."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OPM tomorrow:

"We trust that the Executive Branch knows the difference between remote work and telework, and also that they know that remote workers' duty stations are their homes. As such we interpret this EO to refer to just remote workers, and it requires remote workers to maintain their home duty stations."

lol, love this!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OPM tomorrow:

"We trust that the Executive Branch knows the difference between remote work and telework, and also that they know that remote workers' duty stations are their homes. As such we interpret this EO to refer to just remote workers, and it requires remote workers to maintain their home duty stations."

I think this is a real possibility that they worded it this way on purposes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OPM tomorrow:

"We trust that the Executive Branch knows the difference between remote work and telework, and also that they know that remote workers' duty stations are their homes. As such we interpret this EO to refer to just remote workers, and it requires remote workers to maintain their home duty stations."

I believe in DCUM parlance this is known as the “stupid and happy” technique of dealing with your MIL. 🤣😂🤣

[Anonymous]

The order's language seems to be mainly just for his supporters, of which vast majority blindly believes whatever talking point there is about the "lazy bureaucrat". The lack in detail and length of the order in the perfect language for such type of supporter's comprehension level and attention span, but any baby attorney can pick apart the vagueness of this order and how much deference it gives to the mid-to-upper level supervisors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The order's language seems to be mainly just for his supporters, of which vast majority blindly believes whatever talking point there is about the "lazy bureaucrat". The lack in detail and length of the order in the perfect language for such type of supporter's comprehension level and attention span, but any baby attorney can pick apart the vagueness of this order and how much deference it gives to the mid-to-upper level supervisors.

This exactly. They’ll believe it’s done and expect grocery prices to be lower tomorrow from that other vague EO. All hilarious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Glad I got my popcorn early.

Does it turn you on when other people’s lives are upended?

Drama llama? RTO is hardly an upending - have some perspective

It is if you live across the country. I have remote coworkers who live in all 50 states.