Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate the union’s attitude of zealous advocacy, but The head dude was a bit much. When he maligns “management” for and says they want to torture us, he forgets that our group heads and supervisors that are staying will have some discretion and don’t want to torture us.

While it's true that supervisors are part of management that's not who he is referring to. It is very clear that he is referring to the agency leadership. Honestly supervisors have far more in common with the worker bees than they do with agency leadership.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sure that people on this board know the details.

My GUESS: the agency is targeting a specific headcount (probably 2019 levels). They probably have 8-12 months to get there, one way or another.

Note that project 2025 says nothing about big cuts to the agency.

Project 2025 also didn't dismantle USAID, yet here we are.

You obviously didn’t read it. They didn’t use the word “dismantle” but might as well have. In contrast, the small chapter on the SEC is boring and suggests minor reforms.

Keep telling yourself that. You can use semantics all you want, but there is no guidebook anymore. The SEC CBA was also supposedly “strong” 🙄

Periodic reminder that credit for the strong CBA must go to the rockstar union negotiator.

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:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Jesus, listen to yourself. Working from a (very nice by government standards) office is “cruel punishment.” WTF.

RTO sucks, but whiny, entitled people like this are why we are this position.

I’m sorry you don’t have a life outside work (or at least one that isn’t miserable). Other people actually do and took a job at the SEC because it offered flexibility.

Enjoy working in the office 40 hours a week 3 years from now when anyone even remotely talented will have left.

NP. I am the biggest WFH booster there is, and I'm tired of the whining too. RTO is stupid and wrong and happening. Stop rehashing it. Just decide to go or stay.

A bunch of friends got RIFd this week and I'm glad to have a job. I've worked at agencies with much worse locations and I'm glad to be near metro and parking. Every month I'm not fired is money coming in and time toward my pension and time for the job market to settle down.

I agree it’s happening and it’s here to stay. But what’s up with the people pretending RTO will relax by the summer? What’s the basis for that statement besides a giant dose of hopium.

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:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Jesus, listen to yourself. Working from a (very nice by government standards) office is “cruel punishment.” WTF.

RTO sucks, but whiny, entitled people like this are why we are this position.

I’m sorry you don’t have a life outside work (or at least one that isn’t miserable). Other people actually do and took a job at the SEC because it offered flexibility.

Enjoy working in the office 40 hours a week 3 years from now when anyone even remotely talented will have left.

NP. I am the biggest WFH booster there is, and I'm tired of the whining too. RTO is stupid and wrong and happening. Stop rehashing it. Just decide to go or stay.

A bunch of friends got RIFd this week and I'm glad to have a job. I've worked at agencies with much worse locations and I'm glad to be near metro and parking. Every month I'm not fired is money coming in and time toward my pension and time for the job market to settle down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Jesus, listen to yourself. Working from a (very nice by government standards) office is “cruel punishment.” WTF.

RTO sucks, but whiny, entitled people like this are why we are this position.

I’m sorry you don’t have a life outside work (or at least one that isn’t miserable). Other people actually do and took a job at the SEC because it offered flexibility.

Enjoy working in the office 40 hours a week 3 years from now when anyone even remotely talented will have left.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Jesus, listen to yourself. Working from a (very nice by government standards) office is “cruel punishment.” WTF.

RTO sucks, but whiny, entitled people like this are why we are this position.

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:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Jesus, listen to yourself. Working from a (very nice by government standards) office is “cruel punishment.” WTF.

RTO sucks, but whiny, entitled people like this are why we are this position.

Jesus, listen to yourself. You make it sound like GG invented telework three years ago. No — it’s been around for DECADES in one form or another. And folks arranged their lives around it. Then they strip it away COMPLETELY for no reason with 2 months notice. It’s insane.

Pushover apologists like you who think this is normal/acceptable are actually why we’re on this position.

Huh? How did I make it seem like Gensler invented telework? That it has been around for a while hardly makes taking it away cruel punishment.

As for notice, you had a pretty good sense this was coming since the election. It’s still rough to figure things mid-school year, but you’ve had a lot more time than lots of people.

As for no reason, that’s your take, but obviously others feel there is value in having people work in the office.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Jesus, listen to yourself. Working from a (very nice by government standards) office is “cruel punishment.” WTF.

RTO sucks, but whiny, entitled people like this are why we are this position.

Jesus, listen to yourself. You make it sound like GG invented telework three years ago. No — it’s been around for DECADES in one form or another. And folks arranged their lives around it. Then they strip it away COMPLETELY for no reason with 2 months notice. It’s insane.

Pushover apologists like you who think this is normal/acceptable are actually why we’re on this position.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Jesus, listen to yourself. Working from a (very nice by government standards) office is “cruel punishment.” WTF.

RTO sucks, but whiny, entitled people like this are why we are this position.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Jesus, listen to yourself. Working from a (very nice by government standards) office is “cruel punishment.” WTF.

RTO sucks, but whiny, entitled people like this are why we are this position.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Jesus, listen to yourself. Working from a (very nice by government standards) office is “cruel punishment.” WTF.

RTO sucks, but whiny, entitled people like this are why we are this position.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

There is a big continuum along OPM making the decisions, MU/PA as nothing more than a lapdog doing OPMs bidding, and leadership making decisions informed by information and preferences of the administration.

Who know where things will actually play out.

This is all academic. Nobody would fire the head of the SEC for not having a “good enough RTO policy” or “only cutting 9 percent of staff instead of 12 percent.” He might get fired for bad climate or cyber policy, but not for mundane differences. I think opm has (and wants) a lot less “control” than people think.

Please then tell me why everyone, including BU, are back in the office? The SEC has always been a fairly civil place to work. Some people have despised Chairman and still overall it has been a good place to work.

If the Union wins and the agency appeals (which would mean everyone would come in during the appeal), I think it will for the first time turn into an overall miserable place. I get other agencies are facing mass layoffs and there’s a whole other level of despair and destruction going on. I’m simply remarking that such a scenario will destroy the SEC as we know it. And for all this MU/PA will be independent, if they follow that path it will be on them. Not Trump. Not Musk. But on them personally.

And as far as I can tell, no one wants to destroy the SEC. But that would do it.

Agree completely. Going back to 2019 TW policy would be one thing — totally defensible. But completely ignoring the CBA and imposing a policy from 1983 that puts us behind every professional firm in the DMV/NY/etc is just a slap in the face.

I don’t care if I lived across the street from the office or already came in 5x a week anyway — it’s the principle/message of the whole thing — it’s intended as cruel punishment, a rank “F you” to the staff. And anyone who is ok with that or excuses it or doesn’t push back has no self respect.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

Easy, MU wants a bigger role once his term as commissioner ends and he sees this as the means to an end.

FWIW, GG wanted to go to treasury and did the things he did (in particular overhiring) to curry favor with his masters so it's not like this is the first time this is happening.

Why would over hiring help Gensler’s chances of getting Treasury?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 percent of staff have NOT left. That’s 600 people. Not even close.

Why the hell do NONE of us who work at this agency have ANY IDEA what the freaking plans are?

If plans were (presumably) submitted to OPM yesterday, why would you expect to have heard about them? This isn’t something that is going to leak easily.

I’m not sure folks at other agencies where nothing has happened yet have any better idea of what may happen in the future.

I’m not expecting a leak. I’m expecting our leaders to offer some transparency or concern about us before and/or after plans were due. I’m expecting our leaders, who presumably care so much about this agency, and the agency’s mission, to care about the people who are helping achieve the mission.

What could they say at this point? They’ve submitted things to OPM and, until they receive feedback, they probably don’t have a great sense of how things will go.

Let’s say they are arguing that voluntary cuts to date and a hiring freeze for the last couple of years should mean no RIF is warranted. It doesn’t help you to know that (because that may or may not be how things play out), and leaking that may make it harder to get OPM approval.

I guess if we were facing a bloodbath, people might want to know (even though you’d never yet be told on an individual level) because that might impact VERA/VISP decisions, but if they are still looking to make big cuts, I think there is a good chance they would offer a new window or extend the current one.

Didn’t a judge just rule that OPM can’t make those decisions?

A more philosophical question: why would MU (or PA, or anyone else notable, for that matter) embarrass themselves and waste their mid careers being lapdogs for OPM or OMB? Both have great options in the private sector and can make much more money there. What’s the point of playing this game or going through this charade with opm? It’s very weird. I can see some B-list fox host wanting to do this, but why them?

Easy, MU wants a bigger role once his term as commissioner ends and he sees this as the means to an end.

FWIW, GG wanted to go to treasury and did the things he did (in particular overhiring) to curry favor with his masters so it's not like this is the first time this is happening.