How, specifically, is it affecting your work? You said she performs menial, low priority tasks. How does that affect you?

I want people who can do their jobs at home to stay home and stay off the roads.

Anonymous wrote:It’s your management’s responsibility to manage her work and to help address your workload. You have no way of knowing she’s abusing RA because you don’t know her condition(s).

This. Feds need to stick to looking to themselves and not looking at their peers for "how much". It's already a trying time and this is not a good look.

OP, you have a job where you have to be in-person. That's a choice. There are lots of us with those types of jobs. Stop worrying about other people and worry about yourself. Now's not a good time, but I very much hope in the future that you can leverage the requirements of your job (that some people do not want to do--in person) to higher pay.

I work with someone who has a RO because she suffered from fatigue after RTO and required medication to sleep (they told me they were applying). The thing that bugs me about it is the sleep issues are not every night but the never have to come to the office. Why not just liberal telework on the nights there is an issue and if medication works then??

If it's been a decade, her inability to come to the office predates covid (and likely predates many people in your office). You have no evidence that she's abusing it. If you have a reasonable complaint about your job duties, discuss with your supervisor -- it has nothing to do with this woman.

Anonymous wrote:It stinks. Sounds like my former office where a colleague has permanent WFH because she claims she gets sick riding the metro in. She got a doctors’ note for this.

Meanwhile everyone else has to commute in.

Sucks and unfair. Just brings down morale.

Why doesn't she drive?

It’s your management’s responsibility to manage her work and to help address your workload. You have no way of knowing she’s abusing RA because you don’t know her condition(s).

I refuse to do more so someone else can stay home and do menial tasks. I push back if a supervisor tries to give me work that someone staying at home should be doing.

I would be sympathetic if it were for a short amount of time like 6 months but after that, no way am I doing more work. This is particularly true with a co-worker who can show up for holiday parties.

She could have a seizure disorder , which makes driving impossible and is dangerous around buses and trains as well.

She could have IBS and need more ready access to a bathroom most days than is feasible for a commute and work.

Who knows?

What you are missing is that you are not entitled to know the details of this woman's health and accommodations. That is not your job. That is not your business. Stay out of it.

Report the slacking worker to doge it's a scam and unfair

You’re missing the fact that the Rehab Act of 1973 exists and that DJT’s desire for feds to be in the office does not satisfy the requirement that the employer establish a business interest in in-person presence that the employee’s right to accommodation can never overcome.

If her assigned tasks are done at home, then by definition she is able to fulfill the essential
functions of the job remotely. Your leadership has determined that this way of determining what her vs your essential functions are is OK with them.

Your management cannot share the details of her RA and she has no obligation to share it with you.

Her RA is not why you have no flexibility.

If the conditions of your job are bad, I'm sorry. A lot of people have left federal jobs because they can't make it work, and it sucks.

It stinks. Sounds like my former office where a colleague has permanent WFH because she claims she gets sick riding the metro in. She got a doctors’ note for this.

Meanwhile everyone else has to commute in.

Sucks and unfair. Just brings down morale.

I’m a federal employee required to work on site because our work is sensitive and must be performed in person — through furloughs, COVID, and everything else.

A colleague I’ve worked with for years began in the office, but about a year in was granted a reasonable accommodation. For close to a decade, she has been in the office only once or twice a year (e.g., for holiday parties). She is pleasant, but during this time has had several children, and on occasion they’ve appeared on calls. I don’t know the details of her health situation — and understand some would say it’s not my business — but this arrangement has impacted the rest of the team for years, as she now performs tasks that can be done entirely from home (low priority, often menial tasks).

The rest of us have zero flexibility. Older parents here received no parental leave whatsoever and while that has improved for newer parents like her, it still isn't great. I struggle to understand why someone can continue in a role that otherwise requires all employees to be on site, rather than moving to a position better suited to full-time remote work. I’m also surprised senior management has supported this arrangement indefinitely — whether by choice or legal obligation — given the negative impact on team morale.

What am I missing?