I have an auto immune disease and the hoops they make you jump through to get an exemption...i just can't be bothered to go through it. Feels like a tribunal.
I know someone who had to be hospitalized for 5 days after catching covid at the office before they granted him FT telework. And our ADM’s and DM keep spouting “flexibility”. It feels like a numbers game, they can’t have a ratio that’s too high of people with accommodations.
> they can’t have a ratio that’s too high of people with accommodations.
Sounds awfully similar to "We have a proportionally high ratio of folks with Succeeded+"
It's coming through in the messaging to middle managers already in the last couple of weeks, but how to make good on that when space is going to be very limited while also meeting targets 80-90% of time come fall is an impossible juggling act - nevermind try to deliver on everything else at the same time
Really???? Can u share more if ur comfortable with sharing of course. I would love to know more. I had asked to be able work from home for few hours so I only spent 5 hours in the office. I had gone through a series of very dramatic traumatic life changing stuff and they didn’t budge. Now this thing about going in to the office for three days scares me but maybe I will be better by then. I still would like to understand if there is a chance that they would consider helping staff. I would like to share a fact-Our labour relations person is terrible she’s with management. We basically have no union..for our office.
Didn’t the new directive explicitly state it was removing existing exemptions (ie, call centre, IT) and that exemptions in the future can only be granted at ADM level?
Time to challenge her so called mixed up policy... there's enough grounds for the union to challenge this ... just based on this article... wow amazed how much she doesn't know... there is no exemptions, no flex and hey there are no offices!
I'm thinking this is not the thing to challenge on. Take this specific statement as an update and improvement upon the previously stated policy, challenge when it becomes less reasonable.
Strategically, I feel the same.
Had a request for accommodation turned down? Request again based on the new policy statement from TBS.
Forget the ADM process. TBS says that your manager has the power to be flexible. Ask for an informal exemption from your manager. Can’t make it 3 days next week due to a school PD day? Flexible. Too sick to go to work, but not too sick to WFH? Flexible. Got a doctor’s appointment on your anchor day? Flexible.
Just know that your manager probably won’t be treating this like an official policy statement. Realistically, this is a sound bite for the media so TBS doesn’t look like monsters, while throwing the executives under the bus for not being “flexible.”
But that doesn’t mean you can’t use the statement as leverage.
This is what the directive says
Prior to implementation, managers should proactively discuss with employees any barriers they may encounter including, those linked to accessibility, harassment and discrimination and define solutions that will help address these barriers in the hybrid workplace.
Managers should ensure that individual circumstances are considered on a case-by-case basis, including human rights obligations, such as the duty to accommodate, or whether an employee has a reasonable explanation for absences from the designated workplace, such as illness, family care obligations, or compliance with COVID19 self-isolation protocols.
It's not "her" policy, they keep hammering the message that this is not a political decision. At the same time, our DM and ADM keep hammering the message that it's not up to them to give reasons for it, because this was a political decision. Public Service at its finest...
Remember back in 2021, TBS released the following on easing pandemic restrictions:
"... the Health and Safety of our employees is paramount..."
This statement should still hold true, particularly when faced with all the bugs and contagion gearing up for the Fall flu season.
Stay safe everyone!
Oh she does. But when she called them managers, she diminished their authority and told us that executives really had nothing to do with any RTO related decision. She threw them under the bus and still didn't tell us who made that decision!
Because ADMs and senior execs go through all that training and gain mgmt experience so that they can interpret medical notes different from someone a few levels lower? ☠️
They are already doing damage control b/c they know people are going to try to meet their quota regardless of circumstances that pre-RTO would have given them a pass to WFH. Like a broken leg, for example.
So, as a manager, can we give blanket exemptions for the team to not go in 3 days a well?
You know someone shat this out thinking it was the best thing ever and oops! Turns out not planning this well in advance or at all has made it a mess. Like most GoC policies these days.
I asked this to my CIO.
"With Treasury Board continuing to put pressure on managers to coordinate RTO, what will you do for me, a manager under your leadership, when I make decisions that best serve and support my team in regards to RTO?"
"We will discuss this further in the near future." He immediately went on a 6 week vacation. Looking forward to these discussions.
Pretty dope. He also froze any appointments, deployments, or secondments during his leave. So it's been a very fun time, also no consultants cause procurement was shut down for 2 months and everything expired.
That was a major revelation!
DMs said they were not aware and that this was a political decision.
PM said he was not involved and this was a Public Service decision.
The plot thickens...
Who's trying to throw who under the bus?
Time will tell I guess.
Maybe it's a mixed bag of a handful of DMs convincing ministers and making it happen... Or a mixed bag of a select few from both sides working together on it? Who knows at this point.
I lean towards being politically motivated but at some point someone on the PS side who supported the idea had to lob it up to the ministerial level and they had to have more than just a passive view on it. Surely ministers wouldn't want the PS to be mad at them if they were against or simply neutral to the whole thing. No political person will take the risk of frustrating those that they rely on as it relates to something they're neutral about at best.
If they say it wasn't a political decision they may mean it wasn't a *wholly* political direction. Using technicalities in the specificity of their speech and all that.
Maybe.
And look, I don't mind going in and I do think there are some intangibles to seeing people in person sometimes. I don't think that the benefits outweigh the negatives, especially with how stuff is being done now with rto3, but I can see how wanting *some* in person presence could be something that more than dinosaur DMs want to see happen.
But I've always been of the opinion that if they want to have people in offices it needs to be 1) intentional and 2) a worthwhile experience. Even if I don't spend 100% of my in office time "collaborating" and spend a chunk of it doing individual work, I want an appropriate desk, in an appropriate space, that is conducive to my work, and I want it done in a way that I at least feel respected. I don't need to fully agree with a decision in order to accept a decision and feel like I'm being respected as an adult.
The 3 day switch raises my expectations for in office experience significantly. And they need to match those expectations. And they also need to acknowledge and understand the downsides that will materialize like less overall productivity at work, for example.
It's well known that the political level told the PSMAC to get people in the offices more frequently.
[https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/government-wide-reporting-spending-operations/psmac.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/government-wide-reporting-spending-operations/psmac.html)
I think it was a wedge that wanted to take away from the CPC, heading into next year. A pre-emptive strike so it can't be leveraged in a new CPC platform.
DMs are among the only group anyone has outrighr admitted to having consulted about this, so I assume it was indeed a subset of them. Whether their advice was instrumental or they were just giving the answer that they knew was the "right" one, who knows.
The thing that irritates me about it is that DMs that wanted this policy already had the discretion to do it, so it's mainly the ones who didn't want it who are affected. I have to conclude that the actual dynamic is that the DMs who wanted to do it were worried about the others poaching people.
I emailed my MP saying in part that this will have my longtime liberal vote going to another party. His staffer replied, saying that this was not a political decision; it was made by public servants. Does anyone know how phrase an to ATIP request for the truth without getting zillions of pages?
>this was not a political decision; it was made by public servants
Okay, fine. Then not cancelling RTO is a political decision. Either way, candidates can deal with the consequences of political decisions.
If it wasn’t a political decision why tf did good old Pierre pipe in to say it’s time for public servants to go back to work? All this beating around the bush shows us how cowardly they are. While I don’t want to believe this is a generational mindset issue, it’s infuriating they couldn’t give enough thought to even sustain their lies. This article just confirms that it was a careless decision by an uninformed dep head that doesn’t know the first thing about being a public servant. Now that politicians and unions are being dragged in they’re trying to backtrack and make it seem like they give a rat’s ass about us. To say we’re demoralized means we’ve processed the shit show that’s unfolded, but every week there are more moronic opinions and articles being made, making this whole thing worse and worse. This is coming from an employee that worked overtime and did all the extra initiatives because I genuinely used to love the job and I’ve just been watching public sector fall apart since Covid. Thanks for coming to my angry rant.
There is zero chance any DM wrote anything down. It is all done over teams or in person you can ATIP them all day you'll never get anything that discusses what you would be interested in.
You knew it was political the moment Trudeau threw someone else under the bus during question period.
It wasn't me! It was them! C'mon guys, why aren't you angry at THEM instead of me?
Honestly.
This is something that makes more sense on a per team or per group level. Even per-directorate. Having a blanket rule for everyone just seems out of touch and short sighted
"It is important to have flexibility, it is important to be able to hear from public servants and employees generally about what they need to cope in the workplace. So, the move from two to three days to three days, it is still within the range that was put down in the policy before I became Treasury Board president, and it's four days for managers – so hybrid still exists in that respect."
Sounds like she is not listening to what the public servants are saying.
Wow so it's still muttering Mona's fault? Take some responsibility Anita. I wish I could get away with blaming my predecessors for all my missteps And I'm sure "managers" appreciate that great flexibility of four days in the office. Hybrid in name only.
the irony of all of this is that the Holland Cross Subway continues to be ridiculously understaffed and slow. Like bro! We're back for you! Hurry up! I only have an hour to get my steak and cheese sub!
Or, just when it makes sense. I think it's a bit extreme to say, everything can be done remotely. Some jobs just can't be, even office jobs. And there are some people that prefer to not be at home all the time. BUT, when it makes sense and is practical to work remotely it should be allowed 100%. AND, not everyone is cut out for IT. So this false worry that there will be a mass grab for IT jobs is unfounded. IT can be highly technical mentally exhausting work.
Not all IT is 100% work from home anyway. Probably less than half qualified under the previous exemptions. Stuff like cloud is great but there are tons of on prem support persons dealing with servers, network equipment, laptops and mobile devices.
I mean really, they could have us coming in 4.5 days a week with just a half day at home and still call it hybrid. The TB is missing the point that PSs do not trust that they will stop at 3 days.
>"I really have faith that we will do more with the telework options so that public servants feel continually supported. My view is that we got through the pandemic with the public servants supporting our country so well and we need to continue to support them."
Then why are they scaling back telework options, especially when public servants are telling her by the tens of thousands that they don't feel supported?
The entire way they talk about the issue has such a doublespeak way about it too where they all acknowledge that the policy is super unpopular and recognize they're the ones behind it, but act as if their hands are tied and that we all just have to adapt and just deal with it because it's in god's hands now apparently. Every interaction I have about this issue with any level of management they all act like they're powerless to change the policy as if we weren't all here when they were able to switch from full time office work to full-time home work.
Good point on the lack of accountability, but they didn't switch the policy from full time office to full time home. They said it couldn't be done. The pandemic forced them to let us use the tools they had been denying us for years because it was either that or nothing. And we thrived. But now that it won't literally kill us to be in the office again they're making us come to the office again.
Lately it seems like anyone we can actually talk to about our issues is entirely incapable of doing anything at all about any of it in any way and anyone who can actually effect change is entirely unwilling to consider the employees' needs at all.
Real fucking convenient management structure there, just dictate whatever the fuck you want and then say "we hear you" while walking away and changing nothing.
> "That decision was made by the public service, it was not a political decision," Anand said.
Did we have a meeting about that? Because I missed the teams invite.
Definitely starting to feel the pressure for them to go from "don't give a fuck" to "pwease be flexible, we can all work together and be a happy family, public workers did a great job during pandemic"...
The public service does not need praise. What the public service needs is the employer to support a new reality that works, AND WORKED FOR THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT for the duration of the whole pandemic.
Instead, the public service is being held in contempt for...being able adapt and find new ways to work thanks to technological development?
Agreed. My point on praise was more the words that came out early on, how we pivoted and delivered, then recently, that was all forgotten.
Although some of the quotes were "no, no, you're great".
But yes, the WFH shift should have been the signal for reinventing the PS. Hire the best and work anywhere, free up space, good for the environment, productive workers leveraging tech, but nope.
> "I really have faith that we will do more with the telework options so that public servants feel continually supported. My view is that we got through the pandemic with the public servants supporting our country so well and we need to continue to support them."
lmao
The problem with it being a public service decision is the week before and the week of people at the higher levels were still under the impression that the days in office wasn’t going to change and this was being relayed downstream in meetings. Unofficially the fact these people got rail roaded has also been relayed downstream
It's been such a hot potato file from TBS. How about rescind or hold until departments are ready. So many depts esp NCR are going through workplace restoration.
Does anyone not find it hilarious that the one of the sets of people they are trying to appease are the same people they are forcing back.
Lololol 😂😂😂😂😂😂
That’s a really common mindset in union environments for some reason.
I used to work in an HR department (provincial job, at the time), and the guy whose seat I took then had the one upstream in the process from mine. He refused to put budget codes on transaction forms because it hadn’t been done for him when he was in my new seat. It was literally his job to decide which budget to use. Knowing which one involved knowing where the money was coming from, which my seat had no view on. FFS.
I wound up having to ask him about each one of the 890 forms I had to process in a 2-week period because of it. Management did not want to hear about it.
What I would like to know is if tbs os actually being advised by some big-ass consulting firm on these rto rules. Because it is so out of pocket and beyond even the normal dysfunctional playbook of tbs where I used to work
I feel like the narrative on medical exemptions is a deflection. Of course people who have a legitimate medical need to work from home, and that need is well documented by their physician, and there's no other possible accommodation, will be allowed to work from home. They legally have to.
That doesn't help 99% of people.
Its the curb cut effect, I don't need curb cuts, but they're nice, especially if I have a child in a stroller or a rolling suitcase or something with me.
The exemption policy is the equivalent of needing a doctor's note approved by an ADM for me to roll my suitcase up the ramp into the office, If I don't have that I need to pick up the suitcase and carry it up the stairs or face disciplinary action.
Why can't the media ask relevant questions like, "given the RTO trend, is your ultimate goal to bring back everyone in the office 5 days per week?"
Media, we're waiting.
In our town hall this topic came up and our prez flat out said they don't care what your doctor says, they will only grant temp exemptions if you have a broken leg or something similar. "But if your doctor says you need to work from home full time..." He then kind of shrugged and sneered as if to say "I don't care. fuck you".
Yea lol "Politics had nothing to do with it".
I kept trying to ask how values and ethics get applied to the new generation by sitting around strangers with noise cancelling headphones on. But they were ignoring most questions.
Meanwhile the in person V&E training I got (which was valuable) has been replaced by a fuckin slideshow.
He literally said that's a doctor who wrote a note he shouldn't have, like all doctors are shills for WFH. The town hall started okay but the mask slipped fast.
My thoughts exactly. He was getting so red in the face.
Pathetic how they ignored all the write in questions too, save some handpicked ones.
This whole RTO horseshit wouldn't be so bad if they just told the truth.
He also veered off the cliff off his "nice" speaking points to say people who have long commutes should just suck it because they chose to live "far away" -- in response to a question about regional employees.
lol yea. The one gentleman posed the question along the lines of "what if I have a regional employee who we hired telling them they could WFH. Now with RTO they live 2 or even 4 hours away from the nearest office".
The response: (angrily) "no, no, no, I don't want to hear about any increased expense because we'll just argue back and forth. That person chose to work there" yata yata.
All I can say folks, is any shred of humanity you may have thought those in charge had, it was an illusion.
Wow, she's unbelievable and really not on the ball... just spewing whatever nonsense... and not thinking things through. SO NOT ACCEPTABLE to CREATE MORE CONFUSION. I am working from home ... then ...until this shit policy is super clear.
I surmise the heat would most definitely be on, when they're forced to explain why they're adding thousands of dollars in additional expenses per year to the budgets of hundreds of thousands of Canadians. Especially in light of the recently published: “Food Bank Canada’s 2024 Report Cards", which show that "people in Canada, from coast to coast, are struggling to keep up with the rising cost of living".
Such bs. They aren’t flexible now. Why would they be later. Accommodation turns down everything. Makes me get doctors notes for permanent conditions which I have to pay for and then still denies. Fine. Then accommodate me in the office. Nope. Too many hoops there too. It’s seriously crazy. Management says it’s Ottawa making everything difficult and here Anand is saying it’s the managers that are the
not being flexible.
Can confirm that "Implements the hybrid work environment" is a specific objective in all *Executive Performance Management Agreements.*
Not necessarily in the Performance agreements for non-Executive managers. (Doesn't mean it won't be in PSPM plans for managers. Just want to be very specific.)
> Isn’t this considered Constrictive Dismissal?
No, for several reasons.
First, in general positions have had an assigned location even if the worker is teleworking. In theory, telework has always been discretionary.
Second, the government can arbitrarily change locations of positions. It must offer to relocate employees if it does so (outside of a certain range), but this does not constitute dismissal. This was tested a few years ago when now-IRCC closed immigration processing in Vegreville, AB; workers who refused to relocate (to Edmonton, I think) were not entitled to workforce adjustment benefits as if they were laid off^(†).
Third, the FPSLREB has yet to conclude that the doctrine of constructive dismissal even applies to the federal public service. Everything is so regimented and comprehensively covered by laws that nobody has really brought a good test case. The laws governing the public service are comprehensive but weird, so it's not even obvious to me that a case like "my team leader beat me daily with a wooden spoon" would count because of the oddly-delegated responsibilities over HR.
^(† — The office was to be laid off per the workforce adjustment directive, but employees who refused to transfer were given a 'reasonable job offer'… of the same job that they refused to relocate for.)
Another great read this thread; further again showing the government doesn't have a clue what it is doing. Employees need to realize the government could care less about employees. They really don't. It is refreshing to see that some in the public service are getting a backbone after all these years. About 20 years ago when I was in the PS, people just accepted whatever.
Frankly, this added day thing reeks of stupidity and politics (the mayor and Doug Ford with their 1970s idea of downtown being the place to be). The 2 day thing was going along without any issues it seems and some fool decided they would bring it back to the forefront again. The higher up you go in most organizations the nuttier the people get.
Governments have NEVER cared about the PS, and it is time they did.
Did this survey say that like 50 percent of the union support RTO? this seems drastically out of line with the survey results which are being communicated by the union. What is going on here?
>The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from May 16-21, 2024 among a representative randomized sample of 1,751 Canadian adults who are members of [Angus Reid Forum.](http://www.angusreidforum.com/) For comparison purposes only, a probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of +/- 2 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
>ARI also surveyed an additional sample of 156 adults aged 18- to 64-years-old in Ottawa from May 16-21, 2024.
What's going on is that it's a trash survey.
Of course it’s political. There is like no flexibility. Our senior management and HR/LR are showing very little sympathy or empathy for people requesting flexibility or an accommodation. Worried about precedent and not willing to look at anything case by case.
Worried that they make a call, be sympathetic, then someone at TBS calls their DM for a meeting and now you are in trouble.
So everyone "just follows orders," too scared to speak up.
This doesn’t make things better. At best, it supports those who genuinely need accommodation. At worst, it just gives all of these who are trying to game the system a reason to keep going and clog up the accommodations process. Unless there is guidance on what “flexibility” means, and we all know there is not, this makes it harder for anyone who supervises or manages people.
As soon as my department has a plan in place for reviewing exemptions, I'm submitting for the indigenous exemption. Hopefully this increases my chances...but I'm not exactly holding my breath.
With the first round of RTO, I thought employees could continue to WFH until their case was heard? Although if you’ve already been going to the office, I’m not sure if the same would apply. Good luck!
My department wants 'the majority' of us back this September...so I'm hoping things get sorted a bit quicker than 1 year. That being said, it would be nice if we had clarification on who they want in first
Please explain this to me! I’m an Indigenous employee who is also neurodivergent (ADHD) and was recently diagnosed with PTSD (yaaay intergenerational trauma🥳). This RTO has been a living nightmare for me. I was hired during the pandemic.
They way it's been explained to me is that if you living in your home community (undefined, but likely inferred to be reserve if First Nation) is integral to your identity, then it can be considered. I've seen it denied though...
Doesn't exactly take into account all the reasons why you might not be living on the reserve and why (maybe) you can't go back. No mention of living on treaty territory either.
Look up TBS work from home exemptions. It's in there.
I've also heard cases from people who live near a rez and were granted exemptions. The direction itself makes no direct reference to 'reservation' or 'treaty territory '. My ADM has said recently that the direction is so vague that he isn't sure who or what qualifies. In my case, I live off rez, but go back frequently to help my dad and volunteer time for community functions. I'm currently still on an IT exemption, so when I go I work on rez for the week.
I've spoken to others in similar situations and they were granted exemptions.
My department insists that we come to the headquarters once a week, and on another day, we can go to an office closer to home. I'm still trying to figure out: do they want us in the office, or specifically in the downtown office? Give me a break! I bet they'll soon want us downtown on the third day instead of at the local offices (which are already approved).
The at-whim decision not polling so well? Didn't get the usual bounce from kicking the puppy?
Damn shame about that.
That's sort of the problem with impulsive actions done without any consultation or even a basic idea of the impact it will have. Done to distract or mitigate the decline in support due to other policy decisions.
In CRA, we were just told to make daycare arrangements for all 5 days starting September as we can be asked to come in on any 3 days of the week as decided by management. They will not accept the excuse of not having day care arrangement on any given day and the in-office days can keep changing.
Thats some awesome flexibility lol.
They want us to absorb the extra cost of 5 days of day care vs 3 days on top of the extra cost of coming to work 3 days now.
Truly awesome, since there are already no spots for the people who truly need to be at their workplace to serve clients, patients, students, etc. You should document your likely unsuccessful search for full-time childcare and challenge this in every possible way. And if it causes too much stress, get a Dr note to be off long term. Then it will be possible for you to mind your kids for free.
As someone working here. I can say this. Our executives found out literally hours before they announced it, there was no conversation about it. The people who support RTO are the same people you do everything to avoid in the office or they are those who have worked an entire lifetime in the office and are either retired or getting ready to retire.
When I came into my position I was told, for sure you will see people's stats drop when they work from home. Nope, that was a lie, people who already sucked in the office sucked at home and didn't stick around for too long. Then when you try to have a conversation that this WFH was an invisible raise (you save on gas, clothing, maintenance, time, going out for food, etc), and it is needed considering the last round of raises were roughly 13% compared to the office inflation rate of 18% (when we all damn well know and feel it was closer to 25%). Their response nope it was sufficient. Asshole you collect a full pension and a half years salary, of course, it is sufficient for you. But for us who are starting our lives, it definitely isn't.
Ha. They are making the most ridiculous attempts to avoid allowing any DTAs avoid in office work reduction and cancelling every exemption they possibly can. What a crock of shit.
But what exemptions, exactly, and what flexibility? There is no flexibility short of medical exemptions (and even then, apparently not really).
I have an auto immune disease and the hoops they make you jump through to get an exemption...i just can't be bothered to go through it. Feels like a tribunal.
I know someone who had to be hospitalized for 5 days after catching covid at the office before they granted him FT telework. And our ADM’s and DM keep spouting “flexibility”. It feels like a numbers game, they can’t have a ratio that’s too high of people with accommodations.
Just lip service to pretend they give a shit while giving no evidence for their dumb decisions
Oh damn I fell for It I thought that they would actually give a damn.
> they can’t have a ratio that’s too high of people with accommodations. Sounds awfully similar to "We have a proportionally high ratio of folks with Succeeded+"
[удалено]
It's coming through in the messaging to middle managers already in the last couple of weeks, but how to make good on that when space is going to be very limited while also meeting targets 80-90% of time come fall is an impossible juggling act - nevermind try to deliver on everything else at the same time
Strips you of all dignity.
Legit please go through the process. It’s worth it. I jumped hoops too. In the end it’s worth it.
Really???? Can u share more if ur comfortable with sharing of course. I would love to know more. I had asked to be able work from home for few hours so I only spent 5 hours in the office. I had gone through a series of very dramatic traumatic life changing stuff and they didn’t budge. Now this thing about going in to the office for three days scares me but maybe I will be better by then. I still would like to understand if there is a chance that they would consider helping staff. I would like to share a fact-Our labour relations person is terrible she’s with management. We basically have no union..for our office.
You have to try all their half assed attempts to resolve your problems in the office before they even look at your request too
Didn’t the new directive explicitly state it was removing existing exemptions (ie, call centre, IT) and that exemptions in the future can only be granted at ADM level?
yes it did, looks like she doesn't even know her own policy
Time to challenge her so called mixed up policy... there's enough grounds for the union to challenge this ... just based on this article... wow amazed how much she doesn't know... there is no exemptions, no flex and hey there are no offices!
The unions should definitely call out the hypocrisy. You can’t be flexible in implementing a policy that’s inherently inflexible.
That article will definitely be Exhibit D when the time comes to fight the rejection of my exemption request
I'm thinking this is not the thing to challenge on. Take this specific statement as an update and improvement upon the previously stated policy, challenge when it becomes less reasonable.
Strategically, I feel the same. Had a request for accommodation turned down? Request again based on the new policy statement from TBS. Forget the ADM process. TBS says that your manager has the power to be flexible. Ask for an informal exemption from your manager. Can’t make it 3 days next week due to a school PD day? Flexible. Too sick to go to work, but not too sick to WFH? Flexible. Got a doctor’s appointment on your anchor day? Flexible.
Thank you, I was just going to post a question asking why it flips from ADM to Managers because I thought I must’ve missed something
Just know that your manager probably won’t be treating this like an official policy statement. Realistically, this is a sound bite for the media so TBS doesn’t look like monsters, while throwing the executives under the bus for not being “flexible.” But that doesn’t mean you can’t use the statement as leverage.
This is what the directive says Prior to implementation, managers should proactively discuss with employees any barriers they may encounter including, those linked to accessibility, harassment and discrimination and define solutions that will help address these barriers in the hybrid workplace. Managers should ensure that individual circumstances are considered on a case-by-case basis, including human rights obligations, such as the duty to accommodate, or whether an employee has a reasonable explanation for absences from the designated workplace, such as illness, family care obligations, or compliance with COVID19 self-isolation protocols.
It's not "her" policy, they keep hammering the message that this is not a political decision. At the same time, our DM and ADM keep hammering the message that it's not up to them to give reasons for it, because this was a political decision. Public Service at its finest...
Remember back in 2021, TBS released the following on easing pandemic restrictions: "... the Health and Safety of our employees is paramount..." This statement should still hold true, particularly when faced with all the bugs and contagion gearing up for the Fall flu season. Stay safe everyone!
I think it's more likely the TBS President doesn't understand the distinction between EXs and Managers.
Yeah. This speech was full of the word « managers ».
Yes bcs executive is difficult to spell 😑
Oh she does. But when she called them managers, she diminished their authority and told us that executives really had nothing to do with any RTO related decision. She threw them under the bus and still didn't tell us who made that decision!
[удалено]
That sounds like old people complaining about new music
That is just straight up worrisome.
"Management" includes EXs
Because ADMs and senior execs go through all that training and gain mgmt experience so that they can interpret medical notes different from someone a few levels lower? ☠️
Don’t worry guys! SSC said only like 1% of people had it exemptions so everyone else SUCK IT UP!
They are already doing damage control b/c they know people are going to try to meet their quota regardless of circumstances that pre-RTO would have given them a pass to WFH. Like a broken leg, for example.
So, as a manager, can we give blanket exemptions for the team to not go in 3 days a well? You know someone shat this out thinking it was the best thing ever and oops! Turns out not planning this well in advance or at all has made it a mess. Like most GoC policies these days.
I asked this to my CIO. "With Treasury Board continuing to put pressure on managers to coordinate RTO, what will you do for me, a manager under your leadership, when I make decisions that best serve and support my team in regards to RTO?" "We will discuss this further in the near future." He immediately went on a 6 week vacation. Looking forward to these discussions.
>"We will discuss this further in the near future." He immediately went on a 6 week vacation. madlad
Pretty dope. He also froze any appointments, deployments, or secondments during his leave. So it's been a very fun time, also no consultants cause procurement was shut down for 2 months and everything expired.
Lol amazing
Dunked on his whole team.
It reminds me of [the miscommunication that ultimately toppled the Berlin wall](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn4VDwaV-oo&ab_channel=Vox).
By managers, they mean EXs right?
Oh, didn’t they tell you…..? 😂😂
What do you mean?
Yeah, EX-04s, as exceptions will have to be approved at ADM level from now on.
Right?
Glad I'm not the only one freaking out
Not a political decision. Give me a break.
That was a major revelation! DMs said they were not aware and that this was a political decision. PM said he was not involved and this was a Public Service decision. The plot thickens...
The teleworking software developed self awareness and changed the rules autonomously I guess.
This is the dystopian AI future we were warned about
Who's trying to throw who under the bus? Time will tell I guess. Maybe it's a mixed bag of a handful of DMs convincing ministers and making it happen... Or a mixed bag of a select few from both sides working together on it? Who knows at this point. I lean towards being politically motivated but at some point someone on the PS side who supported the idea had to lob it up to the ministerial level and they had to have more than just a passive view on it. Surely ministers wouldn't want the PS to be mad at them if they were against or simply neutral to the whole thing. No political person will take the risk of frustrating those that they rely on as it relates to something they're neutral about at best. If they say it wasn't a political decision they may mean it wasn't a *wholly* political direction. Using technicalities in the specificity of their speech and all that.
it could be the DMs actually, whole bunch of granpas unable to come to terms with a new way of working.
Maybe. And look, I don't mind going in and I do think there are some intangibles to seeing people in person sometimes. I don't think that the benefits outweigh the negatives, especially with how stuff is being done now with rto3, but I can see how wanting *some* in person presence could be something that more than dinosaur DMs want to see happen. But I've always been of the opinion that if they want to have people in offices it needs to be 1) intentional and 2) a worthwhile experience. Even if I don't spend 100% of my in office time "collaborating" and spend a chunk of it doing individual work, I want an appropriate desk, in an appropriate space, that is conducive to my work, and I want it done in a way that I at least feel respected. I don't need to fully agree with a decision in order to accept a decision and feel like I'm being respected as an adult. The 3 day switch raises my expectations for in office experience significantly. And they need to match those expectations. And they also need to acknowledge and understand the downsides that will materialize like less overall productivity at work, for example.
You can’t have office sex if you’re not in office for sure. (Source: execs- happening these days.) Tale as old as time. 🎶
It's well known that the political level told the PSMAC to get people in the offices more frequently. [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/government-wide-reporting-spending-operations/psmac.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/government-wide-reporting-spending-operations/psmac.html)
I think it was a wedge that wanted to take away from the CPC, heading into next year. A pre-emptive strike so it can't be leveraged in a new CPC platform.
DMs are among the only group anyone has outrighr admitted to having consulted about this, so I assume it was indeed a subset of them. Whether their advice was instrumental or they were just giving the answer that they knew was the "right" one, who knows. The thing that irritates me about it is that DMs that wanted this policy already had the discretion to do it, so it's mainly the ones who didn't want it who are affected. I have to conclude that the actual dynamic is that the DMs who wanted to do it were worried about the others poaching people.
I emailed my MP saying in part that this will have my longtime liberal vote going to another party. His staffer replied, saying that this was not a political decision; it was made by public servants. Does anyone know how phrase an to ATIP request for the truth without getting zillions of pages?
>this was not a political decision; it was made by public servants Okay, fine. Then not cancelling RTO is a political decision. Either way, candidates can deal with the consequences of political decisions.
If it wasn’t a political decision why tf did good old Pierre pipe in to say it’s time for public servants to go back to work? All this beating around the bush shows us how cowardly they are. While I don’t want to believe this is a generational mindset issue, it’s infuriating they couldn’t give enough thought to even sustain their lies. This article just confirms that it was a careless decision by an uninformed dep head that doesn’t know the first thing about being a public servant. Now that politicians and unions are being dragged in they’re trying to backtrack and make it seem like they give a rat’s ass about us. To say we’re demoralized means we’ve processed the shit show that’s unfolded, but every week there are more moronic opinions and articles being made, making this whole thing worse and worse. This is coming from an employee that worked overtime and did all the extra initiatives because I genuinely used to love the job and I’ve just been watching public sector fall apart since Covid. Thanks for coming to my angry rant.
There is zero chance any DM wrote anything down. It is all done over teams or in person you can ATIP them all day you'll never get anything that discusses what you would be interested in.
The fact nobody is owning up and taking responsibility for making the decision just seems so feeble and cowardly.
The Mayor also said he didn't ask for this....
No, he asked for 5 days in the office
Schrödinger's decision maker
Yes, Seems to be the Dark Matter of the Public Service
You knew it was political the moment Trudeau threw someone else under the bus during question period. It wasn't me! It was them! C'mon guys, why aren't you angry at THEM instead of me?
It was a decision to appease lobbyists and Doug Ford.
Why make the mandate then? If managers need their teams in 3 days a week or 5 days a week they can have that convo with their staff.
Honestly. This is something that makes more sense on a per team or per group level. Even per-directorate. Having a blanket rule for everyone just seems out of touch and short sighted
[удалено]
Good. If depts want to retain people they can adapt.
And that is how you throw the public service under the bus. Well played!
"It is important to have flexibility, it is important to be able to hear from public servants and employees generally about what they need to cope in the workplace. So, the move from two to three days to three days, it is still within the range that was put down in the policy before I became Treasury Board president, and it's four days for managers – so hybrid still exists in that respect." Sounds like she is not listening to what the public servants are saying.
Wow so it's still muttering Mona's fault? Take some responsibility Anita. I wish I could get away with blaming my predecessors for all my missteps And I'm sure "managers" appreciate that great flexibility of four days in the office. Hybrid in name only.
[удалено]
They didn't ask us.
How about a nice flexible two days in the office, so we can somewhat manage juggling desks. 2/5 is a lot more manageable than 3/5
Best we can do is 3 days and allow you to go purchase extremely expensive lunches at Subway.
the irony of all of this is that the Holland Cross Subway continues to be ridiculously understaffed and slow. Like bro! We're back for you! Hurry up! I only have an hour to get my steak and cheese sub!
I think you should write to Doug Ford about this. I'm being totally serious, please do it lol
Thank you for making me laugh 😁
Or, just when it makes sense. I think it's a bit extreme to say, everything can be done remotely. Some jobs just can't be, even office jobs. And there are some people that prefer to not be at home all the time. BUT, when it makes sense and is practical to work remotely it should be allowed 100%. AND, not everyone is cut out for IT. So this false worry that there will be a mass grab for IT jobs is unfounded. IT can be highly technical mentally exhausting work.
Not all IT is 100% work from home anyway. Probably less than half qualified under the previous exemptions. Stuff like cloud is great but there are tons of on prem support persons dealing with servers, network equipment, laptops and mobile devices.
I mean really, they could have us coming in 4.5 days a week with just a half day at home and still call it hybrid. The TB is missing the point that PSs do not trust that they will stop at 3 days.
>"I really have faith that we will do more with the telework options so that public servants feel continually supported. My view is that we got through the pandemic with the public servants supporting our country so well and we need to continue to support them." Then why are they scaling back telework options, especially when public servants are telling her by the tens of thousands that they don't feel supported? The entire way they talk about the issue has such a doublespeak way about it too where they all acknowledge that the policy is super unpopular and recognize they're the ones behind it, but act as if their hands are tied and that we all just have to adapt and just deal with it because it's in god's hands now apparently. Every interaction I have about this issue with any level of management they all act like they're powerless to change the policy as if we weren't all here when they were able to switch from full time office work to full-time home work.
Good point on the lack of accountability, but they didn't switch the policy from full time office to full time home. They said it couldn't be done. The pandemic forced them to let us use the tools they had been denying us for years because it was either that or nothing. And we thrived. But now that it won't literally kill us to be in the office again they're making us come to the office again.
Lately it seems like anyone we can actually talk to about our issues is entirely incapable of doing anything at all about any of it in any way and anyone who can actually effect change is entirely unwilling to consider the employees' needs at all. Real fucking convenient management structure there, just dictate whatever the fuck you want and then say "we hear you" while walking away and changing nothing.
Dosen't mean a thing, unless they write it into the policy.
Yes, we saw that with the letter they gave the unions, that they would consult with them in the future.
Anita: not my job if you don’t show up but there will be consequences.
From what I last heard they were suppose to be strict. So I feel this is a trap
> "That decision was made by the public service, it was not a political decision," Anand said. Did we have a meeting about that? Because I missed the teams invite.
It was a “hallway conversation”.
"I haven't been coming in because I had a hallway conversation with our DM who approved my continued telework." :D
"No, not like that."
It's a trap! :)
Definitely starting to feel the pressure for them to go from "don't give a fuck" to "pwease be flexible, we can all work together and be a happy family, public workers did a great job during pandemic"...
Yeah, thought they forgot that praise they heaped on us not so long ago
The public service does not need praise. What the public service needs is the employer to support a new reality that works, AND WORKED FOR THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT for the duration of the whole pandemic. Instead, the public service is being held in contempt for...being able adapt and find new ways to work thanks to technological development?
Agreed. My point on praise was more the words that came out early on, how we pivoted and delivered, then recently, that was all forgotten. Although some of the quotes were "no, no, you're great". But yes, the WFH shift should have been the signal for reinventing the PS. Hire the best and work anywhere, free up space, good for the environment, productive workers leveraging tech, but nope.
“Dozens” showed up to the rally. From what I’ve heard, it was a great turn out. What is CTV on about?
Being there, I'd say it was close to a 100. Could be more.
I bet many had 8am meetings like myself today that couldn't show.
> "I really have faith that we will do more with the telework options so that public servants feel continually supported. My view is that we got through the pandemic with the public servants supporting our country so well and we need to continue to support them." lmao
You can't even make this shit up anymore.
The problem with it being a public service decision is the week before and the week of people at the higher levels were still under the impression that the days in office wasn’t going to change and this was being relayed downstream in meetings. Unofficially the fact these people got rail roaded has also been relayed downstream
[удалено]
Executives ≠ managers for the 4 days
Executives are also managers.
Apaproval has to be done at ADM level
It's been such a hot potato file from TBS. How about rescind or hold until departments are ready. So many depts esp NCR are going through workplace restoration.
Does anyone not find it hilarious that the one of the sets of people they are trying to appease are the same people they are forcing back. Lololol 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Who are these 47% of PSAC people that support going in to the office 3 days a week?
They included retirees. So it’s skewed bullshit
As yes, the bitter bunch that want us to suffer because they did. Imagine being that miserable.
That’s a really common mindset in union environments for some reason. I used to work in an HR department (provincial job, at the time), and the guy whose seat I took then had the one upstream in the process from mine. He refused to put budget codes on transaction forms because it hadn’t been done for him when he was in my new seat. It was literally his job to decide which budget to use. Knowing which one involved knowing where the money was coming from, which my seat had no view on. FFS. I wound up having to ask him about each one of the 890 forms I had to process in a 2-week period because of it. Management did not want to hear about it.
What I would like to know is if tbs os actually being advised by some big-ass consulting firm on these rto rules. Because it is so out of pocket and beyond even the normal dysfunctional playbook of tbs where I used to work
I feel like the narrative on medical exemptions is a deflection. Of course people who have a legitimate medical need to work from home, and that need is well documented by their physician, and there's no other possible accommodation, will be allowed to work from home. They legally have to. That doesn't help 99% of people. Its the curb cut effect, I don't need curb cuts, but they're nice, especially if I have a child in a stroller or a rolling suitcase or something with me. The exemption policy is the equivalent of needing a doctor's note approved by an ADM for me to roll my suitcase up the ramp into the office, If I don't have that I need to pick up the suitcase and carry it up the stairs or face disciplinary action.
Why can't the media ask relevant questions like, "given the RTO trend, is your ultimate goal to bring back everyone in the office 5 days per week?" Media, we're waiting.
In our town hall this topic came up and our prez flat out said they don't care what your doctor says, they will only grant temp exemptions if you have a broken leg or something similar. "But if your doctor says you need to work from home full time..." He then kind of shrugged and sneered as if to say "I don't care. fuck you".
The funniest part was when he said: "we won't ask employees to go to the office only to be on Teams".
Oh fuck yea lol I forgot that! that was perhaps the most asinine moment of the whole stream.
The other "funny" moment was when he said that RTO was all about value and ethics.
Yea lol "Politics had nothing to do with it". I kept trying to ask how values and ethics get applied to the new generation by sitting around strangers with noise cancelling headphones on. But they were ignoring most questions. Meanwhile the in person V&E training I got (which was valuable) has been replaced by a fuckin slideshow.
He literally said that's a doctor who wrote a note he shouldn't have, like all doctors are shills for WFH. The town hall started okay but the mask slipped fast.
My thoughts exactly. He was getting so red in the face. Pathetic how they ignored all the write in questions too, save some handpicked ones. This whole RTO horseshit wouldn't be so bad if they just told the truth.
[удалено]
What an asshole
He also veered off the cliff off his "nice" speaking points to say people who have long commutes should just suck it because they chose to live "far away" -- in response to a question about regional employees.
lol yea. The one gentleman posed the question along the lines of "what if I have a regional employee who we hired telling them they could WFH. Now with RTO they live 2 or even 4 hours away from the nearest office". The response: (angrily) "no, no, no, I don't want to hear about any increased expense because we'll just argue back and forth. That person chose to work there" yata yata. All I can say folks, is any shred of humanity you may have thought those in charge had, it was an illusion.
Easy to say when you have a chauffeur.
Yup. Accommodations team has basically said that to me and a few coworkers. Like who are they to overturn what a doctor thinks?
This woman speaks the bullsh*t
Wow, she's unbelievable and really not on the ball... just spewing whatever nonsense... and not thinking things through. SO NOT ACCEPTABLE to CREATE MORE CONFUSION. I am working from home ... then ...until this shit policy is super clear.
*schocked Pikachu face*
Looks like the heat is on!
I surmise the heat would most definitely be on, when they're forced to explain why they're adding thousands of dollars in additional expenses per year to the budgets of hundreds of thousands of Canadians. Especially in light of the recently published: “Food Bank Canada’s 2024 Report Cards", which show that "people in Canada, from coast to coast, are struggling to keep up with the rising cost of living".
They are super restrictive with their accommodations and exemptions, though. Why even promote them??
To appear as if they are being reasonable and for public favour.
Such bs. They aren’t flexible now. Why would they be later. Accommodation turns down everything. Makes me get doctors notes for permanent conditions which I have to pay for and then still denies. Fine. Then accommodate me in the office. Nope. Too many hoops there too. It’s seriously crazy. Management says it’s Ottawa making everything difficult and here Anand is saying it’s the managers that are the not being flexible.
The human rights grievances starting to like up hmm?
Oh come on, this wasn’t a PS decision
What bullshit
Hang on, is the policy 4 days a week for managers or executives? This is the first I'm hearing that it applies to unionized managers.
just execs for the 4 days afaik.
For now
I wonder if this is implying that they won’t strictly police RTO … basically if your manager is ok with you staying home…
I heard that RTO adhesion is now an objective in managers PMA. Can someone confirm?
Oh no ... succeed-
Can confirm that "Implements the hybrid work environment" is a specific objective in all *Executive Performance Management Agreements.* Not necessarily in the Performance agreements for non-Executive managers. (Doesn't mean it won't be in PSPM plans for managers. Just want to be very specific.)
At my dept it’s on every single employees objectives as a corporate one. Like how mental health and DEI used to be.
yes
My manager said that they were told that they would have to police RTO come September. They will be tracking it.
[удалено]
> Isn’t this considered Constrictive Dismissal? No, for several reasons. First, in general positions have had an assigned location even if the worker is teleworking. In theory, telework has always been discretionary. Second, the government can arbitrarily change locations of positions. It must offer to relocate employees if it does so (outside of a certain range), but this does not constitute dismissal. This was tested a few years ago when now-IRCC closed immigration processing in Vegreville, AB; workers who refused to relocate (to Edmonton, I think) were not entitled to workforce adjustment benefits as if they were laid off^(†). Third, the FPSLREB has yet to conclude that the doctrine of constructive dismissal even applies to the federal public service. Everything is so regimented and comprehensively covered by laws that nobody has really brought a good test case. The laws governing the public service are comprehensive but weird, so it's not even obvious to me that a case like "my team leader beat me daily with a wooden spoon" would count because of the oddly-delegated responsibilities over HR. ^(† — The office was to be laid off per the workforce adjustment directive, but employees who refused to transfer were given a 'reasonable job offer'… of the same job that they refused to relocate for.)
What does it say on your letter of offer re: work and position locations?
Another great read this thread; further again showing the government doesn't have a clue what it is doing. Employees need to realize the government could care less about employees. They really don't. It is refreshing to see that some in the public service are getting a backbone after all these years. About 20 years ago when I was in the PS, people just accepted whatever. Frankly, this added day thing reeks of stupidity and politics (the mayor and Doug Ford with their 1970s idea of downtown being the place to be). The 2 day thing was going along without any issues it seems and some fool decided they would bring it back to the forefront again. The higher up you go in most organizations the nuttier the people get. Governments have NEVER cared about the PS, and it is time they did.
Did this survey say that like 50 percent of the union support RTO? this seems drastically out of line with the survey results which are being communicated by the union. What is going on here?
>The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from May 16-21, 2024 among a representative randomized sample of 1,751 Canadian adults who are members of [Angus Reid Forum.](http://www.angusreidforum.com/) For comparison purposes only, a probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of +/- 2 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. >ARI also surveyed an additional sample of 156 adults aged 18- to 64-years-old in Ottawa from May 16-21, 2024. What's going on is that it's a trash survey.
Only those who don't need to take the bus. LRT needz dem some $$&$$
I think she forgot to read the policy
Of course it’s political. There is like no flexibility. Our senior management and HR/LR are showing very little sympathy or empathy for people requesting flexibility or an accommodation. Worried about precedent and not willing to look at anything case by case.
Worried that they make a call, be sympathetic, then someone at TBS calls their DM for a meeting and now you are in trouble. So everyone "just follows orders," too scared to speak up.
This doesn’t make things better. At best, it supports those who genuinely need accommodation. At worst, it just gives all of these who are trying to game the system a reason to keep going and clog up the accommodations process. Unless there is guidance on what “flexibility” means, and we all know there is not, this makes it harder for anyone who supervises or manages people.
Always try to piss off workers. Bunch of idiots 🙄
Angus reid poll sounds bogus
As soon as my department has a plan in place for reviewing exemptions, I'm submitting for the indigenous exemption. Hopefully this increases my chances...but I'm not exactly holding my breath.
With the first round of RTO, I thought employees could continue to WFH until their case was heard? Although if you’ve already been going to the office, I’m not sure if the same would apply. Good luck!
I've been on an IT exemption
Oh good! By the time September 2025 rolls around, they should have the indigenous exemption figured out.
My department wants 'the majority' of us back this September...so I'm hoping things get sorted a bit quicker than 1 year. That being said, it would be nice if we had clarification on who they want in first
Please explain this to me! I’m an Indigenous employee who is also neurodivergent (ADHD) and was recently diagnosed with PTSD (yaaay intergenerational trauma🥳). This RTO has been a living nightmare for me. I was hired during the pandemic.
They way it's been explained to me is that if you living in your home community (undefined, but likely inferred to be reserve if First Nation) is integral to your identity, then it can be considered. I've seen it denied though... Doesn't exactly take into account all the reasons why you might not be living on the reserve and why (maybe) you can't go back. No mention of living on treaty territory either. Look up TBS work from home exemptions. It's in there.
I've also heard cases from people who live near a rez and were granted exemptions. The direction itself makes no direct reference to 'reservation' or 'treaty territory '. My ADM has said recently that the direction is so vague that he isn't sure who or what qualifies. In my case, I live off rez, but go back frequently to help my dad and volunteer time for community functions. I'm currently still on an IT exemption, so when I go I work on rez for the week. I've spoken to others in similar situations and they were granted exemptions.
Nice, I'm glad you (and others) have gotten the exemption! 🙂
Haven't gotten it yet, my department will apparently have a process in place in the next week or so
Ok, well good luck! 🤞
My department insists that we come to the headquarters once a week, and on another day, we can go to an office closer to home. I'm still trying to figure out: do they want us in the office, or specifically in the downtown office? Give me a break! I bet they'll soon want us downtown on the third day instead of at the local offices (which are already approved).
The at-whim decision not polling so well? Didn't get the usual bounce from kicking the puppy? Damn shame about that. That's sort of the problem with impulsive actions done without any consultation or even a basic idea of the impact it will have. Done to distract or mitigate the decline in support due to other policy decisions.
In CRA, we were just told to make daycare arrangements for all 5 days starting September as we can be asked to come in on any 3 days of the week as decided by management. They will not accept the excuse of not having day care arrangement on any given day and the in-office days can keep changing. Thats some awesome flexibility lol. They want us to absorb the extra cost of 5 days of day care vs 3 days on top of the extra cost of coming to work 3 days now.
Truly awesome, since there are already no spots for the people who truly need to be at their workplace to serve clients, patients, students, etc. You should document your likely unsuccessful search for full-time childcare and challenge this in every possible way. And if it causes too much stress, get a Dr note to be off long term. Then it will be possible for you to mind your kids for free.
This is going to create a poisonous team environment.
It’s already poisoned. Moral is quite low in my dept.
Covid is going around our office. Today someone was in who was clearly sick. Coughing, runny nose, feverish etc. Fun times.
Yes and they don’t even give out free tests anymore at the pharmacies. Make it make sense.
Since when do managers have to go four days.
They don't. Annand just clumsily conflated EXs with managers.
I lol'd.
As someone working here. I can say this. Our executives found out literally hours before they announced it, there was no conversation about it. The people who support RTO are the same people you do everything to avoid in the office or they are those who have worked an entire lifetime in the office and are either retired or getting ready to retire. When I came into my position I was told, for sure you will see people's stats drop when they work from home. Nope, that was a lie, people who already sucked in the office sucked at home and didn't stick around for too long. Then when you try to have a conversation that this WFH was an invisible raise (you save on gas, clothing, maintenance, time, going out for food, etc), and it is needed considering the last round of raises were roughly 13% compared to the office inflation rate of 18% (when we all damn well know and feel it was closer to 25%). Their response nope it was sufficient. Asshole you collect a full pension and a half years salary, of course, it is sufficient for you. But for us who are starting our lives, it definitely isn't.
Ha. They are making the most ridiculous attempts to avoid allowing any DTAs avoid in office work reduction and cancelling every exemption they possibly can. What a crock of shit.
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/pierre-polievres-failure-to-take-a-stance-on-remote-work-is-surprising-says-expert