Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MarkinDC24 t1_j8o0wxs wrote

Agencies have gotten themselves into a bind. Large recruitment efforts have been centered on offering workplace flexibilities. Locality pay determinations have been favorably offered for telework/remote staff to get locality pay for the official duty station of their employer, but they work in an alternative work site. It is only a matter of time, before the goose is cooked and things start to be audited. People who moved to Wyoming and fly into the city a few times each month, will get their Wyoming locality pay (+16.2% adjustment), and that is a big negative delta from the District of Columbia's locality pay (+32.49 adjustment). It is going to be sad, comical, and scary for some.

We are only in the beginning stages of this work place flexibility audit and/or fall-out.

12

Mtskiguy21 t1_j8ono9i wrote

There are exactly zero remote federal employees being paid for a locality other than the one where their house is located. There is no such thing as offering "favorably offered locality pay" for remote employees. If an employee is not remote, they are required to go into an office 2X per pay period, and locality is based on the location of that office.

25

Surefinewhatever1111 t1_j8pkq7q wrote

Agreed with one caveat. You have to be in the locality pay of the office twice per pay period. If you live in the same locality area as the office working from home, the point is moot, you can be 100% at home and get locality.

6

MarkinDC24 t1_j8qpe12 wrote

I understand and agree with you. What you might not understand, is there are some of us who are aware of this clear guidance/legal direction not being followed. So, yes, there are much more than “zero” federal employees who are teleworking outside of the region (I.e. National Capital Region) and getting paid non-regional D.C. area locality pay. Please. Do. Not. Shoot the messenger!

3

[deleted] t1_j8ow2la wrote

[deleted]

13

MarkinDC24 t1_j8qp3th wrote

I am describing entrenched and systemic issues. Agencies have long used highly “creative” interpretations of legal statues. I am also pointing out a lack of oversight by OPM. These two phenomena are not exclusive to any one administration, they are two highly systematic problems that is highly entrenched. Review the PLUM and see how many political appointees manage government, who are often ignorant of the law or find creative ways to skirt around it! OPM doesn’t do much auditing, so problem become highly probable and/or entrenched.

1

big_thanks t1_j8pi3pp wrote

Uh, this sounds like straight-up fraud.

4

MarkinDC24 t1_j8qpfyd wrote

It does. It is. And the oversight body OPM is where exactly? Lol.

1