SEC job openings and telework

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Odds PA doesn't go to FLRA if there's a favorable arbitration ruling for the union? Like less than 5% right? Seriously considering leaving for a pay cut to get some flexibility back.

I would say close to 0. He had them pick the longest post arbitration briefing schedule he could sp he is clearly doing everything he can to drag this out.

Also, not that I care about the two hours but if he won't even give people 2 hours early release for the holidays when many other cabinet heads are doing this he is clearly going to be a hardass on TW too.

It’s all for show. I know many people who telework plenty. But gotta do just enough so that you can honestly say during congressional hearings that the agency “doesn’t allow regular telework.” Gotta play the game.

Yeah but it’s so dependent on your division and individual mgmt whether you get to telework at all.

+1. I have gotten 1 day TW total since RTO and that was because the trains were messed up.

Meanwhile my friends in OASB get to TW 1-2 times per week.

Gotta hand it to mgmt in OASB for going out on a limb and risking their careers just to liberally interpret and implement some stupid ambiguous “policy” that nobody understands. If I were mgmt, there’d be zero telework, period. If the 10th floor wants a different policy, they could issue it (clearly and unambiguously).

[Anonymous]

The union needs to push mgmt for a clear policy on ad hoc telework. Sounds like OASB is allowing a frequent and regular telework schedule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The union needs to push mgmt for a clear policy on ad hoc telework. Sounds like OASB is allowing a frequent and regular telework schedule.

lol. The union is in no position to “ push” for anything. It has zero leverage. It’s totally irrelevant. An abysmal failure. I doubt PA gives GG the time of day. Why would he?

Anyone still paying dues is either a moron or a fool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The union needs to push mgmt for a clear policy on ad hoc telework. Sounds like OASB is allowing a frequent and regular telework schedule.

Then no one will get situational at all, which is worse than the current status quo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The union needs to push mgmt for a clear policy on ad hoc telework. Sounds like OASB is allowing a frequent and regular telework schedule.

Then no one will get situational at all, which is worse than the current status quo.

Exactly, if you push for a blanket rule they will go with the strictest interpretation possible. Better that at least some people get a benefit.

[Anonymous]

I’ve heard this explanation, but I’m skeptical that it’s not just a bluff by management that they’d eliminate telework entirely.

I also wonder about offices like OIA that have calls off hours where they sometimes they rope in staff from other divisions. If staff can’t take those calls from home they just aren’t going to happen. You would also have even more staff taking more annual leave if they couldn’t do ad hoc, more staff would start looking for jobs elsewhere, morale would get even worse, etc., etc.

It seems like Atkins is comfortable with current staffing levels and doesn’t want to do a RIF. Presumably he could just eliminate ad hoc on his own initiative if he wanted to encourage more people to quit, take leave more, etc. I’m not convinced that pushing for some sort of uniform rules related to ad hoc would have to be so draconian. As long as it’s not one day a week I don’t think he’d be seen by his White House overlords as giving in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The union needs to push mgmt for a clear policy on ad hoc telework. Sounds like OASB is allowing a frequent and regular telework schedule.

Then no one will get situational at all, which is worse than the current status quo.

Exactly, if you push for a blanket rule they will go with the strictest interpretation possible. Better that at least some people get a benefit.

[Anonymous]

^ad hoc for credit hours in the situations you mentioned seems to be fine (i.e. for the benefit of the agency). Ad hoc seems to only be restricted when you want to use it for your benefit.