RTO. Different office?
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 11:46 last edited by
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 14:21 last edited by
If the goal is to cut costs, this is the opposite. Everything costs more with RTO. Everything. Overhead for the building, lease payments, security, food services, custodial, utilities, IT support, plus of course costs to the employee gas, pollution, child care... Of course a few years ago it was normal to be in the office 5 days a week, so this isn't ground breaking stuff, but it is literally the opposite of cutting costs. And most jobs where the employee leaves will be filled by a new person, which involves training costs.
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 14:55 last edited by
If they don't like it, they can take their 8 months salary and resign.
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 15:47 last edited by
Yup, pay them for 8 months of not doing any work, then pay for their replacements to be trained up. Oh and then pay for all the costs for them to do a job in a GSA-leased building and all of the costs involved as listed above.
Again, is the goal to cut costs? If so, RTO is the complete opposite.
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 15:49 last edited by Horace
It seems implicit that retired people will not be replaced. Of course that calls into question how the work will get done, but I assume Elon and company don't believe much work was being done in the first place.
We have some green card applications in the pipeline for my in-laws, I'll watch that space for delays. Actually it's already been delayed by one year as compared to the original estimate (which was one year). But that happened before Trump was re-elected. No change in the estimate since Nov 6.
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 15:51 last edited by
In my own experience, I've found that if you offer incentives, the people who typically quit first are the employees who can most readily find work elsewhere. IOW, the best ones.
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 15:53 last edited by
Based on my time in federal agencies, and stories from my wife and my friends, if the goal was to cut costs via reducing the workforce, the real solution (although brutal) to be effective would to empower (maybe even incentivize) agency leadership to reduce their workforce by 20% allowing them to fire anyone they want for any reason. Most people in a job can look around and see people who are absolutely not adding any value and are just filling a billet, a seat.... that's the bloat that needs to go.
Asking folks to return to the office (which costs the taxpayers more) or asking folks to retire early and get 8 months of free pay (also costing the taxpayers more) where most of those people will just switch to the contractor world (also costing the taxpayers more) is an approach for campaign marketing, but doesn't address the issue of reducing costs or workers adding no value.
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 16:59 last edited by
just now realizing my retirement date has been wayyyy moved up!
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 19:47 last edited by
Aren't you glad you voted for Trump?
-
Based on my time in federal agencies, and stories from my wife and my friends, if the goal was to cut costs via reducing the workforce, the real solution (although brutal) to be effective would to empower (maybe even incentivize) agency leadership to reduce their workforce by 20% allowing them to fire anyone they want for any reason. Most people in a job can look around and see people who are absolutely not adding any value and are just filling a billet, a seat.... that's the bloat that needs to go.
Asking folks to return to the office (which costs the taxpayers more) or asking folks to retire early and get 8 months of free pay (also costing the taxpayers more) where most of those people will just switch to the contractor world (also costing the taxpayers more) is an approach for campaign marketing, but doesn't address the issue of reducing costs or workers adding no value.
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 20:25 last edited by@89th said in RTO. Different office?:
Asking folks to return to the office ... doesn't address the issue of reducing costs or workers adding no value.
Gotta wonder what the private sector corporate bosses are thinking as more and more of them are hopping onto the RTO train.
-
just now realizing my retirement date has been wayyyy moved up!
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 20:26 last edited by@NobodySock said in RTO. Different office?:
just now realizing my retirement date has been wayyyy moved up!
Let us know when it's time to congratulate you!
-
wrote on 29 Jan 2025, 20:36 last edited by
well by wayyyy up, it is really only 3 months. But technically speaking, I would be done with work on Feb 6. This is alot to grasp right now and will wait a few days before responding to the offer as more details are fleshed out. This is really weird to think this may be my last pay period of 40 years work.
-
-
@89th said in RTO. Different office?:
Asking folks to return to the office ... doesn't address the issue of reducing costs or workers adding no value.
Gotta wonder what the private sector corporate bosses are thinking as more and more of them are hopping onto the RTO train.
wrote on 30 Jan 2025, 05:05 last edited by@Axtremus said in RTO. Different office?:
@89th said in RTO. Different office?:
Asking folks to return to the office ... doesn't address the issue of reducing costs or workers adding no value.
Gotta wonder what the private sector corporate bosses are thinking as more and more of them are hopping onto the RTO train.
Not sure. It saves the private company money to have remote workers, so I'd imagine they won't change as much. Again, Trump's RTO is literally costing the taxpayer more, it's the opposite of saving costs.
-
wrote on 30 Jan 2025, 05:10 last edited by
Trump also said in his speech tonight that he wants federal workers to return to the office like the rest of Americans who have to work in an office. Of course, don't let the fact that 14% of the country (three years ago) work remotely, approximately 32 million adults in the US work remotely as of this year. What is funny is 14% of the federal government works remotely as of Dec 2024... so what Trump said doesn't add up at all, but who cares. @George-K are we at 30,573 yet?
-
well by wayyyy up, it is really only 3 months. But technically speaking, I would be done with work on Feb 6. This is alot to grasp right now and will wait a few days before responding to the offer as more details are fleshed out. This is really weird to think this may be my last pay period of 40 years work.
wrote on 30 Jan 2025, 07:15 last edited by@NobodySock said in RTO. Different office?:
well by wayyyy up, it is really only 3 months. But technically speaking, I would be done with work on Feb 6. This is alot to grasp right now and will wait a few days before responding to the offer as more details are fleshed out. This is really weird to think this may be my last pay period of 40 years work.
Be careful. There doesn’t seem to be any legal basis for the 8 month pay.
Also, is it really 8 months? Or is it ‘through September’? Reporting has been unclear about that. September would make sense for Trump/Musk because (as you surely know) that’s the end of the fiscal year so their first full year would be lighter.
I get that this week ‘8 months’ and ‘through September’ are the same thing but if one needed to stick around a bit to train someone in their duties it could start to make a difference.
Only non-witches get due process.
- Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
-
@Axtremus said in RTO. Different office?:
@89th said in RTO. Different office?:
Asking folks to return to the office ... doesn't address the issue of reducing costs or workers adding no value.
Gotta wonder what the private sector corporate bosses are thinking as more and more of them are hopping onto the RTO train.
Not sure. It saves the private company money to have remote workers, so I'd imagine they won't change as much. Again, Trump's RTO is literally costing the taxpayer more, it's the opposite of saving costs.
wrote on 30 Jan 2025, 17:02 last edited by@89th said in RTO. Different office?:
Again, Trump's RTO is literally costing the taxpayer more, it's the opposite of saving costs.
I disagree a bit. People in the office go out to lunch, drive, take public transport, etc. Their purchases and the taxes help (probably more locally), but especially in a place like Wash DC.
-
wrote on 30 Jan 2025, 22:51 last edited by
You know…I completely get that many jobs/situations/individuals can perform equal or better working from home, but study after study keeps suggesting that on the whole, working in a centralized office leads to higher output and more productivity. That’s why so many private companies are going back to in-office. Forget the government… Amazon, Google, Apple, Salesforce, Zoom (how funny is that?), Blackrock, CitiGroup, Goldman Sachs, Disney, and on and on… All are insisting their employees return to the office…
And give it one contract, and I suspect Government Contractors are going to be facing a similar dilemma…
And none of those have the accountability and oversight issues that Federal Employees have…
-
@NobodySock said in RTO. Different office?:
well by wayyyy up, it is really only 3 months. But technically speaking, I would be done with work on Feb 6. This is alot to grasp right now and will wait a few days before responding to the offer as more details are fleshed out. This is really weird to think this may be my last pay period of 40 years work.
Be careful. There doesn’t seem to be any legal basis for the 8 month pay.
Also, is it really 8 months? Or is it ‘through September’? Reporting has been unclear about that. September would make sense for Trump/Musk because (as you surely know) that’s the end of the fiscal year so their first full year would be lighter.
I get that this week ‘8 months’ and ‘through September’ are the same thing but if one needed to stick around a bit to train someone in their duties it could start to make a difference.
wrote on 30 Jan 2025, 22:59 last edited by jon-nyc@jon-nyc said in RTO. Different office?:
@NobodySock said in RTO. Different office?:
well by wayyyy up, it is really only 3 months. But technically speaking, I would be done with work on Feb 6. This is alot to grasp right now and will wait a few days before responding to the offer as more details are fleshed out. This is really weird to think this may be my last pay period of 40 years work.
Be careful. There doesn’t seem to be any legal basis for the 8 month pay.
Also, is it really 8 months? Or is it ‘through September’? Reporting has been unclear about that. September would make sense for Trump/Musk because (as you surely know) that’s the end of the fiscal year so their first full year would be lighter.
I get that this week ‘8 months’ and ‘through September’ are the same thing but if one needed to stick around a bit to train someone in their duties it could start to make a difference.
Also has anyone checked the fine print (if there is any) to see if this overrides any normal retirement benes? I don't mean pension, of course, but, say, being paid out unused vacation or whatever.
IOW they could be giving with one hand and taking away with the other, even unintentionally because this was surely rushed.
-
wrote on 24 Feb 2025, 13:55 last edited by 89th
Just got back from a business trip to DC. Talked to a few friends who are federal staff (Dept of Labor, Dept of Homeland Security, etc)... the first two I talked to said they bring a book to work and about half the workforce just sits in a conference room or hallway and reads since there aren't enough computers or workstations or internet bandwidth for everyone. They said they could easily log-in from home and do their job, but since they aren't allowed they just sit for 2-3 days each week and read a novel. I'll think of this as I pay my taxes soon!
