Biden wants RTO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will be surprised if agencies act decisively given all these factors.

LMAO. Agencies are not going to act “decisively” wrt RTO. No one is going back to the office who doesn’t need to.

[Anonymous]

I'm primarily frustrated by this because we gave up space and moved into a smaller space where we no longer have our own permanent offices (we will do hoteling) based on a certain number of days back in the office. If the days increase, I really want to have my own permanent office, but don't see a way for the agency to unwind that now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I’ve heard similar. Many people who didn’t have strong family tiesup and moved and they hired a bunch of newbies into remote positions. I get it to some degree and don’t mind going in once a week or as needed, but beyond that, I don’t want to do. And the current system for deciding on remote seems to almost penalize people who for whatever reason (kids, elder care, lack of money) can’t move immediately. It also seems to benefit new hires over those of us who have been long term excellent employees.

I agree with this, but frankly we're having trouble recruiting new folks because the GS 11-12 positions don't really pay enough for anyone with a family or student loans to move to DC and live decently. (I live almost 50 miles away because my salary doesn't stretch that far, I wish remote were an option.)

You can live closer just not where you want and how you want.

Sure, I could fit my family of 4 into a one bedroom apartment if i absolutely had to. But doesn't that actually just support my point that people don't want to take these jobs because why would you move somewhere at a salary that won't let you live where and how you want?

Exactly. What is the point?

[Anonymous]

I’m looking forward to it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love WFH more than anyone, but there’s no question that RTO is much better for the local economy. Lunches, metro rides, parking fees, dry cleaners, etc.

People at home still spend money, just on different things. PR has us thinking that certain businesses are entitled to our money and that it is our duty to give it to them. The government needlessly luring people out of the house to enrich certain businesses is corruption and also happens to be anti-free market for those who care about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love WFH more than anyone, but there’s no question that RTO is much better for the local economy. Lunches, metro rides, parking fees, dry cleaners, etc.

People at home still spend money, just on different things. PR has us thinking that certain businesses are entitled to our money and that it is our duty to give it to them. The government needlessly luring people out of the house to enrich certain businesses is corruption and also happens to be anti-free market for those who care about that.

This is just not true. I spend a lot less money when I wfh, zero gas, never walk out for a sandwich instead make one in my kitchen, don’t wear suits that need dry cleaning, etc. DC has lost a lot of small businesses since the pandemic started and you may not care about that but I’m glad the DC and federal government do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love WFH more than anyone, but there’s no question that RTO is much better for the local economy. Lunches, metro rides, parking fees, dry cleaners, etc.

People at home still spend money, just on different things. PR has us thinking that certain businesses are entitled to our money and that it is our duty to give it to them. The government needlessly luring people out of the house to enrich certain businesses is corruption and also happens to be anti-free market for those who care about that.

This is just not true. I spend a lot less money when I wfh, zero gas, never walk out for a sandwich instead make one in my kitchen, don’t wear suits that need dry cleaning, etc. DC has lost a lot of small businesses since the pandemic started and you may not care about that but I’m glad the DC and federal government do.

For every one of the things you can list, I can list another thing you spend more on while WFH. All utilities bills are higher. Your grocery (vs eating out) budget goes up. You are running laundry more often, which wears out clothes faster in addition to jacking up the water bills. Etc.

This is 95% about the preferences of the National Restaurant Association--the other NRA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love WFH more than anyone, but there’s no question that RTO is much better for the local economy. Lunches, metro rides, parking fees, dry cleaners, etc.

People at home still spend money, just on different things. PR has us thinking that certain businesses are entitled to our money and that it is our duty to give it to them. The government needlessly luring people out of the house to enrich certain businesses is corruption and also happens to be anti-free market for those who care about that.

The thing people miss about the economic reasons for an increased onsite presence in urban areas is that nobody is saying it is an individual employee's "duty" to prop up business, or is any individual being forced to give their money to any particular establishment.

You know what entity DOES have a duty to make sure the economy is sound, resilient and equitable? The federal government does. And they have ALWAYS accomplished this in part by adjusting incentives. They consider it when deciding where to open public facilities in the first place, where and when to provide subsidies to private business, etc. Deciding what their own policies are as they run the business of government also counts. And they do these things, at least primarily, to keep the economy stable for all residents. Sure it is influenced by special interest lobbying. But the failure of CRE has ALREADY had an impact in the banking sector that affected almost everyone.

I'm in favor of a hybrid schedule with a small amount of onsite presence. But I also understand and appreciate that the various interests the federal government in particular is uniquely trying to balance here is a lot more complex than people like to portray it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love WFH more than anyone, but there’s no question that RTO is much better for the local economy. Lunches, metro rides, parking fees, dry cleaners, etc.

People at home still spend money, just on different things. PR has us thinking that certain businesses are entitled to our money and that it is our duty to give it to them. The government needlessly luring people out of the house to enrich certain businesses is corruption and also happens to be anti-free market for those who care about that.

The thing people miss about the economic reasons for an increased onsite presence in urban areas is that nobody is saying it is an individual employee's "duty" to prop up business, or is any individual being forced to give their money to any particular establishment.

You know what entity DOES have a duty to make sure the economy is sound, resilient and equitable? The federal government does. And they have ALWAYS accomplished this in part by adjusting incentives. They consider it when deciding where to open public facilities in the first place, where and when to provide subsidies to private business, etc. Deciding what their own policies are as they run the business of government also counts. And they do these things, at least primarily, to keep the economy stable for all residents. Sure it is influenced by special interest lobbying. But the failure of CRE has ALREADY had an impact in the banking sector that affected almost everyone.

I'm in favor of a hybrid schedule with a small amount of onsite presence. But I also understand and appreciate that the various interests the federal government in particular is uniquely trying to balance here is a lot more complex than people like to portray it.

Govt does but workers don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love WFH more than anyone, but there’s no question that RTO is much better for the local economy. Lunches, metro rides, parking fees, dry cleaners, etc.

People at home still spend money, just on different things. PR has us thinking that certain businesses are entitled to our money and that it is our duty to give it to them. The government needlessly luring people out of the house to enrich certain businesses is corruption and also happens to be anti-free market for those who care about that.

The thing people miss about the economic reasons for an increased onsite presence in urban areas is that nobody is saying it is an individual employee's "duty" to prop up business, or is any individual being forced to give their money to any particular establishment.

You know what entity DOES have a duty to make sure the economy is sound, resilient and equitable? The federal government does. And they have ALWAYS accomplished this in part by adjusting incentives. They consider it when deciding where to open public facilities in the first place, where and when to provide subsidies to private business, etc. Deciding what their own policies are as they run the business of government also counts. And they do these things, at least primarily, to keep the economy stable for all residents. Sure it is influenced by special interest lobbying. But the failure of CRE has ALREADY had an impact in the banking sector that affected almost everyone.

I'm in favor of a hybrid schedule with a small amount of onsite presence. But I also understand and appreciate that the various interests the federal government in particular is uniquely trying to balance here is a lot more complex than people like to portray it.

Govt does but workers don’t.

PP here, and that is exactly what I said.

The govt is not forcing anyone to buy a sandwich. They are creating conditions and incentives that make it more likely that you will. (And this particular consideration in the RTO/WFM debate is really more about transit and rent anyway)

[Anonymous]

Again, if I need to subsidize DC with my income, you’re going to have to give me an incentive to do so. Flexible work hours or higher pay. No one cares about dry cleaners in DC. Those businesses left, many of them moved to the suburbs anyway. People shifted a WHILE ago. Business creation is UP. Just not in cities. The economy is actually doing great right now, even without people commuting in DC on the daily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, if I need to subsidize DC with my income, you’re going to have to give me an incentive to do so. Flexible work hours or higher pay. No one cares about dry cleaners in DC. Those businesses left, many of them moved to the suburbs anyway. People shifted a WHILE ago. Business creation is UP. Just not in cities. The economy is actually doing great right now, even without people commuting in DC on the daily.

I think we are talking past eachother.

This sounds harsh, but your incentive to do so is that your job requires you to be in a certain place for a certain amount of time. You are free to spend the money or not.

Several banks DID fail and several banks are at risk in part due to CRE. The closure of multiple small businesses in a concentrated area WILL have secondary effects, and immediate effects on those business owners. A reduction in overall tax revenue in major downtown areas including DC will also have impacts over time. The economy is a lot more complex than many are making it out to be.

And again, I am certainly in favor of flexible working hours and minimal onsite presence. I'm just not blind to all of the factors at play or myopic about it. It isn't only about whether I personally buy a sandwich or get my own personal tasks done well at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, if I need to subsidize DC with my income, you’re going to have to give me an incentive to do so. Flexible work hours or higher pay. No one cares about dry cleaners in DC. Those businesses left, many of them moved to the suburbs anyway. People shifted a WHILE ago. Business creation is UP. Just not in cities. The economy is actually doing great right now, even without people commuting in DC on the daily.

I think we are talking past eachother.

This sounds harsh, but your incentive to do so is that your job requires you to be in a certain place for a certain amount of time. You are free to spend the money or not.

Several banks DID fail and several banks are at risk in part due to CRE. The closure of multiple small businesses in a concentrated area WILL have secondary effects, and immediate effects on those business owners. A reduction in overall tax revenue in major downtown areas including DC will also have impacts over time. The economy is a lot more complex than many are making it out to be.

And again, I am certainly in favor of flexible working hours and minimal onsite presence. I'm just not blind to all of the factors at play or myopic about it. It isn't only about whether I personally buy a sandwich or get my own personal tasks done well at home.

You have an extremely narrow view of what my options are. If my job requires it, I will leave. See? This is what the issue is right now.

The businesses closed already. They aren’t coming back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, if I need to subsidize DC with my income, you’re going to have to give me an incentive to do so. Flexible work hours or higher pay. No one cares about dry cleaners in DC. Those businesses left, many of them moved to the suburbs anyway. People shifted a WHILE ago. Business creation is UP. Just not in cities. The economy is actually doing great right now, even without people commuting in DC on the daily.

I think we are talking past eachother.

This sounds harsh, but your incentive to do so is that your job requires you to be in a certain place for a certain amount of time. You are free to spend the money or not.

Several banks DID fail and several banks are at risk in part due to CRE. The closure of multiple small businesses in a concentrated area WILL have secondary effects, and immediate effects on those business owners. A reduction in overall tax revenue in major downtown areas including DC will also have impacts over time. The economy is a lot more complex than many are making it out to be.

And again, I am certainly in favor of flexible working hours and minimal onsite presence. I'm just not blind to all of the factors at play or myopic about it. It isn't only about whether I personally buy a sandwich or get my own personal tasks done well at home.

Noone is blind or myopic about it. People just don't agree it's their job to fix the problem.

[Anonymous]

The government also has an interest in running well, which surpasses DC’s interests. As it should. Federal employees are not going to turn around CRE. That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. Private sector is hiring and figuring out ways to deal with the labor market that exists. The government needs to follow their lead if they want to retain or hire. Commercial real estate investors can pivot to the burbs. Everyone else did.