Knowing the courts in D.C. will win in their favor, if I were Trump I would say, “Return tomorrow or your computer will be locked, you will be fired and you will not be paid.” Their boss is insubordinate and must be fired now, today.
Locking them out of government servers is the next level of action the new administration should take and fire the managers who told them to ignore their employer. No mgr to call no computer access. Show up or you’ve quit!
Either one works for me. But if you were taking direction from your manager and/or belong to a union there may be a level of questioning. Don’t get me wrong, I am ready to terminate a lot of these employees. We are not getting good value for the money they are paid from our tax dollars.
I do not see how they can win unless it's defined in their work contract. As they stated, this was put in place as a result of covid. Covid is over, Trump pulled the covid mandate. I get your point of the DC courts being in the pocket of the establishment, but I think that the precedence to implement WFH is now over, so less "teeth" to keep it.
Many federal positions are categorized as remote. Especially in locations that are “in the middle of nowhere” and need technical support. Will be interesting to see what happens with those folks.
Agree, some positions would be required. If it was defined up front, as reqs for the role, it should stay that way, IMHO. The issue is peoples perception of a government is poor, from the abundant examples we have encountered in our lives. Not all a worthless make work employees, there are a ton that bust their ass, they should welcome getting rid of the deadwood. Clean house, right size the footprint of the work spaces and implement WFH as a reward earned, not expected based on KPIs and overall benefit provided back from the employee.
As you clearly state, there are remote locations and gigs that were and should be remote, you are spot on with that observation.
I wish COVID was over. Recently started new gig and "I got COVID" is discussed everywhere 🤷♀️🤦♀️
Meanwhile immune compromised me ain't complaining 🤔 it's as if it's not that big of a deal
But not to worry; the courts will overturn a reasonable employer policy. . .you'll have to spend a million or so in legal fees to get that decision; difficult for many to do. Even harder for the unemployed.
Reagan and the Air Traffic Controllers comes to mind. If the current fed employees who are working from home, and their at home access is cut off, and they don't come in, are they then technically on strike, like the Air Traffic Controllers under Reagan, which were not allowed by law to strike so Reagan fired them?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968)
I worked a restaurant growing up. If you don't show up to work... you quit, you were 'not fired'. Big difference. They were just taking off the rest of the schedule.
NOPE. FIRE THEM ALL IF THEY DONT GO TO THE OFFICE. The court cannot overturn it their job was in the office not from home. They went home because of the covid BS most that went home to work with covid have returned to the office. No legal court would uphold them staying home when their job is in the office. FIRE THEM ALL.
The letter should all that is needed to force them back into the office.
Some union contracts require a 14 day notice for change of work hours or location, after that time period, if there is one, terminate anyone that doesn't show under job abandonment.
In other words, dollars to donuts, there is no contractual definition in their work contract to WFH. Trump ended the covid mandate already. There is no reason for them to WFH. I was already down voted on the following comment prior (LOL) by what I assume are gov employees working from home. I am all for WFH roles, but in an effort for new leadership to enact revised corp culture, team synergies, cross training and employee work accommodations, RTO (Return to Office) has to be implemented.
This will drive a multitude of benefits. In addition to the above benefits, you will also save huge money on the upcoming RIF (Reduction in Force) when implements schedule F (Ability to fire gov workers). Many employees will self select out of the government roles, saving RIF and severance costs.
Rest assured, you'll find many of these workers in vacation spots that do not have any other employers locally. Tons of these folks and IT Bros moved to vacation spots, when the recent RTO rig pull happened. Now, they face relocation expenses and trying to sell a vacation property in a buyer's market. Sure, they can try and locate another WFH gig, but that trend is reversing. It's going to be real interesting to see when Sched F gets in place and they clean house. I know a few gov employees, they do not do shit, one of them also works a 2nd gig while collecting a full time gov gig. Not saying all of them are slackers, but we can all comfortably know our experience with gov workers like dmv or the ssa and extrapolate that there is a bunch with no fear of having to work hard. There is obviously a bunch that also bust their asses too. Schedule F will right size and support meritocracy. Maybe they'll even implement rank stacking like they do in the private sector. Once team and resource evals are completed, WFH can be set for those who deserve it. I am all for WFH, I did it for 90% of my career.
Idiots. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill ...
To cut through all this nonsense, the simplest, most direct, unquestionably legal action a gov't supervisor can mandate, is a timecard. The employer's not even being an asshole for doing it. Federal law itself requires accurate timekeeping. The method is up to the employer.
You have to be physically present to punch your timecard in.
You have to be physically present to punch your timecard out.
If you're physically present to punch your timecard, you can physically work in your assigned office location.
Anyone that listens to "the leadership" and doesn't return to their physical work offices... doesn't get paid for unexcused absence. They can also be written up starting immediately for excessive unexcused absences.
Even for Federal employees... within 60-days time, anyone not reporting back to work full time can be fired for cause. If other employees get upset and stage a walk-out protest... then same deal applies.
Over-turned by what grounds?
Are employers all of a sudden obligated to let their staff work from home?? If there job doesn't inherently say work from home then...i can't imagine it being "overturned"...
It's not even a valid court decision! So, that means any employee that's moved to another location can say "nah, fuck that! I'm not going" can get away with it?! Employees don't dictate the location of their job!
Iknoright
I mean like don't get me wrong I would love to be able to say "yo Boss your rules and regulations you can go stick it I'ma work where, I want when I want, and how I want," I'd love to be able to say that but alas I made a decision to work for my boss and my boss gets to tell me how he wants that work and where he wants that work done ....so there's that
When the boss tells you to return to work, you return to work or get fired. Doesnt matter what the old boss said.
My brother is upper middle management in one of the Big 3. He works with the dealerships and has no need to ever go to the office. Hes on his computer and the phone or travelling. But his company ordered them back to the office so back to the office he goes.
Just when I thought the democrats could not be more ridiculous- they actually believe that they have a legal right to refuse an order from their boss demanding that they show up to work! 😂
No it won't get overturned in court. Uless you have a signed contract stating you get to work from home, if you do not show as required you can be fired for cause.
I say go ahead and stay home, they government will send you a registered letter infoming you your last paycheck will be mailed out next month sometime.
In the defence of some of these people. The Covid lockdown forced them home and some people moved out the the City Hell Holes they were existing in. Since they didn't need to go to an office. A compromise would be to reduce salaries for people who want to stay out of Cities and work from home.
THE largest Union in the USA the Federal Govt will take legislation to actually fire them,but he can move them to where ever he wants ,like Greenland perhaps,these overpaid fat couch taters will just quit first.
If I remember correctly federal workers were not granted the legal right to form unions by the legislation authorizing non government workers to unionize. They were granted that privilege by Presidential Executive Order (Possibly President Kennedy). This was done under the principle that all Executive Branch authority rest in one person, the President. If my memory on this is correct, then the Executive Order allowing federal employee unions could be cancelled by a new order by President Trump. With this order, the unions would be dissolved thus nullifying the last minute agreement on work at home authority signed with the unions by the Biden Administration. Brings to mind the old saying about being careful what you ask for as you might get it.
JFK did create the ability for federal unions to organize. It was later codified into law by the civil service laws. Rescinding this executive order wouldn't change anything - it will require an act of congress. I know this because I used to think like you did - but then I researched it. Here is the AI answer you're looking for:
Rescinding Executive Order 10988, issued by President John F. Kennedy in 1962, would not automatically end unions in the federal government. While this executive order was a significant milestone in granting federal employees the right to unionize and collectively bargain, subsequent legislation and executive orders have further codified and expanded these rights.
The impact of rescinding Executive Order 10988 would be limited for several reasons:
1. Subsequent legislation: The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 codified many of the principles and concepts found in Executive Order 10988 into law. This act established the Federal Labor Relations Authority and provided a statutory basis for federal employee unions.
2. Expanded executive orders: President Richard Nixon’s Executive Order 11491 in 1969 replaced and expanded upon Kennedy’s order, further developing the framework for labor-management relations in the federal government.
3. Established practices: Over the past six decades, federal employee unions have become deeply integrated into the federal workforce, with established practices, procedures, and legal precedents.
4. Legal challenges: Any attempt to completely eliminate federal employee unions would likely face significant legal challenges based on constitutional grounds and existing labor laws.
However, rescinding Executive Order 10988 could potentially be part of a broader effort to reduce the power and influence of federal employee unions. Such an action might signal a shift in policy and could be followed by additional executive orders or legislative efforts to limit union rights.
It’s important to note that changes to federal labor relations often occur incrementally and are subject to political, legal, and administrative processes. While rescinding Executive Order 10988 alone would not end federal employee unions, it could be seen as a symbolic move or the beginning of a larger policy shift regarding federal labor relations.
Thanks for sharing your research. I haven't had occasion to consider this subject for many years and wasn't aware of the later events. I appreciate you bringing me up to date.
I'd like to hear an opinion from our lawfags about how union contracts that currently allow teleworking will be affected by President Trump's EO? The wording in the EO seemed to allow some flexibility for existing agreements. I'm wondering if they would just wait until the existing union contracts expire, and instruct them that no teleworking can be included in a contract renewal?
I got a letter stating we are going back after plan of action is being taken. There are union contracts for the telework, but contracts up for me. I'll go either way idc. Maybe this is why they are thinking of moving the govt buildings out of DC so they can't fight it. But a signed document is a signed legal document. Idc who you are. You agreed to terms you need to follow them. Then when the deals up you can re negotiate
My union contract says I'm remote - and I have to be remote as a condition of employment. If it ends for me, I don't know what I'd do as I'm more than 50 miles from any office to go into.
Knowing the courts in D.C. will win in their favor, if I were Trump I would say, “Return tomorrow or your computer will be locked, you will be fired and you will not be paid.” Their boss is insubordinate and must be fired now, today.
knowing the court system they will be retired before the case is heard
That’s ok. Just withhold/suspend their pay until the matter is “resolved” — no matter how long it takes 😎. Worst could happen is back payment.
OR
Mass firing. Then see y’all in court.
Locking them out of government servers is the next level of action the new administration should take and fire the managers who told them to ignore their employer. No mgr to call no computer access. Show up or you’ve quit!
Either one works for me. But if you were taking direction from your manager and/or belong to a union there may be a level of questioning. Don’t get me wrong, I am ready to terminate a lot of these employees. We are not getting good value for the money they are paid from our tax dollars.
I do not see how they can win unless it's defined in their work contract. As they stated, this was put in place as a result of covid. Covid is over, Trump pulled the covid mandate. I get your point of the DC courts being in the pocket of the establishment, but I think that the precedence to implement WFH is now over, so less "teeth" to keep it.
Many federal positions are categorized as remote. Especially in locations that are “in the middle of nowhere” and need technical support. Will be interesting to see what happens with those folks.
Agree, some positions would be required. If it was defined up front, as reqs for the role, it should stay that way, IMHO. The issue is peoples perception of a government is poor, from the abundant examples we have encountered in our lives. Not all a worthless make work employees, there are a ton that bust their ass, they should welcome getting rid of the deadwood. Clean house, right size the footprint of the work spaces and implement WFH as a reward earned, not expected based on KPIs and overall benefit provided back from the employee.
As you clearly state, there are remote locations and gigs that were and should be remote, you are spot on with that observation.
I wish COVID was over. Recently started new gig and "I got COVID" is discussed everywhere 🤷♀️🤦♀️ Meanwhile immune compromised me ain't complaining 🤔 it's as if it's not that big of a deal
Any time I hear that I always ask them whatever happened to the flu?
Exactly.
But not to worry; the courts will overturn a reasonable employer policy. . .you'll have to spend a million or so in legal fees to get that decision; difficult for many to do. Even harder for the unemployed.
whoever told them to ignore it should be FIRED FIRST
Such defiance should show the people just how far gone our country is...it's not the US...and Trump is TRYING to restore it.
Others had to go back to work in the office...people working who pay the taxes for these workers who think they are above it all? FIRE THEM!
Exactly. Just WOW!
Fire them.
Anyone of us working out here would be fired for less than this.
Reagan and the Air Traffic Controllers comes to mind. If the current fed employees who are working from home, and their at home access is cut off, and they don't come in, are they then technically on strike, like the Air Traffic Controllers under Reagan, which were not allowed by law to strike so Reagan fired them? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968)
Correct just shut off the VPN.
I worked a restaurant growing up. If you don't show up to work... you quit, you were 'not fired'. Big difference. They were just taking off the rest of the schedule.
NOPE. FIRE THEM ALL IF THEY DONT GO TO THE OFFICE. The court cannot overturn it their job was in the office not from home. They went home because of the covid BS most that went home to work with covid have returned to the office. No legal court would uphold them staying home when their job is in the office. FIRE THEM ALL.
The letter should all that is needed to force them back into the office.
Some union contracts require a 14 day notice for change of work hours or location, after that time period, if there is one, terminate anyone that doesn't show under job abandonment.
Job abandonment is also in every union contract.
Call in their federally owned computers and phones - they can no longer perform their duties at home. Simple.
Also... remotely download and archive their user data then purge their user data folder.
Have fun, lazy assholes.
send an update that bricks the devices🤣
Start the firing now. Whoever emailed that retarded shit to "ignore the EO" needs to be gone by the end of today.
FAFO.
In other words, dollars to donuts, there is no contractual definition in their work contract to WFH. Trump ended the covid mandate already. There is no reason for them to WFH. I was already down voted on the following comment prior (LOL) by what I assume are gov employees working from home. I am all for WFH roles, but in an effort for new leadership to enact revised corp culture, team synergies, cross training and employee work accommodations, RTO (Return to Office) has to be implemented.
This will drive a multitude of benefits. In addition to the above benefits, you will also save huge money on the upcoming RIF (Reduction in Force) when implements schedule F (Ability to fire gov workers). Many employees will self select out of the government roles, saving RIF and severance costs.
Rest assured, you'll find many of these workers in vacation spots that do not have any other employers locally. Tons of these folks and IT Bros moved to vacation spots, when the recent RTO rig pull happened. Now, they face relocation expenses and trying to sell a vacation property in a buyer's market. Sure, they can try and locate another WFH gig, but that trend is reversing. It's going to be real interesting to see when Sched F gets in place and they clean house. I know a few gov employees, they do not do shit, one of them also works a 2nd gig while collecting a full time gov gig. Not saying all of them are slackers, but we can all comfortably know our experience with gov workers like dmv or the ssa and extrapolate that there is a bunch with no fear of having to work hard. There is obviously a bunch that also bust their asses too. Schedule F will right size and support meritocracy. Maybe they'll even implement rank stacking like they do in the private sector. Once team and resource evals are completed, WFH can be set for those who deserve it. I am all for WFH, I did it for 90% of my career.
So much winning!
Idiots. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill ...
To cut through all this nonsense, the simplest, most direct, unquestionably legal action a gov't supervisor can mandate, is a timecard. The employer's not even being an asshole for doing it. Federal law itself requires accurate timekeeping. The method is up to the employer.
Problem solved.
FLSA
clocking in/out
He's clearing the way so marxists get the boot and patriots get the jobs!!!
If you are a patriot out of work, a patriot who wants to get their job: polish up your resume and get it ready!!
As long as they drop the college degree requirements.
Apparently, they haven’t been paying attention…I’ll pop some popcorn.
Fire their asses
This should be good.
Anyone that listens to "the leadership" and doesn't return to their physical work offices... doesn't get paid for unexcused absence. They can also be written up starting immediately for excessive unexcused absences.
Even for Federal employees... within 60-days time, anyone not reporting back to work full time can be fired for cause. If other employees get upset and stage a walk-out protest... then same deal applies.
Over-turned by what grounds? Are employers all of a sudden obligated to let their staff work from home?? If there job doesn't inherently say work from home then...i can't imagine it being "overturned"...
One word - Unions. I am not anti union but a lot of them jumped on the work from home bandwagon under "rights".
The precedence for WFH was covid - covid mandate is over!
Yep
It's not even a valid court decision! So, that means any employee that's moved to another location can say "nah, fuck that! I'm not going" can get away with it?! Employees don't dictate the location of their job!
Iknoright I mean like don't get me wrong I would love to be able to say "yo Boss your rules and regulations you can go stick it I'ma work where, I want when I want, and how I want," I'd love to be able to say that but alas I made a decision to work for my boss and my boss gets to tell me how he wants that work and where he wants that work done ....so there's that
Then fire them all. How do you reduce the size, scope and cost of government quickly? They just gave Trump the answer.
Sounds like Reagan vs the air traffic controllers. Reagan won
When the boss tells you to return to work, you return to work or get fired. Doesnt matter what the old boss said.
My brother is upper middle management in one of the Big 3. He works with the dealerships and has no need to ever go to the office. Hes on his computer and the phone or travelling. But his company ordered them back to the office so back to the office he goes.
Just when I thought the democrats could not be more ridiculous- they actually believe that they have a legal right to refuse an order from their boss demanding that they show up to work! 😂
No it won't get overturned in court. Uless you have a signed contract stating you get to work from home, if you do not show as required you can be fired for cause.
I say go ahead and stay home, they government will send you a registered letter infoming you your last paycheck will be mailed out next month sometime.
In the defence of some of these people. The Covid lockdown forced them home and some people moved out the the City Hell Holes they were existing in. Since they didn't need to go to an office. A compromise would be to reduce salaries for people who want to stay out of Cities and work from home.
This also happened in the private sector.
Bozos & Zukershithead told employees to get back or they get fired.
So yea, cry me a river for the 'poor federal employees'.
FUCK compromise.
We’ve been compromising with the embedded enemy for 62 damn years.
IT ENDS NOW
Case by case basis but not way 90 percent had to move. Feds make good money
Insubordination
THE largest Union in the USA the Federal Govt will take legislation to actually fire them,but he can move them to where ever he wants ,like Greenland perhaps,these overpaid fat couch taters will just quit first.
If I remember correctly federal workers were not granted the legal right to form unions by the legislation authorizing non government workers to unionize. They were granted that privilege by Presidential Executive Order (Possibly President Kennedy). This was done under the principle that all Executive Branch authority rest in one person, the President. If my memory on this is correct, then the Executive Order allowing federal employee unions could be cancelled by a new order by President Trump. With this order, the unions would be dissolved thus nullifying the last minute agreement on work at home authority signed with the unions by the Biden Administration. Brings to mind the old saying about being careful what you ask for as you might get it.
JFK did create the ability for federal unions to organize. It was later codified into law by the civil service laws. Rescinding this executive order wouldn't change anything - it will require an act of congress. I know this because I used to think like you did - but then I researched it. Here is the AI answer you're looking for:
Rescinding Executive Order 10988, issued by President John F. Kennedy in 1962, would not automatically end unions in the federal government. While this executive order was a significant milestone in granting federal employees the right to unionize and collectively bargain, subsequent legislation and executive orders have further codified and expanded these rights. The impact of rescinding Executive Order 10988 would be limited for several reasons: 1. Subsequent legislation: The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 codified many of the principles and concepts found in Executive Order 10988 into law. This act established the Federal Labor Relations Authority and provided a statutory basis for federal employee unions. 2. Expanded executive orders: President Richard Nixon’s Executive Order 11491 in 1969 replaced and expanded upon Kennedy’s order, further developing the framework for labor-management relations in the federal government. 3. Established practices: Over the past six decades, federal employee unions have become deeply integrated into the federal workforce, with established practices, procedures, and legal precedents. 4. Legal challenges: Any attempt to completely eliminate federal employee unions would likely face significant legal challenges based on constitutional grounds and existing labor laws. However, rescinding Executive Order 10988 could potentially be part of a broader effort to reduce the power and influence of federal employee unions. Such an action might signal a shift in policy and could be followed by additional executive orders or legislative efforts to limit union rights. It’s important to note that changes to federal labor relations often occur incrementally and are subject to political, legal, and administrative processes. While rescinding Executive Order 10988 alone would not end federal employee unions, it could be seen as a symbolic move or the beginning of a larger policy shift regarding federal labor relations.
Thanks for sharing your research. I haven't had occasion to consider this subject for many years and wasn't aware of the later events. I appreciate you bringing me up to date.
I'd like to hear an opinion from our lawfags about how union contracts that currently allow teleworking will be affected by President Trump's EO? The wording in the EO seemed to allow some flexibility for existing agreements. I'm wondering if they would just wait until the existing union contracts expire, and instruct them that no teleworking can be included in a contract renewal?
Is anyone old enough to remember the air traffic controllers strike? Jus' sayin.
You really going to believe your supervisor?
FAFO
Trump would be the last person I'd test. They might win, but what are the odds?
This time President Trump has Elon, and with Elon, there will NOT be any appeals. New Sheriff and a New Deputy!!!
In the meantime fire them.
I got a letter stating we are going back after plan of action is being taken. There are union contracts for the telework, but contracts up for me. I'll go either way idc. Maybe this is why they are thinking of moving the govt buildings out of DC so they can't fight it. But a signed document is a signed legal document. Idc who you are. You agreed to terms you need to follow them. Then when the deals up you can re negotiate
My union contract says I'm remote - and I have to be remote as a condition of employment. If it ends for me, I don't know what I'd do as I'm more than 50 miles from any office to go into.
Mine says 200 miles lol. I can literally be in another state if I want to with how my home office is,(not DC) but that sucks.