As Trump orders all federal workers back to the office, we should think about what federal work should look like in the years to come.
Let us recognize that federal workers have completely abused work from home (WFH) policies. When the pandemic hit, they all went home and never came back – even long after all private sector workers had returned to work. The result is a largely absent federal workforce and empty buildings. By ordering them all back into the office, Trump is returning the office status quo to March of 2020.
From there, we need to have a common sense WFH standard for federal employees. I do have an informed perspective here. I was a hybrid worker from about 2004 to 2013 and have been full WFH since. It’s not for everybody. You have to have self-discipline, a quality workspace, and a family that understands that when you’re at work… you’re at work. Also, not all jobs lend themselves to WFH. Many obviously require someone to be at an office or job site. And for some companies and departments, they just work better if the people doing the work are in the same physical space. It works for me and my job, but I’ve seen people in the same line of work do poorly working from home. And I’ve seen people who are exceptionally effective working from home and get distracted in an office environment. It takes the right job and the right person.
That being said, as I said, we need a common sense WFH standard for federal employees. First, we need to identify the jobs that can be done by people working from home or in an office. These are generally jobs in which output can be readily measured and physical proximity is not needed. Clerical jobs, research, data processing, IT, administration, some management, call center, etc. all lend themselves to WFH. Healthcare, military, public-facing, secure, and other jobs, do not work for WFH.
Once we have defined the jobs that are workable for WFH, we have to define the parameters by which those jobs will be done. How will equipment be handled? How will data be secured? Appropriate workplace standards? Employee measurement criteria? Video and monitoring protocols? Etc. The private sector has been thoughtfully working through all of this for 20 years and has a lot of it figured out.
Then we have to allow some latitude for individual departments and teams to decide if they want WFH or not. There has to be some discretion if a particular department (State, for example) wants everyone in the office to foster the culture they want. There isn’t a one-size-fits-all answer here.
Finally, for those departments and jobs that we think are OK for people to do from home and we have established the appropriate measurements and protocols, not every employee is going to cut it. Some of them lack the self-discipline or home environment to be successful working from home. If the job is ONLY available WFH because we close the office, then they must be replaced.
There are some benefits for WFH for our country. It will allow us to divest from a fair amount of real estate. More importantly, it will allow people all over the country to work for the federal government – not just those who live near a federal office. This opens up the labor pool and diversifies the imprint and impact of a giant glob of federal employees clustered around federal offices.
We can have a thoughtful policy for WFH that works for employees and taxpayers. My own impression is that most federal jobs still need to happen in an office, but I also think that most federal jobs (outside of the military) are not necessary.
“…but I also think that most federal jobs (outside of the military) are not necessary.”
The money quote. We don’t need to call half of those people back into the office, just let them go.