Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's BS that people who have been working remotely for 10+ years are now just expected to uproot their lives over night. It's down right cruel and stressful. Gives no thought to people's actual lives. Removing flexibility in the workplace for remote work is absolutely going to cost productivity when people aren't able to use the perfectly good work stations in their homes, and instead have to take time off.

But people hired under remote job announcements are exempt.

I was hired remote and I'm certainly not.

What did they say about relocation costs and timing? Have they been up-front about severance if you decline the reassignment?

There is no Trump appointee at my agency yet, so no one has told us anything other than "report Monday" whatever that means.

For remote employees, that still means reporting to your duty location--home. Terminating a remote work agreement doesn't change their duty station.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

WTF. You're not going to be fired for being sympathetic.

Aren't you worried you're going to be left without staff? I'm freaking out that I'm going to lose half my team if I can't get an exemption.

PP - Oh I am very worried. Especially without the capacity to hire them back. By fear of being fired, I worry more about disagreeing with the administration or the order, not being sympathetic

PP. I've been clear that I disagree with the policy and will do everything in my power to seek exemptions. But I've also been clear I don't know if I'll be able to get them. I've asked remote employees to give me a chance to try before they leave, telling them they wouldn't be eligible for severance if they resign voluntarily before formally being reassigned. I've told in-person staff we'll be as flexible as we can be on situational telework, but that we're haven't gotten any detailed guidance on that yet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's BS that people who have been working remotely for 10+ years are now just expected to uproot their lives over night. It's down right cruel and stressful. Gives no thought to people's actual lives. Removing flexibility in the workplace for remote work is absolutely going to cost productivity when people aren't able to use the perfectly good work stations in their homes, and instead have to take time off.

But people hired under remote job announcements are exempt.

I was hired remote and I'm certainly not.

What did they say about relocation costs and timing? Have they been up-front about severance if you decline the reassignment?

There is no Trump appointee at my agency yet, so no one has told us anything other than "report Monday" whatever that means.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NASA- RTO Monday, January 27th

Memo came out late Friday evening

Same with FDA. No guidance, no one seems to be in charge because most high level feds already resigned and Trump admin hasn't appointed any acting people.

Not sure what will happen on Monday because there is no room for even all those currently teleworking from the agency buildings a few days a week to be there all at the same time. Assume many won't see the email until Monday morning.

Are you saying FDA sent out an email different than the HHS one, or merely that the HHS email came out after 5:00? HHS employees have guidance and it’s not everyone returns to work Monday.

DP. I never got anything from FDA. I checked earlier today.

You should have gotten an HHS-wide email Friday at 5:30 or so.

PP back again. If it turns out you got the HHS email but didn’t realize it applied to you, that is hysterical, though I’m laughing at your management, not you. FDA does like to act like it’s not merely a subcomponent of a very large Department.

If you didn’t get the email, check with your supervisors.

The email was sent after 5 pm on Friday from HHS.

If HHS wanted everyone at FDA or any part of HHS to show up Monday morning, they should have sent that email out before 5pm. Since Trump was inaugurated, I no longer ask any staff to work extra hours or check email outside of scheduled work hours.

Most supervisors won't even know they received the email or open that email until Monday morning. Most supervisors and feds aren't on DCUM and it's not part of the official chain of command.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's BS that people who have been working remotely for 10+ years are now just expected to uproot their lives over night. It's down right cruel and stressful. Gives no thought to people's actual lives. Removing flexibility in the workplace for remote work is absolutely going to cost productivity when people aren't able to use the perfectly good work stations in their homes, and instead have to take time off.

But people hired under remote job announcements are exempt.

I was hired remote and I'm certainly not.

What did they say about relocation costs and timing? Have they been up-front about severance if you decline the reassignment?

The plan for those that are remote is to end their agreement. It is literally spelled out in the EO. They will do this by RIF.

It's easy for an agency to delete billets and reassign them elsewhere. This gets around all the red tape for government relocation of the employee. If you are remote then you should be worried and doing everything you can to get back to your duty station if you value your job.

No one should believe trump and musk are going to let anyone slide and stay remote.

Isn’t the new RTO order against the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

WTF. You're not going to be fired for being sympathetic.

Aren't you worried you're going to be left without staff? I'm freaking out that I'm going to lose half my team if I can't get an exemption.

PP - Oh I am very worried. Especially without the capacity to hire them back. By fear of being fired, I worry more about disagreeing with the administration or the order, not being sympathetic

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How long does it take to rent a new building? Months I'd assume

need to put it out for bid, then potentially do modifications to make it GSA-compliant. 6 mos-1year. But also see any move that any government office has tried to do in the DMV. They often take years.

My agency is moving. It’s been a 4 year process. Granted the pandemic caused a slow down. But the move in date just got pushed back to May for my division. No idea if Trump and DOGE expects us to show up, sit on the floor, and use hot spots as construction workers build out cubicals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's BS that people who have been working remotely for 10+ years are now just expected to uproot their lives over night. It's down right cruel and stressful. Gives no thought to people's actual lives. Removing flexibility in the workplace for remote work is absolutely going to cost productivity when people aren't able to use the perfectly good work stations in their homes, and instead have to take time off.

But people hired under remote job announcements are exempt.

I was hired remote and I'm certainly not.

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

My employees know that I like flexible workplace policies—I don’t plan to sugarcoat anything for them. This is what it is. Show up or it’s your job, same as for me. We are all adults and can make our own choices.

Anonymous wrote:For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)

WTF. You're not going to be fired for being sympathetic.

Aren't you worried you're going to be left without staff? I'm freaking out that I'm going to lose half my team if I can't get an exemption.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NASA- RTO Monday, January 27th

Memo came out late Friday evening

That's crazy they're not giving you guys any notice. I always thought NASA was one of the happier agencies to work for.

Musk probably wants to make NASA part of SpaceX so DOGE can get to Mars faster.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's BS that people who have been working remotely for 10+ years are now just expected to uproot their lives over night. It's down right cruel and stressful. Gives no thought to people's actual lives. Removing flexibility in the workplace for remote work is absolutely going to cost productivity when people aren't able to use the perfectly good work stations in their homes, and instead have to take time off.

But people hired under remote job announcements are exempt.

True, for now in certain agencies, but the DOGE goal is for no one to work remote. And other people started as in person but were later converted to remote, so would not be covered.

For supervisors, how are you handling discussions around this with your employees? I find it challenging to balance toeing the company line for risk of being fired with being sympathetic to how disruptive this will be to people’s lives (though I feel some of the DCUM responses are a bit entitled also)