Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll go back. I'll be much more of a clock watcher, though.

However, we are 50% in the office, as we don't have space for everyone. Where will they put us?

We have had dozens of posts of “but no space” — they don’t care. You need to badge in and find a corner of floor. They do not care about productivity, enough bathrooms, HVAC, comfort or anything. They want you in and miserable so you will quit.

So stop with that line of concern.

We need to hook our computers up to the LAN to work, so no individual workstation with LAN cable = no work.

Do you and your coworkers hook up to LAN at home?

No, my house has wifi.

I look forward to going to lunch with colleagues, after work happy hours, etc. Yes my age group still likes those things.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll go back. I'll be much more of a clock watcher, though.

However, we are 50% in the office, as we don't have space for everyone. Where will they put us?

We have had dozens of posts of “but no space” — they don’t care. You need to badge in and find a corner of floor. They do not care about productivity, enough bathrooms, HVAC, comfort or anything. They want you in and miserable so you will quit.

So stop with that line of concern.

We need to hook our computers up to the LAN to work, so no individual workstation with LAN cable = no work.

Do you and your coworkers hook up to LAN at home?

Not the pp, but our office wifi is patchy and doesn’t work in some of the office spaces. I actually do work over physical connection at home usually, but am allowed to use WiFi. If just doesn’t work well at the office.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll go back. I'll be much more of a clock watcher, though.

However, we are 50% in the office, as we don't have space for everyone. Where will they put us?

We have had dozens of posts of “but no space” — they don’t care. You need to badge in and find a corner of floor. They do not care about productivity, enough bathrooms, HVAC, comfort or anything. They want you in and miserable so you will quit.

So stop with that line of concern.

We need to hook our computers up to the LAN to work, so no individual workstation with LAN cable = no work.

Do you and your coworkers hook up to LAN at home?

My sibling works in tech at a FAANG company. RTO is a way to do layoffs and really doesn’t have anything to do with performance. There’s nothing inherent in being at home that means that you’re a low performer and even with anecdotes to the contrary there’s also one off anecdotes about people who work in office (an example..when people at the SEC were watching porn for hours on end).

There’s also a cost to having everyone come in. Both in office space and lost productivity when illness are passed around. Since being able to telework I’ve taken maybe one or two sick days when I literally couldn’t get out of bed. But if I were in office I would not go in with gastro symptoms, the flu, strep, etc. i also worked until the day i gave birth for my second baby because I wasn’t worried about my water breaking in front of my coworkers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is a common set-up: two parents out of the house 10 hours a day, scrambling to provide care for their own children. We make it work because we have to.

And what benefit is there to society in making more people have to deal with this?

So your question (why should I have to suffer like you, essentially) comes across as a bit… privileged to those of us who do essential in-person jobs.

Nice try. Answer the question. What benefit is there to society in making other people’s lives worse?

You mean: What if we are all as self-serving as you?

Who is going to teach your children? Who is going to provide after-school activities and childcare for you? Who is going to be at the urgent care when you or your child get sick?

See, it’s really tiresome for those of us who work for the betterment of society (which often has to be done in person) to hear the woe-is-me from somebody who may have to experience a bit of what we do. It’s hard to feel sympathy when your argument is “well, you’re suffering, but thankfully I don’t have to!”

Nailed it.

Exactly - so self serving!

Are you enjoying talking to yourself? How about answering the question you keep ignoring. What benefit is there to society in this? It should be simple to explain. Why can’t you?

read much?? It was already answered. The benefit is that companies get their full time attention and work product back from the folks who have not been putting in 40 hours and full attention while wfh. No, I don't want to pay to do your kids homework, or laundry during meetings or workout between calls. I want you to earn your freaking paycheck. Go work somewhere else if you cant understand this,

People are working at home. We know YOU can’t do it. But the rest of us are. Now, explain what the benefit is of removing WFH for people who do their work just fine that way.

DP. No, maybe YOU are. Many, many others are doing what PP referenced. That will now stop, and that’s a good thing. Arrange your childcare accordingly. Do your laundry, “start dinner,” etc, etc at times when you aren’t being paid to do a job.

And for the 100th time, no one needs to “explain the benefit” to you. You insist you’re owed that, and you simply aren’t. Don’t like it? No one’s barring the door.

What about people sitting at the office not doing anything? Why do you support inefficiencies and not want to take full advantage of technology? Do you also want the office workers using fax machines?

The office has died a slow death. Casual Friday, the laptop, the iPhone, death of the landline etc.

I can admit that wfh has been an absolute boon for me personally. I saved crazy money with no childcare, no commute, no lunches out, no dry cleaning expense. I always knew it would come to an end so I’m not upset. Nobody can take away the 6 years of massive benefit and savings and now my kids are old enough that I don’t mind going in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will be willing to RTO but I will not work a minute early or a minute later than scheduled if I do. And, no laptops will be taken home at night or for snow days.

If they want to go back to 1990, then we go back to 1990.

This. I will check my boxes and nothing more. Need me to stay late? No, sorry, I have an appointment. Log on at home for call with out west coast colleagues. Sorry, I have an appointment.

I do all that now as I View that as a trade off for my flexibility. But that will end immediately upon RTO.

Get 'em tiger. Way to be a team player. You are soooo cool.

There is no team. It’s an employer not a family member. Get a grip.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is a common set-up: two parents out of the house 10 hours a day, scrambling to provide care for their own children. We make it work because we have to.

And what benefit is there to society in making more people have to deal with this?

So your question (why should I have to suffer like you, essentially) comes across as a bit… privileged to those of us who do essential in-person jobs.

Nice try. Answer the question. What benefit is there to society in making other people’s lives worse?

You mean: What if we are all as self-serving as you?

Who is going to teach your children? Who is going to provide after-school activities and childcare for you? Who is going to be at the urgent care when you or your child get sick?

See, it’s really tiresome for those of us who work for the betterment of society (which often has to be done in person) to hear the woe-is-me from somebody who may have to experience a bit of what we do. It’s hard to feel sympathy when your argument is “well, you’re suffering, but thankfully I don’t have to!”

Nailed it.

Exactly - so self serving!

Are you enjoying talking to yourself? How about answering the question you keep ignoring. What benefit is there to society in this? It should be simple to explain. Why can’t you?

read much?? It was already answered. The benefit is that companies get their full time attention and work product back from the folks who have not been putting in 40 hours and full attention while wfh. No, I don't want to pay to do your kids homework, or laundry during meetings or workout between calls. I want you to earn your freaking paycheck. Go work somewhere else if you cant understand this,

People are working at home. We know YOU can’t do it. But the rest of us are. Now, explain what the benefit is of removing WFH for people who do their work just fine that way.

DP. No, maybe YOU are. Many, many others are doing what PP referenced. That will now stop, and that’s a good thing. Arrange your childcare accordingly. Do your laundry, “start dinner,” etc, etc at times when you aren’t being paid to do a job.

And for the 100th time, no one needs to “explain the benefit” to you. You insist you’re owed that, and you simply aren’t. Don’t like it? No one’s barring the door.

Prove it. Even Joni Ernst and her little expose couldn’t find make than anecdotes about one person taking a call from the bath. How about you offer some real evidence, otherwise all signs point to this policy being exactly what its chief proponents have openly admitted—an attempt to make workers miserable enough to quit so that our government works worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is a common set-up: two parents out of the house 10 hours a day, scrambling to provide care for their own children. We make it work because we have to.

And what benefit is there to society in making more people have to deal with this?

So your question (why should I have to suffer like you, essentially) comes across as a bit… privileged to those of us who do essential in-person jobs.

Nice try. Answer the question. What benefit is there to society in making other people’s lives worse?

You mean: What if we are all as self-serving as you?

Who is going to teach your children? Who is going to provide after-school activities and childcare for you? Who is going to be at the urgent care when you or your child get sick?

See, it’s really tiresome for those of us who work for the betterment of society (which often has to be done in person) to hear the woe-is-me from somebody who may have to experience a bit of what we do. It’s hard to feel sympathy when your argument is “well, you’re suffering, but thankfully I don’t have to!”

Nailed it.

Exactly - so self serving!

Are you enjoying talking to yourself? How about answering the question you keep ignoring. What benefit is there to society in this? It should be simple to explain. Why can’t you?

read much?? It was already answered. The benefit is that companies get their full time attention and work product back from the folks who have not been putting in 40 hours and full attention while wfh. No, I don't want to pay to do your kids homework, or laundry during meetings or workout between calls. I want you to earn your freaking paycheck. Go work somewhere else if you cant understand this,

People are working at home. We know YOU can’t do it. But the rest of us are. Now, explain what the benefit is of removing WFH for people who do their work just fine that way.

DP. No, maybe YOU are. Many, many others are doing what PP referenced. That will now stop, and that’s a good thing. Arrange your childcare accordingly. Do your laundry, “start dinner,” etc, etc at times when you aren’t being paid to do a job.

And for the 100th time, no one needs to “explain the benefit” to you. You insist you’re owed that, and you simply aren’t. Don’t like it? No one’s barring the door.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is a common set-up: two parents out of the house 10 hours a day, scrambling to provide care for their own children. We make it work because we have to.

And what benefit is there to society in making more people have to deal with this?

Did you care about the rest of society before this impacted you?

Answer the question first. What is the benefit of this?

NP. There is no benefit. RTO is a step backwards for society. They just like to crap on women who will be disproportionately affected by childcare conflicts and forced to resign.

Why are women watching their kids when they are supposed to be working. You do see you actually answered the question "what is the benefit" - the company actually gets a full time employee back for the full time they have been paying people who were not actually working. THATS the benefit. The companies have caught on to your BS and now you are mad. Get over it.

Pp here who was part-time before the pandemic. When my husband commuted daily I had to use my sick leave for doctors’ appointments for the kids and it was down to nothing (after unpaid time away when they were born). My husband did daycare drop off and pickups. Now we can share the pickups more easily (both worn full time at home), l’ve returned to fulll-time and, since his leave policies are more generous, he covers more appointments. Our 7 year old currently has the flu. I should be able to attend my important presentation on Tuesday from 10-noon while DH is on childcare. We can then figure out the rest of the day but probably I can work 4-5 hours at least (and the rest of the week while she recovers) rather than taking multiple sick days to be home with her. I also won’t be going to the office and potentially spreading the flu to commuters and colleagues.

Anonymous wrote:If your agency allows it, why not switch to a part-time schedule, rather than resign. That would reduce your in-office days.

I was part time pre-Covid. We were required to be in office 14 hrs a pay period and could not exceed 10 hr days. The requirement was not reduced for part time employees. So I worked from home Monday, Weds, Thursday, went to the office on Tuesday, and took Friday off.

My colleagues at the time were in other field offices, so I would typically commute and write / research in an office by myself most the day, have some meetings over zoom, and have lunch at my desk. It was pointless.

Now I go in when there’s interesting training or presentations or someone’s baby shower or something but otherwise I work from home. It makes so much more sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the default parent and my job pays significantly less than my spouse's. I can certainly up and quit but I enjoy keeping occupied for now. The problem is in addition to several extra hours a day wasted on a long commute that make question long term viability of the position in the first place, I would have to find someone to pick my Kindergartener (FCPS) up at the bus stop in the afternoon (I already pay for SACC before care but I would miss the bus in the pm by about 10-15 min meaning full pay after care doesn't make sense). Hoping any RTO fizzles but next best would be to start as late as possible, ideally after June.

Leave 15 minutes earlier in the morning and get home 15 earlier for the bus. Problem solved

Why should they have to?

Off topic, but back when I worked for a DC nonprofit my boss didn’t like that he got to the office at 8:30 and I got in at 8:45. He asked me to be there when he was. So I started taking the bus that came 45 mins earlier, getting in at 8 and leaving 45 mins earlier. He didn’t like that either because it didn’t match his work day. I basically told him to pick one because at 28k a year I wasn’t getting car and I wasn’t sticking around an extra 45 minutes either. There aren’t always public transit issues that can be fixed with slight adjustments.

Anonymous wrote:I thought federal civil servants had good health insurance? Its "expensive"?

Fed here. It’s nice to have options - when I worked in the private sector we didn’t have choices. But my husband’s current and former employers gave choices AND covered more of the premium (former) or all (current) so it’s a lot more affordable to be on his company’s insurance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live close enough I could but as you pointed out, we also simply don't have the space. Enough of my colleagues are out of state remote and live in other states for unshakable reasons (family, spouse's job). We have been remote for over a decade, well before COVID.

So those of us who did RTO would be the band on the Titanic, playing as the ship goes down. We're fee funded, if we can't deliver work, people won't file anymore and we'll collapse and the global system will shift to one of our foreign counterparts.

"...Enough of my colleagues are out of state remote and live in other states for unshakable reasons ..."

Do these out of state colleagues still get DC location pay?

No

Np here. I’m a fed in CA. I get paid based on my region (my home and office are in the same region). My colleagues in different states who are close enough to a regional office and go on occasion are paid that office’s regional pay. Otherwise they are paid the regional pay for where their homes are.