Biden wants RTO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Excuse me but RTO will cost me $1000/month. It’s not my responsibility to prop up the local economy at the expense of my own retirement or kids’ college fund.

Excuse me but it’s not the government’s job to employ you. Why should any employer OWE you a life on YOUR TERMS? If you can do better, get another job. Your comments reek of entitlement.

And why should government be more concerned about you than the cities it does business in? If you lived in DC, you might welcome RTO.

If the government paid me enough to live in DC, maybe I would.

It's not about CARING. I don't expect any employer to CARE about me. It's basically a quantifiable pay cut, so I'm applying for jobs that pay more. All employers want more out of their employees for less; all employees want the most they can get for their jobs. RTO is very much like pulling back a pay raise. Do you think it's entitlement for a worker to have an issue with an actual salary cut, a financial benefit like the employer contribution to health insurance, or something like that? Why are you couching this in emotional terms ("the government should CARE," entitlement, etc) rather than looking at it as rational on both sides?

Let’s get rational. The pay increase you got through WFH was never intended. It was a byproduct of the pandemic. So, RTO is not “taking it back,” even if it FEELS like it to you. You’re the one who is emotional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Excuse me but RTO will cost me $1000/month. It’s not my responsibility to prop up the local economy at the expense of my own retirement or kids’ college fund.

That’s an underestimation.

There’s another thread about what “hacks” people use to juggle two commuters. The cost of coming in every day is really not small. Raising a family when both parents are out of the house 12 hours a day is hard and expensive. In my case—

300 per month to park, plus gas and mileage.
50 per week in dry cleaning (min)
350 per month for bi-weekly house keeping
400 for after school care if we can’t stagger our commutes
400 for dog walking

Plus whatever extra we spend on eating out for convenience since time is so tight.

Plus a work wardrobe and a gym membership near the office.

Plus private school or any educational enrichment you want for your kids since you can’t be with them as much.

That’s great. A few less people will be buying outrageously expensive cars and airline and hotel costs will finally deflate. Very few have talked about the ongoing savings boost that consumers have enjoyed with WFH. Let’s bust this bubble of implicit wage inflation.

The money we “saved” has been spent elsewhere in the economy.

Right. On luxury items, like new cars, fancy vacays, bigger house. All the while, you’ve received large pay increases for inflation that you didn’t personally experience. Now, those wage increases are baked into your salary and benefits for life. Sorry, but this isn’t fair to others. Vacation at home is up.

Hahaha. No. We spent it on education, housing (property taxes), and things for our children, like summer camp and other experiences we couldn’t have afforded otherwise. Boomers, with passive income, are the ones buying cars and vacations. Not working families. Look it up.

[Anonymous]

I would love to buy a used mini van! Lol. New cars! Hahaha. Sorry. I’m laughing too hard. Both of our cars have over 100k miles on them—even without the commuting for the last three years. If we RTO chances are I’m going to have to figure out how to replace one of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Excuse me but RTO will cost me $1000/month. It’s not my responsibility to prop up the local economy at the expense of my own retirement or kids’ college fund.

Excuse me but it’s not the government’s job to employ you. Why should any employer OWE you a life on YOUR TERMS? If you can do better, get another job. Your comments reek of entitlement.

And why should government be more concerned about you than the cities it does business in? If you lived in DC, you might welcome RTO.

If the government paid me enough to live in DC, maybe I would.

It's not about CARING. I don't expect any employer to CARE about me. It's basically a quantifiable pay cut, so I'm applying for jobs that pay more. All employers want more out of their employees for less; all employees want the most they can get for their jobs. RTO is very much like pulling back a pay raise. Do you think it's entitlement for a worker to have an issue with an actual salary cut, a financial benefit like the employer contribution to health insurance, or something like that? Why are you couching this in emotional terms ("the government should CARE," entitlement, etc) rather than looking at it as rational on both sides?

Let’s get rational. The pay increase you got through WFH was never intended. It was a byproduct of the pandemic. So, RTO is not “taking it back,” even if it FEELS like it to you. You’re the one who is emotional.

Intentions are irrelevant. It is what it is.

-DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love to buy a used mini van! Lol. New cars! Hahaha. Sorry. I’m laughing too hard. Both of our cars have over 100k miles on them—even without the commuting for the last three years. If we RTO chances are I’m going to have to figure out how to replace one of them.

Be happy that you’ve had 3 years of no commute and big pay raises to save for one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to buy a used mini van! Lol. New cars! Hahaha. Sorry. I’m laughing too hard. Both of our cars have over 100k miles on them—even without the commuting for the last three years. If we RTO chances are I’m going to have to figure out how to replace one of them.

Be happy that you’ve had 3 years of no commute and big pay raises to save for one.

We didn’t save anything. We spent it on our immediate needs, namely supplementing our child’s education and social life since schools were closed for a year and half of that time. Not to mention supporting our truly local economy. You’re just completely and totally out of touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Excuse me but RTO will cost me $1000/month. It’s not my responsibility to prop up the local economy at the expense of my own retirement or kids’ college fund.

Excuse me but it’s not the government’s job to employ you. Why should any employer OWE you a life on YOUR TERMS? If you can do better, get another job. Your comments reek of entitlement.

And why should government be more concerned about you than the cities it does business in? If you lived in DC, you might welcome RTO.

If the government paid me enough to live in DC, maybe I would.

It's not about CARING. I don't expect any employer to CARE about me. It's basically a quantifiable pay cut, so I'm applying for jobs that pay more. All employers want more out of their employees for less; all employees want the most they can get for their jobs. RTO is very much like pulling back a pay raise. Do you think it's entitlement for a worker to have an issue with an actual salary cut, a financial benefit like the employer contribution to health insurance, or something like that? Why are you couching this in emotional terms ("the government should CARE," entitlement, etc) rather than looking at it as rational on both sides?

Let’s get rational. The pay increase you got through WFH was never intended. It was a byproduct of the pandemic. So, RTO is not “taking it back,” even if it FEELS like it to you. You’re the one who is emotional.

For many of us it wasn't a pay increase. School shut down and I had to personally pay for a pod supervisor and an extra year of daycare. The pandemic cost me tens of thousands, actually, in child care. And, now that things are returning to normal, there is still a childcare shortage. To get full summer camp coverage costs significantly more than it did pre-pandemic, as does aftercare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Excuse me but RTO will cost me $1000/month. It’s not my responsibility to prop up the local economy at the expense of my own retirement or kids’ college fund.

Excuse me but it’s not the government’s job to employ you. Why should any employer OWE you a life on YOUR TERMS? If you can do better, get another job. Your comments reek of entitlement.

And why should government be more concerned about you than the cities it does business in? If you lived in DC, you might welcome RTO.

If the government paid me enough to live in DC, maybe I would.

It's not about CARING. I don't expect any employer to CARE about me. It's basically a quantifiable pay cut, so I'm applying for jobs that pay more. All employers want more out of their employees for less; all employees want the most they can get for their jobs. RTO is very much like pulling back a pay raise. Do you think it's entitlement for a worker to have an issue with an actual salary cut, a financial benefit like the employer contribution to health insurance, or something like that? Why are you couching this in emotional terms ("the government should CARE," entitlement, etc) rather than looking at it as rational on both sides?

Let’s get rational. The pay increase you got through WFH was never intended. It was a byproduct of the pandemic. So, RTO is not “taking it back,” even if it FEELS like it to you. You’re the one who is emotional.

Who cares if something was intended? Do my property taxes go down now because the huge run up in prices was not intended? Do I get a discount at the grocery store because inflation was not intended? That's not how budgets work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Excuse me but RTO will cost me $1000/month. It’s not my responsibility to prop up the local economy at the expense of my own retirement or kids’ college fund.

Excuse me but it’s not the government’s job to employ you. Why should any employer OWE you a life on YOUR TERMS? If you can do better, get another job. Your comments reek of entitlement.

And why should government be more concerned about you than the cities it does business in? If you lived in DC, you might welcome RTO.

If the government paid me enough to live in DC, maybe I would.

It's not about CARING. I don't expect any employer to CARE about me. It's basically a quantifiable pay cut, so I'm applying for jobs that pay more. All employers want more out of their employees for less; all employees want the most they can get for their jobs. RTO is very much like pulling back a pay raise. Do you think it's entitlement for a worker to have an issue with an actual salary cut, a financial benefit like the employer contribution to health insurance, or something like that? Why are you couching this in emotional terms ("the government should CARE," entitlement, etc) rather than looking at it as rational on both sides?

Let’s get rational. The pay increase you got through WFH was never intended. It was a byproduct of the pandemic. So, RTO is not “taking it back,” even if it FEELS like it to you. You’re the one who is emotional.

Who cares if something was intended? Do my property taxes go down now because the huge run up in prices was not intended? Do I get a discount at the grocery store because inflation was not intended? That's not how budgets work.

You’ve received large wage increases to account for generally rising prices. The implicit WFH subsidy is totally different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are being told WH COS memo is the driver.

Whatever happened to "agency heads will just ignore COS memo"? Some poster here was confident enough to guarantee it.

Even mid-week I95 I395 remain empty. The VRE is empty as is Metro. Slug Lots are empty. No one is RTOing.

It's not. You just don't know because you are WFH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Excuse me but RTO will cost me $1000/month. It’s not my responsibility to prop up the local economy at the expense of my own retirement or kids’ college fund.

Excuse me but it’s not the government’s job to employ you. Why should any employer OWE you a life on YOUR TERMS? If you can do better, get another job. Your comments reek of entitlement.

And why should government be more concerned about you than the cities it does business in? If you lived in DC, you might welcome RTO.

If the government paid me enough to live in DC, maybe I would.

It's not about CARING. I don't expect any employer to CARE about me. It's basically a quantifiable pay cut, so I'm applying for jobs that pay more. All employers want more out of their employees for less; all employees want the most they can get for their jobs. RTO is very much like pulling back a pay raise. Do you think it's entitlement for a worker to have an issue with an actual salary cut, a financial benefit like the employer contribution to health insurance, or something like that? Why are you couching this in emotional terms ("the government should CARE," entitlement, etc) rather than looking at it as rational on both sides?

Let’s get rational. The pay increase you got through WFH was never intended. It was a byproduct of the pandemic. So, RTO is not “taking it back,” even if it FEELS like it to you. You’re the one who is emotional.

Who cares if something was intended? Do my property taxes go down now because the huge run up in prices was not intended? Do I get a discount at the grocery store because inflation was not intended? That's not how budgets work.

You’ve received large wage increases to account for generally rising prices. The implicit WFH subsidy is totally different.

I’m sorry what? Since when do federal wages keep up with inflation. Lol.

[Anonymous]

It’s interesting that this thread is now 65 pages! Government workers are doing a lot of complaining. Sounds right. Notice that there’s not a thread of similar length for private sector workers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting that this thread is now 65 pages! Government workers are doing a lot of complaining. Sounds right. Notice that there’s not a thread of similar length for private sector workers?

We are passionate about what we do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting that this thread is now 65 pages! Government workers are doing a lot of complaining. Sounds right. Notice that there’s not a thread of similar length for private sector workers?

It’s a DC board. It’s the largest employer in the area. You think you’re clever but you’re not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting that this thread is now 65 pages! Government workers are doing a lot of complaining. Sounds right. Notice that there’s not a thread of similar length for private sector workers?

We are passionate about what we do.

Ha! No one is talking about mission.