CFPB tries for third time since Biden inauguration to prematurely roll back COVID-19 safety, including masks in offices

Keep masking up. Regardless of CFPB's proposal, masks are still required at CFPB offices! Max telework still in place through April 23rd!

All masking, social distancing, COVID-19 Admin Leave, and maximum telework policies are still in place through at least April 23rd. No changes to policies have yet been made - although management has sent a proposal to NTEU based on recent CDC guidance, which they must negotiate and get agreement with us on before they can change any of the current COVID safety rules. Our union proposal keeps in place reasonable safety precautions such as indoor masking & maximum telework, and ties it directly to community transmission risk. 

The CDC’s latest guidance is focused on hospital bed availability, not preventing transmission. Because of that, it’s not a suitable guideline for the Bureau to use for workplace safety if they wish to remain in compliance with our contract. 

NTEU 335’s position remains consistent with the science on COVID-19 transmission: we support a mask requirement indoors in CFPB offices so long as COVID-19 community transmission is occurring. Removing the mask protections prematurely poses a risk to the health and safety of CFPB employees that we represent, which would be a violation of our union contract. There were multiple reported cases of COVID-19 in the DC office reported in the month of February; so transmission risk is still real. Meanwhile there is no downside or risk to wearing masks that would supercede the risks of contracting COVID-19 that would compel us to support removing the requirement prematurely.

Removing mask protections would also have a disproportionate negative impact on our most vulnerable employees, including the immunocompromised and people of color. It also puts parents of young children who are not vaccinated at higher risk of contracting COVID-19 at work and bringing it home to their families. Confining some colleagues to their homes for the foreseeable future while others go maskless in offices, inevitably transmitting COVID-19, is not acceptable for a workplace that proports to be equitable and inclusive. We also have a moral duty to our contractor colleagues who don’t have our union contract to protect them and are required to work in-person despite the very real risks even with masking and vaccines. Removing masks indoors would expose our custodian, security guard, Service Desk, and other contractor personnel who are in the office frequently and bear the highest risk of exposure during surges.

Download CFPB's proposal lifting COVID-19 safety precautions here.

Notes from 3/7 Health & Safety Committee meeting with CFPB 

CFPB updates

• The CFPB proposes following the new CDC guidance on county-based COVID-19 community levels

• The Low, Medium, High determinations will be provided weekly – the data would be updated mid-week (Wednesday or Thursday) – Then agencies will review this and then make changes

• Focusing on the DC Metro Area and Regions:

  • Using the new CDC guidelines, community levels are currently low around the DC Metro Area and Regions

  • Under Low, the mask wearing would not be required; testing would not be required;

  • Medium: No face mask required but we would be placing a testing (similar but not the same to what we discussed a few weeks ago).

  • Essentially, we would be moving back and forth between levels. We do not anticipate it being within a 24 hours’ notice but a little longer to update that information and communicate it out. If a local jurisdiction has requirements, we would follow those guidance’s and implement it regardless of the community level. Though, I use the word “require” it does not mean that we would not allow it – mask wearing would be optional.

• Screening and Testing: is pretty much the same and based on community levels. Not a lot has changed with testing methods:

  • We still have Option 1 by a 3rd party that can monitor results – If testing is not available for free, we have made sure the employees would receive refunds

• • Option 2: If there is not testing we would make sure testing options are available

Q&A

• NTEU: In your proposal, you’ll be looking at just the areas you’ve mentioned; but, what about the areas that does not mention the counties of employees that do not live in those monitored areas?

• CFPB: For example, if we have people in North Dakota, we will pivot to communicate slightly different with those staff – Communication might say, “if you come into the 1700 G street, Masks will be required”. However, if you live in a different area to check this website (whatever that is) for your area.

• NTEU: Yes, we would probably propose that, that decision not be placed in the hands of the employees; for them to determine if transmission rate is Low, Medium or High.

• CFPB: Yes, so if someone is traveling there needs to be some communication and guidance, if we get to that point

• NTEU: Procedures for people who are immune compromised and don’t want to be in the office with people without masks – what should those individuals do?

• CFPB: Since its outside the community levels we’re focusing on, reach out to Human Capital – it may qualify for Reasonable Accommodations to explore. There are situations where they work with employees to find the best accommodations to work with the employee.

• NTEU: Will there be a communication for this?

• CFPB: Does not have a yes/no today, but will take it back to our Comps Plan and Human Capital

• NTEU: I know Human Capital has the criteria but it might be worth while that the their communications are very clear for employees, as well as, what to provide. And, to make sure its not up to Supervisory Approval – There’s a lot of people who are concerned about this

• CFPB: Will take this back to the team and Human Capital and discuss this – all are valid points and we’ll do our best to frame this to make it more encouraging to support the process