From Federal News Network:
... Under a new memorandum of understanding (MOU) between SSA and the American Federation of Government Employees, signed March 1, employees can now request “episodic telework” — or extra work-from-home days — when unexpected personal circumstances arise.
The new flexibility, which took effect March 4, gives SSA employees the option to occasionally request taking an extra day of telework in extenuating circumstances. That’s instead of having to take time off or dip into annual leave. ...
Agency spending levels are the next challenge SSA will face. To try to improve services and morale at SSA, AFGE is proposing a supplemental funding package of $20 billion over the next 10 years.
The highly anticipated budget proposal from House and Senate appropriators, which has a deadline of March 22, is unlikely to yield the results AFGE is hoping for.
“We’re severely underfunded in our operating costs, and current budget talks aren’t signaling that we’re going to get much money this year,” LaPointe said. “So, we’re really getting creative.” ...
27 comments:
just another giveaway by mgmt to the union with no commensurate benefit to mgmt.
Nice win for the union.
AFGE ate that up with a spork!
This helps management as much as or more than the worker. Instead of taking a whole day off for an appointment or some other need, the person can continue to work for most or all
Of the day. Federal and state workers give up or donate a lot of use or lose annual days every year
HR made this deal without even consulting with a single soul in Operations. Total clown show
Why does everyone always say things like this saves leave? The employee will simply use the leave another day. This just means less employees will be available in the office more often. Anyway, I've never understood the logic that this saves leave. It's simply an employee perk at the cost of in office availability and group benefit. Fail for our customers, trainees, and group cohesion.
@828pm It could save leave if the leave is sick leave. Since that can be carried over all the way to retirement, saving it does aid the agency and the employee as far as getting a slightly higher pension amount.
But as far as annual leave goes, it saves it for the employee to use another time but does nothing for the agency. In my experience, very little use or lose was ever lost in the offices I worked in. Management made sure it was scheduled before the end of the year.
To 11:56 AM --That, that comment right there is at the heart of part of SSA’s problem. It demonstrates all too well why SSA FEVS scores keep falling. It shows the chokehold mindset management seems to want to keep over SSA employees. And you know what? Sometimes just sometimes, when something is a benefit for the employees it’s actually good for the agency as well. This telework flexibility can be a win-win for the employees and the agency and dare I say the public because it ultimately keeps more employees online to do their jobs.
Not every ounce of benefit demands a pound of misery in return. And just because something is good for control freak type managers does not automatically make it good for the agency.
Commissioner O'Malley has refused to meet with OGC employees or explain why he is bringing them back at greater levels than before the pandemic (3 days now vs. 2 days before). He also won't explain why OGC is required to return to the office while OHO, OAO and ALJs are exempt when those divisions are much more public-facing than OGC. While he claims it is based on "data," he has refused to disclose that data. So while he enjoys favorable press and commendation from the unions, he is greatly disadvantaging a large and important component at SSA with no accountability.
This is likely response to the hundreds of complaints Commissioner O'Malley got on his "Engage USA" intranet discussion forum, after he announced telework would be cut beginning in April.
Many of these employees (Central and Regional Office) have had 4 years of total work from home, and are quite upset about having to come in 3 days per week now. The Commissioner is hoping this "episodic telework" giveback will ease some of the blowback he has been receiving for the telework cuts.
In addition some employees have true hardship situations. But I hope this episodic telework is not used by some employees to avoid coming into the office just because they'd rather work from home. That's not fair to those of us who do come into our SSA offices.
What the recent posts are not grasping is this flexibility will ultimately attempt to be abused by some employees. Which will further put pressure on the employees remaining in the office. It will also tie up already overburdened managers to address these requests and issue responses instead of doing their main job. In my experience having a cohesive office increases morale way more than these odd, random HR practices. This will not increase cohesion but rather have the opposite effect - all at the expense of the American public.
What are the extenuating circumstances and who determines if the circumstances meet the definition of extenuating? Is there a limit on the number of extenuating circumstances that one can have?
Lots of questions here, and I foresee a lot of potential for allegations of abuse from both sides. We shall see.
Well, chokehold or no chokehold, from my perspective we're not as good as we were before the pandemic in providing service, training our new hires, or caring about each other. What changed? Telework....
Good for those left. I’m finally out of this mess of an agency after 20 years.
Hopefully things start to turn around at some point.
Worked at 3 agencies with episodic telework. Management denies the request 99% of the time. No win here for staff.
11:53 Why should the commissioner meet with employees who are now required to come into the office? They will always find 100 reasons why they shouldn't have to come in, and refuse to accept any reasons he gives for cutting back on telework.
Some employees have such an emotional investment in wanting continued work from home, they are unreasonable. Of course there are advantages for the agency , in cutting back telework, but they will not admit it.
A fair number of the comments on the Commissioners online blog, on the telework issue, have been downright insulting and rude towards Commissioner O'Malley. If I were him I wouldn't reward that type of behavior and I would not budge an inch.
11:22 It seems like you do not work for the agency and have little understanding. Commissioner O'Malley has repeatedly stated that he is interesting in hearing from front-line workers. Message after message reiterates that point, so if he wants to hear from front-line OGC workers he would meet with them. He thus far has refused, meaning his claims of wishing to meet with front-line employees are hollow.
Emotions don't matter. What matters is data. I challenge you to show me the data showing OGC and other regional employees are MORE productive when in-office. You can't. That should be the only focus when determining telework and in-office days. You also can't explain why in-office requirements have increased since prior to the pandemic.
Good leaders have thick skin. When you solicit ideas and opinions you will get them and they won't always be watered down and varnished. By the way he talks, Commissioner O'Malley purports to have thick skin. But by not meeting with OGC and RO employees who are impacted by the new in-office policy, he is showing thin skin and an inability to face those negatively affected by his policy.
OCG and RO employees thinking they are front-line employees, now THAT's a good chuckle for the afternoon LOL
Unfortunately, O'Malley is between a rock and a hard place on the telework issue.
The White House has point blank ordered all federal agencies to reduce telework and to increase physical presence. O'Malley thus has no choice in the matter. At present, the way he is managing telework is the only way he sees himself able to accomplish the orders of the President short of totally ending it for everyone.
And make no mistake, that original agreement with AFGE "guaranteeing telework through 2025"?
It was written in a way that the agency can essentially back out of it at pretty much any time for pretty much any reason and AFGE won't be able to do crap about it beyond increasing the levels of whinging.
I hope they don't totally end it for all of you employees still working there (I retired from SSA a couple months ago), but the writing is absolutely on the wall if Biden isn't re-elected vs the other guy who absolutely WILL end it.
Ogc and HQ employees are not front line employees
Abuse?!? How could this be abused? Discretion to approve or deny requests for episodic or split days is left with management, but denials should only occur in the case of bona fide operational needs. If there is an operational need, then deny it! If there isn’t, then the abuse is forcing folks into the office three times a week on the pretextual claim that there is some business need to foster collaboration. Recall that operational need was the only permissible basis for changing the telework agreement from the former status quo of 100% for RO, CO, and DCS employees. So if that need isn’t present, then how could telework on non-assigned days be abuse?
The RTO order was necessary, due to political pressure from the Congressional Republicans, and the White House mandate for federal workers to have a greater presence in the office.
Also, some SSA employees had inappropriately been granted continued 100% work from home, after the COVID crisis was over. While at the same time other SSA employees on the front lines, received their RTO office orders two years ago, and now work a hybrid schedule.
This led some employees to feel that they were entitled to 5 days per week telework: after 4 years they thought that was the norm. And it created resentment among other SSA employees.
Bottom line, Commissioner O'Malley is correct in his recent action to bring these employees back 3 days per week. White House and Congressional pressure cannot be ignored. Increasing their online presence from 0% to 60% will fill a lot of seats in the office and help take the political pressure off.
Also it is good for the agency as these jobs require collaboration and onsite presence, more so than Claims Specialist, TSC rep, or Benefit Authorizer , which require independent work.
That being said, it should have been phased in. Bring them back 1 day per week in the first phase, then 2 days per week, , finally 3 days, in the final phase six months down the road. It is difficult and stressful to have to suddenly come in 3 days per week, after 4 years of working from home.
9:16 is respectfully wrong. The RTO was not necessary, here's proof: ALJs, AAJs, OAO, OHO and any number of components. They're exempt from this "necessary" RTO? I bet you a good chunk of HQ employees also were deemed exempt. When you have one set of rules for a subset of employees and a different set for another, that's how you get inequality and low morale.
I agree with you on the fact that some front-line employees cannot telework, while many others can. But this should be remedied by giving special perks and OT and anything they can offer to the hardworking employees who must show up daily. Not by taking away telework from some (remember, not all) employees.
Bottom line is not as you say, the bottom line is are teleworking employees more or less productive when teleworking? If more, that solves it. If less, they must be hauled back in. Filling seats, fake claims of collaboration, spurring downtown commerce and any other reasons are bogus. And if they were valid, why do they not apply to OHO and OAO? Commissioner O'Malley certainly can't say, and has dodged any attempt for an explanation. But you shouldn't be so naive as to buy the Commissioner's bogus reasoning.
Increasing flex band hours, additional telework, and OT all result in employees working more hours and using less leave, the data is clear. The vast majority of agency employees are middle-aged adults with portable work in an almost entirely electronic system who already rarely had the time or need for in-person collaboration, and those people have lives, kids, medical problems, and provide the free space, internet, and utilities to the govt for free by working for home, which increases economic spending and reduces fiscal waste in a grossly underfunded agency that doesn’t have enough physical space to ask even 50% of employees to come back to non-existing offices.
The WH ordered all federal staff back at a predetermined level, and the higher-graded mgmt class and NBUs without a contract to shield them got chosen. Most go to empty offices to then manage their completely remote employees, which is a waste of resources and time.
The audience pushing for in-office return hasn’t even considered (or doesn’t care) that a significant driver of the backlash is employees whose work environment is so generally toxic and absurd, racist, sexist, ableist (the ultimate irony), etc. that they would literally rather be unemployed than go back to their old level of extra suffering. Telework is the only avenue for respite that even exists for these employees doing oppressive work for terrible people at a place many medical professionals have described as “uniquely dysfunctional” in a sea of terrible, unethical bureaucracies. Making them more miserable is not going to improve customer service or morale.
Dude, 11:16 post. It might be time to either go to church and invite some joy into your life or retire. You sound miserable. That's not the SSA I know that you speak of. How did people get to the point where it's SO awful to imagine the thought of going into work.
Well, 11:16's post is exactly the SSA that I know. And the feeling is the same for the majority of the employees in my component. Telework is the only positive thing about working for this agency.
It's window dressing. Our office is staffed at 25% of it's capacity. We were told we'll be getting employees from other components reporting to our nearly empty office because local management is desperately trying to keep the office open so they're not the ones commuting.
11:56: do employee polling, read the FEVS, read Ideascale, read EEOC and MSPB cases, or listen to the discipline stories employees tell cause they are all insane and verifiable. Terrorist attack victims, domestic violence victims, terminally ill people, victims of natural disasters, grieving employees, victims of physical violence at the office are all considerably "minor" issues of managerial abuse in this Dante's Inferno of an agency. Jesus look at the WV whistleblowers whose lives SSA ruined while the employees were trying to actually save their own agency. SSA won't even apologize after prosecuting Conn and the poor claimants ALJ Daugherty and RCALJ used for cannon fodder. The union published an employee suicide rate close to 10% attributed to the agency.
What planet are you on and can the rest of the employees come with you? If you think those employees should all leave if they're this miserable, you don't understand US economics. People need money to live, and the majority of the staff are under GS 11. If they leave, the work stops, and then you'll complain there's a 5-year backlog unfair to the public. If you think that's not SSA you don't work there or you aren't listening.
Post a Comment