CDC employees losing RA telework

[Anonymous]

Would one of these bring back telework -

-Dem winning the next election
-A good economy
-Union strike

[Anonymous]

Why the federal government HR is so incompetent?
I am not a fed, but it seems the problem is not people who abuse the system. The problem is those who should distinguish real disabilities from fake ones, but can’t competently perform their job. Am I wrong?

[Anonymous]

Telework is very helpful for people who need a lot of ongoing therapy/treatments. It allows them to minimize time off which allows them to continue working instead of taking sick leave. With telework they can take 2 hrs of sick leave then work 6 hours; with no telework they may have to take almost a full day of sick leave and not work at all. I have colleagues who will probably have to quit or go on FMLA if their RA is removed … and then we will be royally screwed because we are very short handed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why the federal government HR is so incompetent?
I am not a fed, but it seems the problem is not people who abuse the system. The problem is those who should distinguish real disabilities from fake ones, but can’t competently perform their job. Am I wrong?

You're right, but HR offices at fed agencies don't have medical staff capable of making informed and educated decisions. They don't even have the staff to administratively process the requests in a timely fashion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Telework is very helpful for people who need a lot of ongoing therapy/treatments. It allows them to minimize time off which allows them to continue working instead of taking sick leave. With telework they can take 2 hrs of sick leave then work 6 hours; with no telework they may have to take almost a full day of sick leave and not work at all. I have colleagues who will probably have to quit or go on FMLA if their RA is removed … and then we will be royally screwed because we are very short handed.

In the past, a lot of people would choose appointment locations close to where they work, rather than close to where they live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will say that it was horrible for me losing telework, but I didn't think it was fair that coworkers got RAs approved for made up reasons. I know that RAs are often legitimate, but the ones I saw and know personally (I am in the approval chain for these) were bogus. Anxiety and back pain from a long commute were popular.

I don't get this argument at all. The claims either meet the standard for an RA or they don't. If the HR people aren't doing their jobs and properly vetting claims the answer is they should be disciplined or trained better, not remove the RA from everyone.

But what is an appropriate RA? I have a few disabled coworkers who were in electric wheelchairs and they worked in person with me for 15 years. We even put in van accessible parking spots just for them.

Maybe immunocompromised in an RA?

Yes, and various autoimmune disorders, and people under going cancer treatment for example. They can still work, but it might be deadly to come into the office and catch flu or Covid.

Treatment for cancer isn’t permanent. They should and do get a temporary RA. I know several people with autoimmune diseases that work in person. A few are teachers.

NP - The fact that you know several people with autoimmune diseases who work in-person is irrelevant. It depends on the specific autoimmune disease and the specific person.

Moreover, some cancers are incurable, but treatable, i.e., people are on treatments for the rest of their lives to keep the cancer at bay. In many of those instances, the treatments are immunosuppressive. So, yes, for people who are on those kinds of cancer treatments and are severely immunocompromised as a result, full-time telework is a very appropriate RA.

Or providing a respirator or maybe a private office.

Or full-time telework. I get some people abuse the system, but many don’t.

Certainly, but it looks like employers will choose to offer other effective accommodations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Telework is very helpful for people who need a lot of ongoing therapy/treatments. It allows them to minimize time off which allows them to continue working instead of taking sick leave. With telework they can take 2 hrs of sick leave then work 6 hours; with no telework they may have to take almost a full day of sick leave and not work at all. I have colleagues who will probably have to quit or go on FMLA if their RA is removed … and then we will be royally screwed because we are very short handed.

In the past, a lot of people would choose appointment locations close to where they work, rather than close to where they live.

Well a lot of people don’t actually have that ability now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will say that it was horrible for me losing telework, but I didn't think it was fair that coworkers got RAs approved for made up reasons. I know that RAs are often legitimate, but the ones I saw and know personally (I am in the approval chain for these) were bogus. Anxiety and back pain from a long commute were popular.

I don't get this argument at all. The claims either meet the standard for an RA or they don't. If the HR people aren't doing their jobs and properly vetting claims the answer is they should be disciplined or trained better, not remove the RA from everyone.

But what is an appropriate RA? I have a few disabled coworkers who were in electric wheelchairs and they worked in person with me for 15 years. We even put in van accessible parking spots just for them.

Maybe immunocompromised in an RA?

Yes, and various autoimmune disorders, and people under going cancer treatment for example. They can still work, but it might be deadly to come into the office and catch flu or Covid.

Treatment for cancer isn’t permanent. They should and do get a temporary RA. I know several people with autoimmune diseases that work in person. A few are teachers.

NP - The fact that you know several people with autoimmune diseases who work in-person is irrelevant. It depends on the specific autoimmune disease and the specific person.

Moreover, some cancers are incurable, but treatable, i.e., people are on treatments for the rest of their lives to keep the cancer at bay. In many of those instances, the treatments are immunosuppressive. So, yes, for people who are on those kinds of cancer treatments and are severely immunocompromised as a result, full-time telework is a very appropriate RA.

Or providing a respirator or maybe a private office.

Or full-time telework. I get some people abuse the system, but many don’t.

Certainly, but it looks like employers will choose to offer other effective accommodations.

They are offering zero accommodations in my agency because no one wants to attach their name to an approved RA. So the disabled person files an EEO lawsuit or appeal and then gets their RA approved when it's determined the agency didn't follow any of the rules or procedures in determining there were no accommodations available. This is how the fed government works right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will say that it was horrible for me losing telework, but I didn't think it was fair that coworkers got RAs approved for made up reasons. I know that RAs are often legitimate, but the ones I saw and know personally (I am in the approval chain for these) were bogus. Anxiety and back pain from a long commute were popular.

I don't get this argument at all. The claims either meet the standard for an RA or they don't. If the HR people aren't doing their jobs and properly vetting claims the answer is they should be disciplined or trained better, not remove the RA from everyone.

But what is an appropriate RA? I have a few disabled coworkers who were in electric wheelchairs and they worked in person with me for 15 years. We even put in van accessible parking spots just for them.

Maybe immunocompromised in an RA?

Yes, and various autoimmune disorders, and people under going cancer treatment for example. They can still work, but it might be deadly to come into the office and catch flu or Covid.

Treatment for cancer isn’t permanent. They should and do get a temporary RA. I know several people with autoimmune diseases that work in person. A few are teachers.

NP - The fact that you know several people with autoimmune diseases who work in-person is irrelevant. It depends on the specific autoimmune disease and the specific person.

Moreover, some cancers are incurable, but treatable, i.e., people are on treatments for the rest of their lives to keep the cancer at bay. In many of those instances, the treatments are immunosuppressive. So, yes, for people who are on those kinds of cancer treatments and are severely immunocompromised as a result, full-time telework is a very appropriate RA.

Or providing a respirator or maybe a private office.

Where do you guys work that there are limitless private offices? There are employees working at folding card tables right now, 3 to a “private office.” It’s cheaper to let someone telework than to take up that space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s amazing how much meaner people are on DCUM than on other parts of the internet

It’s because people don’t use the report button. Jeff deletes mean people like a flash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Telework is very helpful for people who need a lot of ongoing therapy/treatments. It allows them to minimize time off which allows them to continue working instead of taking sick leave. With telework they can take 2 hrs of sick leave then work 6 hours; with no telework they may have to take almost a full day of sick leave and not work at all. I have colleagues who will probably have to quit or go on FMLA if their RA is removed … and then we will be royally screwed because we are very short handed.

In the past, a lot of people would choose appointment locations close to where they work, rather than close to where they live.

Well a lot of people don’t actually have that ability now.

Why not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will say that it was horrible for me losing telework, but I didn't think it was fair that coworkers got RAs approved for made up reasons. I know that RAs are often legitimate, but the ones I saw and know personally (I am in the approval chain for these) were bogus. Anxiety and back pain from a long commute were popular.

I don't get this argument at all. The claims either meet the standard for an RA or they don't. If the HR people aren't doing their jobs and properly vetting claims the answer is they should be disciplined or trained better, not remove the RA from everyone.

But what is an appropriate RA? I have a few disabled coworkers who were in electric wheelchairs and they worked in person with me for 15 years. We even put in van accessible parking spots just for them.

Maybe immunocompromised in an RA?

Yes, and various autoimmune disorders, and people under going cancer treatment for example. They can still work, but it might be deadly to come into the office and catch flu or Covid.

Treatment for cancer isn’t permanent. They should and do get a temporary RA. I know several people with autoimmune diseases that work in person. A few are teachers.

NP - The fact that you know several people with autoimmune diseases who work in-person is irrelevant. It depends on the specific autoimmune disease and the specific person.

Moreover, some cancers are incurable, but treatable, i.e., people are on treatments for the rest of their lives to keep the cancer at bay. In many of those instances, the treatments are immunosuppressive. So, yes, for people who are on those kinds of cancer treatments and are severely immunocompromised as a result, full-time telework is a very appropriate RA.

Or providing a respirator or maybe a private office.

Where do you guys work that there are limitless private offices? There are employees working at folding card tables right now, 3 to a “private office.” It’s cheaper to let someone telework than to take up that space.

So seek an accommodation for a private office and they might allow telework until they're able to accommodate that request.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s amazing how much meaner people are on DCUM than on other parts of the internet

It’s because people don’t use the report button. Jeff deletes mean people like a flash.

The anti-fed trolling has increased dramatically this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s amazing how much meaner people are on DCUM than on other parts of the internet

It’s because people don’t use the report button. Jeff deletes mean people like a flash.

The anti-fed trolling has increased dramatically this year.

There's very little trolling, just a lot of people (probably many of them feds) pointing out that telework doesn't need to be provided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will say that it was horrible for me losing telework, but I didn't think it was fair that coworkers got RAs approved for made up reasons. I know that RAs are often legitimate, but the ones I saw and know personally (I am in the approval chain for these) were bogus. Anxiety and back pain from a long commute were popular.

I don't get this argument at all. The claims either meet the standard for an RA or they don't. If the HR people aren't doing their jobs and properly vetting claims the answer is they should be disciplined or trained better, not remove the RA from everyone.

But what is an appropriate RA? I have a few disabled coworkers who were in electric wheelchairs and they worked in person with me for 15 years. We even put in van accessible parking spots just for them.

Maybe immunocompromised in an RA?

Yes, and various autoimmune disorders, and people under going cancer treatment for example. They can still work, but it might be deadly to come into the office and catch flu or Covid.

Treatment for cancer isn’t permanent. They should and do get a temporary RA. I know several people with autoimmune diseases that work in person. A few are teachers.

NP - The fact that you know several people with autoimmune diseases who work in-person is irrelevant. It depends on the specific autoimmune disease and the specific person.

Moreover, some cancers are incurable, but treatable, i.e., people are on treatments for the rest of their lives to keep the cancer at bay. In many of those instances, the treatments are immunosuppressive. So, yes, for people who are on those kinds of cancer treatments and are severely immunocompromised as a result, full-time telework is a very appropriate RA.

Or providing a respirator or maybe a private office.

Where do you guys work that there are limitless private offices? There are employees working at folding card tables right now, 3 to a “private office.” It’s cheaper to let someone telework than to take up that space.

So seek an accommodation for a private office and they might allow telework until they're able to accommodate that request.

Why is any of this your business? People will seek out and receive whatever accommodation they need. It’s cheaper for agencies to let people telework permanently than to get more space.