Biden wants RTO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

+ My private sector DH and neighbors are all still full time WAH. And they make a lot more than me. Making GS level employees like me go into DC even a few days a week isn’t going to save CRE or failing businesses. We don’t collectively make enough to keep DC afloat and the government risks losing good employees to private sector jobs. Even if they land in a private sector job that requires in office days, they’ll make more $ to counteract the commute.

WAH is basically the reason I’m at my job as a working mom of 3. This literally could be the difference of whether I stay in government, possibly even the workforce. (Before you ask, my kids were in daycare before the pandemic so commuting wasn’t as bad). But now that they are school age and their school has an extended day waitlist we haven’t been able to make it off for 3 years (employee shortage due to the post-COVID labor market) and they have early activities beginning around 5 pm, I have really come to rely on WAH. (DH also WAH but can’t start/end his day early like me). I know I’m not alone and collectively the government could lose a lot of qualified employees.

Someone else would happily do your job. None of us are owed or entitled to federal employment.

You are absolutely wrong about this. Yes, someone without my qualifications and experience would be happy to have the money. But they can’t do the job. So there’s the rub.

So move on, if you don’t like the federal government coming back to the office in DC please go do something else. Many of us are glad to be back in the office and think this is good policy.

I will. As Will others. And then you e got a massive problem. Stop putting your head in the sand. A one size fits all solution — everybody back 6 days a PP— is not going to work.

I’ve been a fed for more than 20 years and have listened to so many versions of “if x is elected, if they change this policy, if y happens EVERYONE WILL LEAVE!” Meanwhile federal attrition has been pretty flat over the years and the retirement wave of older feds that I heard about back in grad school never happened. It’s not a bad deal, we have more flexibility than most with decent pay and benefits. Before the pandemic I was required to be in my office 4 days a week, now we’re coming back 2 days a week. Seems like a win to me, we’d be lucky if we had certain people leave but there won’t be a serious exodus over this.

+1.

I've been a fed since the Reagan administration and it's always been we're underpaid compared to the private sector, everyone will leave if such and such happens, and guess what? It's rare when someone actually leaves the fed. Yes they might change to a different agency, but they aren't leaving the fed because despite all the 24/7 nose to the grindstone federal employees here on DCUM, it's a gravy train. I'm the first to admit it! Generous leave, a great 401K with 5% matching, cheap life insurance, not the best health insurance but can't complain about the choices, now free parental leave, flexibility, etc.

Say two feds who entered the workforce in the EIGHTIES, bought their homes when housing and education for their kids were just a small fraction of what they are now. Dear god. Retire. Please.

Different topic for a different thread but... why? Why do you hate older workers?

Late 30s GS-15 here. Yes, I mostly do. They’re past their time of prime and can’t relate to the younger generations. Thank you for your service but please move on. If you’ve been a fed since the Reagan administration you can retire with a very healthy pension and benefits. Move the eff on.

So how old is too old? What do you recommend the mandatory retirement age be?

DP again. Some jobs, like the foreign service, have mandatory retirement after 25 years I believe. That’s a good system.

PP here. Oh, I know. But I think some are suggesting a blanket mandatory retirement. You think 25 years of federal service for all federal employees is good?

Yes. I do. I’ve been in for close to 20. I started very young. I’m nowhere near retirement but cannot fathom staying until then. Maxed out on pay for a few years now. I would retire next year if I could, with my modest pension in my back pocket while I took the leap to private (would likely start my own consulting business). As it is, it’s risky without some income security.

Everybody says the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

+ My private sector DH and neighbors are all still full time WAH. And they make a lot more than me. Making GS level employees like me go into DC even a few days a week isn’t going to save CRE or failing businesses. We don’t collectively make enough to keep DC afloat and the government risks losing good employees to private sector jobs. Even if they land in a private sector job that requires in office days, they’ll make more $ to counteract the commute.

WAH is basically the reason I’m at my job as a working mom of 3. This literally could be the difference of whether I stay in government, possibly even the workforce. (Before you ask, my kids were in daycare before the pandemic so commuting wasn’t as bad). But now that they are school age and their school has an extended day waitlist we haven’t been able to make it off for 3 years (employee shortage due to the post-COVID labor market) and they have early activities beginning around 5 pm, I have really come to rely on WAH. (DH also WAH but can’t start/end his day early like me). I know I’m not alone and collectively the government could lose a lot of qualified employees.

Someone else would happily do your job. None of us are owed or entitled to federal employment.

You are absolutely wrong about this. Yes, someone without my qualifications and experience would be happy to have the money. But they can’t do the job. So there’s the rub.

So move on, if you don’t like the federal government coming back to the office in DC please go do something else. Many of us are glad to be back in the office and think this is good policy.

I will. As Will others. And then you e got a massive problem. Stop putting your head in the sand. A one size fits all solution — everybody back 6 days a PP— is not going to work.

I’ve been a fed for more than 20 years and have listened to so many versions of “if x is elected, if they change this policy, if y happens EVERYONE WILL LEAVE!” Meanwhile federal attrition has been pretty flat over the years and the retirement wave of older feds that I heard about back in grad school never happened. It’s not a bad deal, we have more flexibility than most with decent pay and benefits. Before the pandemic I was required to be in my office 4 days a week, now we’re coming back 2 days a week. Seems like a win to me, we’d be lucky if we had certain people leave but there won’t be a serious exodus over this.

+1.

I've been a fed since the Reagan administration and it's always been we're underpaid compared to the private sector, everyone will leave if such and such happens, and guess what? It's rare when someone actually leaves the fed. Yes they might change to a different agency, but they aren't leaving the fed because despite all the 24/7 nose to the grindstone federal employees here on DCUM, it's a gravy train. I'm the first to admit it! Generous leave, a great 401K with 5% matching, cheap life insurance, not the best health insurance but can't complain about the choices, now free parental leave, flexibility, etc.

Say two feds who entered the workforce in the EIGHTIES, bought their homes when housing and education for their kids were just a small fraction of what they are now. Dear god. Retire. Please.

Different topic for a different thread but... why? Why do you hate older workers?

Late 30s GS-15 here. Yes, I mostly do. They’re past their time of prime and can’t relate to the younger generations. Thank you for your service but please move on. If you’ve been a fed since the Reagan administration you can retire with a very healthy pension and benefits. Move the eff on.

So how old is too old? What do you recommend the mandatory retirement age be?

DP again. Some jobs, like the foreign service, have mandatory retirement after 25 years I believe. That’s a good system.

PP here. Oh, I know. But I think some are suggesting a blanket mandatory retirement. You think 25 years of federal service for all federal employees is good?

Yes. I do. I’ve been in for close to 20. I started very young. I’m nowhere near retirement but cannot fathom staying until then. Maxed out on pay for a few years now. I would retire next year if I could, with my modest pension in my back pocket while I took the leap to private (would likely start my own consulting business). As it is, it’s risky without some income security.

Everybody says the same thing.

And? They stay, because they can’t retire. What I don’t get, are the people that cling on welllll past retirement age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Studies show people are most effective at work years 3-7.

Govt workers get super fat non deserved pensions for working 10-30 years their least useful years and most expensive.

Just make 100 percent of feds go back to work and anyone with 7 years or more tenure good riddance.

My first job we had a pension but you started to best at 5. We weeded out people in years 4-5. Deadbeats out the door preventing. Feds should do the same

You obviously don’t know what the FERS pension pays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

+ My private sector DH and neighbors are all still full time WAH. And they make a lot more than me. Making GS level employees like me go into DC even a few days a week isn’t going to save CRE or failing businesses. We don’t collectively make enough to keep DC afloat and the government risks losing good employees to private sector jobs. Even if they land in a private sector job that requires in office days, they’ll make more $ to counteract the commute.

WAH is basically the reason I’m at my job as a working mom of 3. This literally could be the difference of whether I stay in government, possibly even the workforce. (Before you ask, my kids were in daycare before the pandemic so commuting wasn’t as bad). But now that they are school age and their school has an extended day waitlist we haven’t been able to make it off for 3 years (employee shortage due to the post-COVID labor market) and they have early activities beginning around 5 pm, I have really come to rely on WAH. (DH also WAH but can’t start/end his day early like me). I know I’m not alone and collectively the government could lose a lot of qualified employees.

Someone else would happily do your job. None of us are owed or entitled to federal employment.

You are absolutely wrong about this. Yes, someone without my qualifications and experience would be happy to have the money. But they can’t do the job. So there’s the rub.

So move on, if you don’t like the federal government coming back to the office in DC please go do something else. Many of us are glad to be back in the office and think this is good policy.

I will. As Will others. And then you e got a massive problem. Stop putting your head in the sand. A one size fits all solution — everybody back 6 days a PP— is not going to work.

I’ve been a fed for more than 20 years and have listened to so many versions of “if x is elected, if they change this policy, if y happens EVERYONE WILL LEAVE!” Meanwhile federal attrition has been pretty flat over the years and the retirement wave of older feds that I heard about back in grad school never happened. It’s not a bad deal, we have more flexibility than most with decent pay and benefits. Before the pandemic I was required to be in my office 4 days a week, now we’re coming back 2 days a week. Seems like a win to me, we’d be lucky if we had certain people leave but there won’t be a serious exodus over this.

+1.

I've been a fed since the Reagan administration and it's always been we're underpaid compared to the private sector, everyone will leave if such and such happens, and guess what? It's rare when someone actually leaves the fed. Yes they might change to a different agency, but they aren't leaving the fed because despite all the 24/7 nose to the grindstone federal employees here on DCUM, it's a gravy train. I'm the first to admit it! Generous leave, a great 401K with 5% matching, cheap life insurance, not the best health insurance but can't complain about the choices, now free parental leave, flexibility, etc.

Say two feds who entered the workforce in the EIGHTIES, bought their homes when housing and education for their kids were just a small fraction of what they are now. Dear god. Retire. Please.

Different topic for a different thread but... why? Why do you hate older workers?

Late 30s GS-15 here. Yes, I mostly do. They’re past their time of prime and can’t relate to the younger generations. Thank you for your service but please move on. If you’ve been a fed since the Reagan administration you can retire with a very healthy pension and benefits. Move the eff on.

So how old is too old? What do you recommend the mandatory retirement age be?

DP again. Some jobs, like the foreign service, have mandatory retirement after 25 years I believe. That’s a good system.

PP here. Oh, I know. But I think some are suggesting a blanket mandatory retirement. You think 25 years of federal service for all federal employees is good?

DP. Yes, that would be good. My DH already has 25 years at age 47 but won’t be at minimum retirement age for 10 more years, and there are still advantages to staying in until age 62.

[Anonymous]

Biden is gonna fcuk it up for the gubmint employees? Sheiiiit!

[Anonymous]

RTO is going to cause some agencies to hemorrhage decent young-ish employees. One day a week already led to us losing a few attorneys for the private sector. They can’t afford to live close in and as soon as they have kids they can’t manage a commute that’s an hour plus. I’m in a weird boat where my spouse makes a lot of money so we live close in but has garbage health insurance which doesn’t work because one of our kids is SN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

+ My private sector DH and neighbors are all still full time WAH. And they make a lot more than me. Making GS level employees like me go into DC even a few days a week isn’t going to save CRE or failing businesses. We don’t collectively make enough to keep DC afloat and the government risks losing good employees to private sector jobs. Even if they land in a private sector job that requires in office days, they’ll make more $ to counteract the commute.

WAH is basically the reason I’m at my job as a working mom of 3. This literally could be the difference of whether I stay in government, possibly even the workforce. (Before you ask, my kids were in daycare before the pandemic so commuting wasn’t as bad). But now that they are school age and their school has an extended day waitlist we haven’t been able to make it off for 3 years (employee shortage due to the post-COVID labor market) and they have early activities beginning around 5 pm, I have really come to rely on WAH. (DH also WAH but can’t start/end his day early like me). I know I’m not alone and collectively the government could lose a lot of qualified employees.

Someone else would happily do your job. None of us are owed or entitled to federal employment.

You are absolutely wrong about this. Yes, someone without my qualifications and experience would be happy to have the money. But they can’t do the job. So there’s the rub.

So move on, if you don’t like the federal government coming back to the office in DC please go do something else. Many of us are glad to be back in the office and think this is good policy.

I will. As Will others. And then you e got a massive problem. Stop putting your head in the sand. A one size fits all solution — everybody back 6 days a PP— is not going to work.

I have not seen a proposal for all government workers to go back 6 days pp? Is that out there?

I have a friend who said their agency (and independent agency) is going to require that as of Jan 1st (for non union employees). But they haven’t negotiated with the union yet.

Right right. But I was asking about a blanket rule for ALL federal government.
This thread was started because the WH started pushing overall direction and policy objectives. I just wanted to be sure that there was no concrete rule being applied across the board.

No I haven’t seen that either. But, a blanket rule at an entire agency is foolish IMO as well.

PP here. I agree it is not ideal. But the blanket rules are honestly a result of unions and litigation risk. It becomes unworkable to make case-by-case decisions.

It will be unworkable when all of your mid level managers and lawyers leave to pursue private practice. The government needs to compete. If it can’t compete on flexibility then it must compete on pay.

To be more thorough, if the government wants its top-level people to be skilled and competent, it could compete on pay (which it doesn’t), on total compensation (pension is nice but increasingly expensive for recent hires), or benefits (for white collar professionals these aren’t exceptional), or job security (but during record low unemployment this is less appealing), or flexibility. If flexibility reduces what is left to keep good, mid/late career federal employees on the job?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RTO is going to cause some agencies to hemorrhage decent young-ish employees. One day a week already led to us losing a few attorneys for the private sector. They can’t afford to live close in and as soon as they have kids they can’t manage a commute that’s an hour plus. I’m in a weird boat where my spouse makes a lot of money so we live close in but has garbage health insurance which doesn’t work because one of our kids is SN.

+1. Some of the posters are delusional about how much it costs to live reasonably close in with kids, where there is access to safe public schools and housing. I bought my house in 2013 and prices have since skyrocketed, and I still had nearly an hour commute downtown from within Fairfax County. Why would I want to spend nearly 1.5 - 2 hours a day commuting when I could spend that time with my family, driving kids to activities, exercising, cooking a healthy meal, etc. Life is too short to waste it in a car to spend 8 hours in the office on Teams meetings. Furthermore, I am a Federal manager and most of my younger, hard-working staff all want telework - for the exact reasons I do, so they can balance their careers and home life. I don’t want to lose them and I certainly don’t want to force them in the office more. Our work is computer based and can be completed effectively from home. I also have staff more willing to work on an issue later in the day or earlier in the morning when they’re home. Staff is flexible and more engaged in the work because they have a manager who is flexible regarding where they do the work. For computer based work, RTO is not the answer. The genie is out of the bottle and it’s not going back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

+ My private sector DH and neighbors are all still full time WAH. And they make a lot more than me. Making GS level employees like me go into DC even a few days a week isn’t going to save CRE or failing businesses. We don’t collectively make enough to keep DC afloat and the government risks losing good employees to private sector jobs. Even if they land in a private sector job that requires in office days, they’ll make more $ to counteract the commute.

WAH is basically the reason I’m at my job as a working mom of 3. This literally could be the difference of whether I stay in government, possibly even the workforce. (Before you ask, my kids were in daycare before the pandemic so commuting wasn’t as bad). But now that they are school age and their school has an extended day waitlist we haven’t been able to make it off for 3 years (employee shortage due to the post-COVID labor market) and they have early activities beginning around 5 pm, I have really come to rely on WAH. (DH also WAH but can’t start/end his day early like me). I know I’m not alone and collectively the government could lose a lot of qualified employees.

Someone else would happily do your job. None of us are owed or entitled to federal employment.

You are absolutely wrong about this. Yes, someone without my qualifications and experience would be happy to have the money. But they can’t do the job. So there’s the rub.

So move on, if you don’t like the federal government coming back to the office in DC please go do something else. Many of us are glad to be back in the office and think this is good policy.

I will. As Will others. And then you e got a massive problem. Stop putting your head in the sand. A one size fits all solution — everybody back 6 days a PP— is not going to work.

I’ve been a fed for more than 20 years and have listened to so many versions of “if x is elected, if they change this policy, if y happens EVERYONE WILL LEAVE!” Meanwhile federal attrition has been pretty flat over the years and the retirement wave of older feds that I heard about back in grad school never happened. It’s not a bad deal, we have more flexibility than most with decent pay and benefits. Before the pandemic I was required to be in my office 4 days a week, now we’re coming back 2 days a week. Seems like a win to me, we’d be lucky if we had certain people leave but there won’t be a serious exodus over this.

+1.

I've been a fed since the Reagan administration and it's always been we're underpaid compared to the private sector, everyone will leave if such and such happens, and guess what? It's rare when someone actually leaves the fed. Yes they might change to a different agency, but they aren't leaving the fed because despite all the 24/7 nose to the grindstone federal employees here on DCUM, it's a gravy train. I'm the first to admit it! Generous leave, a great 401K with 5% matching, cheap life insurance, not the best health insurance but can't complain about the choices, now free parental leave, flexibility, etc.

Say two feds who entered the workforce in the EIGHTIES, bought their homes when housing and education for their kids were just a small fraction of what they are now. Dear god. Retire. Please.

Different topic for a different thread but... why? Why do you hate older workers?

Late 30s GS-15 here. Yes, I mostly do. They’re past their time of prime and can’t relate to the younger generations. Thank you for your service but please move on. If you’ve been a fed since the Reagan administration you can retire with a very healthy pension and benefits. Move the eff on.

So how old is too old? What do you recommend the mandatory retirement age be?

DP again. Some jobs, like the foreign service, have mandatory retirement after 25 years I believe. That’s a good system.

PP here. Oh, I know. But I think some are suggesting a blanket mandatory retirement. You think 25 years of federal service for all federal employees is good?

Yes. I do. I’ve been in for close to 20. I started very young. I’m nowhere near retirement but cannot fathom staying until then. Maxed out on pay for a few years now. I would retire next year if I could, with my modest pension in my back pocket while I took the leap to private (would likely start my own consulting business). As it is, it’s risky without some income security.

Everybody says the same thing.

And? They stay, because they can’t retire. What I don’t get, are the people that cling on welllll past retirement age.

Nothing for you to "get". It's their decision. You just focus on your work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

+ My private sector DH and neighbors are all still full time WAH. And they make a lot more than me. Making GS level employees like me go into DC even a few days a week isn’t going to save CRE or failing businesses. We don’t collectively make enough to keep DC afloat and the government risks losing good employees to private sector jobs. Even if they land in a private sector job that requires in office days, they’ll make more $ to counteract the commute.

WAH is basically the reason I’m at my job as a working mom of 3. This literally could be the difference of whether I stay in government, possibly even the workforce. (Before you ask, my kids were in daycare before the pandemic so commuting wasn’t as bad). But now that they are school age and their school has an extended day waitlist we haven’t been able to make it off for 3 years (employee shortage due to the post-COVID labor market) and they have early activities beginning around 5 pm, I have really come to rely on WAH. (DH also WAH but can’t start/end his day early like me). I know I’m not alone and collectively the government could lose a lot of qualified employees.

Someone else would happily do your job. None of us are owed or entitled to federal employment.

You are absolutely wrong about this. Yes, someone without my qualifications and experience would be happy to have the money. But they can’t do the job. So there’s the rub.

So move on, if you don’t like the federal government coming back to the office in DC please go do something else. Many of us are glad to be back in the office and think this is good policy.

I will. As Will others. And then you e got a massive problem. Stop putting your head in the sand. A one size fits all solution — everybody back 6 days a PP— is not going to work.

I’ve been a fed for more than 20 years and have listened to so many versions of “if x is elected, if they change this policy, if y happens EVERYONE WILL LEAVE!” Meanwhile federal attrition has been pretty flat over the years and the retirement wave of older feds that I heard about back in grad school never happened. It’s not a bad deal, we have more flexibility than most with decent pay and benefits. Before the pandemic I was required to be in my office 4 days a week, now we’re coming back 2 days a week. Seems like a win to me, we’d be lucky if we had certain people leave but there won’t be a serious exodus over this.

+1.

I've been a fed since the Reagan administration and it's always been we're underpaid compared to the private sector, everyone will leave if such and such happens, and guess what? It's rare when someone actually leaves the fed. Yes they might change to a different agency, but they aren't leaving the fed because despite all the 24/7 nose to the grindstone federal employees here on DCUM, it's a gravy train. I'm the first to admit it! Generous leave, a great 401K with 5% matching, cheap life insurance, not the best health insurance but can't complain about the choices, now free parental leave, flexibility, etc.

Say two feds who entered the workforce in the EIGHTIES, bought their homes when housing and education for their kids were just a small fraction of what they are now. Dear god. Retire. Please.

Different topic for a different thread but... why? Why do you hate older workers?

Late 30s GS-15 here. Yes, I mostly do. They’re past their time of prime and can’t relate to the younger generations. Thank you for your service but please move on. If you’ve been a fed since the Reagan administration you can retire with a very healthy pension and benefits. Move the eff on.

So how old is too old? What do you recommend the mandatory retirement age be?

DP again. Some jobs, like the foreign service, have mandatory retirement after 25 years I believe. That’s a good system.

PP here. Oh, I know. But I think some are suggesting a blanket mandatory retirement. You think 25 years of federal service for all federal employees is good?

Yes. I do. I’ve been in for close to 20. I started very young. I’m nowhere near retirement but cannot fathom staying until then. Maxed out on pay for a few years now. I would retire next year if I could, with my modest pension in my back pocket while I took the leap to private (would likely start my own consulting business). As it is, it’s risky without some income security.

Everybody says the same thing.

And? They stay, because they can’t retire. What I don’t get, are the people that cling on welllll past retirement age.

Nothing for you to "get". It's their decision. You just focus on your work.

Classic. Just classic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RTO is going to cause some agencies to hemorrhage decent young-ish employees. One day a week already led to us losing a few attorneys for the private sector. They can’t afford to live close in and as soon as they have kids they can’t manage a commute that’s an hour plus. I’m in a weird boat where my spouse makes a lot of money so we live close in but has garbage health insurance which doesn’t work because one of our kids is SN.

+1. Some of the posters are delusional about how much it costs to live reasonably close in with kids, where there is access to safe public schools and housing. I bought my house in 2013 and prices have since skyrocketed, and I still had nearly an hour commute downtown from within Fairfax County. Why would I want to spend nearly 1.5 - 2 hours a day commuting when I could spend that time with my family, driving kids to activities, exercising, cooking a healthy meal, etc. Life is too short to waste it in a car to spend 8 hours in the office on Teams meetings. Furthermore, I am a Federal manager and most of my younger, hard-working staff all want telework - for the exact reasons I do, so they can balance their careers and home life. I don’t want to lose them and I certainly don’t want to force them in the office more. Our work is computer based and can be completed effectively from home. I also have staff more willing to work on an issue later in the day or earlier in the morning when they’re home. Staff is flexible and more engaged in the work because they have a manager who is flexible regarding where they do the work. For computer based work, RTO is not the answer. The genie is out of the bottle and it’s not going back.

Bless you. You get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RTO is going to cause some agencies to hemorrhage decent young-ish employees. One day a week already led to us losing a few attorneys for the private sector. They can’t afford to live close in and as soon as they have kids they can’t manage a commute that’s an hour plus. I’m in a weird boat where my spouse makes a lot of money so we live close in but has garbage health insurance which doesn’t work because one of our kids is SN.

+1. Some of the posters are delusional about how much it costs to live reasonably close in with kids, where there is access to safe public schools and housing. I bought my house in 2013 and prices have since skyrocketed, and I still had nearly an hour commute downtown from within Fairfax County. Why would I want to spend nearly 1.5 - 2 hours a day commuting when I could spend that time with my family, driving kids to activities, exercising, cooking a healthy meal, etc. Life is too short to waste it in a car to spend 8 hours in the office on Teams meetings. Furthermore, I am a Federal manager and most of my younger, hard-working staff all want telework - for the exact reasons I do, so they can balance their careers and home life. I don’t want to lose them and I certainly don’t want to force them in the office more. Our work is computer based and can be completed effectively from home. I also have staff more willing to work on an issue later in the day or earlier in the morning when they’re home. Staff is flexible and more engaged in the work because they have a manager who is flexible regarding where they do the work. For computer based work, RTO is not the answer. The genie is out of the bottle and it’s not going back.

I understand but has this all changed dramatically in the last 3 years since the pandemic started? My whole office used to commute 4 days a week deal with traffic or public transportation, figure out kids activities, etc and now just doing what they used to do is intolerable? I get that we had a few years with more flexibility but we're being asked to do what everyone did for decades and suddenly that's too hard and everyone will quit?

[Anonymous]

I understand but has this all changed dramatically in the last 3 years since the pandemic started? My whole office used to commute 4 days a week deal with traffic or public transportation, figure out kids activities, etc and now just doing what they used to do is intolerable? I get that we had a few years with more flexibility but we're being asked to do what everyone did for decades and suddenly that's too hard and everyone will quit?

Everyone makes job decisions based on a number of factors. Salary is one, but the Government can't change that. Commute, benefits, flexibility are others. Some people found that the flexibility they were afforded made their lives better, and don't want to lose that, so if they can find another job that offers it, or another one that does not but makes up for it by increasing salary, many of those people will make a switch.
It is not rocket science. FWIW, I love my small agency's management, and they said they are trying to keep RTO at a "reasonable level for employees," but don't have full control over the issue. I am inclined to believe them, based on past good experience with their candor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RTO is going to cause some agencies to hemorrhage decent young-ish employees. One day a week already led to us losing a few attorneys for the private sector. They can’t afford to live close in and as soon as they have kids they can’t manage a commute that’s an hour plus. I’m in a weird boat where my spouse makes a lot of money so we live close in but has garbage health insurance which doesn’t work because one of our kids is SN.

+1. Some of the posters are delusional about how much it costs to live reasonably close in with kids, where there is access to safe public schools and housing. I bought my house in 2013 and prices have since skyrocketed, and I still had nearly an hour commute downtown from within Fairfax County. Why would I want to spend nearly 1.5 - 2 hours a day commuting when I could spend that time with my family, driving kids to activities, exercising, cooking a healthy meal, etc. Life is too short to waste it in a car to spend 8 hours in the office on Teams meetings. Furthermore, I am a Federal manager and most of my younger, hard-working staff all want telework - for the exact reasons I do, so they can balance their careers and home life. I don’t want to lose them and I certainly don’t want to force them in the office more. Our work is computer based and can be completed effectively from home. I also have staff more willing to work on an issue later in the day or earlier in the morning when they’re home. Staff is flexible and more engaged in the work because they have a manager who is flexible regarding where they do the work. For computer based work, RTO is not the answer. The genie is out of the bottle and it’s not going back.

I understand but has this all changed dramatically in the last 3 years since the pandemic started? My whole office used to commute 4 days a week deal with traffic or public transportation, figure out kids activities, etc and now just doing what they used to do is intolerable? I get that we had a few years with more flexibility but we're being asked to do what everyone did for decades and suddenly that's too hard and everyone will quit?

mass exodus will never happen. i call bluff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RTO is going to cause some agencies to hemorrhage decent young-ish employees. One day a week already led to us losing a few attorneys for the private sector. They can’t afford to live close in and as soon as they have kids they can’t manage a commute that’s an hour plus. I’m in a weird boat where my spouse makes a lot of money so we live close in but has garbage health insurance which doesn’t work because one of our kids is SN.

+1. Some of the posters are delusional about how much it costs to live reasonably close in with kids, where there is access to safe public schools and housing. I bought my house in 2013 and prices have since skyrocketed, and I still had nearly an hour commute downtown from within Fairfax County. Why would I want to spend nearly 1.5 - 2 hours a day commuting when I could spend that time with my family, driving kids to activities, exercising, cooking a healthy meal, etc. Life is too short to waste it in a car to spend 8 hours in the office on Teams meetings. Furthermore, I am a Federal manager and most of my younger, hard-working staff all want telework - for the exact reasons I do, so they can balance their careers and home life. I don’t want to lose them and I certainly don’t want to force them in the office more. Our work is computer based and can be completed effectively from home. I also have staff more willing to work on an issue later in the day or earlier in the morning when they’re home. Staff is flexible and more engaged in the work because they have a manager who is flexible regarding where they do the work. For computer based work, RTO is not the answer. The genie is out of the bottle and it’s not going back.

I understand but has this all changed dramatically in the last 3 years since the pandemic started? My whole office used to commute 4 days a week deal with traffic or public transportation, figure out kids activities, etc and now just doing what they used to do is intolerable? I get that we had a few years with more flexibility but we're being asked to do what everyone did for decades and suddenly that's too hard and everyone will quit?

Houses I was looking at for 400k three years ago are now going for 700k. Federal employee pay has not increased 75%.