Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was hired fully remote in another state. I have no clue what this will mean for me.
Youll be canned.
It’s literally cheaper to keep someone fully remote than pay them the DC locality. But I suppose no one is really using logic.
Presumably a nontrivial share of newly RTO feds would retire/quit. The corresponding cost savings would trump whatever increase from DC locality pay.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was hired fully remote in another state. I have no clue what this will mean for me.
Youll be canned.
It’s literally cheaper to keep someone fully remote than pay them the DC locality. But I suppose no one is really using logic.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was hired fully remote in another state. I have no clue what this will mean for me.
Youll be canned.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was hired fully remote in another state. I have no clue what this will mean for me.
Youll be canned.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just focus on senior folks that are barely performing and push them out of the door. They are the most expensive and least productive.
Yes, but they're always quick to scream age discrimination. They know they won't be able to get a different job.
I mean after a while they should be judged on their performance. Every agency has more than 1/3rd folks as seniors that shouldn't be there and it looks like a welfare to me.
You're right, but who are those seniors' bosses? Other old people.
An independent assessment needs to happen and may be at the SESs level they need to see which 14/15s to keep if they are not performing or letting lower level non-performers go.
I think retirement eligible feds that are underperforming could be given incentives to separate. Would be cheaper than trying to manage them out.
Anonymous wrote:I was hired fully remote in another state. I have no clue what this will mean for me.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No because I don’t think DOGE is a real thing
+1
Anonymous wrote:No because I don’t think DOGE is a real thing
Anonymous wrote:My die hard Full Remote WFH forever employee went to NYC this week. Jokingly I said what if Broadway just showed a Zoom version of Play, the restaurant just had you pick up a frozen dinner to heat up at your hotel. At hotel you did on line check in and you had to clean your own toilets and make your own beds.
She was like that is outrageous. Funny how she does not want anyone working from home when it is stuff she wants, but she is not willing to go to work.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We aren’t worried about RTO but 8-6 hours is untenable and we accepted lower paying Fed jobs for the 40 hour work week
You accepted a Fed job for the security.
Hours worked are 40 whether your commute is 2 min or 2 hours.
I left the house at 8 to get to Fed job by 9. Left at 5:30, got home 6:30. That's 40 worked hours even if I was out of the house longer.
Anonymous wrote:Yes, I think the feds will have to go back to the office like most of the working world.