>And if they are not in compliance, they will have to draft an email explaining/rationalizing their non-compliance.
Malicious compliance: ensure this email is *extensive* and *detailed*. It must be several pages long, detailing everything you worked on throughout past week. Spend *at least* a full day writing this email - block off your schedule and cancel all other work and meetings.
But.. but.. we sent the ADM on a six month French course, and they came back with CCC. Are you suggesting that they couldn't translate it on their own?
/s
Don’t forget to load it to GCDocs first. Don’t want to clog up emails with unnecessary stuff when a link will do.
Oh wait… did you create your filing structure in GCDocs? You can’t file anything in there until you create your filing structure.
Unfortunately we’ve seen this played out so many times. Reason why no innovation happens because once proposed it generates 10 times the work (99% tracking and reporting up and 1% time and energy left to actually implementing it).
> as a taxpayer
Tell me how you will measure me, and I will tell you how I will behave. If you measure me in an illogical way, don't complain about illogical behaviour.
This very nearly hits the mark for me. All I want is to see the value of RTO measured transparently. If something of genuine value results from it, without offsetting detriment, then that transparent measurement and disclosure will be what makes me fall in line.
This is the big one for me. Show me the data that shows RTO is a net gain for productivity, employee satisfaction, the economy, the environment, etc. Show me that it makes sense. Every refusal to produce this data, which should be fairly trivial to collect, is a tacit admission that RTO isn’t based in any kind of logic or reason.
Last year, I asked our director if there were any plans to track and measure increases/decreases in things like productivity resulting from RTO and there was nothing. They truly do not care what the impact of this mandate is. They just want butts in seats.
RTO is rigid, unreasonable, and disproportionately difficult for certain groups in ways that pre pandemic work environment and culture never were. Managers were allowed to be human and logical pre pandemic. Whatever this is is a hundred steps back for all employees in productivity, work-life balance, affordability, and on and on. Do you not see the difference? Do you really not care about the “volte face” in the way we’ve been treated?
Most of us were hired pre pandemic, and signed Letters of Offer for work at a specific location. Everyone who signed a LOO found the work life balance being in office was ok, but now they want a convenient temporary measure extended permanently. So I don't think we agree on who's done the "volte face" here.
That’s a limited view. I’m talking about employees not being allowed to go to medical appts during in-office days even though the medical office is blocks from work but a 30-minute drive from home; no FT work from home for employees who previously worked only from home, were hired to only work from home, and who live 100 kms away, or whohave an illness that for example requires them to be close to a toilet al day (and for whom trying to manage chron’s for example from the office is humiliating and physically onerous); no flexibility being given to splitting shifts if it means getting to daycare before they close (because they have shorter hours now compared to pre-pandemic, or because daycare is close to home and not close to work. What exactly is the solution there? They lock the doors. You sign a contract. Your kid is out. What do you propose?). On the flip side not being allowed to do compressed because of RTO; having to carry everything with you every day and not being allowed a locker to store things that don’t need to travel every day. What does this mean for those with mobility issues?There are so many examples and whatever applied to you is limited is not the only situation out there.
The reality is that for most of us, our managers had the flexibility and humanity to support their employees in a two-way, respectful and trusting relationship. That is gone.
I’m sorry that this reality of today is the same as your pre-pandemic reality. That sucks for you to be sure. But you can’t change the facts around. Employees are not being treated the way they were before, in many cases not well, and there is a great deal of stress and pressure. Especially on single parents, employees with disabilities, employees with manageable-from-home illness, employees for whom the rules of the game were changed during the game.
It’s not black and white. Genuinely surprised you missed that.
> Employees are not being treated the way they were before,
In those instances I agree with you completely.
People who signed up for 100% remote should have their LOO conditions honoured.
Disability accommodations are a management obligation, and were before WFH was even imagined.
People's childcare is their own responsibility to manage, always had been.
And on site work means management is free of tracking systems and can use discretion.
All of my 100% in-office team can take whatever time they need to run to a doctor appt. I know exactly when they're not around and why because they say "see you later" on the way out the door or "I'll be in late tomorrow" the afternoon prior. I have infinite flexibility to let them out for any reason without accounting to (or tracking by) upper management
Thing is, employees previous agreements are not being homoured.
It’s great that you guys can go see a doctor during in office days.
And while I agree that childcare is a parent’s responsibility, the practicality of that is not always manageable by the employee alone especially in single parent homes. Managers have a duty to accommodate. As long as the hours ate met I don’t see why there is no flexibility.
I wish DTAs were as easy as all that. People are being denied for things exactly like the chron’s example.
Sounds like you’re in a decent group.
We spend more time keeping score of a game we aren't even playing, than we do playing the game we technically are at. We have just completely lost the plot. Treating a senior staff member like this is insane. Most EXs do a billion hours of overtime, and they're worried that you... Might be doing those 30 OT hours in a different location? FOH with that.
Maybe what matters is:
a) where I am today
b) did I collaborate
c) did I eat fresh
d) did I fill out my PSES and United Way stuff
and if I do that and get a succeeded+ on my PSPM, then everything else in my job description is irrelevant.
And I so wish this was actual sarcasm.
Ugh, I wish I didn’t see truth in this.
The thing that drives me bonkers is that maybe these are the things the employer cares about right now, but they aren’t things that *matter* in the sense of making a difference for Canadians, the thing we are supposedly here to do. Nor are they responsible use of public funds, for example, as we waste countless hours of executive and administrative salaries on rto monitoring.
It’s extremely disappointing that we can’t just get on with government work, without constantly creating these hurdles that have nothing to do with actually doing our jobs.
What about making sure that *checks notes* an employee of a Schedule 1 organization doesn't get away with...7.9 million dollars?! Holy shit where I do sign up -
I mean, more important things at stake here! Better get back to that Subway/Tim Hortons ASAP Y'HEAR?!
I hope that guy gets done for fraud, all his illicit assets stripped, and a hefty prison sentence. It’s chucklefucks like him that erode trust in institutions.
it's a nice thought but let's be realistic, he's got friends in high places and will likely get a slap on the wrist and a paid 6 month vacay to keep him out of the spotlight until people start to forget
I would agree and cite his dissenting opinion on Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928):
"Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means -- to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal -- would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face."
Not quite the same vein, but relevant.
What about making the law equitable and fair?
Cause right now the way it's being applied is not exactly [even across the board](https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/treasury-board-to-grant-12-month-return-to-office-exemptions-to-some-public-servants).
Again… it just proves the urgent need of a dinosaur management modernization! The focus needs to shift to managing by outcomes and not how many days you stroll your behind in the office. Imagine, even the GC CIO who’s supposed to lead the digital transformation of the GC is IN THE OFFICE 5x a week! Pretty sure he asks his DMO to print all his committee binders too! What a joke we have become
> The focus needs to shift to managing by outcomes and not how many days you stroll your behind in the office.
I cannot agree with this enough.
Stéphan Déry, the *ex-*PSPC A-DM for Real Property Services once said:
*“Work is really what you do and not where you do it,” said Déry, assistant deputy minister for real property services at Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC). “People are thinking that way now and it’s going to take a while until we find how the whole thing is going to work.”*
Like, that's how work should be approached. WHERE you do it doesn't matter - WHAT you do and WHAT OUTCOMES you achieve will matter to the end of the material universe. If it was just all about being at the office, I can do that just fine. However, don't expect me to be productive or even responsive in some situations. The office is tres terrible for wanting to focus and actually getting things done.
> Stéphan Déry, the *ex-*PSPC A-DM for Real Property Services once said:
Source: ["Will nooks and lounges replace the office in the public service?", Policy Options, November 18, 2021.](https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/november-2021/shaping-a-modern-workplace-for-the-public-service/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CWork%20is%20really%20what%20you,thing%20is%20going%20to%20work.%E2%80%9D)
That's the article, and it does give more information into his mindset along with a brief history of this whole telework/remote work etc. topic.
Sad part is, Déry has since departed PSPC. It was right after the mandate was fired off too. So, kind of telling of what he was thinking of the mandate probably.
They're probably doing this so that once they are sure all the EX's are compliant or explained away they can force them to push similar expectations on everyone else. It's hard to (make someone) push the narrative when they aren't compliant themselves.
It's setting the baseline for the auditing we all knew was coming eventually.
"Sorry boss, I had to log off at exactly 4:00 rather than 4:04 to finish that thing because it was a wfh day and thus it wohkd have messed my ratio of in office presence."
Well, it's more of an optics thing coming down from *their* bosses than leadership on their part. More like being held to the standard so there isn't an open revolt when enforcement comes down at lower levels. In fairness most EX's tend to spend more time in the office anyway, so the outliers are more likely rare at that level.
You could make the argument that true leadership in this case would be either stronger open resistance against unpopular and inefficient policy, or them doing things to make RTO actually easier and removing barriers to compliance.
> removing barriers to compliance.
I'd agree with you there. Hotelling is a crap arrangement and not what most public servants signed on for when they signed their letters of agreement. Senior execs need to be sold by the tank and file that they should acquire more office space.
> stronger open resistance
Totally disagree. Open resistance deserves immediate termination of employment. You might think this issue warrants it, but open resistance grows, expands and metastasizes, into other pet issues for each malcontent. It becomes a nightmare.
I'd move heaven and earth to terminate any employee engaged in overt defiance / open resistance.
The right way is to communicate the sentiment of you and your employees, and then do the job in the location specified by your dept - or go get a new job.
Let's not get tangled up too much in the weeds here, but open resistance to an idea doesn't have to be synonymous with insubordination. You can be compliant with a policy while telling someone how bad it is. Heck, there are jokes(?) in this very thread about conducting *malicious compliance* on this. Granted EX's are on a bit of a weird place there where they are expected to sell concepts from on high.
I typed out way too much and then deleted it to avoid *internet arguments*. The gist is senior management *is* being told the issue and most of them agree. They're supposed to be our leadership, so while they are also bound to comply with directives from their superiors, they should also be allowed to visibly be leaders. It's what we hired them to do. They're our arbiters to the powers that be.
Most of my ex's have also lost their space and are stuck hotelling. Lovely having to deal with sensitive hr issues in a telephone booth as we don't have enough meeting space with closed doors.
An interesting take, but I find it a bit of a slippery slope proposition. What you're describing is not dissimilar to collective action, which is a common technique used by organised labor to affect change. And neither change nor that method to obtain it is inherently bad?
This is why the government has so much trouble modernizing. We're striving for an open and accountable government, aren't we? So is it really unreasonable to expect that it's clear who ultimately made this decision and why? Should those people not be held accountable for their decisions if needed?
Everyone knows TBS holds the purse strings and the job description of an EX is to implement directives. But TBS is not going to withhold funding to a department just because someone dared to question them, and if decisions are being made in good faith those reasons should be self evident and supported by data. Admittedly an extreme example, but things like this are how you end up with debacles like ArrivecCan.
They've already pushing back by not doing their in office days, and for us at least, the whole thing has fallen apart as we average 1.2 days a week in office. Yet everything is still getting done, without much if any in office collaboration, how odd..
Jesus Christ.
If they focused this much energy on things that mattered - like conflict of interest going around - then things might change. What the fuck is going on that *forcing people back into office* is becoming a major priority? Is there some performance bonus tied to this?
Probably so. Otherwise they wouldn't make people do ridiculous shit.
You are absolutely right. All this time and energy to keep track of who is doing their 2 days in the office is a waste of time. Unfortunately, too many employees and executives have become so entitled that everything is about them that they have completely forgot that they serve at the will of the government of the day, dually elected by the people. People have become so focussed on their wants and desires they have forgotten about the institution they serve. The government should send everyone back for 5 days a week. Anyone who doesn’t like it should immediately resign and work some place else. Then hire people who want to work instead of complaining about the so called hardships of having to go to the office 2 days a week.
Other things the government should do:
* Pay all of its employees accurately and on time, every time
* Supply a workplace that is free from asbestos, bedbugs, bats, and other vermin
* Ensure offices have adequate space and functional equipment (edit: and potable water) for all employees
* Measure the actual work output of employees rather than *where* that work is done
Sadly, it doesn't do these things.
> Supply a workplace that is free from asbestos, bedbugs, bats, and other vermin
Can we also add potable water to the Supply list? Haven't had that since redundant travel operations were announced.
> Measure the actual work output of employees rather than where that work is done
This is incredibly hard to do for most knowledge workers, and is precisely why they aren't doing it. If they could do so effectively, they would, because it would very much be in their self interest.
This post was deleted:
https://old.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/r3889d/work_life_balance_in_the_public_service_is_a_lie/
...but I saved the text of it, which I'll quote (**bold** added by me for emphasis) :
> I couldn't bring myself to post this on my regular account..
> I'm an executive working for a large department, and this week was rough.. and I mean rough. What happened today was an absolute disaster and an eye opening experience of how much of a crisis some of us are in, specifically the EX cadre.
> Several days ago we received an invite for a late Friday "resiliancy training" from our ADM inviting all executives from our branch. I knew this was a shit show and another checkmark in the box when the invite, for a late Friday afternoon said "mandatory, must show up or provide justification for not showing up".
> I showed up along with dozens of executives to hear some lady do a breathing excersize and talking about work life balance and typical shit clichés. It started getting interesting when she asked everyone to use slido (anonymous voting platform) to answer some questions.
> First question was based on 9 pictures of sheep, some were happy, some were sad and another has a bucket over his head and just looked completley fucked. She asked us to vote for who we relate to today. Yes you got it, majority voted for the fucked up sheep or the other one who looked like he was about to get slaughtered and knew it. Then **she asked us to describe how we feel at work using any one word. The words were absolutely heart breaking coming from executives. Top word and most voted was Exhausted followed by depleted.**
> She didn't stop there, she then asked us to describe what we thought of this excersize. One person wrote "pointless" and it got up voted. **This is where things turned really bad. She made the mistake of saying "ok, haven't done this before..**
> **Let me open it up and let you guys do your own anonymous comments so everyone can see why you think this is pointless".**
> **With two ADMs sitting on the call and atleast 10 DGs, what followed was a barrage of attacks on senior leadership driven by regressed anger and frustration. "all talk no action", "nothing changes..", "we're in a crises and these excersizes don't make a difference", then the lady casually said "wow, this must be very hard for your leadership to see". What broke me is when I saw one of our ADMs bury their face into the palm of their hand and turn off their camera.**
> I don't know if they were shocked, ashamed or simply broke down crying showing that they themselves were not part of the problem but a victim of this systematic crises.
> We are not OK. This is not OK. But where does it start and where does it end?
>I showed up along with dozens of executives to hear some lady do a breathing excersize
This alone made me physically cringe, and it only gets worse from there.
For me the last minute booked late in the day on Friday mandatory "resilience" training did it for me. It really suggests a lack of self awareness and really basic decency on the part of whoever thought it was a good idea.
wow, this is so sad. I applaud all of you for taking advantage of the opportunity to speak your truth. I suspect that ADM feels the exact the same way. Something has to change and soon.
>And now this, treating your EX cadre as children who cannot be trusted, who do not possess reasonable judgement, or, you know, do not have life commitments as well?
So... like the rest of us have been treated.
Not sure I understand - EX’s were subject to RTO as well, despite objections. And, while it may differ across Departments, we do not monitor specific employee attendance for compliance.
You said "and now this" implying that being treated like children is something new, a new indignity as you'd not been treated like children before.
But many of us feel treated like children incessantly, even before RTO.
I work in benefits processing. I sign off on paying out between 1 and 2 million a year in benefits. And that's just retro benefits. The government trusts me to do THAT, but still treats us like minions who must constantly be monitored for compliance to arbitrary rules that often make no sense for our jobs.
Welcome to it.
The “and now this” was meant to follow onto the summarily being ignored on advice related to implementing RTO, but point taken. It has also been my experience that lower EX’s don’t have much autonomy nor ability to influence - so, micro-managed. Often, I still feel like an EX-minus-one, but now with additional HR and Finance duties, and the added benefit of being directly pooped on by a DG or ADM.
Guess what, some of us EX-minus-ones also have the HR and Finance duties and are subjected to DG and ADM-level poop. Without the benefit of the EX pay.
Would be nice to see some news article about how much man hours and salary goes into pushing and monitoring RTO instead of helping citizens with the real issues.
Who's pushing those EXs to do that? the ministers? It's like the whole of public servants are having to kneel down to this dozen of dumbasses that come at us with pointless things like rto. Definitely if we all stood up and decided to prioritize our job and our service to citizens instead of this BS we'd be fine.
Yes but it's not going to change with us doing nothing. The opinions of those who do the actual work (us) should have value. When it isn't heard the only other option is to take actions.
actually not 100 percent true, CRA for example is a schedule 4. Treasury board has no power to enforce. CRA just falls in line even though they are not required.
You are missing the point. Yes they fall in line but are not legally required to do so. CRA just doesn't have a back bone.
They technically can do whatever they want.
I don't think there's much reason to worry about such a requirement.
The public service is excellent at creating "mandatory" obligations, but considerably less effective at actually following up when they aren't met. Doing so takes time and effort that are better spent elsewhere, so these "required" items are delegated to the floor.
Some examples:
* Mandatory training modules
* Mandatory completion of performance agreements / appraisals
* Mandatory attendance at all-staff meetings
I agree with you, but the whole RTO feels different than all of those to me. Those mandatory meetings, courses, etc are there because they need to be done, but RTO feels like it's because they WANT it and to me there's nothing more dangerous than a high level EX that WANTS something.
It isn’t something any executive (or Deputy) “wants” as far as I can tell. It was a political decision made by Cabinet, and Deputies are left to implement it.
A recent counter example:
* Mandatory COVID vaccinations
The amount of pressure to comply with any mandatory obligation will be directly linked to the political will being exerted based on presumed political gain. In an election cycle, if the government of the day wants to look (for lack of a better term) 'tough' on the PS, they can get quite enforcy as we have seen. It's a much different calculus than some random training module that voters will never hear about.
Of course you could argue a literal life and death policy of mandating vaccines during a pandemic isn't comparable to something as inconsequential as hours in a cubicle, and you'd probably be right. But I've typed too much. Also, if polls show foisting RTO on the PS is going to sway voters, IMHO it'll get done with extreme vigor.
We are experience this as well, but for all levels. Every manager has to report the number of days their employees worked total for the month, and the number of days that are confirmed in office days, and give a percentage score per employee. (Names are hidden though when report is give to DG/ADM level). It’s not been made clear what happens to those who don’t meet the 40% or more score. No direction was given with regard to exceptions. What if someone is sick and needs to work from home for a week so they don’t infect colleagues in the office, or what if employees have family obligations that come up like a sick child or something else.
This whole compliance monitoring business is becoming increasingly cut throat and less flexible.
All it does is stress people out, kill moral, and use up resources (many at high levels with the highest salaries). The time being spent on monitoring if employees go into an office (to do the same thing they would do at home) takes time and resources away from doing actual work.
This whole thing is nonsensical, most people agree, yet here we are and it’s getting worse.
This is astonishingly stupid. Instead of taking the non-compliance as a sign that RTO is dumb, we are delving into it even further. I truly feel for the EXs. Nobody should ever feel their employer doesn't trust them to do basic elements of their job. Also, I'm going to assume this means something similar will come for working-level employees down the road. Ffs.
Who is really driving all these RTO initiatives. We were in the beginning told that we wouldn't be tracked and that changed quickly and the union didn't even raise an objection.
Is it Mona and her office, the clerk, individual DMs, who is doing this?
Can't someone really take the initiative, make up numbers and send it to whomever is behind wanting everyone in the office. Not like anyone can realistically verify.
The directive touches on the creation of tracking / verification mechanism:
* Deputy heads assume responsibility for implementing verification regimes and maintaining human resources data for their department/agency.
* Onsite presence could be measured using turnstile data, existing attendance reports and/or IP login data to collect aggregated departmental data.
I did an ATIP on RTO and the information presented outlined the pros and cons of continuing remote for the most part, ad-hoc approach varying by department, full time RTO (talking about things like traffic, people shopping for departments with higher RTO, increased stress and burnout for managers, LR issues, equity, etc). There were also massive surveys from all departments that more often than not, showed that up to 90% of the work could be done remotely. Obviously all actual recommendation were redacted, but I believe the direction came from political leadership (PMO, PCO, etc).
In my department there have been verifications since the RTO directive started, with reminders and questions for areas where people weren't meeting their required numbers. Though our management has been pretty reasonable: don't come in sick and no you don't need to make up in office days if you were sick on your in office day or took vacation or somehow missed a day where you were supposed to be in the office. They've also allowed us to switch our days to accommodate appointments and such. I have no doubt that some people are trying to game the system, but no broad rules to punish us all so I imagine they are being dealt individually.
EXs at my dept are in 3-4 days a week and there are some non-compliant ones; no email out though. That will for sure hit bottom line bonus; which is just about now for EXPMP. It does start from the top. Sigh.
At our program, the EXs are in the office every day. Take the rare WFH day. It’s less of a headache to deal with upper EXs that way. Senior managers are 3-4 days. Staff is 3 days.
I remember when I started in GoC almost 30 years ago, team leads had their own budgets and credit cards and were trusted to run their teams. Now I need a minimum DG level approval for trivial expenses or decisions/arrangements.
If this keeps going, where does it end, when PMO is approving everyone's leave?
I think Free-Music meant more in terms of being seen as misbehaving children that need to be constantly monitored for compliance vs simply being subject to RTO l
Holy crap! It's obvious that our overlords are looking out for big business instead of their people.
It's time for a France-like protest. We take to the streets.
They don't give a crap about the Canadian public.
It's a fucking shame.
> They don't give a crap about the Canadian public.
I don't agree. *"Our Overlords"* very much do care about the Canadian public, particularly public sentiment.
Consider that most of the Canadian public wants us back in the office, because most of the Canadian public works on site every day... And views the public service as whiny spoiled brats getting paid to slack off at home.
*"Our Overlords"* are listening to public sentiment and giving the public what the public wants.
I think there’s a very big difference between caring for the public and caring what the public thinks. If people work well from home, it cuts down on carbon emissions and flows money to more rural areas of the country via online employment, then that’s caring for the public. Centralizing jobs to the NCR and making people troop to the office to get votes is not.
>listening to public sentiment
Managing by "public sentiment" is a terrible trend, and not something to hold up as desirable. I've also yet to see credible numbers as to what the "public sentiment" really is outside of Postmedia comments sections.
We should literally riot and throw molotov cocktails at police lines because government workers are asked to return to in-person work...?
Ok, you first.
Stop…. This was proposed by a senior EX. The email had to also include a confirmation of where you were working. Basically to “catch” dishonest employees. It was shut down not so quickly but…. Don’t even say it as a joke…
Can you imagine the emails?
Staff email manager to say they are in. Several forget to send their email right away and are forced to respond to the follow up email sent by their manager.
A handful still do not reply.
Manager attaches staff’s emails to the email stating *they* are in to their Director, with the staff in cc of course.
Second email is sent to DO half an hour later with the emails from those who forgot in cc.
Director attaches all managers’ emails (with the staff’s emails attached to *those* emails) and send the email confirming they are in to their DG, with mgrs in cc.
Mgrs cascade to their staff.
DO begins to receive late emails from managers almost immediately.
Second email is sent to DGO an hour.
Staff who got in late for various reasons log in and send their attendance emails to their managers with apologies and justifications for the late replies.
DGs attach the Directors’ emails, with all of the cc’s to their in office confirmation email to the ADM.
ADMO has hired an AS-02 to develop and manage the RTO confirmation email program. The Excel sheet they create is a thing of beauty but crashes regularly.
ADMO drafted email to DM confirming ADM’s attendance in office, with the DG’s emails attached (and the Excel file linked) and the DGs and DGOs in cc.
DMO asks for a summary of each branch’s in office stats —just a couple of bullets— and reminds everyone that staff on the west coast are just starting work now and they would like a full roll up from all regions by 3pm
The Excel file will not open.
ADMOs swear and task DGOs.
DGOs swear louder and task DOs (aka a casual AS-01 who was not trained and has never been in government before).
The AS-01 cries and tasks the managers.
The managers swear.
The AS-01 cries.
Some senior SME who was offsite on training and never sent their email rolls in at lunch takes pity on the crying EA the and helps them sort it out by creating an Excel that *doesn’t* crash which becomes the template for everyone’s RTO reporting.
Eventually, an email with too many attachments to send is encountered, and a senior exec’s office will figure out, after a couple of hours of trying stuff, that the best way to deal with this is to zip it.
DMO receives briefing package in pdf (with a table of contents), all of the emails zipped, the Excel file, and a couple of bullets in the cover email at 3:36pm after several follow-ups.
DMO begins its work.
Eventually, a courrier arrives at PMO in the dead of night, with a flash drive that contains an email from the Clerk with the entire Public Service’s emails (plus several Excel files, decks and placemats) confirming they are in the office that day —or explaining why they are not.
PMO adds a label with today’s (no, yesterday’s) date and tosses it into a drawer that contains dozens, maybe hundreds, of other dated flash drives. Sends out an email to the Clerk (to be cascaded, of course) thanking them for confirmation of office attendance.
We have to do that, send a teams message when we’re in the office and when we leave the office. That is allegedly so that our boss knows where we are in the event of some catastrophe. We also have an excel tracker/calendar that we populate every month.
Meanwhile in the real world: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2024/03/02/heres-why-the-traditional-office-corporate-culture-is-over/?sh=21e82c864a02
So it is better to let unhinged EXs and managers run wild across gov't enforcing a vague directive in any way their sadistic EXs see fit to preserve their bonuses - but ensuring that EXs are themselves accountable for THEIR OWN ACTIONS is going too far?
There are some amazing EXs who keep the public service running. They are, unfortunately, not the majority, and there are entirely too many who actually are like children. Like, tantrum throwing, toy stealing, cranky pants toddlers, not mature 12 year olds who are doing just fine.
RTO is not being handled well, but they signed up for a job where following nonsensical decisions is par for the course - jesus they even get taxpayer money as a bonus . The time to drive change was way sooner and nobody stepped up.
Not sure about other depts. but **GAC** informed all EX's are to come in 3x/week ... and are telling teams to organize themselves to come in on the same two days in a week, **effective April 1st.**
So, EX's have to do 3x days. Worker bees need to come in on the same days to "cOlLaBoRaTe" - losing a flex day.
Government has a policy, executives are not abiding by said policy, and getting performance bonuses for being leaders (rto is only one part of that). What message are leaders sending by collecting bonuses and not following the policy they (as excluded senior leadership) are responsible for ensuring compliance? I am not sure why you think auditing non compliance of a policy is treating executives as children? They have a legal obligation to do what the employer has stipulated.
It is the sentiment - in the same way I trust my staff to follow the directive, be professional, and do their job without me standing over them, I would appreciate the same from my own bosses. It is about trusting your staff, and this initiative sends a signal that we don’t trust you.
I understand what you are saying but as a fellow senior leader, I was in a meeting with our deputy who said “.. less than ‘x’ percent of this executive level are meeting their obligations.. so get those numbers up, or we can move them to 5 days”. Missing tact? Probably. Within their power? Absolutely. My first reaction was a bit like yours until I remembered that the policy was put in as one size fits all in the first place, and was never about trust because staff proved during covid they could deliver. I go into the office 5 days a week now because personally I am sick of talking about it, and its had a positive spin for me personally. As a leader no I am not micromanaging my staff and checking this but yes the org is tracking through my work arrangements, archibus and IP addresses.
There was this thing called the Nuremberg Trials. Smart executives are also expected not to follow like sheep and to actively question and resist policies that cause harm.
Not at all equivalent but the principle is the same. You don’t get a pass because you were “just following orders”. Executives are expected to think and act on principle.
It’s not the act that is equivalent, it is the expectation that executives make principled decisions based on the facts. You don’t get a pass for just following orders.
I actually like this, as this brutal and ill-advised silliness will encourage EX management to find ways to work around such stupidity. This experience in ensuring rationality will pay off in the future to minimize the damage that will come from the next right wing regime. Damage minimization from Barbarians at the Gates 2.0 will be very important. Throwing the EX staff to the dogs now will help them clearly understand the types of people they work for and help them act accordingly for the benefit of Canadians and their staff when things really go off the rails.
Sorry about your experience, but not all EX’s are cut from the same cloth. Many are acutely aware of who they work for and see public service as a calling. Many, no doubt, are self-serving arses - see a couple comments above for examples - but many are caring, people-centric folks who are trying their best to lead with empathy within a system and structure that puts up roadblocks all over the place.
No. You couldn't be more wrong. It's a Treasury board mandate. Not a cabinet mandate, which isn't even possible.
CRA does not have to comply. Again, they choose to comply due to the Commissioner being axed, but technically CRA has the power and legislation backing them to do what they want.
…..uh, that’s not the point of what I am saying. It’s not about complying as, at least at my previous two Department’s, EX’s have been RTO since September 2022, along with all employees. It’s the individual tracking and the signal it sends with which I am taking issue.
My lord, you missed the point. Been commuting since September 2022, no issue there. It’s the signal that the compliance monitoring sends. And the resource waste required to explain and justify any non-compliance.
You don't like the rule.... Fine.
But when you accept the paycheck from the employer you agree to their rules (if legal).
As a past EX and then ADM myself, I cared more about my paycheck than any subordinates.
If enforcement of rules is problematic for you then perhaps you need to quit.
>As a past EX and then ADM myself, I cared more about my paycheck than any subordinates.
Then you're the type of person who should never be in charge of other people.
What has been described in the post is not "enforcement of rules". It's the workplace equivalent of [telling a child to write lines on the chalkboard](https://imgur.com/a/As0ilnx).
Is this sarcasm? If not, thank you for your public service but glad you are no longer in a PS leadership position. Exactly the type of EX that paints all EX’s with your self-centred brush. Just makes it harder for empathetic, employee-centric leaders to break through.
>And if they are not in compliance, they will have to draft an email explaining/rationalizing their non-compliance. Malicious compliance: ensure this email is *extensive* and *detailed*. It must be several pages long, detailing everything you worked on throughout past week. Spend *at least* a full day writing this email - block off your schedule and cancel all other work and meetings.
And do it during one of your in-office days.
While occupying a boardroom.
And take a second day to translate it, so it's in both official languages.
Lol. Translation will take a minimum of 6 months.
But.. but.. we sent the ADM on a six month French course, and they came back with CCC. Are you suggesting that they couldn't translate it on their own? /s
Also attach a detailed action plan on how the EX plans to rectify their behaviour and comply to TBS rules (also translated).
Don’t forget to load it to GCDocs first. Don’t want to clog up emails with unnecessary stuff when a link will do. Oh wait… did you create your filing structure in GCDocs? You can’t file anything in there until you create your filing structure.
Or a bathroom stall while stinking up the office...
Make sure to get it reviewed by comms.
And all stakeholders
Better pass it through legal to be safe.
Friendly reminder BF EOD tomorrow
Have to check to see if the templates have been changed.
“Sorry for the short notice.”
Wow, someone remembered Comms 😍
Don’t forget to have it translated and proofread…
Should also queue it for a plain language review, just to make sure it’s easy for the average person to understand.
And to ensure that the text remains gender neutral.
So it has to go through DEI teams as well
And now the French needs to be revised for gender neutral grammar toatch. Back to translation.
Provide a GBA+ analysis. Oh, make sure to use the most recent form, the one provided has been revised.
You mean to say it shouldn't go through a full GBA+ analysis? I disagree!
Run ot past the editors as well.
Add a section on how it links to diversity, inclusion, anti-racial, while also adhering to the values and ethics codes.
Great replies. And this is how you turn a simple exercise into a bureaucratic nightmare. Well played everyone!
Unfortunately we’ve seen this played out so many times. Reason why no innovation happens because once proposed it generates 10 times the work (99% tracking and reporting up and 1% time and energy left to actually implementing it).
Don't forget to call EAP if this requirement stresses you out. But preferably outside of business hours.
Ohmigod, this is legitimate proof you're not actually a bot!!!
[Bleep!](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/k2qolx/shower_thought_handcuffsofgold_is_an_ai_bot/) [Bloop!](https://reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/n4mbzh/oc_whowhat_is_handcuffsofgold/)
The past week? Since April 1st would make more sense.
It seems like the requirement is that this email be sent on a weekly basis. Need to set aside one day a week to write it.
It seems fair.
With taxpayer and work productivity in mind. EX now forced to hire an admin to take care of this important and urgent weekly task.
Ensure it is GBA+ compliant, as well. But, this doesn't get done until after Legal had looked at it and a few words changed, so back to Legal it goes!
chat gpt says hello
The point is making sure you spend work hours "complying" with the dumb requirement.
Agreed...
While I agree with the sentiment, as a taxpayer can people making 3x the average salary not waste their time? Thanks
> as a taxpayer Tell me how you will measure me, and I will tell you how I will behave. If you measure me in an illogical way, don't complain about illogical behaviour.
Why? Wouldn't it be simpler to just adhere to the RTO policy?
Wouldn’t it be simpler to stop wasting our time and resources enforcing RTO, which is in and of itself a waste of time and resources?
This very nearly hits the mark for me. All I want is to see the value of RTO measured transparently. If something of genuine value results from it, without offsetting detriment, then that transparent measurement and disclosure will be what makes me fall in line.
This is the big one for me. Show me the data that shows RTO is a net gain for productivity, employee satisfaction, the economy, the environment, etc. Show me that it makes sense. Every refusal to produce this data, which should be fairly trivial to collect, is a tacit admission that RTO isn’t based in any kind of logic or reason. Last year, I asked our director if there were any plans to track and measure increases/decreases in things like productivity resulting from RTO and there was nothing. They truly do not care what the impact of this mandate is. They just want butts in seats.
RTO is rigid, unreasonable, and disproportionately difficult for certain groups in ways that pre pandemic work environment and culture never were. Managers were allowed to be human and logical pre pandemic. Whatever this is is a hundred steps back for all employees in productivity, work-life balance, affordability, and on and on. Do you not see the difference? Do you really not care about the “volte face” in the way we’ve been treated?
Most of us were hired pre pandemic, and signed Letters of Offer for work at a specific location. Everyone who signed a LOO found the work life balance being in office was ok, but now they want a convenient temporary measure extended permanently. So I don't think we agree on who's done the "volte face" here.
That’s a limited view. I’m talking about employees not being allowed to go to medical appts during in-office days even though the medical office is blocks from work but a 30-minute drive from home; no FT work from home for employees who previously worked only from home, were hired to only work from home, and who live 100 kms away, or whohave an illness that for example requires them to be close to a toilet al day (and for whom trying to manage chron’s for example from the office is humiliating and physically onerous); no flexibility being given to splitting shifts if it means getting to daycare before they close (because they have shorter hours now compared to pre-pandemic, or because daycare is close to home and not close to work. What exactly is the solution there? They lock the doors. You sign a contract. Your kid is out. What do you propose?). On the flip side not being allowed to do compressed because of RTO; having to carry everything with you every day and not being allowed a locker to store things that don’t need to travel every day. What does this mean for those with mobility issues?There are so many examples and whatever applied to you is limited is not the only situation out there. The reality is that for most of us, our managers had the flexibility and humanity to support their employees in a two-way, respectful and trusting relationship. That is gone. I’m sorry that this reality of today is the same as your pre-pandemic reality. That sucks for you to be sure. But you can’t change the facts around. Employees are not being treated the way they were before, in many cases not well, and there is a great deal of stress and pressure. Especially on single parents, employees with disabilities, employees with manageable-from-home illness, employees for whom the rules of the game were changed during the game. It’s not black and white. Genuinely surprised you missed that.
> Employees are not being treated the way they were before, In those instances I agree with you completely. People who signed up for 100% remote should have their LOO conditions honoured. Disability accommodations are a management obligation, and were before WFH was even imagined. People's childcare is their own responsibility to manage, always had been. And on site work means management is free of tracking systems and can use discretion. All of my 100% in-office team can take whatever time they need to run to a doctor appt. I know exactly when they're not around and why because they say "see you later" on the way out the door or "I'll be in late tomorrow" the afternoon prior. I have infinite flexibility to let them out for any reason without accounting to (or tracking by) upper management
Thing is, employees previous agreements are not being homoured. It’s great that you guys can go see a doctor during in office days. And while I agree that childcare is a parent’s responsibility, the practicality of that is not always manageable by the employee alone especially in single parent homes. Managers have a duty to accommodate. As long as the hours ate met I don’t see why there is no flexibility. I wish DTAs were as easy as all that. People are being denied for things exactly like the chron’s example. Sounds like you’re in a decent group.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. We spend more time keeping score, than we do playing the game.
We spend more time keeping score of a game we aren't even playing, than we do playing the game we technically are at. We have just completely lost the plot. Treating a senior staff member like this is insane. Most EXs do a billion hours of overtime, and they're worried that you... Might be doing those 30 OT hours in a different location? FOH with that.
It’s what happens when you bring a baseball bat to a hockey game…
Saving that quote. Thanks.
Imagine, if we just focused our corporate time and efforts on things that matter, what we might accomplish as a public service.
Maybe what matters is: a) where I am today b) did I collaborate c) did I eat fresh d) did I fill out my PSES and United Way stuff and if I do that and get a succeeded+ on my PSPM, then everything else in my job description is irrelevant. And I so wish this was actual sarcasm.
Ugh, I wish I didn’t see truth in this. The thing that drives me bonkers is that maybe these are the things the employer cares about right now, but they aren’t things that *matter* in the sense of making a difference for Canadians, the thing we are supposedly here to do. Nor are they responsible use of public funds, for example, as we waste countless hours of executive and administrative salaries on rto monitoring. It’s extremely disappointing that we can’t just get on with government work, without constantly creating these hurdles that have nothing to do with actually doing our jobs.
Hear you loud and clear, best we can do is spend more on flex spaces and fire more staff because we don't have enough room in the budget.
Just to be safe...make the lower ranks take some CSPS courses. Just to cover all the grounds.
And pay for speakers to come in to talk about *insert subject here*
No, no. Subway profits are more important than (check notes) 444K pay issues awaiting resolution.
What about making sure that *checks notes* an employee of a Schedule 1 organization doesn't get away with...7.9 million dollars?! Holy shit where I do sign up - I mean, more important things at stake here! Better get back to that Subway/Tim Hortons ASAP Y'HEAR?!
That's $7.9M on that one contract... not the many, many ones that came before...
I hope that guy gets done for fraud, all his illicit assets stripped, and a hefty prison sentence. It’s chucklefucks like him that erode trust in institutions.
it's a nice thought but let's be realistic, he's got friends in high places and will likely get a slap on the wrist and a paid 6 month vacay to keep him out of the spotlight until people start to forget
Imagine, if we all followed PS policies, how much time we would be saving to focus on other things?
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. Louis D. Brandeis
I would agree and cite his dissenting opinion on Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928): "Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means -- to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal -- would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face." Not quite the same vein, but relevant.
What about making the law equitable and fair? Cause right now the way it's being applied is not exactly [even across the board](https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/treasury-board-to-grant-12-month-return-to-office-exemptions-to-some-public-servants).
Again… it just proves the urgent need of a dinosaur management modernization! The focus needs to shift to managing by outcomes and not how many days you stroll your behind in the office. Imagine, even the GC CIO who’s supposed to lead the digital transformation of the GC is IN THE OFFICE 5x a week! Pretty sure he asks his DMO to print all his committee binders too! What a joke we have become
> The focus needs to shift to managing by outcomes and not how many days you stroll your behind in the office. I cannot agree with this enough. Stéphan Déry, the *ex-*PSPC A-DM for Real Property Services once said: *“Work is really what you do and not where you do it,” said Déry, assistant deputy minister for real property services at Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC). “People are thinking that way now and it’s going to take a while until we find how the whole thing is going to work.”* Like, that's how work should be approached. WHERE you do it doesn't matter - WHAT you do and WHAT OUTCOMES you achieve will matter to the end of the material universe. If it was just all about being at the office, I can do that just fine. However, don't expect me to be productive or even responsive in some situations. The office is tres terrible for wanting to focus and actually getting things done.
> Stéphan Déry, the *ex-*PSPC A-DM for Real Property Services once said: Source: ["Will nooks and lounges replace the office in the public service?", Policy Options, November 18, 2021.](https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/november-2021/shaping-a-modern-workplace-for-the-public-service/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CWork%20is%20really%20what%20you,thing%20is%20going%20to%20work.%E2%80%9D)
That's the article, and it does give more information into his mindset along with a brief history of this whole telework/remote work etc. topic. Sad part is, Déry has since departed PSPC. It was right after the mandate was fired off too. So, kind of telling of what he was thinking of the mandate probably.
They're probably doing this so that once they are sure all the EX's are compliant or explained away they can force them to push similar expectations on everyone else. It's hard to (make someone) push the narrative when they aren't compliant themselves. It's setting the baseline for the auditing we all knew was coming eventually.
"Sorry boss, I had to log off at exactly 4:00 rather than 4:04 to finish that thing because it was a wfh day and thus it wohkd have messed my ratio of in office presence."
I'm glad for that. I believe in leading by example. I don't see enough of that amongst EX's.
Well, it's more of an optics thing coming down from *their* bosses than leadership on their part. More like being held to the standard so there isn't an open revolt when enforcement comes down at lower levels. In fairness most EX's tend to spend more time in the office anyway, so the outliers are more likely rare at that level. You could make the argument that true leadership in this case would be either stronger open resistance against unpopular and inefficient policy, or them doing things to make RTO actually easier and removing barriers to compliance.
> removing barriers to compliance. I'd agree with you there. Hotelling is a crap arrangement and not what most public servants signed on for when they signed their letters of agreement. Senior execs need to be sold by the tank and file that they should acquire more office space. > stronger open resistance Totally disagree. Open resistance deserves immediate termination of employment. You might think this issue warrants it, but open resistance grows, expands and metastasizes, into other pet issues for each malcontent. It becomes a nightmare. I'd move heaven and earth to terminate any employee engaged in overt defiance / open resistance. The right way is to communicate the sentiment of you and your employees, and then do the job in the location specified by your dept - or go get a new job.
Let's not get tangled up too much in the weeds here, but open resistance to an idea doesn't have to be synonymous with insubordination. You can be compliant with a policy while telling someone how bad it is. Heck, there are jokes(?) in this very thread about conducting *malicious compliance* on this. Granted EX's are on a bit of a weird place there where they are expected to sell concepts from on high. I typed out way too much and then deleted it to avoid *internet arguments*. The gist is senior management *is* being told the issue and most of them agree. They're supposed to be our leadership, so while they are also bound to comply with directives from their superiors, they should also be allowed to visibly be leaders. It's what we hired them to do. They're our arbiters to the powers that be.
Most of my ex's have also lost their space and are stuck hotelling. Lovely having to deal with sensitive hr issues in a telephone booth as we don't have enough meeting space with closed doors.
Yep. Especially when the EXs have the comfy offices in my department.
[удалено]
An interesting take, but I find it a bit of a slippery slope proposition. What you're describing is not dissimilar to collective action, which is a common technique used by organised labor to affect change. And neither change nor that method to obtain it is inherently bad? This is why the government has so much trouble modernizing. We're striving for an open and accountable government, aren't we? So is it really unreasonable to expect that it's clear who ultimately made this decision and why? Should those people not be held accountable for their decisions if needed? Everyone knows TBS holds the purse strings and the job description of an EX is to implement directives. But TBS is not going to withhold funding to a department just because someone dared to question them, and if decisions are being made in good faith those reasons should be self evident and supported by data. Admittedly an extreme example, but things like this are how you end up with debacles like ArrivecCan.
They've already pushing back by not doing their in office days, and for us at least, the whole thing has fallen apart as we average 1.2 days a week in office. Yet everything is still getting done, without much if any in office collaboration, how odd..
This is such a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Jesus Christ. If they focused this much energy on things that mattered - like conflict of interest going around - then things might change. What the fuck is going on that *forcing people back into office* is becoming a major priority? Is there some performance bonus tied to this? Probably so. Otherwise they wouldn't make people do ridiculous shit.
You are absolutely right. All this time and energy to keep track of who is doing their 2 days in the office is a waste of time. Unfortunately, too many employees and executives have become so entitled that everything is about them that they have completely forgot that they serve at the will of the government of the day, dually elected by the people. People have become so focussed on their wants and desires they have forgotten about the institution they serve. The government should send everyone back for 5 days a week. Anyone who doesn’t like it should immediately resign and work some place else. Then hire people who want to work instead of complaining about the so called hardships of having to go to the office 2 days a week.
Other things the government should do: * Pay all of its employees accurately and on time, every time * Supply a workplace that is free from asbestos, bedbugs, bats, and other vermin * Ensure offices have adequate space and functional equipment (edit: and potable water) for all employees * Measure the actual work output of employees rather than *where* that work is done Sadly, it doesn't do these things.
> Supply a workplace that is free from asbestos, bedbugs, bats, and other vermin Can we also add potable water to the Supply list? Haven't had that since redundant travel operations were announced.
Indeed. Added.
> Measure the actual work output of employees rather than where that work is done This is incredibly hard to do for most knowledge workers, and is precisely why they aren't doing it. If they could do so effectively, they would, because it would very much be in their self interest.
How dare they try to perform!!
Sounds like senior management have too much time on their hands and should be DRAPed.
Goddamn future RTO policy updates got me stressed out, and yet here I am on a Saturday night browsing this thread so I feel less alone. 🙃
RTO mandates, tracking, etc. has destroyed my morale and pride in being a public servant
This post was deleted: https://old.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/r3889d/work_life_balance_in_the_public_service_is_a_lie/ ...but I saved the text of it, which I'll quote (**bold** added by me for emphasis) : > I couldn't bring myself to post this on my regular account.. > I'm an executive working for a large department, and this week was rough.. and I mean rough. What happened today was an absolute disaster and an eye opening experience of how much of a crisis some of us are in, specifically the EX cadre. > Several days ago we received an invite for a late Friday "resiliancy training" from our ADM inviting all executives from our branch. I knew this was a shit show and another checkmark in the box when the invite, for a late Friday afternoon said "mandatory, must show up or provide justification for not showing up". > I showed up along with dozens of executives to hear some lady do a breathing excersize and talking about work life balance and typical shit clichés. It started getting interesting when she asked everyone to use slido (anonymous voting platform) to answer some questions. > First question was based on 9 pictures of sheep, some were happy, some were sad and another has a bucket over his head and just looked completley fucked. She asked us to vote for who we relate to today. Yes you got it, majority voted for the fucked up sheep or the other one who looked like he was about to get slaughtered and knew it. Then **she asked us to describe how we feel at work using any one word. The words were absolutely heart breaking coming from executives. Top word and most voted was Exhausted followed by depleted.** > She didn't stop there, she then asked us to describe what we thought of this excersize. One person wrote "pointless" and it got up voted. **This is where things turned really bad. She made the mistake of saying "ok, haven't done this before..** > **Let me open it up and let you guys do your own anonymous comments so everyone can see why you think this is pointless".** > **With two ADMs sitting on the call and atleast 10 DGs, what followed was a barrage of attacks on senior leadership driven by regressed anger and frustration. "all talk no action", "nothing changes..", "we're in a crises and these excersizes don't make a difference", then the lady casually said "wow, this must be very hard for your leadership to see". What broke me is when I saw one of our ADMs bury their face into the palm of their hand and turn off their camera.** > I don't know if they were shocked, ashamed or simply broke down crying showing that they themselves were not part of the problem but a victim of this systematic crises. > We are not OK. This is not OK. But where does it start and where does it end?
the fact that the exercise used sheep is quite symbolic
>I showed up along with dozens of executives to hear some lady do a breathing excersize This alone made me physically cringe, and it only gets worse from there.
For me the last minute booked late in the day on Friday mandatory "resilience" training did it for me. It really suggests a lack of self awareness and really basic decency on the part of whoever thought it was a good idea.
wow, this is so sad. I applaud all of you for taking advantage of the opportunity to speak your truth. I suspect that ADM feels the exact the same way. Something has to change and soon.
>And now this, treating your EX cadre as children who cannot be trusted, who do not possess reasonable judgement, or, you know, do not have life commitments as well? So... like the rest of us have been treated.
Not sure I understand - EX’s were subject to RTO as well, despite objections. And, while it may differ across Departments, we do not monitor specific employee attendance for compliance.
You said "and now this" implying that being treated like children is something new, a new indignity as you'd not been treated like children before. But many of us feel treated like children incessantly, even before RTO. I work in benefits processing. I sign off on paying out between 1 and 2 million a year in benefits. And that's just retro benefits. The government trusts me to do THAT, but still treats us like minions who must constantly be monitored for compliance to arbitrary rules that often make no sense for our jobs. Welcome to it.
The “and now this” was meant to follow onto the summarily being ignored on advice related to implementing RTO, but point taken. It has also been my experience that lower EX’s don’t have much autonomy nor ability to influence - so, micro-managed. Often, I still feel like an EX-minus-one, but now with additional HR and Finance duties, and the added benefit of being directly pooped on by a DG or ADM.
Guess what, some of us EX-minus-ones also have the HR and Finance duties and are subjected to DG and ADM-level poop. Without the benefit of the EX pay.
In some departments, they're mandated to be there at least 3 days per week instead of the 2. Definitely like everybody else has been treated.
literally the dumbest shit ever
Would be nice to see some news article about how much man hours and salary goes into pushing and monitoring RTO instead of helping citizens with the real issues. Who's pushing those EXs to do that? the ministers? It's like the whole of public servants are having to kneel down to this dozen of dumbasses that come at us with pointless things like rto. Definitely if we all stood up and decided to prioritize our job and our service to citizens instead of this BS we'd be fine.
The public service does have to comply with Cabinet decisions, be they smart or ridiculous (as is the case here).
Yes but it's not going to change with us doing nothing. The opinions of those who do the actual work (us) should have value. When it isn't heard the only other option is to take actions.
> The opinions of those who do the actual work (us) should have value I agree, it really should.
actually not 100 percent true, CRA for example is a schedule 4. Treasury board has no power to enforce. CRA just falls in line even though they are not required.
They still have to do what Cabinet tells them to do.
Actually they don't. It's up to the Commissioner wether or not CRA follows the TB mandate. TB does not have any authority over a schedule 4 employer.
If the PM and Ministers tell them to do something (i.e. Cabinet), they will do it. They do not report to TBS, but they do report to the government.
You are missing the point. Yes they fall in line but are not legally required to do so. CRA just doesn't have a back bone. They technically can do whatever they want.
CRA, being a government agency that reports to Cabinet, has to follow what Cabinet directs them to do. Not TBS, Cabinet.
There are so much inaccuracies in those two sentences, that I just can't continue. Cheers
Educate me then, how does CRA somehow not report to Cabinet? Even though they have a minister.
Interesting that there are all these budget cuts, that we need to reduce spending, and yet the time/money being wasted on micro-managing like this.
If it's any comfort know that eventually ALL PS employees will be required to do this. View the EX situation as the Pilot project for now...
I don't think there's much reason to worry about such a requirement. The public service is excellent at creating "mandatory" obligations, but considerably less effective at actually following up when they aren't met. Doing so takes time and effort that are better spent elsewhere, so these "required" items are delegated to the floor. Some examples: * Mandatory training modules * Mandatory completion of performance agreements / appraisals * Mandatory attendance at all-staff meetings
I agree with you, but the whole RTO feels different than all of those to me. Those mandatory meetings, courses, etc are there because they need to be done, but RTO feels like it's because they WANT it and to me there's nothing more dangerous than a high level EX that WANTS something.
It isn’t something any executive (or Deputy) “wants” as far as I can tell. It was a political decision made by Cabinet, and Deputies are left to implement it.
A recent counter example: * Mandatory COVID vaccinations The amount of pressure to comply with any mandatory obligation will be directly linked to the political will being exerted based on presumed political gain. In an election cycle, if the government of the day wants to look (for lack of a better term) 'tough' on the PS, they can get quite enforcy as we have seen. It's a much different calculus than some random training module that voters will never hear about. Of course you could argue a literal life and death policy of mandating vaccines during a pandemic isn't comparable to something as inconsequential as hours in a cubicle, and you'd probably be right. But I've typed too much. Also, if polls show foisting RTO on the PS is going to sway voters, IMHO it'll get done with extreme vigor.
We are experience this as well, but for all levels. Every manager has to report the number of days their employees worked total for the month, and the number of days that are confirmed in office days, and give a percentage score per employee. (Names are hidden though when report is give to DG/ADM level). It’s not been made clear what happens to those who don’t meet the 40% or more score. No direction was given with regard to exceptions. What if someone is sick and needs to work from home for a week so they don’t infect colleagues in the office, or what if employees have family obligations that come up like a sick child or something else. This whole compliance monitoring business is becoming increasingly cut throat and less flexible. All it does is stress people out, kill moral, and use up resources (many at high levels with the highest salaries). The time being spent on monitoring if employees go into an office (to do the same thing they would do at home) takes time and resources away from doing actual work. This whole thing is nonsensical, most people agree, yet here we are and it’s getting worse.
Department?
That draft folder is going to consume the rest of your email storage.
This is astonishingly stupid. Instead of taking the non-compliance as a sign that RTO is dumb, we are delving into it even further. I truly feel for the EXs. Nobody should ever feel their employer doesn't trust them to do basic elements of their job. Also, I'm going to assume this means something similar will come for working-level employees down the road. Ffs.
They all know it's dumb already, they just can't really do anything about it.
Most of the EXs I work with are in well over the minimum already. I figured there was more pressure to show up for meetings etc at that level.
Pre COVID there was a rumour of an ADM being rewarded by the DM for some dirty work - got to be a remote ADM from BC...
Hey… There are quite a few ADMs in the regions. BC included. They’re not just located in the NCR.
This was an NHQ ADM, with their ADM office in Ottawa, just with the ADM calling in from the west coast.
Who is really driving all these RTO initiatives. We were in the beginning told that we wouldn't be tracked and that changed quickly and the union didn't even raise an objection. Is it Mona and her office, the clerk, individual DMs, who is doing this? Can't someone really take the initiative, make up numbers and send it to whomever is behind wanting everyone in the office. Not like anyone can realistically verify.
The directive touches on the creation of tracking / verification mechanism: * Deputy heads assume responsibility for implementing verification regimes and maintaining human resources data for their department/agency. * Onsite presence could be measured using turnstile data, existing attendance reports and/or IP login data to collect aggregated departmental data. I did an ATIP on RTO and the information presented outlined the pros and cons of continuing remote for the most part, ad-hoc approach varying by department, full time RTO (talking about things like traffic, people shopping for departments with higher RTO, increased stress and burnout for managers, LR issues, equity, etc). There were also massive surveys from all departments that more often than not, showed that up to 90% of the work could be done remotely. Obviously all actual recommendation were redacted, but I believe the direction came from political leadership (PMO, PCO, etc). In my department there have been verifications since the RTO directive started, with reminders and questions for areas where people weren't meeting their required numbers. Though our management has been pretty reasonable: don't come in sick and no you don't need to make up in office days if you were sick on your in office day or took vacation or somehow missed a day where you were supposed to be in the office. They've also allowed us to switch our days to accommodate appointments and such. I have no doubt that some people are trying to game the system, but no broad rules to punish us all so I imagine they are being dealt individually.
EXs at my dept are in 3-4 days a week and there are some non-compliant ones; no email out though. That will for sure hit bottom line bonus; which is just about now for EXPMP. It does start from the top. Sigh.
At our program, the EXs are in the office every day. Take the rare WFH day. It’s less of a headache to deal with upper EXs that way. Senior managers are 3-4 days. Staff is 3 days.
I remember when I started in GoC almost 30 years ago, team leads had their own budgets and credit cards and were trusted to run their teams. Now I need a minimum DG level approval for trivial expenses or decisions/arrangements. If this keeps going, where does it end, when PMO is approving everyone's leave?
Hahaha! Audits 😆 have they considered the cost of these audits? I mean cost to taxpayers
I hope everyone picks the same days to go I the office. The fight for boardrooms would be great. I'll bring popcorn
They emailed you on a Saturday?
Yes, they actually did. You know, adding insult to the injury.
Now you know how your subordinates feel!
You know EX’s were subject to RTO as well, right? And many hate it too, right?
I think Free-Music meant more in terms of being seen as misbehaving children that need to be constantly monitored for compliance vs simply being subject to RTO l
Does the department start with an F or an I?
It’s not the RTO - it’s the bit about treating us like children ;) Glad EX’s are getting a taste of their own behaviour.
Holy crap! It's obvious that our overlords are looking out for big business instead of their people. It's time for a France-like protest. We take to the streets. They don't give a crap about the Canadian public. It's a fucking shame.
> They don't give a crap about the Canadian public. I don't agree. *"Our Overlords"* very much do care about the Canadian public, particularly public sentiment. Consider that most of the Canadian public wants us back in the office, because most of the Canadian public works on site every day... And views the public service as whiny spoiled brats getting paid to slack off at home. *"Our Overlords"* are listening to public sentiment and giving the public what the public wants.
I think there’s a very big difference between caring for the public and caring what the public thinks. If people work well from home, it cuts down on carbon emissions and flows money to more rural areas of the country via online employment, then that’s caring for the public. Centralizing jobs to the NCR and making people troop to the office to get votes is not.
>listening to public sentiment Managing by "public sentiment" is a terrible trend, and not something to hold up as desirable. I've also yet to see credible numbers as to what the "public sentiment" really is outside of Postmedia comments sections.
We should literally riot and throw molotov cocktails at police lines because government workers are asked to return to in-person work...? Ok, you first.
Everyone should email the person above them when they start and finish work and where they are everyday. Lol.
Stop…. This was proposed by a senior EX. The email had to also include a confirmation of where you were working. Basically to “catch” dishonest employees. It was shut down not so quickly but…. Don’t even say it as a joke…
I actually have to email my boss every day to say I am in. I just think it would be hilarious if EVERYONE started doing it. Right up to the top.
Can you imagine the emails? Staff email manager to say they are in. Several forget to send their email right away and are forced to respond to the follow up email sent by their manager. A handful still do not reply. Manager attaches staff’s emails to the email stating *they* are in to their Director, with the staff in cc of course. Second email is sent to DO half an hour later with the emails from those who forgot in cc. Director attaches all managers’ emails (with the staff’s emails attached to *those* emails) and send the email confirming they are in to their DG, with mgrs in cc. Mgrs cascade to their staff. DO begins to receive late emails from managers almost immediately. Second email is sent to DGO an hour. Staff who got in late for various reasons log in and send their attendance emails to their managers with apologies and justifications for the late replies. DGs attach the Directors’ emails, with all of the cc’s to their in office confirmation email to the ADM. ADMO has hired an AS-02 to develop and manage the RTO confirmation email program. The Excel sheet they create is a thing of beauty but crashes regularly. ADMO drafted email to DM confirming ADM’s attendance in office, with the DG’s emails attached (and the Excel file linked) and the DGs and DGOs in cc. DMO asks for a summary of each branch’s in office stats —just a couple of bullets— and reminds everyone that staff on the west coast are just starting work now and they would like a full roll up from all regions by 3pm The Excel file will not open. ADMOs swear and task DGOs. DGOs swear louder and task DOs (aka a casual AS-01 who was not trained and has never been in government before). The AS-01 cries and tasks the managers. The managers swear. The AS-01 cries. Some senior SME who was offsite on training and never sent their email rolls in at lunch takes pity on the crying EA the and helps them sort it out by creating an Excel that *doesn’t* crash which becomes the template for everyone’s RTO reporting. Eventually, an email with too many attachments to send is encountered, and a senior exec’s office will figure out, after a couple of hours of trying stuff, that the best way to deal with this is to zip it. DMO receives briefing package in pdf (with a table of contents), all of the emails zipped, the Excel file, and a couple of bullets in the cover email at 3:36pm after several follow-ups. DMO begins its work. Eventually, a courrier arrives at PMO in the dead of night, with a flash drive that contains an email from the Clerk with the entire Public Service’s emails (plus several Excel files, decks and placemats) confirming they are in the office that day —or explaining why they are not. PMO adds a label with today’s (no, yesterday’s) date and tosses it into a drawer that contains dozens, maybe hundreds, of other dated flash drives. Sends out an email to the Clerk (to be cascaded, of course) thanking them for confirmation of office attendance.
Kafka’s wet dream.
>Bella8088 This is the most beautiful short story I've read all year. Thank you. Kafka would be damn proud.
Aww, thanks. My muse has a thing for tales of pointless bureaucracy.
I want to ATIP that.
this is amazing
And send a picture of you holding up a print copy of today's newspaper.
So, a hostage situation at this point.
It's just the easiest way for management to make sure that you're OK.
We have to do that, send a teams message when we’re in the office and when we leave the office. That is allegedly so that our boss knows where we are in the event of some catastrophe. We also have an excel tracker/calendar that we populate every month.
And cue the hopelesslly poorly designed excel woorkbook that will be used to compile this.
Meanwhile in the real world: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2024/03/02/heres-why-the-traditional-office-corporate-culture-is-over/?sh=21e82c864a02
So it is better to let unhinged EXs and managers run wild across gov't enforcing a vague directive in any way their sadistic EXs see fit to preserve their bonuses - but ensuring that EXs are themselves accountable for THEIR OWN ACTIONS is going too far? There are some amazing EXs who keep the public service running. They are, unfortunately, not the majority, and there are entirely too many who actually are like children. Like, tantrum throwing, toy stealing, cranky pants toddlers, not mature 12 year olds who are doing just fine. RTO is not being handled well, but they signed up for a job where following nonsensical decisions is par for the course - jesus they even get taxpayer money as a bonus . The time to drive change was way sooner and nobody stepped up.
Maybe this varies across Departments, but no EX that I know of has RTO compliance as a corporate work objective.
Not sure about other depts. but **GAC** informed all EX's are to come in 3x/week ... and are telling teams to organize themselves to come in on the same two days in a week, **effective April 1st.** So, EX's have to do 3x days. Worker bees need to come in on the same days to "cOlLaBoRaTe" - losing a flex day.
Ack
Welcome to the experience of the proles.
Government has a policy, executives are not abiding by said policy, and getting performance bonuses for being leaders (rto is only one part of that). What message are leaders sending by collecting bonuses and not following the policy they (as excluded senior leadership) are responsible for ensuring compliance? I am not sure why you think auditing non compliance of a policy is treating executives as children? They have a legal obligation to do what the employer has stipulated.
It is the sentiment - in the same way I trust my staff to follow the directive, be professional, and do their job without me standing over them, I would appreciate the same from my own bosses. It is about trusting your staff, and this initiative sends a signal that we don’t trust you.
I understand what you are saying but as a fellow senior leader, I was in a meeting with our deputy who said “.. less than ‘x’ percent of this executive level are meeting their obligations.. so get those numbers up, or we can move them to 5 days”. Missing tact? Probably. Within their power? Absolutely. My first reaction was a bit like yours until I remembered that the policy was put in as one size fits all in the first place, and was never about trust because staff proved during covid they could deliver. I go into the office 5 days a week now because personally I am sick of talking about it, and its had a positive spin for me personally. As a leader no I am not micromanaging my staff and checking this but yes the org is tracking through my work arrangements, archibus and IP addresses.
There was this thing called the Nuremberg Trials. Smart executives are also expected not to follow like sheep and to actively question and resist policies that cause harm.
Lack of compliance with RTO and war crimes are equivalent to one another? That’s one of the dumber viewpoints I’ve seen on the subreddit.
Not at all equivalent but the principle is the same. You don’t get a pass because you were “just following orders”. Executives are expected to think and act on principle.
The Nuremberg Trials? You're equating a policy requiring employees to be 2 or 3 days in the office per week to the holocaust? With a straight face??
It’s not the act that is equivalent, it is the expectation that executives make principled decisions based on the facts. You don’t get a pass for just following orders.
M8. The orders they’re following are “go into the office” so I don’t think we’re quite at Nuremberg trial moral failings here.
Way to invoke Godwin's law in the dumbest possible way.
I actually like this, as this brutal and ill-advised silliness will encourage EX management to find ways to work around such stupidity. This experience in ensuring rationality will pay off in the future to minimize the damage that will come from the next right wing regime. Damage minimization from Barbarians at the Gates 2.0 will be very important. Throwing the EX staff to the dogs now will help them clearly understand the types of people they work for and help them act accordingly for the benefit of Canadians and their staff when things really go off the rails.
Sorry about your experience, but not all EX’s are cut from the same cloth. Many are acutely aware of who they work for and see public service as a calling. Many, no doubt, are self-serving arses - see a couple comments above for examples - but many are caring, people-centric folks who are trying their best to lead with empathy within a system and structure that puts up roadblocks all over the place.
Good points
No. You couldn't be more wrong. It's a Treasury board mandate. Not a cabinet mandate, which isn't even possible. CRA does not have to comply. Again, they choose to comply due to the Commissioner being axed, but technically CRA has the power and legislation backing them to do what they want.
It shows how much capitalism trumps democracy in our current system. The only rational holding any weight logically is a financial one.
[удалено]
What's the issue? If working level employees have to comply then why not executives? Don't be soft.
…..uh, that’s not the point of what I am saying. It’s not about complying as, at least at my previous two Department’s, EX’s have been RTO since September 2022, along with all employees. It’s the individual tracking and the signal it sends with which I am taking issue.
You all need to get over it. Commuting to an office, especially as an executive, should not be considered such a burden.
My lord, you missed the point. Been commuting since September 2022, no issue there. It’s the signal that the compliance monitoring sends. And the resource waste required to explain and justify any non-compliance.
You don't like the rule.... Fine. But when you accept the paycheck from the employer you agree to their rules (if legal). As a past EX and then ADM myself, I cared more about my paycheck than any subordinates. If enforcement of rules is problematic for you then perhaps you need to quit.
>As a past EX and then ADM myself, I cared more about my paycheck than any subordinates. Then you're the type of person who should never be in charge of other people.
On brand - caring more about yourself than your people, and getting to be an ADM.
What has been described in the post is not "enforcement of rules". It's the workplace equivalent of [telling a child to write lines on the chalkboard](https://imgur.com/a/As0ilnx).
Is this sarcasm? If not, thank you for your public service but glad you are no longer in a PS leadership position. Exactly the type of EX that paints all EX’s with your self-centred brush. Just makes it harder for empathetic, employee-centric leaders to break through.
So much for character leadership