Reply to Anyone get telework approved at SEC?

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "Anyone get telework approved at SEC?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]What’s “weird” and “stupid” is the notion that a president would fire his chief market regulator bc he tweaked working hours or allowed a little telework. [/quote]

I don’t care about the chairman getting fired.  I care about deeper cuts at the agency, which I do think become more likely if we are thumbing our nose at the President’s directive.[/quote]

I think we are all learning that with this administration, the more you give in, the more emboldened they get. So, backing down on anything, including telework, does not earn us any good graces. [/quote]

+1.  They are going to cut what they want to cut regardless of what the agency does on TW.  [/quote]

Absolutely. Also the news cycle under this administration moves so quickly. Has anyone cared about FDA going back to two days a week telework?

The only people who care are some insanely jealous people who must be very unhappy with their own lives and careers.[/quote]

My relative is at FDA. They were provided that “flexibility” because they didn’t have enough space to house everyone. I think there are some agencies where regular telework is being allowed and that is because of the lack of space to accommodate everyone. PTO examiners are one such group. The whole lot of them were exempt from the telework requirement. [/quote]

This FDA info is inaccurate (at least in part); although the space constraints and parking problems at White Oak are real, they would not have been sufficient to cause this more or less immediate walk-back. They restored two days of telework per week for drug and device reviewers because: (1) they had already lost too many people and the exitflow was not abating; and (2) reviewers -- per agency guidance -- were taking entire days off for minor appointments & etc. Pharma raised the alarm because they actually pay for the drug and device review programs (which are subject to statutory deadlines that were going to quickly become infeasible (and probably already have)).

At the risk of triggering our hard-core hall monitor, there are some analogies (albeit imperfect) to the SEC here that are likely -- in conjunction with all of the other common sense considerations -- to exert pressure on the maximalist 5-day TW position, at least in the medium to long term.
 [/quote]

Such as? FWIW ppl are already taking full days off for appointments and 4 weeks in no one seems to care. It’s only going to continue bc ppl aren’t going to cancel some specialist they or their kid need who books 6 months out bc the only opening happens to be 11 AM - they’ll just take the whole day for a 45 min appointment.[/quote]

PP 12:46 here. This is entirely consistent with what I said. The fact that "no one seems to care" right now (which is not actually true btw) does not mean that the cumulative effect over time won't lead to the same result as FDA. Not likely in the short-term, but quite possible in the medium to long term IMO (again, when added to all of the other considerations). From a Bayesian perspective, I would guess that there is a ~65% chance that SEC moves to something more flexible within 18 months.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics