Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do folks think this is the new trend for federal agencies? I hope they don’t abolish it.

They should. I know people who "telework" who go grocery shopping, take kids to medical appointments and one who went Christmas shopping. It's a sham. You have a job and it should be performed at your office!

Ok, Boomer.

truth hurts.

Anonymous wrote:Who is going to apply for the SSA attorney advisor jobs with no telework?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seemed odd to me that they cut the program entirely rather than curtail it for individuals with productivity issues. Alternatively, perhaps the jobs in that division are public facing and don't lend themselves well to teleworking but one wonders why that was not readily ascertainable prior to launching the pilot program.

From a fed manager's perspective and from what I see attending management meetings throughout my department, it's very hard to curtail things for some employees (those with productivity issues) but not others. They file grievances, fake EEOs and even sometimes get lawyers. Even when you have ironclad evidence, it's still very difficult and you basically can't ever fire someone. It would be great to have a more dynamic hiring and firing system, but it doesn't exist.

PP here and if there is enough management support to cut telework en masse presumably there is enough support to implement some form of a disciplinary system with respect to telework. I mean, I get that in your situation maybe senior management doesn't care or is too lazy but here senior management is clearly on board with making changes by axing telework for this subset of people. They could just as easily come up with some measure by which if people fall behind they lose telework for six months or a year or whatever.

No, sadly. It's relatively easy to cut back telework. To reform government hiring and firing would likely take an act of congress.

I'm not talking about hiring and firing. I'm talking about implementing guidelines for pulling telework for individuals that aren't meeting deadlines/productivity goals. And, to be honest, I don't understand why something like this wouldn't be included in the pilot program. Seriously poor management.

Those people need to be fired not have telework taken away. Why get rid of something when the issue is poor individual performers not telework which is fine for the majority of people.

Anonymous wrote:People abuse it like crazy at my agency. Maybe other agencies are better (or worse)...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seemed odd to me that they cut the program entirely rather than curtail it for individuals with productivity issues. Alternatively, perhaps the jobs in that division are public facing and don't lend themselves well to teleworking but one wonders why that was not readily ascertainable prior to launching the pilot program.

From a fed manager's perspective and from what I see attending management meetings throughout my department, it's very hard to curtail things for some employees (those with productivity issues) but not others. They file grievances, fake EEOs and even sometimes get lawyers. Even when you have ironclad evidence, it's still very difficult and you basically can't ever fire someone. It would be great to have a more dynamic hiring and firing system, but it doesn't exist.

PP here and if there is enough management support to cut telework en masse presumably there is enough support to implement some form of a disciplinary system with respect to telework. I mean, I get that in your situation maybe senior management doesn't care or is too lazy but here senior management is clearly on board with making changes by axing telework for this subset of people. They could just as easily come up with some measure by which if people fall behind they lose telework for six months or a year or whatever.

No, sadly. It's relatively easy to cut back telework. To reform government hiring and firing would likely take an act of congress.

I'm not talking about hiring and firing. I'm talking about implementing guidelines for pulling telework for individuals that aren't meeting deadlines/productivity goals. And, to be honest, I don't understand why something like this wouldn't be included in the pilot program. Seriously poor management.

Anonymous wrote:Ours was negotiated by the union. Does that mean it’s some sort of binding contract?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seemed odd to me that they cut the program entirely rather than curtail it for individuals with productivity issues. Alternatively, perhaps the jobs in that division are public facing and don't lend themselves well to teleworking but one wonders why that was not readily ascertainable prior to launching the pilot program.

From a fed manager's perspective and from what I see attending management meetings throughout my department, it's very hard to curtail things for some employees (those with productivity issues) but not others. They file grievances, fake EEOs and even sometimes get lawyers. Even when you have ironclad evidence, it's still very difficult and you basically can't ever fire someone. It would be great to have a more dynamic hiring and firing system, but it doesn't exist.

PP here and if there is enough management support to cut telework en masse presumably there is enough support to implement some form of a disciplinary system with respect to telework. I mean, I get that in your situation maybe senior management doesn't care or is too lazy but here senior management is clearly on board with making changes by axing telework for this subset of people. They could just as easily come up with some measure by which if people fall behind they lose telework for six months or a year or whatever.

No, sadly. It's relatively easy to cut back telework. To reform government hiring and firing would likely take an act of congress.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seemed odd to me that they cut the program entirely rather than curtail it for individuals with productivity issues. Alternatively, perhaps the jobs in that division are public facing and don't lend themselves well to teleworking but one wonders why that was not readily ascertainable prior to launching the pilot program.

From a fed manager's perspective and from what I see attending management meetings throughout my department, it's very hard to curtail things for some employees (those with productivity issues) but not others. They file grievances, fake EEOs and even sometimes get lawyers. Even when you have ironclad evidence, it's still very difficult and you basically can't ever fire someone. It would be great to have a more dynamic hiring and firing system, but it doesn't exist.

PP here and if there is enough management support to cut telework en masse presumably there is enough support to implement some form of a disciplinary system with respect to telework. I mean, I get that in your situation maybe senior management doesn't care or is too lazy but here senior management is clearly on board with making changes by axing telework for this subset of people. They could just as easily come up with some measure by which if people fall behind they lose telework for six months or a year or whatever.

No, sadly. It's relatively easy to cut back telework. To reform government hiring and firing would likely take an act of congress.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seemed odd to me that they cut the program entirely rather than curtail it for individuals with productivity issues. Alternatively, perhaps the jobs in that division are public facing and don't lend themselves well to teleworking but one wonders why that was not readily ascertainable prior to launching the pilot program.

From a fed manager's perspective and from what I see attending management meetings throughout my department, it's very hard to curtail things for some employees (those with productivity issues) but not others. They file grievances, fake EEOs and even sometimes get lawyers. Even when you have ironclad evidence, it's still very difficult and you basically can't ever fire someone. It would be great to have a more dynamic hiring and firing system, but it doesn't exist.

PP here and if there is enough management support to cut telework en masse presumably there is enough support to implement some form of a disciplinary system with respect to telework. I mean, I get that in your situation maybe senior management doesn't care or is too lazy but here senior management is clearly on board with making changes by axing telework for this subset of people. They could just as easily come up with some measure by which if people fall behind they lose telework for six months or a year or whatever.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seemed odd to me that they cut the program entirely rather than curtail it for individuals with productivity issues. Alternatively, perhaps the jobs in that division are public facing and don't lend themselves well to teleworking but one wonders why that was not readily ascertainable prior to launching the pilot program.

From a fed manager's perspective and from what I see attending management meetings throughout my department, it's very hard to curtail things for some employees (those with productivity issues) but not others. They file grievances, fake EEOs and even sometimes get lawyers. Even when you have ironclad evidence, it's still very difficult and you basically can't ever fire someone. It would be great to have a more dynamic hiring and firing system, but it doesn't exist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is going to apply for the SSA attorney advisor jobs with no telework?

I’m an SSA Attorney Advisor. And no one, because it’s so hard to get above a GS 13. Telework is a big reason many people stay. Lot of parents— often moms— in these jobs because they work so well with a family. Under telework, they’ve slashed the backlog and the hard numbers are there on to say productivity and quality are up on telework days.

And it’s not just finding people. SSA regulatory review is a specialized skill set and you don’t learn it overnight.

SSA is a huge agency. Operations staff in Baltimore and OAO attorneys in FC/CC/Wabash are completely different things. SSA was getting hammered about the ALJ plus AC backlog a few years ago. WaPo stories on the “million case backlog” and the “biggest backlog in the federal government”. Now they’ve cut it in half. Plus, they are are having huge waves on the people who know what they are doing retiring, with a lot more scheduled.

Also, SSA has a Commissioner on a 6 year appointment— so less subject to Trump’s whims than most agencies.

I think a core day would help a lot. Besides that? Maybe I’m being optimistic, but I think the new Commissioner has bigger fish to fry than breaking something that works well. Almost all voters on both sides of the aisle care a lot when SSA when SSA isn’t working well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do folks think this is the new trend for federal agencies? I hope they don’t abolish it.

They should. I know people who "telework" who go grocery shopping, take kids to medical appointments and one who went Christmas shopping. It's a sham. You have a job and it should be performed at your office!

Ok, Boomer.