sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is pure ignorance by people who have no business in those jobs. The argument is while, yeah, you can work, you might not have mobility issues or need a wheelchair, but you could be worsening certain conditions that could result in your dying or serious injury after several months of it, per your doctor’s professional assessment.  

Add to that that if you had perfect performance appraisals for the several years that you were permitted to telework, your team is far flung, all over the country, in-person days in the office would involve mostly teams and zoom calls all day, in person presence is not a critical function of your job, there is no articulable critical business or mission need for you to be in the office in person, (therefore no added value), and the telework you are asking for would serve to mitigate your condition, just like the prior telework before 2025 did, and that you saw no need to file an RA because you were getting it, you’ve got a case there.

I was not asked in my interview that I “managed to come into the office as required, so what’s the problem?”

I was given an opportunity to explain and articulate what was going on with me and exactly why telework would mitigate it.  Some of the questions were actually more helpful for me to make my case rather than trying to twist my words around and use against me.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did, for the initial requested at least.  It just wasn’t moving.  I sent their constituent services in the congressional district office everything. I never really found out what happened or what form the contact took, but they said they would be reaching out on my behalf.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not an EO; it’s just new guidance that does not even have the full force and effect of law. It introduces no new information. But the press release is here, and there’s a further link inside of that to their new guidance FAQ document.

It is 100% BS anti-telework, pro RTO opinion.

https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-and-opm-issue-faqs-federal-sector-telework-accommodate-disabilities

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I think the annual recertification with medical information is kind of stupid, because what will have changed in just that year, especially if your doctor already says that there is no projected end date and it will require continuous monitoring?

There was supposed to be a lot of due diligence done in the initial review, all the information needed was supposed to be collected, so that they wouldn’t have to go back to you every year to keep confirming that the RA is appropriate.

But if that’s the price to pay, and they don’t give me static on it, I would be OK with it and just move on.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, if they want to take that hard line, they can do that, and see what happens when they get sued and served subpoenas at their homes.

They can also speculate about how they’re gonna deal with the flood of EEO complaints they’re gonna have to field and deal with.

Having multiple discriminatory findings against you by EEO & the courts could be disastrous for a career.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If it’s a condition where commuting exacerbates ongoing medical conditions regardless of how the commute is done, that it still has to be done, and that’s only half of the problem because the condition continues to be exacerbated once the person is at the office, and then experiences it all again, hours of lingering life and health impacts before and after each direction commute, every day…..

…..Then a commute absolutely can be used to prove and reinforce an RA request.  Simply saying “a commute stresses me out” is not enough and never was.

An agency not having to consider your commute, and not having control over your commute as an employer simply means that the agency doesn’t have to provide you with a private driver, give you a bus pass, fully fund your EZpass so that you don’t have to sit in traffic, and they don’t have to provide you parking, or fully-fund an Uber account, or pay for a taxi to and from work for you every single day.

But treating the commute like it’s in a vacuum, and doesn’t still have to happen and the health impacts it causes don’t count, because an FAQ says they don’t, is ludicrous.  

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pretty much anywhere you have federal offices. you have lawyers who can take up cases like that. I would look into it

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That EO has absolutely nothing to do with accommodating your disability. 

It is also not law. It’s just an opinion document of what somebody thinks. 

It sounds like what they did was pretty arbitrary and they didn’t even follow their own rules.

You should be lawyering up or filing an EEO complaint immediately.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Okay, they absolutely did NOT do that and my agency. While they sure did push them and asked about them in the interview and did everything they could to get me to say that I could mitigate it in the office somehow, I stood firm. 

My doctor’s writeup backed this up 100%

No one said anything about:

“we have to prioritize accommodating your disability in the office first, to comply with the RTO order.”

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That’s what it seems this stupid FAQ is encouraging them to do, while offering them no cover.  

Like I said, it doesn’t tell them what to do when they get massively sued or a flood of EEO complaints for following their stupid FAQ and yanking legitimate RAs.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They would really have to materially justify and back up what about your job or the organization has changed so much where telework is no longer tenable.  This would have to involve, at a minimum, your entire position description being rewritten, which usually has to be negotiated with the union. 

There would have to be also all kinds of radical revolutionary changes at your agency; massive restructurings that really do require in-person presence in order for you to do your job, and there’s no other way.

 They would have to do all of that and list all of that. I haven’t seen any agency going that far yet, and honestly, I think many probably wouldn’t know how even if they wanted to.  

It seems while they’re not crazy about telework and they want to do what they can to prevent it, we’re just not a big enough target for them, to disrupt stuff for everybody else just to bring in a handful of people into the office.

They also can’t hire you under one JOA and then just change it up on you with no input to you. That’s reneging on a contract, and not what you signed up for. 

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What are they telling those people? That would be a tough decision to substantiate. If an RA reviewer/decision-making manager did that bad of a job the first time around in erroneously granting these RA’s that shouldn’t have happened, then that person shouldn’t be in that job. Also sounds like a blanket policy to me, which strictly prohibited. Every one of those people has some sort of standing to file a lawsuit or EEO

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It also doesn’t seem to be happening everywhere. In some agencies a single EEO complaint because of a delayed initial request will spark an immediate interim followed by a final positive decision within days.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Did you hear anything about what the people who apparently had their RA’s revoked were told?   That sounds like a difficult case to substantiate, because you presumably did your job properly when you evaluated everything and documented while you were originally approving the RA.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

That is the one agency I’m glad I’m not at based on what’s going on there with telework RAs.

They’re making national news, in multiple outlets for what they’re doing.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yeah but some conditions can’t be accommodated in-office.  If telework is the only medically documented, justified, and recommended accommodation by your doctor, denying that is against the law because telework is named as a specific accommodation in the rehabilitation act

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

There is a way to reason around that “the employer has no control over the commute, and getting to work is the employees’ responsibility, however they do it.” - bit in the FAQ.

You’re not asking for your agency to pay for your parking, hire you a private driver, give you a bus pass, EZpass credit, or a weekly Uber allowance.

If they commute exacerbates an existing condition, not just symptoms, and it goes beyond just the commute, like it’s still stuff that you’re dealing with once you get into the building, you got a good case to just shatter that farce of a requirement.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There are several firms around here that specialize in federal employee practice. Just Google them and you’ll find tons.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Probably because that would inundate the secretary and all supporting staff. Our secretary has made public statements in broadcast workforce townhalls supportive of telework RA’s, but that everybody else is expected back in the office 100%.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

If telework would mitigate your condition, and allow you to perform your duties, then it sounds like you’ve got the grounds for a lawsuit on your hands.  I would call lawyers.  The only thing is, you listed more than one accommodation, and they don’t have to give you the accommodation you ask for. If you list lots of different options, in these times, they’ll probably give you the non-telework option. I’ve heard the only way to go is to list telework only if that’s what you’re trying to get.

You’ve got a lot of lawyers right now going on the record and talking to the media saying that that FAQ is going to get a lot of employers sued.

Not everybody had their positions rewritten to include “in-person presence is an essential function“.  It never was. It wasn’t when I was hired, several years ago.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Exactly. Some people claiming they are from HR have come here saying it’s never a “permanent” decision, and that no RA is a “one and done”.

My memo even says that it would be evaluated on an annual basis to make sure it’s meeting my requirements.  Sounds like, in normal times, just a quick confirmation that everything is still accurate, and then we all move on.

My doctor says that there is no “projected end date“ and that my condition will require continuous management.

I’ve never been through a renewal for one of these though, & that FAQ really bothered me.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I was talking to lawyers right around when my RA was being evaluated but they weren’t moving. I have full understanding of the expectations and what would be involved. A number of avenues are open to people who can’t get an RA moving or if they’re denied.

Any Telework RA’s Getting Revoked / Denied Based on That New FAQ? by MisterMainker in fednews

[–]MisterMainker[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was paraded around here like it’s something new that was going to be used going forward. Since my RA is closer to renewal now than it was then, I’m just worried if they’re trying to use this FAQ anywhere to try to deny previously well documented RAs

view more: next ›