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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I won’t be happy with it for long, especially if I can’t flex my start and end times. Dinner and breakfast with my family means a lot to me. I don’t want my teenager home alone for five hours after school every day. I like being around—even if we aren’t interacting, everyone stays on track with homework and laundry etc. I could never go back to how we used to live, I’d prefer living on less.
Really ? You sound so simple. I don't know too many teenagers who sit around a breakfast table. And I don't know ANY teens that do not have after school activities. NO teenager, comes home right after school and waits for Mommy to come home at "7pm" Please!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm the higher earner in my household, so I will go back. I already bought a parking pass just in case. It will cost us plenty in driving/parking but the big impact is to my non-fed DH, who will need to limit himself to remote roles so he can handle the to/from school situation. Right now we split it because we each work hybrid.
What did you do before COVID in terms of getting kids to and from school situation?
Not PP but I was remote before COVID.
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![]()
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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think about it but probably not. We were considering a move that would lengthen my commute and have shelved it.
If you’ve been government 15 years, then know if you leave and come back you’ll be in the higher amount of pension contribution.
That is not true. You go back into the system you started in on your first day. I know this because I left and came back after the change and I stayed in the old system. What is noteworthy is that they do not have to respect your GS level if you stay away more than 3 years. Left as a 15 step 3 and returned as a 14 step 1. It was the right decision for my family but it pissed me off.
Anonymous wrote:Why do people get worked up over this BEFORE a decision is made? If you worked in the office pre-Covid, are you surprised you may be asked to RTO?
Anonymous wrote:I'm the higher earner in my household, so I will go back. I already bought a parking pass just in case. It will cost us plenty in driving/parking but the big impact is to my non-fed DH, who will need to limit himself to remote roles so he can handle the to/from school situation. Right now we split it because we each work hybrid.
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![]()
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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I won’t be happy with it for long, especially if I can’t flex my start and end times. Dinner and breakfast with my family means a lot to me. I don’t want my teenager home alone for five hours after school every day. I like being around—even if we aren’t interacting, everyone stays on track with homework and laundry etc. I could never go back to how we used to live, I’d prefer living on less.
Really ? You sound so simple. I don't know too many teenagers who sit around a breakfast table. And I don't know ANY teens that do not have after school activities. NO teenager, comes home right after school and waits for Mommy to come home at "7pm" Please!
Anonymous wrote:I won’t be happy with it for long, especially if I can’t flex my start and end times. Dinner and breakfast with my family means a lot to me. I don’t want my teenager home alone for five hours after school every day. I like being around—even if we aren’t interacting, everyone stays on track with homework and laundry etc. I could never go back to how we used to live, I’d prefer living on less.
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.
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.