Moving on… (part 2)

My last post ended with thank you – to those who have stayed as well as to those who have left civil service. After several questions from readers, I want to be more explicit on why my “thank you” was deeply genuinely written – as well as share suggestions that helped me with my own next steps. 

Thank you for working in jobs that are often thankless (when all goes well) or in the newspapers (when anything goes wrong – regardless of whether it’s your fault or not!). Thank you to those of you who literally put your life on the line as part of your job. Thank you for taking on a job that pays 24% below private-industry on average (and between 42% to 160% below private-industry average for high-demand tech skills). Thank you for doing your work using old legacy technology that is often so fragile, inefficient and needing so many overlapping manual workarounds that no-one I know would dare use these systems when starting or scaling a Silicon Valley company. (In case you were wondering, those systems are not cheap. The U.S. federal government spends $102 Billion last year on technology systems and contractors[1] which is more than the $90 Billion spent by *all* venture capitalists in Silicon Valley *combined* in 2024[1]). 

For those of you who are still in public service, I thank you for continuing to serve in these “interesting times”. I send you my thanks, best wishes and encouragement. Thank you for continuing to help other humans who depend on the services you provide. Other humans who you will likely never meet. Other humans who live in our *United* States of America. If faced with unusual or questionably illegal directives, I ask that you always keep your oath of loyalty to the Constitution of the United States as well as your personal and professional integrity. I, along with everyone else in this country, depend on you.

For those of you who have left public service, please keep your original heart-felt focus for helping others. There are plenty of organizations who crave your skills and your integrity – once you find them and they find you. These organizations exist in a range of different legal forms – state government, local government, NGOs, non-profits, public-private partnerships as well as pre-IPO startups, Public Benefit Corporations, multinationals and other forms of private industry. Avoid wasting your time running around in demoralizing interview/rejection spirals for roles that somehow don’t feel right in the first place. Instead, figure out whatever social need matters the most to *you* personally and focus there. After you think you have identified your focus, then start looking around – and talking about your focus with others. Maybe you’ll find that your focus is almost – but not quite – right, so be comfortable adjusting your focus as you talk, listen and learn with others. Maybe your next opportunity to do work that matters to you is sitting right there in front of you – with a different title or in a different part of an organization chart of an atypical organization. Or using different tools and a slightly different scope of work. Or maybe, just maybe, no-one is doing it yet, so you should gather some like-minded humans to start a startup! While the current venture capital AI funding frenzy is in the headlines, there are other funders out there looking for public-service-focused, mission-driven experts with proven real-world experience who want to make a difference in society! 

I’ve bounced in and out of roles in startups, non-profits, multinationals and government. In each of these worlds, the terminology, norms and expectations can be confusingly different. In each of these worlds, I’ve found good humans doing their best meaningful work to help others – and you will find them too. If we’re connected here on LinkedIn, and there’s anything I can do to help you continue to help others in our community, please let me know. 

Thank you (again) for serving.

John.

Moving on…

As of 30sep2025, I am no longer a federal employee – which is interesting because I never expected to be one in the first place! 

(That one sentence took a few months to write.)

What’s next for me? I’ll cover that in a later post. For now, I note that I was not the only one to leave federal service recently. Because there are no official numbers from the federal government, we have to rely on research from Partnership for Public Service who estimate over 211,000 humans have left so far in 2025, with even more expected to leave/be-pushed-out by 31dec2025. It’s important to keep in mind that, even after all those humans went away, the need for their work did not go away. Politicians in Congress create laws requiring those services be provided. Humans in civil service government provide the services (as required by those laws) to all those who depend on those services. Now, however, many of the humans in civil service who did the actual work of providing those services are… gone. 

Some humans left or were pushed out because they objected to legally-dubious or plausibly-illegal instructions from new leadership[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. Some humans left because they were ordered to relocate at short notice to arbitrary locations intentionally geographically far from their operational work and their family – or else be fired in a form of clandestine layoff[1][2][3]. Some humans left because aggressive, changing and contradictory behavior by new leadership intentionally “put them in trauma”[1][2][3][4][5][6]. Some were fired without cause simply because they were easier to fire[1][2][3]. Some were fired, re-hired and then re-fired [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. Some were fired against the recommendation of every living former head of that agency[1]. Some were fired simply because new leadership didn’t know what their department worked on – and later didn’t know how to re-hire them after the severity of the error of their firings was discovered[1][2][3]. Predictably, many of these actions triggered ongoing court cases[1][2][3]. 

Some humans stayed because they hoped to find a way, despite all the disruptions from above, to continue providing the services they cared about to citizens who depended on them. Some humans stayed because they are driven, in their heart, to serve and help others. Some humans stayed, despite being paid 24% below private-industry average, because they needed the very next paycheck. (This is not unique to U.S. government employees – 37% of all adult Americans, including those with jobs, don’t have enough spare cash to pay an unexpected $400 emergency bill). 

Some humans who left felt guilty for abandoning their friends and coworkers who stayed. Some humans who stayed felt guilty for not leaving with their coworkers. Some humans who stayed felt abandoned by their departing coworkers. 

Each human had to make their own personal decision – for themselves, for their family and for their professional career. These current/former coworkers are still trusted colleagues, respected domain-expert professionals and (often) lifelong friends.

To all of you who served alongside me in public service – the only words I have are: Thank. You. 

John.

ps: Click here for part#2.

Medical coverage: HOWTO change FEHB to TCC during a government shutdown!

(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer or a health care benefits professional. However, I’ve discovered and used this information for myself successfully, and I have had good trusted friends who are HR professionals with federal government experience review this. There are a lot of “usually” and “it depends on” situations here, so if you have any questions on any of this, please talk with your former supervisor or your former agency’s HR department. This worked for me, so sharing in case it helps others.)


When you lose your job at a company, and your job had medical insurance, you are (usually) allowed to signup for “COBRA” medical coverage. COBRA allows you to continue your existing medical coverage, with no gap in coverage and no new health verification requirements. There are some rules: You need to signup for within 30 days of your last day of employment – and once signed up, you can only remain on COBRA for a total of 18months. Your COBRA payment is more expensive than the medical contributions you had paid while employed, because you are now also paying your employer’s portion of your medical insurance. Depending on your life situation and health insurance offerings in your physical location, COBRA can be a better choice than other health insurance offerings. 

An almost identical situation exists when you lose your job in federal government.

When you lose your job in federal government, and your job had medical insurance, you can (usually) signup for TCC (“Temporary Continuity of Coverage”). Like COBRA, you have 30 days from when you leave federal service to signup for TCC. After that, you have deemed to have waived TCC and cannot revisit.

For the ~270,000 federal employees who left federal service on 30sep2025, the last day of that payroll period is 04oct2025, so your last day to signup for TCC is 04nov2025. In our current reality, lots of federal HR departments have been RIF’d or furloughed by the ongoing federal government shutdown, causing delays all over the place, so if you want to signup for TCC, I would not wait until the last day to apply.

Humans leaving federal service who want to convert from FEHB -> TCC will need to fill in the SF-2809 (click here to get the PDF). The form SF-2809 comes with attached instructions, but these did not apply to my situation, so after lots of asking questions on how to signup for TCC myself, I’m sharing the following notes on what worked for me in case it is helpful for others:

  • Box1-8: Name, DOB, social, address, etc.
  • Box9: “no” (If you had FEHB as a federal employee, for some reason FEHB does not count as “insurance other than medicare”, so if – like me – FEHB was your only insurance, the answer here is “no”)
  • Repeat for each member of your family.
  • PartB: Fill in your current FEHB plan name and plan number. Do not leave blank.
  • PartC: Fill in your desired FEHB plan name and plan number. I was not changing, so these were the same as PartB. Do not leave these tblank. (Note: TCC does allow you to change plans at this time, unlike COBRA)
  • PartD1: “4A” (even though you are still in the 30day-grace-period, you are considered a “former employee”)
  • PartD2: “09/30/2025” (even though technically, I’ve been told it should be the end of that paycycle “10/04/2025″…don’t ask!).
  • PartE,F,G: Leave blank.
  • Sign with wet-ink-on-paper and date (typed-signature not accepted and digital signatures not possible, without your federal PIVcard!)

I then had to send the signed paper form to my agency HR department, who dealt with it as fast as humanly possible during furloughs, RIFs and the govt.shutdown. As of a few days ago, I’m now successfully enrolled into TCC, with no gap in medical coverage. I’m still waiting for USDA NFC to send me my first TCC invoice (this is likely delayed by government shutdown but at least I’m in the system).

Note: It is *not* possible to send this form to FEPBlue or directly to my insurance company (BCBS). These are both private companies, so are open during the government shutdown, so I called them to ask, thinking it might be faster. However, they both said they can only accept TCC enrollments of verified qualified former-fed-employees from the HR department of that agency. Even during federal government shutdown.

Note: The FEPBlue.org website has a bug. When you leave federal service, you have a 30day grace period to enroll in TCC. During that grace period, you can login to FEPBlue and see your medical history, claims in progress, etc. I did this multiple times with no issues – while employed in federal service and while in the 30day-grace-period. However, as soon as FEHB sees that you are registered for TCC, you will lose access to your current/past medical history, claims in progress, etc – all replaced by a banner that says your coverage *will* start on 05nov2025. There is no mention of your current FEHB grace period coverage. In theory, after the start of your TCC coverage on 05nov2025, you can again see your past/current medical history, claims in progress, etc. Until 05nov2025, FEPBlue website thinks that you have not yet started *any* medical coverage with FEPBlue, even though the humans at FEPBlue customer support would confirm on the phone that their inhouse systems show our current coverage was still active during the 30day-grace-period before TCC started. Multiple phone calls with FEPBlue.org support to fix this website went nowhere, so flagging here in case you also hit this and are alarmed.

Open Source at the United Nations!

Well, this is going to be an exciting week here at the United Nations! Just finished a fabulous first day today here with so many wonderful humans from literally all around the globe – all using Open Source at scale to help their countries with their Digital Modernization and Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) work. And that was just Day One!

(In a happy surprise, I even got to give a shout out to the Mozilla l10n and RelEng teams!).

“The 15 Minute City” by Carlos Moreno

I’ve bought many books that looked interesting, only to give up half-way and pass them on. Only a few books end up carefully read (and re-read) all the way to the end, with page markers and highlighted text throughout.

“The 15 Minute City” by Carlos Moreno is a wonderfully readable book full of real-world case studies in multiple different countries around the world. Each showing significant real-world improvements. All supported by indepth theory and research over time by Carlos and his team. It’s rare that books covering urban planning, economic development, reducing climate impact and mathematical modeling of cities are so practical and easy to read. It’s even more rare that a book like this would leave you feeling optimistic that you can do something practical in your own community. Carlos managed to do all that in one book.

In case you need further encouragement, here’s what my book looks like:

Buy it. Read it. You’ll thank yourself (and Carlos!) afterwards. No wonder Carlos is winning so many awards!

Looking for “remote”​ work that matters? (sep2024 edition)

Did you know the US Federal Government is the largest employer in the United States of America and hiring – with 310 “remote” positions open today?

If you want to work in a distributed team doing work that matters – and are eager to help improve a public service you personally care deeply about – have a look. To give you a taste of the vast range of open “remote” positions, here are some that caught my eye:

* Senior Technical Advisor, USAID – Office of Civil Rights
* Artificial Intelligence (AI) Technology Expert, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
* DevOps/SRE, FEMA
* Statistician, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
* Attorney Advisor (Contracts), Maritime Administration , U.S. Department of Transportation
* Immigration Law Analyst, Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
* Information Systems Security, Domestic Finance and Financial Institutions, U.S. Department of the Treasury
* GIS-Cartographer, Bureau of Indian Affairs
* Supervisory Refugee Officer, Refugee Asylum and International Operations, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
* Supervisory IT Specialist Policy and Planning, US Army Futures Command, US Army
* Physician Radiologist, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

For the full list of 310 positions, click here. To apply, you’ll need to create a free account for yourself on usajobs.gov. And if none of those “remote” jobs interest you, just setup a recurring saved search so you get automatic daily/weekly emails as new “remote” job vacancies become available.

John.
=====

DistributedTeams at ConnectedHubs Summit

Thank you and congratulations to Allan Mulrooney, Stephen Carolan, Leah Fairman, Liam Horan and Pauline Leonard for organizing the Western Development Commission 2023 ConnectedHubs summit in Tullamore, Ireland.

This event brought together people, from many different backgrounds and organizations, who all shared one focus: How the workforce shift to distributed teams, supported with neighborhood coworking spaces could help revive the economies of smaller towns and rural communities across Ireland.

There was a great mix of researchers, policy experts, economic developers, people running coworking spaces/hubs and their allies. To me, some highlights were: Yoshio Tsuda‘s session on his beautiful “Morino-Office” space and details of his economic development work in Nagano, Japan. Fergal McPartland and The Shed Distillery Of PJ Rigney showcasing how the Drumshambo Food Hub is helping local entrepreneurs start global commercial food businesses. Deirdre Frost‘s data analysis and metrics showing the value of all this work. And I spoke about my research on the benefits of distributed teams – for employers, employees and for economic developers with coworking spaces in smaller towns and rural communities. (To watch the recording, click here.)

To show just how important this work is viewed nationally, Simon Coveney, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment as well as Heather Humphreys, Minister for Rural and Community Development each gave presentations detailing how various new policies were supporting this work. There was also a session showing how Interreg Europe is helping share these policy lessons with other regional governments across the European Union.

I really enjoyed the different sessions and getting to meet the humans leading hubs in different communities. After the conference was over, I drove to visit several of these hubs in different parts of the countryside. Each was uniquely different, each in a way that fit within their local community, and each in scenic beautiful parts of the island. (More details on that tour in another post.)

The event, the practical optimism of the people and the tour was very inspiring and uplifting. Thank you, all.

(Updated 17mar2024: Add link to video recording.)

Distributed teams vs remote, virtual, hybrid, telework, wfh…

Words matter. It’s easy to slip into a habit of using incorrect words. However, over time, repeated use of incorrect words can give an impression of bias to those you speak with. It can even create bias in yourself. Intentionally choosing to use the correct words can help you communicate without bias and help you avoid creating bias in yourself.

The following words describe very different scenarios and are not interchangeable: “distributed teams,” “hybrid teams,” “virtual teams,” “virtual employee,” “remote work,” “remote employee,” “work from home,” and “work from anywhere,” “telework” and “telecommute”.


Distributed Team: This clearly and correctly describes a group of humans on a team who work together while being physically apart. If you are within immediate arms-reach of every person on your team, then your team is physically co-located. Otherwise, you are part of a distributed team. Because everyone on the physically distributed team is “remote” from someone else, everyone on the team shares equal responsibility to communicate clearly and coordinate their work with others. The term focuses is on how the humans coordinate working with each other. The term does not reference the physical location of humans, so remains accurate even when individuals work from a building with the company logo on top, from their home, a coworking space or another temporary location.


Remote: I usually hear this said by a human in a building with a company logo on it, referring to a coworker who is not at the same location. The “remote” coworker might be working in another office elsewhere with same company logo on it. Or at home. Or at a coworking space. The location of the other coworker doesn’t matter—all that matters is that they are somewhere else. The bias here is that the human speaking believes only the other human is remote. Technically, this is physically impossible. Both are “remote” from each other.

The bias signaled here is that the person thinks of themself as a “real” first-class human in the center-of-their-universe, doing important work, while they think of others as “remote” second-class human physically located elsewhere, doing less important work. This bias will influence new project assignments, bonuses and promotions. During layoffs, this bias can influence decision-makers to keep “real” humans and layoff “remote” humans.

Another bias signaled here is that the “remote” human carries all the responsibility for communicating clearly with the rest of the team—a bias that is incorrect and operationally harmful to the team. If any member of the team is not able to reach out and tap the shoulder of each and every other human on the team, then everyone is remote from someone—and everyone shares equal responsibility for communicating clearly across the entire distributed team.


Hybrid: This term has recently become popular, as employers and employees figure out different post-pandemic work arrangements. This is usually understood to be some compromise between all-in-the-office and all-at-home arrangements. So far, I’ve heard this term used to describe the following very different scenarios:

  1. The team coordinate schedules to all work from the one office location some days per week and all work from home some days. This ensures coworkers meet in person periodically, and this creates a busy office environment for those days, which can be appealing. However, this creates uncomfortable questions about the equity impact for those who cannot commute on those specific days. This requires maintaining a full size preexisting office to handle “peak days”, and creates uncomfortable optics about paying for an expensive office that is intentionally 100% empty on other days.
  2. The team each decide their individual schedules to each work from the one office location some days per week and each work from home some days. This flexibility better handles equity around individual life scheduling issues, but can create scenarios where coworkers who come in on different days never meet each other. This creates an office environment which is never fully empty, but never very full either–often described as what it was like working on the weekend. By avoiding “peak days”, this does allow for reduction in existing office space.
  3. The team consistently work from a range of different locations. Some at the one office location, some at other office locations, some at home. To me, this is not “hybrid”. This is a “distributed team”.

To avoid this confusion, I recommend avoiding this term for now. If you do use the term “hybrid”, be intentional and explicit about which scenario you intend. Also, keep in mind that others using the same term may be describing a different scenario.


Virtual: Similar to “remote” above, I usually hear this said by a human in a building with a company logo on it, referring to a coworker who is not at the same location. The coworker might be working in another office elsewhere with same company logo on it. Or at home. Or at a coworking space. The location of the other coworker doesn’t matter—all that matters is that they are somewhere else.

This term can signal a first-class / second-class mindset—thinking of themself as a real, more-important human, while they consider the other as a virtual(not-real), less-important human. Because of this mindset, these “virtual” humans are usually only assigned more mundane tasks, which obviously limit their career progression, promotion prospects and of course, retention. During layoffs, this bias can influence decision-makers to keep “real” humans and layoff “virtual” humans.


Telework: This term, and related term “telecommute,” originated in the 1970s[1] when people working outside the office had to use a telephone landline to “phone in” their work. Computer connection speeds were so slow and technology so expensive that video calls and transferring large files were usually impractical. Communications between coworkers were limited to audio-only phone calls / conference calls, emails with small attachments and slow character-based terminal connections.

Because of the physical size of computers and the need for a physical landline telephone, this was usually only done from a fixed home location with plenty of advance time needed for complicated setup and configuration.

Because of the limited communications between coworkers, this work arrangement was usually reserved for focused, short duration, solo work, or for more routine, mundane work—not prolonged collaborative work in a distributed team. Coordinating complicated work with others usually required returning to their desks in the one office location. Because of these technical restrictions, “teleworkers” usually only worked on more routine solo tasks, which obviously limited their career progression and promotion prospects. This impacted retention of teleworkers and discouraged employees from enrolling in a “telework” policy, even if offered.

In recent decades, technology has improved, so use of landline telephones and desktop computers are declining. Now that portable laptops, smartphones, high-speed internet and Wi-Fi are the norm, this term feels increasingly obsolete.


Work From Home (WFH): This “working from home” made sense when describing someone working from their fixed residential location outside of a dedicated physical corporate office location. Like “telework,” the use of a desktop computer and a physical landline telephone connection limited work to a predictable fixed location—typically their home. In recent decades, technology has improved. Now that portable laptops, smartphones, high-speed internet and Wi-Fi are the norm, this term feels increasingly obsolete.

Of course, some people do actually work online from their actual home, so sometimes this can feel accurate. However, it can become a habit, causing people to say “Working from Home” to describe someone working from a coworking space or a hotel conference venue—or when describing coworkers who travel the majority of the time. I’ve also heard the terms “road warrior” and “on the road” used to describe coworkers flying in planes or working from airport lounges. The related term “Work From Anywhere” is gaining popularity, and at least feel less inaccurate if there is a need to describe someone’s non-permanent physical work location.

Focusing on describing the physical location of coworkers, instead of how humans coordinate teamwork, concerns me. Describing the physical location incorrectly bothers me, so I avoid the term “work from home” unless it is somehow relevant to the discussion to know that the human is literally working in their place of residence.


Being intentionally precise and consistent about the words you use helps reduce bias and fosters a healthy culture in your distributed team.

“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
”Inigo Montoya” in the movie “The Princess Bride”

(Originally published in “Distributed Teams“; updated and modified for length 29nov2023)

GSA’s Federal Cowork spaces

It’s only been a few months since GSA opened the doors on our pilot / prototype network of Federal Cowork spaces and we’ve already:

  • Saved taxpayer money, reduced paperwork and reduced disruption for the U.S. National Park Service during a tricky transition.
  • Helped with disaster resilience / continuity of operations for U.S. Department of Agriculture when a storm damaged their office earlier this year.
  • I’m personally also excited that these FedCowork spaces are already working well enough that feds are telling their fed-friends. Net Promoter Scores are important for gauging success, which is why so many organizations ask customers “net promoter” questions in surveys and seek out “influencers” to help raise awareness with potential customers. In Silicon Valley, Net Promoter Scores and influencers are considered particularly essential in the early steps of a new project as you gauge market interest and rapidly adjust based on what you hear. Real time feedback like this helps you “design with users, not for them”. Seeing strong word of mouth referrals like this – especially so early in a pilot project – is just delightfully encouraging.


Full details on all of this are in GSA’s official post here. Also, if you work in federal government and are interested in working in, touring or just learning more about any of these FedCowork locations, you can find contact info and location specific details here.

Environmental value of telework in government (updated)

The State of California’s “Telework Dashboard” continues to gain momentum, so here’s a quick update.

Department of General Services (DGS) continues their work, helping more departments across the State of California include their telework data into this award winning dashboard. And they’ve made impressive progress.

In March 2021, this dashboard showed real-time telework information from 12 agencies with a combined total of ~11,244 humans. The latest data, from April 2023, now shows real-time telework information from 118 agencies with a combined total of 148,523 humans. With more still being added!

How telework combats climate change

This dashboard clearly shows the scale of the benefits of changing commute patterns using widespread, long-term telework. Because these 118 agencies are allowing employees to work from home, we can see that these agencies have reduced collective carbon emissions by 18,013 metric tons during the month of April 2023.

I still find it hard to understand a metric ton of CO2, so to get a sense of the scale of this impact, I turn again to CarbonFootprint.com. They calculate that flying a plane nonstop from San Francisco to Washington DC, land and then fly nonstop back to San Francisco generates 1.10 metric tons of CO2 emissions — the pollution that contributes to the problem of climate change. The 148,523 humans at these agencies who “worked remotely” some (or all) of April 2023 reduced the carbon footprint of their combined commutes by the same amount as NOT making 16,375 round-trip flights between San Francisco and Washington DC, In just the month of April alone. 

Or to phrase it another way: canceling this telework policy and requiring those humans at these agencies to commute daily to their offices would add the same carbon emissions as a policy decision to fly 16,375 nonstop flights from San Francisco to Washington DC and back during the month of April. That’s a new round-trip flight taking off from San Francisco every three minutes — 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for the entire month. 

Setting the standard for a cleaner future

Looking at just this one aspect of the potential environmental benefits of long-term telework can help inform next steps for government agencies who are thinking about their “telework” policies post-COVID. These 118 agencies are tackling hard climate change problems by:

  • Focusing on the largest segment of emissions in the state (commuter traffic pollution according to the California Air Resource Board), then measurably reducing those emissions today by eliminating the need for staff to commute daily from home to the office and back home again.
  • Empowering staff to work effectively and securely from their homes, using modern, consumer-grade technology.
  • Automatically and publicly tracking the impact of these actions in order to make informed policy decisions for the future.

The California agencies contributing data to the live dashboard are showing admirable leadership in tracking the potential benefits of long-term telework at scale in the public sector and I get more delighted by the results as this work continues to scale. These forward-thinking policies, along with the easily digestible info on the dashboard, are a powerful combination, with timely data helping inform smarter decisions and supporting a cleaner future for the government workforce. Thank you (again) to Andrew SturmfelsAnn BaatenGary RensloStuart Drown and many many others for their continued hard work scaling this dashboard.