Anonymous wrote:
I dealt with a similar request on the management side at my agency. I advised against approval, after much consideration. A couple reasons:
1. First and most importantly, the employee performed a function that did require physical presence and ability to come to external meetings on occasion, something he/she could not do from overseas (without a lot of planning ahead and expense to the employee. Keep in mind that when you telework, travel costs to get to duty station are on the employee).
2. IT security
3. Physical security
4. Telecommuting means that the duty station remains DC, getting LOC for DC, which is unfair to other employees
5. We are working with a union that is pushing for ever increasing telework. We believe that our existing policy is liberal, but does provide managers discretion that we train to use appropriately. If we were to let one employee telework fulltime, without the ability to recall to the office when necessary, it would set a very dangerous precedent.
I really don't mean to sound cold-hearted here. The choice you are facing is a tough one for your marriage and career. And maybe you do perform one of those rare functions that do not require physical presence ever. Good luck to you. No harm in asking. But just please don't get upset with your employer if you are denied. They have to think about the entire workforce and getting the job done efficiently and effectively.
I’m a little surprised you would take #4 seriously enough to have it affect your decision. Seems like a minor thing and the “unfairness” would really depend on where the employee is going.
And I’ll push back on #5 a bit too. I think it’s possible to set up a category of “temporarily (2-3 years) permanent” teleworking employees for the purposes of accompanying a partner overseas without worrying about a slippery slope.