u/ExpensiveMixture1877

Maybe it is time for all of us to start talking together, including leadership and the Board

Something interesting seems to be happening in this subreddit.

Students and alumni are speaking up because they want to protect the value and integrity of their degrees. Employees and former employees are speaking up because many of them care deeply about students, the institution, and a culture they once believed was something very special.

The more I read, the more I wonder whether these are really separate concerns at all.

WGU currently has nearly 195,000 students and more than 502,000 alumni. That is almost 700,000 students and graduates alone, before even counting current and former employees.

That is an enormous community of people with a stake in what happens to WGU.

Maybe we don't fully appreciate the influence that community could have if people found constructive ways to speak together.

I also want to say directly to WGU leadership and the Board of Trustees: if you are reading these conversations, or if someone eventually puts them in front of you, I hope you will really read them.

Not just the angry comments. Not just the venting. Read the conversations between students who are worried about their degrees and employees who immediately respond that they would never want to diminish what those students accomplished. Read the former employees who still care deeply about WGU years after leaving. Read the people trying to understand what is happening rather than simply choosing a side.

There is frustration here, certainly. People also need somewhere they can feel heard, and there is value in that even when it isn't particularly tidy.

But there is something else happening too.

There are people here who still care enormously about this institution.

That seems like an opportunity.

I would love to see leadership and the Board engage with this community rather than viewing Reddit simply as a collection of disgruntled voices. Come listen. Explain decisions. Answer difficult questions where you can. Tell people what they may be misunderstanding. Hear what students, alumni and employees are experiencing.

The brave leadership response to criticism isn't necessarily to agree with it. Sometimes it is simply to be willing to engage with it.

And perhaps the rest of us can do something too.

Would there be interest in finding a constructive way for students, alumni, current employees and former employees to communicate some of these shared concerns to leadership and the Board collectively?

Not an attack. Not a demand that everyone agree about what has happened. Not a declaration that anyone is right or wrong.

Something centered around protecting students, employees, academic integrity, fair and consistent processes, the reputation of WGU degrees, and the culture and mission that made so many people believe in this university in the first place.

I've also seen references here to employees doing some union organizing outside of Reddit. I know absolutely nothing about that effort beyond what people have mentioned publicly, so I don't want to speak for anyone involved. But if an employee group is already organizing and thinking about constructive ways for employees to be heard, perhaps this broader student, alumni and employee conversation is something worth considering too.

Employee experience and student experience are connected. When employees feel supported, respected and excited about their work, students benefit from that. When employees are exhausted, afraid, disengaged or miserable, it becomes much harder for them to give students their very best.

For many people, I think that is why these changes hurt so much. They remember a WGU culture that felt extraordinarily healthy, mission driven and different.

Wanting to preserve or recover that isn't the same thing as wanting WGU to fail.

It may mean people care enough about WGU to fight for what they believe made it worth protecting.

So maybe there is an opportunity here for everyone.

Students want to protect their degrees. Alumni want WGU's reputation to remain strong. Employees want to be able to do meaningful work for students in a healthy environment. Former employees carry years of institutional history and experience.

And leadership and the Board have the ability to listen and respond.

Nearly 700,000 students and alumni, plus current and former employees, represent an extraordinary reservoir of experience, loyalty, ideas and advocacy.

That community could be one of WGU's greatest assets.

Maybe the first step is simply for all of us, including the people leading the institution, to start listening to one another.

I'm considering posting this in both r/WGU and r/wgu_employees because the perspectives of students, alumni, current emplovees, and former emplovees all seem important to this conversation. At the same time. 1 don't want to create unnecessary concern for students who mav not be aware of these discussions, so I'm genuinely unsure whether bringing it into the larger WGU community is the right thing to do. Feedback is welcome.

Has anyone here ever talked or thought about talking with a journalist or investigative reporter about the issues being discussed in this group?

I have been doing some reading in publicly available records, and it made me wonder whether anyone has ever taken a broader look at this topic from an investigative journalism perspective. There is actually quite a bit that anyone can research through public sources, including federal court records through PACER, state business registration records, real estate and property records in various states and counties, and other publicly available corporate and government filings.

With RTO mandates, disability accommodations, remote work, retaliation concerns, alleged differences in treatment, and questions about whether established processes were consistently followed getting so much attention right now, it seems like a very timely subject.

I don't know much about journalism or how that process works, but I do know that an article or documentary looking at the changes happening at this and other companies, and the human impact of those changes, is something I would absolutely read or watch. I would also genuinely be interested in hearing how the companies themselves explain the decisions and changes that have taken place.

I'm sure there are many sides to the story, which is part of what I think could make it so interesting. It would be fascinating to hear different perspectives and have someone really dig into the history, policies, court records, public business and property records, timelines, decisions, and firsthand experiences to see how everything fits together. Sometimes individual pieces of information don't mean much by themselves, but an experienced investigative reporter may know what questions to ask and whether seemingly unrelated pieces actually connect to anything meaningful.

For anyone interested in doing their own reading, some useful starting points are PACER for federal court cases, Secretary of State or equivalent business entity databases for corporate filings, county property assessment and recorder offices for real estate records, and other federal and state public record databases depending on what you're researching. Obviously, a lawsuit contains allegations and public records don't necessarily tell the whole story, so context matters.

There is a lot of personal experience and secondhand information shared on Reddit, which can be useful, but I would really like to see someone independently examine actual records, timelines, firsthand accounts, and different perspectives and put everything into a larger context.

Has anyone ever contacted a reporter about it, or are you aware of any journalists who are already looking into these issues? Between the publicly available records and the growing conversation around RTO, accommodations, workplace policies, equity, and employee experiences, it seems like the kind of subject someone could eventually take a deeper interest in.

Maybe it could even start some productive conversations. I understand why people may not want to comment,just wondering out loud.

Someone brought an interesting case to my attention today that may or may not be of interest to any business professional, particularly if disabled.

The case is Daryl Whitfield v. Kristi Noem, Secretary of Homeland Security, Case No. 2:25-cv-04499-HDV-PD, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. You can lookup the case at all related documents at Pacer.UScourts.gov for this and many other interesting employment-related cases.

Whitfield is a federal employee with multiple disabilities who had been working remotely successfully for years and had repeatedly requested reasonable accommodations. When his agency moved toward requiring full-time in-person work, he sued, alleging failure to accommodate/failure to engage in the interactive process, retaliation, and using a blanket RTO policy.

What makes it especially interesting is that the government’s own Answer admits he worked full-time remotely from 2020–2022, received successful performance ratings during that period, and engaged in protected activity. Naturally, the government denies discrimination/retaliation and says it engaged in the interactive process and that any accommodation not provided would have caused undue hardship.

Also intriguing is that after they took his laptop to prevent him from working remotely, the district court had originally denied his request for a preliminary injunction that would have allowed him to remain remote while the case was pending. But the Ninth Circuit reversed, finding that the lower court had applied the wrong, more demanding standard.

One particularly interesting part: the appeals court determined that remote work was the relevant “status quo” because the employee had begun challenging the return-to-office requirement before the remote-work arrangement ended. In other words, asking the court to preserve remote work while the accommodation dispute was litigated wasn't necessarily asking the employer to create some brand-new arrangement.

The court did not decide yet if the employee ultimately wins his disability-accommodation case. It sent the matter back for the lower court to reconsider the injunction under the correct standard.

Worth reading if you're dealing with RTO and disability accommodations and probably worth understanding your rights and the applicable timelines rather than assuming an employer's RTO policy automatically ends the accommodation discussion.

Case: Whitfield v. Kristi Noem, No. 2:25-cv-04499-HDV-PD (C.D. Cal.)

Good morning, I just can't stop thinking of everyone today. For some, it is their first day of not being part of wgu, for others, it is a day of uncertainty, and others are not directly impacted but likely feeling the cultural shift. There is a grieving process that happens for those who may feel disappointed or even betrayed. There may even be guilt on the part of some people involved who had to go along with things they didn't agree with but feel they didn't have a choice. I think that all of that should be recognized as life moves forward. I hope each and every one of you is taking a little extra good care of yourself and those around you. I would love to hear how others are feeling. For me, today feels sad more than anything else. The pride is gone. I miss the wgu I once knew and worry about it's future.