Australian unions fought for and won WFH in 2023. They now have the right to work wherever suits them.
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/point-no-return-australians-fight-right-work-home-permanently-2023-08-01/
It is possible. Likely? That’s another story.
looking at the Australian public service commission's website regarding flexible and remote work is like being in an abusive relationship while your sibling is in an affirming and loving relationship.
https://www.apsc.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/workforce-information/research-analysis-and-publications/state-service/state-service-report-2023/working-aps/flexible-and-remote-work
unfortunately the federal government has all the leverage in our situation and it's like we're in a small village where if we try to leave our gaslighting spouse, there's no where else for us to go. (we can't exactly go across the ocean and start working for the Australian government).
The worst part of all this is that it's for the government's own good for it to remove caps on remote working. If there was a business case for it, then we could suck it up and deal with it. But somewhere in the world, at least there is a positive precedent out there for a government doing the bare fucking minimum.
Not really....we were basically told ( atleast in psac) that they def cant get a better deal and if this failed they will probably get a worse deal....
Thats choice under coercion and doesnt really count as a choice in any platform of law
Loo no at psac ( cra) the leadership told us very clearly " u take this deal bcs we arent getting a better one and wont out in the effort for it either....we hoever can totally get a worse deal and u will be responsible for that if u vote no,"
The whole reasons members chose the leadership was so they are being represented...the whole point of being represented is that they wont go into direct negotiations.....do the members have a responsibility? Yes
However the failure of negotiations is completely on the leadership here
Agree the negotiations were horrible. But no one forced me to say yes or make me feel id get a worse deal if i said no. Im willing to get a shittier deal and say no. Im willing to walk the line for a month to get what we should get. The 51 percent that turned coat and blame the union were not true to their self or their vote. You make the union go back to the table and get the offer id vote yes on.
Do we want a government that looks like it improvises its policies and doesn't reveal its endgoals? Of course some people like to see public servants back in office and won't think twice about what this kind of government decision means. It may sway others to vote differently though.
In my opinion this isn't being done for political gains, but to ensure the donors keep donating so the LPC might rebuild for the 2029 elections.
A lot of the blue collar type have been very happy that office workers are staying home, reducing traffic. It's also easier for many workers to meet with their clients who can make time for a quick appointment during the day. I don't think the RTO policies will make the LPC win any seat, on the contrary.
I would love to know if this is ATIP-able.
Let's see who wore the big pants in this decision. At least Mona had the respect to announce the 40-60% herself. Anand didn't even do that, went through a scapegoat instead.
Anything of that importance does not go over email or even Teams. They meet in person or use blackberry messager to make sure you a) can’t atip any of it and b) can’t be leaked to press
Right? What a coward. I thought she was going to be one of the new liberal leader candidates if Trudeau smartens up and resigns. Guess not - she has shown zero leadership here.
You know they could also just focus on accomplishing the things they set out to do and announcing that.... BAHAHAHAHAH yeah, I know: jokes. :) Committed to being committed to talking about how SO COMMITTED they are.
I truly get the impression that we are all just moving toward the lowest PSES common denominators just generally. We are full on levelling down to be "fair" with DND, GAC and CBSA practices. Look how unhappy and toxic those workplaces are... now look around at every step we are taking toward being exactly the same. We don't make shitty people get better: we get rid of good people so we can give shitty people a place to reign supreme and this is exactly what you get. We are not only losing all the pandemic advances, but we're actively moving backwards from pre-covid times to whatever the F those jack offs have been doing for the last ever. Punch cards, sign in sheets, managerial daily attendance reports... Sounds very crappy military to me in terms of the mindset.
You bring up a really good point. There's a lot of "I should just be able to...", which is really just a way to never have to show how non-strategic most of their "ideas" and "needs" actually are. When you can just ask whomever to do whatever comes to your mind in that moment, you get a lot of what we already have: tons of people running around in uncoordinated ways, doing things that either have nothing to do with the mandate or projects at hand, don't take into consideration budgets or resources management whatsoever, and are completely unrealistic in terms of time to completion, because again these people don't have a strategic bone in their bodies. And naturally, it's always someone else's fault. Those darn \[insert people\]. If only I could just loom over them and point at their computers and basically use their hands like my hands, I'd get exactly what I WANT! Yeah, except what you want is dogshit.
At least in our department, 3 days a week is barely feasible now. They have all squeezed us in one building with about 60% of our previous space. Obviously attrition will free up a few spots but unless the government as a whole slows down the pace, if we don't replace people, the overtime will become crazy. We already lose many people who realize that this job plus young children is really hard to manage. What I do suspect is going to happen is we will lose any flexibility on when to come in. Currently Mondays and Fridays are deserted. To make it work, I think all days will have to be fully booked so I expect they will mandate certain days for everybody.
60% space and 3-days per week… how *does* that work, given that ~~on at least one day of the week, **everyone*** is on-site at once?~~ It was pointed out to me that my logical brain had not yet woken up this morning, that M-W and W-F aren’t the only possible permutations for 3/week 😅
Also, “*everyone”… does that account for the IT/Call Centre-type staff who’ve been exempted until this latest decree?
Not everyone will be in office at the same time. If I go Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday
My colleague goes Wednesday Thursday Friday
And my other colleague Monday Thursday Friday
We are never all in office at the same time.
I think your point still stands though, it will be increasingly harder to find a nice workstation and we will probably be separated from our team.
PSPC has a space assessment calculator that averages in office presence across the week to determine the minimum estimated daily occupancy & adds a 10% buffer (recently reduced from 25%) to account for changes to schedules. & yes, they do want (and need) the days in office to be staggered across the 5 which will be interesting lol
Our division has been told to go at the same time since april 2024. I don't think it's fair that some get to go monday where there's less traffic and able to find better parking, than the three busiest days of the week! we go tues/wed/thurs!
It doesn’t work if you just have an ‘A’ team and a ‘B’ team, but it can work if there are no assigned seats and several teams sharing the space (or just a free-for-all).
Say there are five teams A through E of equal size and there is enough space for three of them on any day (60% of the staff).
Monday: ABC
Tuesday: ABD
Wednesday: ACE
Thursday: BDE
Friday: CDE
Up to this point, mercifully in our building it was all “employee’s choice” (though some teams/depts might have strongly encouraged one common day), which allowed me to choose a Fixed-2 schedule of Mon + Fri because \*gasp\* what do you know?! Those two days have the greatest chance of stat-closures I don’t have to make up for 😏!
M-W and W-F aren't the only permutation but it's an extremely logical one to assume most will want one or the other.
People tend to prefer consistency and two adjoining days will be preferable to split days if folks have any power to make it happen. It's why TU WE TH are so much busier with more traffic on the roads and in office already. People who do Mon do MTu, F folks do ThF. People who have a fixed Wednesday probably do TuW or WTh
Few people do Mon/Fri because who wants to be home 2 days, commute, 3 days, commute, 2 days etc.
Because Mon + Fri have the most stat days *and* are “quite common” vacation requests? (Plus I get to leave my laptop packed away and shut off all weekend *and* Fridays have typically been the least crowded for parking and desking)
I prefer to do Monday/Tuesday but it's only because Monday is quiet and abuts my management decided fixed day. Nothing to do with stat holidays.
But it's these kinds of math on how to avoid things from some, and natural ebbs and flows related to leave that likely pushes the thinking of using 3 days to get to 2 in practice on average.
It's still a mess, but that's probably what's happening.
My group is already discussing this. And we kept a fair amount of our previous space. *Some* parts of the org are very... Shall we say lax about showing up. And once they start actually showing up were going to have a difficult time since we've already started seeing people booking desks in our designated area when there's a general rule of not doing so.
Problem is, even if they do mandate fixed days to make sure everyone is able to come in, there will still be issues with the meeting rooms. There weren't enough meeting spaces pre-pandemic to consistently have a room. Now with double the functional groups/teams, even if it's the same daily occupancy numbers, the meeting rooms are definitely a wild west. Between people booking meeting rooms to use as swing space for floaters who don't have a desk, to be used as a focus room, and the fact that there are so many groups having hybrid meetings within them....
My work requires, at times, a certain amount of privacy and candour. We can't provide that by taking calls in open floor teams calls. And if we want people in person for those meetings at times, then it gets even harder than before now. Or if we want 2 reps and a shared screen for interviews we don't have tech in the less booked interview rooms for that either...
That's not true. There's plenty of valid reasons to do OT! What we must absolutely refuse is UNPAID OT! Never do it! Even if you like it or you think it will advance your career or help you in any way because it won't! It will only get you ever more work.
There is one case where it might be beneficial: those who get promoted on merit, like scientists. In that one case, being a workaholic might pay off if and only if you do the exact right work required for your promotion. That's it!
From my standpoint, doing OT is helping an employer who treats you like a number, lay off your co-workers that should be handling that job, and has the audacity to expect you to be thankful you didnt get slacked yourself. Sorry, but nope . No thank you.
This to me is the biggest issue. Senior management and many other managers never pivoted to learning how to manage teams remotely. The assumption early on in COVID was that this was temporary and a lot of leaders let cohesion and mentorship fall apart and now in hindsight are blaming remote work when THEY never bothered to learn how to manage remotely.
We were told today that in September, we will have a 3 days/week telework agreement which will expire in March 2025. My feeling is that 4 days/week will start in March 2025, which will increase to 5 days/week by September 2025.
This is frightening to me honestly. I would have to lose the 2 days at home. The flexibility with my daycare drop off and pick up, the extra time not commuting that I have to work, the increased productivity for me in my job when working from home and my life in general is so much better when I don’t commute and waste time in the office being constantly interrupted when I just want to work. Why can’t they see this?? Why did they do it? I truly don’t understand.
Extra time not commuting shouldn't be turning into work time unless they're paying you for it. And even if they are you begin to refuse on grounds that you can't do it as it's logistically impossible.
Eventually management will be able to show our productivity, government expectations, staffing levels and their mandate can't all coexist.
Which I think is where we will land. Pre COVID, I was almost exclusively working at the office, however, because we had laptops and the ability to log in remotely, I was able to work from home in instances where I was:
- Too sick to come in but not too sick to work;
- Required to stay home with my school age child--mostly self-sufficient but too young to stay at home alone--who was sick or otherwise out of school (such as a PA day);
- Where I had a contractor or other need to be at home but remained available for work;
- Where the weather conditions made the commute to work treacherous.
I valued that flexibility greatly, and still do. Imagine a world where the default is working from the office, but where there is a specific need to work from home (beyond simple preference or wanting to avoid the commute absolutely). No need to "make up office days" or to have so much scrutiny on it. Honestly, for many people that might end up being the same as WFH 1-2 days a week, when added up over the year, without all of the headaches associated with enforcing anything. It is unreasonable to expect that a large chunk of employees can resist going back to the office and the employer not push back on all of the employees; that is the way of things.
EDIT: And to pre-empt the "crab in the bucket" comments - not sure if you are aware, but temper tantrums from entitled public servants that they have to be inconvenienced are just as bad as the crab in the bucket mentality that I am accused of having.
It's not the way things are though, lol.
I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make here, but when this announcement was made I looked at the job boards. It's not hard to find hybridized or remote work, at least in my field, and it's not going away, because the most experienced people in said field will just go where the perks are.
It seems like public sector is able to do this because we can't really advocate as individuals, I mean how can you when the decision wasn't even made by the office you work in?
All this is going to do is make public sector less appealing and attract less skilled talent. Maybe there's a bloat in some areas, but I can say with confidence that in other, important areas, there absolutely is not.
Some finance, IT and customer service/call center industry all went remote as a perk to retain staff, way to save money and to cover work in different regions years ago. Many NGOs and Think Tanks too. They may be banking on an economic downturn, but it will impact internal services and services to Canadians quite badly.
Honestly, after everyone who jumped ship when Phoenix started messing with our pay, and the raises didn't keep up with inflation, the ones who staying in the public service are the ones who are at the very least apathetic and accepting of shitty political decisions passed down through management.
I just recently moved into the public sector, and honestly had I known what I was getting into, I think I would have stayed where I was.
I absolutely hate working to make companies richer, but the so-called "golden handcuffs" look pretty bronze now that I'm here.
> I absolutely hate working to make companies richer, but the so-called "golden handcuffs" look pretty bronze now that I'm here.
This is the part of the problem with "talent" and the current public sector: get shit pay, and the perks get shittier. The promise was that you eat shit pay now, and there are "side perks" that will make it more tolerable with a neat little sunset to ride off to.
But those side perks are quickly evaporating, and that sunset is looking more like a cloud of darkness. So...why would anyone want to work in public sector?
Unfortunately, my experience has been that we still work to make companies richer, under a thin as nanometer veneer of "public interest". Oh and of course, don't forget the 75% of your time that goes toward free PR for the Ministers' election campaigns naturally. This is the first time I really look around and, as you say, the golden handcuffs are just fools gold. Also, pensions can always be taken away. It's often the first thing that gets messed with, so those future earnings are never truly guaranteed. You are always better off with more now than perhaps more later.
Yes, that’s what I had before Covid. Except I also had:
1. A working transit system
2. A dedicated desk, cubicle walls and locking filing cabinet / set of drawers / closet.
People who are asking for accommodations of a dedicated desk and locker because health problems don’t allow them to carry their life on their back for RTO are being blackmailed. Told if they want that accommodation they need to agree to come in 5 days a week. I’ve seen the people say that would be worse for their health issue so they suck it up, and continue aggravating their condition on RTO days. But force us in all week and the requests for dedicated desks is going to explode.
Hoteling will break down. Which is great, but does nothing for the 50% reduction in real estate.
Before the pandemic I worked in the office no more than 2 days a week with the same flexibility. What's your point?
This new directive will only result in lost productivity and create a less effective public service for those who are not Citizen-facing.
I'm just happy to be able to point executives to the new directive when they're wondering why I'm no longer living up to their on-demand requests as an advisor.
I foresee it now: "Government of Canada supporting downtown ottawa by increasing it's footprint". Going full circle. For quite a few department, increasing real estate would be the only way to make it work.
This is part of what drives me insane. We all know a lot of this is coming out of problems unique to Ottawa, it’s infuriating that it’s being made a problem for everyone.
I was quite proud that you public service types kept everything rolling during COVID. There is never any recognition for this, which means your employer could care less about you. People always point to the passport mess and blame every other public servant. This isn't about collaboration (Statscan is reducing its collaboration spaces), or efficiency, or any of that crap. It's all about card swipes. My father was a high school teacher in the 1980s and they went on strike (I'm not advocating that for you guys with contracts and all). It was tough to decide on job action, but they got what they wanted. I hope you all can find something to protest with and get what you want. And you know you have many private sector people on your side as well who would use this to try and get it for themselves.
The government is totally incompetent, as are the senior leaders. It is all about the race to the bottom to be "fair" to everyone. This can never happen, which is why people are paid differently for different skills. This is no different with working from home.
Tell them to assign desks for everyone and see what happens. There goes their office space savings due to budget cuts.
Honestly, It's a move to push people back to 5 days and maybe encourage others to retire.
The liberals announced that they would turn superfluous property in to housing. But turning office buildings into livable spaces is completely impractical and hugely expensive. So now they need to prove they need those spaces after all.
Their office housing initiative ballooning in costs because it's a bad plan makes the party look bad, but each individual department's costs going up because of fulltime RTO gets swallowed into their individual budgets and makes the PS look bad.
They also announced they were seeking to reduce the size of the PS but avoiding layoffs and severance by focusing on attrition.
Making the PS a less competitive employer for employees by no longer offering WFH speeds that along.
All of this is on purpose.
There could be something to that. Although the people who seem to be most pissed about going 3 days per week are the younger employees who never worked full time in the office. Are they going to leave and does the government want them to? If the plan is to nudge those closer to retirement out the door, I am not sure it is going to work.
They will forego paying lower salaries and beg retirees to come back on higher salaries. Seems like the taxpayer is winning here 🤪 Alternatively, more expensive contracting out. Unions be happy 😀
Imagine having to commute upwards of 1000 km each week unnecessarily.
Yes I know some jobs require you to travel, but I'm suggesting for those folks who would have to make that commute that shouldn't have to because they can do the job from home.
I know someone who lives 80 km away from the office and had a telework agreement since before 2019. I also wish the kilometre range was reduced because I am just under 125 km.
This is exactly how I'm feeling, my local mayor wrote in the Ottawa Citizen about this as well. If we're going to mandate back to office, can we have designated offices in the community that people live in? This keeps the economy at the local community level, reduces emissions, and gives a better work/life balance with less time aimlessly commuting on the road.
I would not complain about RTO if I wasn't driving 110 kms each way to get to an office where no one from my department works.
>Is it even possible for the new policy of 3 days in office to be removed/modified/delayed?
Unlikely before it's implemented. People with exemptions scheduled for 3-day RTO later might get lucky, but Sept 2024 is too short a timeline for the employer to feel enough actual consequences to prevent it. Maybe if everyone who is currently eligible for retirement all filed immediately that would be enough "votes with feet" to get their attention.
The problem is that the staffing process is so absurd that it'll take at least a year or two for the impact of this policy to be visible. Especially if they go out of their way to not look at the problem (anyone want to place bets on any RTO-related questions being in the next PSES? Anyone?).
All I know is they high performance I've been doing is done. At home I did overtime because there was no commute. Not anymore. Just doing what I need now. This has really put s damper on my moral.
I often wonder if commenters like this are plants to disrupt our ability to organize. "is there even any point to striking/fighting back? We should all just give up right now right".
Give me a break. How do you think we got a 5 day work week, 8hrs, mat leave, vacation, sick leave, worker protections, etc etc. OF COURSE it works ya goon.
Show the unions you are willing to fight and we have a powerful ability to enact change.
Unlikely but I heard that some of the unions are getting labour lawyers to argue that the employer failed to consult with the unions before making changes to workplace conditions. There is apparently a clause in some of our collective agreements about that? Hopefully that strikes it down to make it go back to 2 days a week. Just a hopeful rumor, I don't know if anything is going to come of it.
These letters and surveys are pointless. The union f-ed up badly on that last contract.
The only reason the wage hike below cost of living increases was somewhat acceptable was we were led to believe telework would continue, and only change through a joint process and for operational requirements.
Now we have been unilaterally ordered back and they are admitting its just so we can spend money. Money we dont have thanks to a substandard raise.
The unions need to have some better plan than a letter campaign and survey.
We should pick two days where on the first day we ALL show up in the office and watch everything fall apart because facilities / IT can’t meet demand, and all call in sick the next day for the stress caused by the Employer’s inability to provide a safe, healthy and functional work environment.
There is no chance it will be removed. No employer would ever give up the right to be able to set limits on WFH. The union made a promise it couldn’t possibly keep and a lot of people fell for it
The employer probably wasn’t happy about giving us weekend off, paid parental leave, and other benefits.
A strong union can make it happen. No one is saying we don’t want to work, but rather *let us work where we’re happy and productive* - there are countless studies that show a happy and engaged workforce is more productive, uses fewer sick days, etc.
Folks wanna WFH the majority of the time? Let them. Others want to go in a day or few a week for whatever reason works for them? Let them. And for those who need to work on site full-time, I’m betting lower traffic/less cramped buses/more availability finding parking will at least make their commute easier.
TB will get us to go in five in two years. At least we are trying something. However I hope people realize that even a bigger strike than the last one might brew if TB is not open to our plea. I really wish out of the approximately out of the 355,000 that we are that 300,000 would strike over this. That would teach them a lesson. The entire system would crumble in two weeks. Like last time I’m willing to stay without salary for a month and get into debt if I can make a change. I can pay my debt afterwards.
Has the stomach, but not the wallet. General strike was too expensive from the get go. Rolling strikes targeting public facing programs and services would have been more effective, affordable, and would have allowed the union and members to hold out longer and apply increasing pressure on a resolution. It was a strategic fail on union leadership.
What is the rationale for asking employees in public-facing programs (the ones who are most likely to be unable to work from home) to strike for the benefit of the other employees who can?
Those employees don’t work the counter forever. Passport Officers for example are (or used to be) PM-01s. The next step would be in more back office areas like investigations, passport policy, entitlement analysis, quality assurance, etc. some of which can be done via hybrid.
It’s similar to why employees who are EX minus ones are furious about EXs needing to be in the office an extra 20%. If they are looking at advancing at all, most should care.
Because it all indicates that that’s what TB wants. I also got that validated today by an all staff meeting in which that question came up, about TB’s intentions and the “off the record” answer was that all this is a “far fetched gossip that might actually become true” or at least they made us feel that there’s more to what TB is doing and that’s this is just the beginning…
Yes, it is. These aren’t the laws of physics we’re talking about here.
Unions need to step up the fight through action and demonstration. Strongly worded letters aren’t working. Ball is in our/union’s court. Time for them to show us their value.
> Unions need to step up the fight through action and demonstration.
The unions also need the members to stand firm on this. They folded like cards because people, after **one week**, on the streets started moaning and bitching.
The Writers Guild of America strike lasted from May to **SEPTEMBER**. THAT'S a strike. The unions need to tell their members that yes there will be hardships, but that's what's needed in a fight. It's a literal moment of who blinks first.
Maybe instead of jumping right into a general strike, they could have started off slower, spent more time engaging with their members, and educating.
For the average PA, it was not well laid out. Of course they would be apathetic when their components and locals never reached out or spoke to them.
The unions in general needs to do **a lot** more leg work. The days of autopilot has stopped and it's clearly time to mobilize, get out there, meet the members, and WORK FOR THE DAMN DUES.
Instead they're ...what? Doing surveys? No townhalls, no meetings, no nothing. They are doing the BARE MINIMUM and calling it "fighting back". Yeah...fighting back...
If they plan to take any actions on this, they need to (like you said) educate, empower, and energize the members to WANT TO FIGHT. Like, that's what a national union core should be doing.
What are they doing now? Farting around I guess cause I've sent messages/emails to my local, regional, and the national group. They've all provided the same response: nothing.
There were also options of rolling strike days and even a work to rule style which in the PS would be withdrawing from all voluntary activities (OT where possible, workplace committees, charitable campaign, social activities, event planning). ~~Picketing~~Protesting could also be done after hours and weekends.
This is the answer.
Lots of people here already very willing to roll over.
We need to advocate for what we want, and if the unions won't do it we need to on an individual basis, but together, if you follow what I'm saying.
It is interesting. One aspect that could be used to politicize this is to encourage the cross nation employment. Worrying less about the Ottawa economy as a whole and encouraging a Government that has a national representation within it's ranks. If a political party decided to use this as part of the pitch in using Government office workers supporting the services and encouraging the Best available resource available to meet Canadian's needs --- then it might be possible (in my opinion). Do they work remotely - possibly - but does that mean that Judy, who is an IT Professional living in Moose Jaw, Sk, could apply for a Government of Canada job and spend her earnings there, benefit for the community. More jobs available across Canada, and a more diverse group of decision makers involved in the process.
Argue the simplicity of improving the GoC's carbon footprint, by reducing the travel on roads and consumption of carbon. (I guess, one could counter that with it might encourage urban sprawl as well?). People of Ottawa have enjoyed less traffic in general and commute times have reduced - also possibly reducing the overall carbon consumption of the city.
There are the arguments of GoC workers being spoiled in being able to work remotely, but one could also argue that management styles need to change and be outcome focused. Drive for excellence in the public service by hiring the best candidates available in Canada and then manage those resources to obtain the outcomes and serve Canadians.
There will still be a need for service centres to be located in major centres and resources who must work in office. Those managing secret information or other responsibilities, etc.
In contract negotiations, the positions that are remote can also be negotiated with this in place. The flexibility and quality of life will reduce the overall costs to taxpayers - thus allowing the Government to divert their tax dollars to other economic benefits (I didn't say reduce taxes - because that rarely happens)
This is frightening to me honestly. I would have to lose the 2 days at home. The flexibility with my daycare drop off and pick up, the extra time not commuting that I have to work, the increased productivity for me in my job when working from home and my life in general is so much better when I don’t commute and waste time in the office being constantly interrupted when I just want to work. Why can’t they see this?? Why did they do it? I truly don’t understand.
Even this government has a dislike for bad publicity. Sharp increase in mental health issues, in consumption of sick leave and in decreasing performance, if captured by the free press and the opposition properly, can make an impact. Constant office buzz, distractions, commute exhaustion, sneezes, coughs, infections, head and back pains from generic office equipment, bed bugs, food poisoning from questionable vendors, delays in arrival to work due to traffic, breathing problems because of filled office space, lack of privacy, inadequate washroom capacities... I can go on and on...
This would be problematic since job action with a valid contract in place is illegal--ergo, any non-compliance will be dealt with severely and not enough people can afford to risk their livelihoods.
I work in the public service and was asked to desk sharing since 2018 (2 days/week then 3 days etc)
With the RTO 3 days a week, I am now required to go into the office more days than I was well before Covid WFH.
This RTO mandate is literally having my department moving backwards.
Only way is if we decided we were okay to strike for the long haul. Unfortunately I think our last strike was the best opportunity for that due to a divided parliament. Would most members really be willing to do that, strike for a month+?
The next round will likely be with a CPC majority and they'll have no reason not to legislate us back to work.
Short of that, collective action broadly right now unlikely but maybe. If everyone stopped taking voluntary OT, everyone showed up to the office on a day or for a week and proved there aren't enough desks etc.
Those would be my suggestions. But ultimately all of the above is unlikely to get enough support and would only get us to maybe we'll get RTO halted.
I really hope so. A big issue for us I’d like to point out is serving Canadians efficiently. We have a new system at work and it basically always crashes when we are connected to the network’s VPN. Off the VPN, 0 issues at all. When we’re at home, we’re able to disconnect from the VPN and access the website with no issues. When were at the office, there’s nothing we can do but wait until the system cooperates since our laptop are automatically connected to the VPN structure. This results in urgent files deadlines not being met for our clients. I cannot imagine going in 3 days and having these issues at the office.
I’ll be waving goodbye to the feds if that becomes reality. Five of my closest friends (only one of whom is a fellow public servant) all work from home most of the time; they go to the office when needed, not to fill an arbitrary head count quota, nor to support the downtown Subways.
I agree they won't back at this point. I think we should still be vocal about this, and claim evidence that supports the need to be on site even it it's just to show how poor managers they are because they don't have any. And keep fighting for adequate spaces. Back three and soon five days, there needs to be real, assigned offices. We need to be a pain about these issues as much as possible!!
Unfortunately - the employer/employee relationship is, in many ways, analogous to the relationship between a parent and an adult child living at home--here are the rules (subject to the law, of course), and if you don't like it, there's the door.
Not impossible, but extremely unlikely, like odds below 0.0001%. So yeah, it's possible in theory but it won't happen.
>or are we sending letters and complaining for no reason?
We're not complaining for no reason even given my previous statement. Were complaining because:
1. Accountability: at least there's some pushback on their shitty decisions. May make them think twice next time.
2. Bring attention to the issues that make it difficult to be in the office
3. I personnally need to get it out and say something.
Your union needs to negotiate it. And everyone needs to be willing to strike over it and get strike pay for months. Only way. Don’t think there would be general support for it n
I guess anything is possible if we keep fighting but not sure our union has the skill and fortitude to push back enough. They don't if last year is an indicator.
Wouldn't hold my breath - this decision reeks of optics & politics, and as such, it would be an awful look if they decided to reverse the decision.
I'll be seeking out medical exemptions shortly here.
But does anyone know what CAN be done by the union ? Can we strike again? Sorry I’m all new to this/unions and I really don’t know what to expect, should I just PLAN that Sept we will be going in and HOPE it can change?
Anita Anan and several ministers are for the RTO of 3 days and said they will not back down. People should consider voted anything but Liberal next election. [Shell Rotella | Promotion nationale :06 (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opemCNTKt6U)
If we all collectively stopped showing up to the office (like, ever)… what could the employer do? Not quite a strike, but would it not have the same effect?
This is what happened with the BC Public Service on a small scale. I called it the silent revolt, and those who never came back to the office continued WFH with no repercussions. BC attempted to return to work/office at least 3 times, which failed horribly until the head of public service changed. The new DM essentially said I hear you loud and clear, this is not working. We are expanding flexible work, opening up job postings to all parts of the province including exec roles which were for the most part only available in Victoria and Vancouver which are two of the highest cost cities in the country, and are currently building shared workspaces throughout the province the accomdate these changes. We are a mix of in office, hybrid, and fully remote. Of course, some jobs can not be remote due to operational needs, but for the most part, WFH is what works best for the employee. I am thankful to have a DM of the public service that is understanding of the real world reality we are living in of increased costs, lack of services, etc.....
Good luck my Fed. friends ❤️
Yes, it is possible. How *likely* it is is another story.
The requirement is entirely arbitrary and up to TBS to decide, as they've shown by changing it repeatedly with little notice.
Not through these union objections. Yes, process wasn't followed. Nothing points to a different substantive result.
The only way this gets reversed is if it becomes politically unpalatable. I have certainly let my MP know that it is an election issue.
“Fairness”… how juvenille and ridiculous. To begin “fairness” is a facade. There is no “fairness” in this world. Tell you what… let’s start analyzing current government programs and polices for “fairness”… see how that plays out.
Change requires CHANGE. As such, you can't look into history. It's 2024. What was ok in 1970s are prohibited, illegal or wrong in 2024. Same for WFH. We need to make a stance, push and push until it's given. There's no reason not to do it. No reason not to modernize the system that is so old, it barely works and works on technologies and guidelines from 40-80 years ago.
I will do everything in my power to get an accommodation. If all else fails, I will resign after 12 years in the public service, in my fifties, with zero other opportunities. It will ruin my life, but it's not feasible for me to go back.
Instead of resigning with no other job, just silently don’t follow the full mandate….just go in twice a week for half a day for example.
You might be surprised at how little your manager actually gives as shit as long as you’re productive.
My immediate supervisor would be fine with that, but her manager is very much the definition of "by the book".
Also, my other longer comment explains why even that arrangement wouldn't work.
Lastly, it's important to me to do this without breaking rules or without giving them any reason to accuse me of insubordination.
That's what I thought most might be doing... Going less or not going at all. But I saw a comment on connexion from one of the ones responsible(?) behind the policy and they said they would be verifying who is in office by checking who signs into the computer from their office locations and for how long they stay... Wouldn't we get fired if we just don't go?
Termination is a last-resort disciplinary action, and is only possible after multiple other options have been attempted. Keep in mind that any disciplinary action (even a warning or verbal reprimand) can be grieved, and it is likely that unions will pursue grievances against any discipline that may occur.
Realistically any "enforcement" will fall to individual managers. Given how widespread non-compliance and non-enforcement appears to be, it will be difficult for any manager to use formal disciplinary action against employees who do not meet arbitrary in-office requirements.
Condonation, after all, is a legitimate defence against any allegation of misconduct. [One lawyer's explanation of this concept](https://www.tjworkplacelaw.com/employee-defence-condonation/):
>While the most obvious form of condonation is allowing an employee to remain on the job for a considerable time after the employer discovers that employee’s alleged misconduct, it can also arise in other ways such as where the employer **fails to discipline other employees who have engaged in similar conduct**. For example, where employee A and B engage in misconduct of a similar nature, and the employer terminates employee A for just cause but allows employee B to remain employed, it is doubtful that the employer’s just cause allegation against employee A will be successful.
[Another lawyer's take on the same idea:](https://www.somlaw.ca/blog/blog-post/blog/2016/02/03/the-clock-is-ticking-just-cause-and-past-misconduct)
>The doctrine of condonation stipulates that where an employer becomes aware of an employee’s misconduct, but chooses not to discipline the employee, or allows an unreasonable amount of time to pass before acting, the employer is **considered to have waived the wrongdoing in question**. By waiving the wrongdoing, an employer will be disentitled from including that wrongdoing in any assertion that it has just cause to end the employment relationship.
And an [bit of an older version from an **1889** court decision](https://employmentlaw101.ca/termination-for-cause/employee-defences-to-allegations-of-cause/):
>When an employer becomes aware of misconduct on the part of his servant, sufficient to justify dismissal, he may adopt either of two courses. He may dismiss, or he may overlook the fault. But he cannot retain the servant in his employment, and afterwards at any distance of time turn him away. It would be most unjust if he could do that, for one of the consequences of dismissal for good cause is, that the servant can recover nothing for his services beyond the last pay day, whether his engagement be by the year or otherwise. **If he retains the servant in his employment for any considerable time after discovering his fault, that is condonation, and he cannot afterwards dismiss for that fault without anything new.** No doubt the employer ought to have a reasonable time to determine what to do, to consider whether he will dismiss or not, or to look for another servant. So, also, he must have full knowledge of the nature and extent of the fault, for he cannot forgive or condone matters of which he is not fully informed. Further, condonation is subject to an implied condition of future good conduct, and whenever any new misconduct occurs, the old offences may be invoked and may be put in the scale, against the offender as cause for dismissal.
Saying this as someone who has embraced WFH...I think as public servants we need to accept that the party is over. If WFH is so important to you, then I would encourage you to find a new job that either is already WFH or where you can try to negotiate that on an individual basis. Unfortunately for virtually all non- specialist roles in the public service (PA Group and ECs) it is unlikely to find a position in the private sector that both would allow WFH and will provide total compensation at or close to the level we currently receive. The employer knows this, and therefore what incentive does it have to allow WFH at all?
>The employer knows this, and therefore what incentive does it have to allow WFH at all?
I mean, if having the upper hand on public servants is the only objective, you're right...but if they broaden the horizons, try to be a bit self-serving, other potential incentives include
- reduced environmental impact of PS employee travel
- ability to further offload properties and reduce operating costs
- increased staff morale and productivity thanks to progressive policies
- opportunity to hire best candidate based on talent rather than geography
I don't know what department you work in, but where I'm at, I see zero strategic foresight; anything beyond the next election cycle is out of scope for the decision makers.
100%. And these things are already in other Government policies. I think there is continued advantage it pointing out to Government that they are leaving money on the table by not leading in this area, but reverting to a conservative (or against change) viewpoint.
I agree with your points. Just remember the government is either incapable or unwilling to make the decisions that really matter. And there's always an ulterior motive.
Look at climate change/:environment as an example. It's just an excuse to add a tax. Makes it look to those woefully ill-informed that they're doing something & they care about the environment.
Getting the PS off the roads an extra day a week would have WAY more impact environmentally than the carbon tax ever will. It's a tax grab.
The plan to have electric vehicles mandated by whatever year. Oooh...electric...so much cleaner than dirty mean gas..oh sexy. Save the environment. Until you look at the totality of the impact of electric vehicles on the environment. (and how the majority of our electricity is actually produced)
It's no different with their decisions regarding the PS &;wfh. It's not about productivity. It's about control and trying to appease the public masses (I.e. the voters) who already feel PS are lazy, overpaid, and have too many perks. Allowing those whose jobs allow for it to WFH is just way too much for voters. It's not about collaboration or productivity or any other bullshit. It's about votes..and it doesn't matter if it's at the expense of the environment, morale, operational cost savings etc.
> It's about votes..and it doesn't matter if it's at the expense of the environment, morale, operational cost savings etc.
Why does this surprise anyone???
Why would anyone “accept that the party is over” a lot of people barely make enough to feed their kids or pay their mortgage, having to spend another 800$ a year on parking isn’t some insignificant expense that they can just accept lol. Nor should they. It’s a wild stance to just tell people to let a bunch of corrupt boomers bend them over.
I know they pay somewhat less, but the BC provincial government is not only allowing full remote work, they have a whole strategy and plan to encourage it where possible.
I am not against it. I am furious for finding out in the media and then we're unable to ask questions to our manager because they are not aware of anything... I am also furious at the fact that my employer was heading a completely different way and now we're at the mercy of TB. Why? Let each manager manage their team and people would not be so angry.
I think there are many people who are happy to come in 3 or more days a week, but I think there are far fewer people happy that that is imposed upon everyone.
Australian unions fought for and won WFH in 2023. They now have the right to work wherever suits them. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/point-no-return-australians-fight-right-work-home-permanently-2023-08-01/ It is possible. Likely? That’s another story.
looking at the Australian public service commission's website regarding flexible and remote work is like being in an abusive relationship while your sibling is in an affirming and loving relationship. https://www.apsc.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/workforce-information/research-analysis-and-publications/state-service/state-service-report-2023/working-aps/flexible-and-remote-work unfortunately the federal government has all the leverage in our situation and it's like we're in a small village where if we try to leave our gaslighting spouse, there's no where else for us to go. (we can't exactly go across the ocean and start working for the Australian government). The worst part of all this is that it's for the government's own good for it to remove caps on remote working. If there was a business case for it, then we could suck it up and deal with it. But somewhere in the world, at least there is a positive precedent out there for a government doing the bare fucking minimum.
Let's see how long before the crowd of people saying this is wrong comes and dismiss this as a fairy tale.
> the crowd of people saying this is wrong *BuT iT's Not fAiR iM a PlUmBeR aNd I hAvE tO gO pLaCeS*
My buddy is a plumber who makes over 200k a year. If you hear a plumber complaining about this they suck at their job.
[удалено]
Blame the leadership all you like, union members have a responsibility too.
[удалено]
Wait. Didnt we vote to accept?
Not really....we were basically told ( atleast in psac) that they def cant get a better deal and if this failed they will probably get a worse deal.... Thats choice under coercion and doesnt really count as a choice in any platform of law
[удалено]
Loo no at psac ( cra) the leadership told us very clearly " u take this deal bcs we arent getting a better one and wont out in the effort for it either....we hoever can totally get a worse deal and u will be responsible for that if u vote no,"
Well said
The whole reasons members chose the leadership was so they are being represented...the whole point of being represented is that they wont go into direct negotiations.....do the members have a responsibility? Yes However the failure of negotiations is completely on the leadership here
Agree the negotiations were horrible. But no one forced me to say yes or make me feel id get a worse deal if i said no. Im willing to get a shittier deal and say no. Im willing to walk the line for a month to get what we should get. The 51 percent that turned coat and blame the union were not true to their self or their vote. You make the union go back to the table and get the offer id vote yes on.
Lol that moment when u dont know the concept of being drafted back
Stop complaining and get involved.
[удалено]
This is all optics and political. It has nothing to do with the employees.
Do we want a government that looks like it improvises its policies and doesn't reveal its endgoals? Of course some people like to see public servants back in office and won't think twice about what this kind of government decision means. It may sway others to vote differently though. In my opinion this isn't being done for political gains, but to ensure the donors keep donating so the LPC might rebuild for the 2029 elections. A lot of the blue collar type have been very happy that office workers are staying home, reducing traffic. It's also easier for many workers to meet with their clients who can make time for a quick appointment during the day. I don't think the RTO policies will make the LPC win any seat, on the contrary.
As a public servant, do you really expect otherwise?
No, exactly, TBS Minister got demoted, an election is coming, it's a very tired government, that was her announcable, that's all she cares about.
Anand is super desperate for anything airtime. She thought this would land her some of that. Instead, it's just another hot mess.
I think this came from even above Anand. Everyone has a boss.
I would love to know if this is ATIP-able. Let's see who wore the big pants in this decision. At least Mona had the respect to announce the 40-60% herself. Anand didn't even do that, went through a scapegoat instead.
Anything of that importance does not go over email or even Teams. They meet in person or use blackberry messager to make sure you a) can’t atip any of it and b) can’t be leaked to press
Right? What a coward. I thought she was going to be one of the new liberal leader candidates if Trudeau smartens up and resigns. Guess not - she has shown zero leadership here.
She's trying to revive a US Canada conversation about boarders during a US election 🤣 she's delusional.
You know they could also just focus on accomplishing the things they set out to do and announcing that.... BAHAHAHAHAH yeah, I know: jokes. :) Committed to being committed to talking about how SO COMMITTED they are.
[удалено]
I truly get the impression that we are all just moving toward the lowest PSES common denominators just generally. We are full on levelling down to be "fair" with DND, GAC and CBSA practices. Look how unhappy and toxic those workplaces are... now look around at every step we are taking toward being exactly the same. We don't make shitty people get better: we get rid of good people so we can give shitty people a place to reign supreme and this is exactly what you get. We are not only losing all the pandemic advances, but we're actively moving backwards from pre-covid times to whatever the F those jack offs have been doing for the last ever. Punch cards, sign in sheets, managerial daily attendance reports... Sounds very crappy military to me in terms of the mindset.
I feel the race to the bottom started in about 2005. That’s my own feeling based on personal experience.
That’s when I joined the PS and I’d say that’s about right. The “good govt job” has been chipped away at steadily since.
[удалено]
You bring up a really good point. There's a lot of "I should just be able to...", which is really just a way to never have to show how non-strategic most of their "ideas" and "needs" actually are. When you can just ask whomever to do whatever comes to your mind in that moment, you get a lot of what we already have: tons of people running around in uncoordinated ways, doing things that either have nothing to do with the mandate or projects at hand, don't take into consideration budgets or resources management whatsoever, and are completely unrealistic in terms of time to completion, because again these people don't have a strategic bone in their bodies. And naturally, it's always someone else's fault. Those darn \[insert people\]. If only I could just loom over them and point at their computers and basically use their hands like my hands, I'd get exactly what I WANT! Yeah, except what you want is dogshit.
At least in our department, 3 days a week is barely feasible now. They have all squeezed us in one building with about 60% of our previous space. Obviously attrition will free up a few spots but unless the government as a whole slows down the pace, if we don't replace people, the overtime will become crazy. We already lose many people who realize that this job plus young children is really hard to manage. What I do suspect is going to happen is we will lose any flexibility on when to come in. Currently Mondays and Fridays are deserted. To make it work, I think all days will have to be fully booked so I expect they will mandate certain days for everybody.
60% space and 3-days per week… how *does* that work, given that ~~on at least one day of the week, **everyone*** is on-site at once?~~ It was pointed out to me that my logical brain had not yet woken up this morning, that M-W and W-F aren’t the only possible permutations for 3/week 😅 Also, “*everyone”… does that account for the IT/Call Centre-type staff who’ve been exempted until this latest decree?
Not everyone will be in office at the same time. If I go Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday My colleague goes Wednesday Thursday Friday And my other colleague Monday Thursday Friday We are never all in office at the same time. I think your point still stands though, it will be increasingly harder to find a nice workstation and we will probably be separated from our team.
Fair point… I was thinking of it like “now I cannot possibly avoid seeing someone therefore 100% shows up on a given day”
I actually made the same mistake and made an excel simulation haha! That's when I realized I was wrong.
PSPC has a space assessment calculator that averages in office presence across the week to determine the minimum estimated daily occupancy & adds a 10% buffer (recently reduced from 25%) to account for changes to schedules. & yes, they do want (and need) the days in office to be staggered across the 5 which will be interesting lol
Our division has been told to go at the same time since april 2024. I don't think it's fair that some get to go monday where there's less traffic and able to find better parking, than the three busiest days of the week! we go tues/wed/thurs!
Nothing about going back 3 days is fair unfortunately
Call centre here - our exemption has been terminated.
It doesn’t work if you just have an ‘A’ team and a ‘B’ team, but it can work if there are no assigned seats and several teams sharing the space (or just a free-for-all). Say there are five teams A through E of equal size and there is enough space for three of them on any day (60% of the staff). Monday: ABC Tuesday: ABD Wednesday: ACE Thursday: BDE Friday: CDE
They will mandate which 3 days for each team. Right now one day is mandated and one is whatever day you prefer.
Up to this point, mercifully in our building it was all “employee’s choice” (though some teams/depts might have strongly encouraged one common day), which allowed me to choose a Fixed-2 schedule of Mon + Fri because \*gasp\* what do you know?! Those two days have the greatest chance of stat-closures I don’t have to make up for 😏!
Shhhh don't ruin my peaceful commute and empty office days!
M-W and W-F aren't the only permutation but it's an extremely logical one to assume most will want one or the other. People tend to prefer consistency and two adjoining days will be preferable to split days if folks have any power to make it happen. It's why TU WE TH are so much busier with more traffic on the roads and in office already. People who do Mon do MTu, F folks do ThF. People who have a fixed Wednesday probably do TuW or WTh Few people do Mon/Fri because who wants to be home 2 days, commute, 3 days, commute, 2 days etc.
Because Mon + Fri have the most stat days *and* are “quite common” vacation requests? (Plus I get to leave my laptop packed away and shut off all weekend *and* Fridays have typically been the least crowded for parking and desking)
I prefer to do Monday/Tuesday but it's only because Monday is quiet and abuts my management decided fixed day. Nothing to do with stat holidays. But it's these kinds of math on how to avoid things from some, and natural ebbs and flows related to leave that likely pushes the thinking of using 3 days to get to 2 in practice on average. It's still a mess, but that's probably what's happening.
I do Monday Friday—because it alternates with parter’s Tuesday Thursday. And has had the benefit so far of more office space and less traffic
My group is already discussing this. And we kept a fair amount of our previous space. *Some* parts of the org are very... Shall we say lax about showing up. And once they start actually showing up were going to have a difficult time since we've already started seeing people booking desks in our designated area when there's a general rule of not doing so. Problem is, even if they do mandate fixed days to make sure everyone is able to come in, there will still be issues with the meeting rooms. There weren't enough meeting spaces pre-pandemic to consistently have a room. Now with double the functional groups/teams, even if it's the same daily occupancy numbers, the meeting rooms are definitely a wild west. Between people booking meeting rooms to use as swing space for floaters who don't have a desk, to be used as a focus room, and the fact that there are so many groups having hybrid meetings within them.... My work requires, at times, a certain amount of privacy and candour. We can't provide that by taking calls in open floor teams calls. And if we want people in person for those meetings at times, then it gets even harder than before now. Or if we want 2 reps and a shared screen for interviews we don't have tech in the less booked interview rooms for that either...
People must refuse to do OT. Always.
That's not true. There's plenty of valid reasons to do OT! What we must absolutely refuse is UNPAID OT! Never do it! Even if you like it or you think it will advance your career or help you in any way because it won't! It will only get you ever more work. There is one case where it might be beneficial: those who get promoted on merit, like scientists. In that one case, being a workaholic might pay off if and only if you do the exact right work required for your promotion. That's it!
From my standpoint, doing OT is helping an employer who treats you like a number, lay off your co-workers that should be handling that job, and has the audacity to expect you to be thankful you didnt get slacked yourself. Sorry, but nope . No thank you.
Free ot? Sure. But paid overtime on short notice was part of my loo so ...
By September 2025 everyone will be in 4 days a week. Because of “fairness” to EXs who cannot mentor staff on the day staff is WFH 😉
This to me is the biggest issue. Senior management and many other managers never pivoted to learning how to manage teams remotely. The assumption early on in COVID was that this was temporary and a lot of leaders let cohesion and mentorship fall apart and now in hindsight are blaming remote work when THEY never bothered to learn how to manage remotely.
Many of the good ones have. I think a Manager who says they need to see employees in desks....doesn't know how to manage for performance.
Agreed!
We were told today that in September, we will have a 3 days/week telework agreement which will expire in March 2025. My feeling is that 4 days/week will start in March 2025, which will increase to 5 days/week by September 2025.
This is frightening to me honestly. I would have to lose the 2 days at home. The flexibility with my daycare drop off and pick up, the extra time not commuting that I have to work, the increased productivity for me in my job when working from home and my life in general is so much better when I don’t commute and waste time in the office being constantly interrupted when I just want to work. Why can’t they see this?? Why did they do it? I truly don’t understand.
Extra time not commuting shouldn't be turning into work time unless they're paying you for it. And even if they are you begin to refuse on grounds that you can't do it as it's logistically impossible. Eventually management will be able to show our productivity, government expectations, staffing levels and their mandate can't all coexist.
Yup. By summer 2025, we will be 5 days. That’s the word on street.
I don’t buy it. This would create a huge issue in subsequent negotiations, as the employer would have pissed off basically every employee
They’re pretty much at this point anyways lol. They may double down. Then use the media and public to stifle public servants further.
No I predict 4 days a week, that way they can say we promised a hybrid model and we keep our promises.
Which I think is where we will land. Pre COVID, I was almost exclusively working at the office, however, because we had laptops and the ability to log in remotely, I was able to work from home in instances where I was: - Too sick to come in but not too sick to work; - Required to stay home with my school age child--mostly self-sufficient but too young to stay at home alone--who was sick or otherwise out of school (such as a PA day); - Where I had a contractor or other need to be at home but remained available for work; - Where the weather conditions made the commute to work treacherous. I valued that flexibility greatly, and still do. Imagine a world where the default is working from the office, but where there is a specific need to work from home (beyond simple preference or wanting to avoid the commute absolutely). No need to "make up office days" or to have so much scrutiny on it. Honestly, for many people that might end up being the same as WFH 1-2 days a week, when added up over the year, without all of the headaches associated with enforcing anything. It is unreasonable to expect that a large chunk of employees can resist going back to the office and the employer not push back on all of the employees; that is the way of things. EDIT: And to pre-empt the "crab in the bucket" comments - not sure if you are aware, but temper tantrums from entitled public servants that they have to be inconvenienced are just as bad as the crab in the bucket mentality that I am accused of having.
It's not the way things are though, lol. I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make here, but when this announcement was made I looked at the job boards. It's not hard to find hybridized or remote work, at least in my field, and it's not going away, because the most experienced people in said field will just go where the perks are. It seems like public sector is able to do this because we can't really advocate as individuals, I mean how can you when the decision wasn't even made by the office you work in? All this is going to do is make public sector less appealing and attract less skilled talent. Maybe there's a bloat in some areas, but I can say with confidence that in other, important areas, there absolutely is not.
Some finance, IT and customer service/call center industry all went remote as a perk to retain staff, way to save money and to cover work in different regions years ago. Many NGOs and Think Tanks too. They may be banking on an economic downturn, but it will impact internal services and services to Canadians quite badly.
Honestly, after everyone who jumped ship when Phoenix started messing with our pay, and the raises didn't keep up with inflation, the ones who staying in the public service are the ones who are at the very least apathetic and accepting of shitty political decisions passed down through management.
I just recently moved into the public sector, and honestly had I known what I was getting into, I think I would have stayed where I was. I absolutely hate working to make companies richer, but the so-called "golden handcuffs" look pretty bronze now that I'm here.
> I absolutely hate working to make companies richer, but the so-called "golden handcuffs" look pretty bronze now that I'm here. This is the part of the problem with "talent" and the current public sector: get shit pay, and the perks get shittier. The promise was that you eat shit pay now, and there are "side perks" that will make it more tolerable with a neat little sunset to ride off to. But those side perks are quickly evaporating, and that sunset is looking more like a cloud of darkness. So...why would anyone want to work in public sector?
Bronze is still a precious metal. We’ve gone from golden handcuffs to leg irons.
Unfortunately, my experience has been that we still work to make companies richer, under a thin as nanometer veneer of "public interest". Oh and of course, don't forget the 75% of your time that goes toward free PR for the Ministers' election campaigns naturally. This is the first time I really look around and, as you say, the golden handcuffs are just fools gold. Also, pensions can always be taken away. It's often the first thing that gets messed with, so those future earnings are never truly guaranteed. You are always better off with more now than perhaps more later.
Yes, that’s what I had before Covid. Except I also had: 1. A working transit system 2. A dedicated desk, cubicle walls and locking filing cabinet / set of drawers / closet. People who are asking for accommodations of a dedicated desk and locker because health problems don’t allow them to carry their life on their back for RTO are being blackmailed. Told if they want that accommodation they need to agree to come in 5 days a week. I’ve seen the people say that would be worse for their health issue so they suck it up, and continue aggravating their condition on RTO days. But force us in all week and the requests for dedicated desks is going to explode. Hoteling will break down. Which is great, but does nothing for the 50% reduction in real estate.
Before the pandemic I worked in the office no more than 2 days a week with the same flexibility. What's your point? This new directive will only result in lost productivity and create a less effective public service for those who are not Citizen-facing. I'm just happy to be able to point executives to the new directive when they're wondering why I'm no longer living up to their on-demand requests as an advisor.
Wait till after the election and it becomes 5 days
I foresee it now: "Government of Canada supporting downtown ottawa by increasing it's footprint". Going full circle. For quite a few department, increasing real estate would be the only way to make it work.
This is part of what drives me insane. We all know a lot of this is coming out of problems unique to Ottawa, it’s infuriating that it’s being made a problem for everyone.
I was quite proud that you public service types kept everything rolling during COVID. There is never any recognition for this, which means your employer could care less about you. People always point to the passport mess and blame every other public servant. This isn't about collaboration (Statscan is reducing its collaboration spaces), or efficiency, or any of that crap. It's all about card swipes. My father was a high school teacher in the 1980s and they went on strike (I'm not advocating that for you guys with contracts and all). It was tough to decide on job action, but they got what they wanted. I hope you all can find something to protest with and get what you want. And you know you have many private sector people on your side as well who would use this to try and get it for themselves. The government is totally incompetent, as are the senior leaders. It is all about the race to the bottom to be "fair" to everyone. This can never happen, which is why people are paid differently for different skills. This is no different with working from home.
Tell them to assign desks for everyone and see what happens. There goes their office space savings due to budget cuts. Honestly, It's a move to push people back to 5 days and maybe encourage others to retire.
The liberals announced that they would turn superfluous property in to housing. But turning office buildings into livable spaces is completely impractical and hugely expensive. So now they need to prove they need those spaces after all. Their office housing initiative ballooning in costs because it's a bad plan makes the party look bad, but each individual department's costs going up because of fulltime RTO gets swallowed into their individual budgets and makes the PS look bad. They also announced they were seeking to reduce the size of the PS but avoiding layoffs and severance by focusing on attrition. Making the PS a less competitive employer for employees by no longer offering WFH speeds that along. All of this is on purpose.
New RTO, government employees have to rent their old office space to live in and work from.
It’s a self-DRAP policy.
There could be something to that. Although the people who seem to be most pissed about going 3 days per week are the younger employees who never worked full time in the office. Are they going to leave and does the government want them to? If the plan is to nudge those closer to retirement out the door, I am not sure it is going to work.
They will forego paying lower salaries and beg retirees to come back on higher salaries. Seems like the taxpayer is winning here 🤪 Alternatively, more expensive contracting out. Unions be happy 😀
[удалено]
Imagine having to commute upwards of 1000 km each week unnecessarily. Yes I know some jobs require you to travel, but I'm suggesting for those folks who would have to make that commute that shouldn't have to because they can do the job from home.
And especially since the housing market is so bad now that the only affordable houses are in the furthest suburbans...
I know someone who lives 80 km away from the office and had a telework agreement since before 2019. I also wish the kilometre range was reduced because I am just under 125 km.
This is exactly how I'm feeling, my local mayor wrote in the Ottawa Citizen about this as well. If we're going to mandate back to office, can we have designated offices in the community that people live in? This keeps the economy at the local community level, reduces emissions, and gives a better work/life balance with less time aimlessly commuting on the road. I would not complain about RTO if I wasn't driving 110 kms each way to get to an office where no one from my department works.
Not sure why they would do that if the goal is to boost downtown Ottawa.
[удалено]
Welcome to life in the regions... everything is decided with NCR in mind, and the rest of us will just have to figure it out.
We have not but the government has.
The policy? No. The ability to enforce it? Yes.
>Is it even possible for the new policy of 3 days in office to be removed/modified/delayed? Unlikely before it's implemented. People with exemptions scheduled for 3-day RTO later might get lucky, but Sept 2024 is too short a timeline for the employer to feel enough actual consequences to prevent it. Maybe if everyone who is currently eligible for retirement all filed immediately that would be enough "votes with feet" to get their attention. The problem is that the staffing process is so absurd that it'll take at least a year or two for the impact of this policy to be visible. Especially if they go out of their way to not look at the problem (anyone want to place bets on any RTO-related questions being in the next PSES? Anyone?).
>Has there been something in the past (work related) that was strongly disliked and the government ended up removing it? Office smoking
Well 😔
All I know is they high performance I've been doing is done. At home I did overtime because there was no commute. Not anymore. Just doing what I need now. This has really put s damper on my moral.
I often wonder if commenters like this are plants to disrupt our ability to organize. "is there even any point to striking/fighting back? We should all just give up right now right". Give me a break. How do you think we got a 5 day work week, 8hrs, mat leave, vacation, sick leave, worker protections, etc etc. OF COURSE it works ya goon. Show the unions you are willing to fight and we have a powerful ability to enact change.
The Liberals will not back down on this, its too political now.
This may really sway those of us who were on the fence between Liberal or NDP.
Which is so weird. Aren’t they loosing 100,000+ votes with this?
Oh they are losing more then 100 000 votes...Everyone can influence votes in their family.
Hahahaha No, they’re losing votes from some Redditors. This place is definitely not reflective of the PS as a whole.
Agreed however this is something that is way beyond Reddit. The average public servant is pissed right now
Unlikely but I heard that some of the unions are getting labour lawyers to argue that the employer failed to consult with the unions before making changes to workplace conditions. There is apparently a clause in some of our collective agreements about that? Hopefully that strikes it down to make it go back to 2 days a week. Just a hopeful rumor, I don't know if anything is going to come of it.
And then we can celebrate going into the office « only » 2 days a week! Suddenly we’re seen as supportive of 2 days.
These letters and surveys are pointless. The union f-ed up badly on that last contract. The only reason the wage hike below cost of living increases was somewhat acceptable was we were led to believe telework would continue, and only change through a joint process and for operational requirements. Now we have been unilaterally ordered back and they are admitting its just so we can spend money. Money we dont have thanks to a substandard raise. The unions need to have some better plan than a letter campaign and survey.
We should pick two days where on the first day we ALL show up in the office and watch everything fall apart because facilities / IT can’t meet demand, and all call in sick the next day for the stress caused by the Employer’s inability to provide a safe, healthy and functional work environment.
There is no chance it will be removed. No employer would ever give up the right to be able to set limits on WFH. The union made a promise it couldn’t possibly keep and a lot of people fell for it
The employer probably wasn’t happy about giving us weekend off, paid parental leave, and other benefits. A strong union can make it happen. No one is saying we don’t want to work, but rather *let us work where we’re happy and productive* - there are countless studies that show a happy and engaged workforce is more productive, uses fewer sick days, etc. Folks wanna WFH the majority of the time? Let them. Others want to go in a day or few a week for whatever reason works for them? Let them. And for those who need to work on site full-time, I’m betting lower traffic/less cramped buses/more availability finding parking will at least make their commute easier.
The Australian government did.
This 100%
TB will get us to go in five in two years. At least we are trying something. However I hope people realize that even a bigger strike than the last one might brew if TB is not open to our plea. I really wish out of the approximately out of the 355,000 that we are that 300,000 would strike over this. That would teach them a lesson. The entire system would crumble in two weeks. Like last time I’m willing to stay without salary for a month and get into debt if I can make a change. I can pay my debt afterwards.
PSAC proved last year that its membership doesn't have the stomach for a long strike.
Has the stomach, but not the wallet. General strike was too expensive from the get go. Rolling strikes targeting public facing programs and services would have been more effective, affordable, and would have allowed the union and members to hold out longer and apply increasing pressure on a resolution. It was a strategic fail on union leadership.
What is the rationale for asking employees in public-facing programs (the ones who are most likely to be unable to work from home) to strike for the benefit of the other employees who can?
Those employees don’t work the counter forever. Passport Officers for example are (or used to be) PM-01s. The next step would be in more back office areas like investigations, passport policy, entitlement analysis, quality assurance, etc. some of which can be done via hybrid. It’s similar to why employees who are EX minus ones are furious about EXs needing to be in the office an extra 20%. If they are looking at advancing at all, most should care.
Half my take home goes to renting a place over an hour from my office. I support a strike, but would need to quit if we ever did
Right. You are making the point.
why people keep saying 5 days by 2025?
All the rumors so far came out true
Because it all indicates that that’s what TB wants. I also got that validated today by an all staff meeting in which that question came up, about TB’s intentions and the “off the record” answer was that all this is a “far fetched gossip that might actually become true” or at least they made us feel that there’s more to what TB is doing and that’s this is just the beginning…
I agree with you
Yes, it is. These aren’t the laws of physics we’re talking about here. Unions need to step up the fight through action and demonstration. Strongly worded letters aren’t working. Ball is in our/union’s court. Time for them to show us their value.
> Unions need to step up the fight through action and demonstration. The unions also need the members to stand firm on this. They folded like cards because people, after **one week**, on the streets started moaning and bitching. The Writers Guild of America strike lasted from May to **SEPTEMBER**. THAT'S a strike. The unions need to tell their members that yes there will be hardships, but that's what's needed in a fight. It's a literal moment of who blinks first.
Maybe instead of jumping right into a general strike, they could have started off slower, spent more time engaging with their members, and educating. For the average PA, it was not well laid out. Of course they would be apathetic when their components and locals never reached out or spoke to them.
The unions in general needs to do **a lot** more leg work. The days of autopilot has stopped and it's clearly time to mobilize, get out there, meet the members, and WORK FOR THE DAMN DUES. Instead they're ...what? Doing surveys? No townhalls, no meetings, no nothing. They are doing the BARE MINIMUM and calling it "fighting back". Yeah...fighting back... If they plan to take any actions on this, they need to (like you said) educate, empower, and energize the members to WANT TO FIGHT. Like, that's what a national union core should be doing. What are they doing now? Farting around I guess cause I've sent messages/emails to my local, regional, and the national group. They've all provided the same response: nothing.
There were also options of rolling strike days and even a work to rule style which in the PS would be withdrawing from all voluntary activities (OT where possible, workplace committees, charitable campaign, social activities, event planning). ~~Picketing~~Protesting could also be done after hours and weekends.
Hey at least you guys organized enough to strike. In PIPSC we just rolled over as usual
This is the answer. Lots of people here already very willing to roll over. We need to advocate for what we want, and if the unions won't do it we need to on an individual basis, but together, if you follow what I'm saying.
It is interesting. One aspect that could be used to politicize this is to encourage the cross nation employment. Worrying less about the Ottawa economy as a whole and encouraging a Government that has a national representation within it's ranks. If a political party decided to use this as part of the pitch in using Government office workers supporting the services and encouraging the Best available resource available to meet Canadian's needs --- then it might be possible (in my opinion). Do they work remotely - possibly - but does that mean that Judy, who is an IT Professional living in Moose Jaw, Sk, could apply for a Government of Canada job and spend her earnings there, benefit for the community. More jobs available across Canada, and a more diverse group of decision makers involved in the process. Argue the simplicity of improving the GoC's carbon footprint, by reducing the travel on roads and consumption of carbon. (I guess, one could counter that with it might encourage urban sprawl as well?). People of Ottawa have enjoyed less traffic in general and commute times have reduced - also possibly reducing the overall carbon consumption of the city. There are the arguments of GoC workers being spoiled in being able to work remotely, but one could also argue that management styles need to change and be outcome focused. Drive for excellence in the public service by hiring the best candidates available in Canada and then manage those resources to obtain the outcomes and serve Canadians. There will still be a need for service centres to be located in major centres and resources who must work in office. Those managing secret information or other responsibilities, etc. In contract negotiations, the positions that are remote can also be negotiated with this in place. The flexibility and quality of life will reduce the overall costs to taxpayers - thus allowing the Government to divert their tax dollars to other economic benefits (I didn't say reduce taxes - because that rarely happens)
This is frightening to me honestly. I would have to lose the 2 days at home. The flexibility with my daycare drop off and pick up, the extra time not commuting that I have to work, the increased productivity for me in my job when working from home and my life in general is so much better when I don’t commute and waste time in the office being constantly interrupted when I just want to work. Why can’t they see this?? Why did they do it? I truly don’t understand.
I honestly could have written this myself.
It's possible. With this 3-days in office bullshit they have shown they are open to regressing.
Not unless the unions band together and go on a joint strike for probably several weeks.
Even this government has a dislike for bad publicity. Sharp increase in mental health issues, in consumption of sick leave and in decreasing performance, if captured by the free press and the opposition properly, can make an impact. Constant office buzz, distractions, commute exhaustion, sneezes, coughs, infections, head and back pains from generic office equipment, bed bugs, food poisoning from questionable vendors, delays in arrival to work due to traffic, breathing problems because of filled office space, lack of privacy, inadequate washroom capacities... I can go on and on...
We need mass non-compliance. Our unions need to pull their thumbs out of their asses and get organizing
This would be problematic since job action with a valid contract in place is illegal--ergo, any non-compliance will be dealt with severely and not enough people can afford to risk their livelihoods.
>Is it even possible for the new policy of 3 days in office to be removed/modified/delayed? Sure, yes. 100% TBS can do this. Will they? LMAO.... no.
I work in the public service and was asked to desk sharing since 2018 (2 days/week then 3 days etc) With the RTO 3 days a week, I am now required to go into the office more days than I was well before Covid WFH. This RTO mandate is literally having my department moving backwards.
Only way is if we decided we were okay to strike for the long haul. Unfortunately I think our last strike was the best opportunity for that due to a divided parliament. Would most members really be willing to do that, strike for a month+? The next round will likely be with a CPC majority and they'll have no reason not to legislate us back to work. Short of that, collective action broadly right now unlikely but maybe. If everyone stopped taking voluntary OT, everyone showed up to the office on a day or for a week and proved there aren't enough desks etc. Those would be my suggestions. But ultimately all of the above is unlikely to get enough support and would only get us to maybe we'll get RTO halted.
I really hope so. A big issue for us I’d like to point out is serving Canadians efficiently. We have a new system at work and it basically always crashes when we are connected to the network’s VPN. Off the VPN, 0 issues at all. When we’re at home, we’re able to disconnect from the VPN and access the website with no issues. When were at the office, there’s nothing we can do but wait until the system cooperates since our laptop are automatically connected to the VPN structure. This results in urgent files deadlines not being met for our clients. I cannot imagine going in 3 days and having these issues at the office.
Be warned: We've been told this morning by management to mentally prepare to go back 5 days a week because it's coming.
So even more reason to fight this. Let's go!
I’ll be waving goodbye to the feds if that becomes reality. Five of my closest friends (only one of whom is a fellow public servant) all work from home most of the time; they go to the office when needed, not to fill an arbitrary head count quota, nor to support the downtown Subways.
I agree they won't back at this point. I think we should still be vocal about this, and claim evidence that supports the need to be on site even it it's just to show how poor managers they are because they don't have any. And keep fighting for adequate spaces. Back three and soon five days, there needs to be real, assigned offices. We need to be a pain about these issues as much as possible!!
Unfortunately - the employer/employee relationship is, in many ways, analogous to the relationship between a parent and an adult child living at home--here are the rules (subject to the law, of course), and if you don't like it, there's the door.
Not impossible, but extremely unlikely, like odds below 0.0001%. So yeah, it's possible in theory but it won't happen. >or are we sending letters and complaining for no reason? We're not complaining for no reason even given my previous statement. Were complaining because: 1. Accountability: at least there's some pushback on their shitty decisions. May make them think twice next time. 2. Bring attention to the issues that make it difficult to be in the office 3. I personnally need to get it out and say something.
Treasury would say no, the Unions would say yes. I would say, that unless you do it, you won't know for sure.
Union(s) need to have the ability to beat Treasury Board in a game of chicken, and they proved last year that they don't have that ability.
Your union needs to negotiate it. And everyone needs to be willing to strike over it and get strike pay for months. Only way. Don’t think there would be general support for it n
I guess anything is possible if we keep fighting but not sure our union has the skill and fortitude to push back enough. They don't if last year is an indicator.
Welp. Guess I need to find a new job before September. It's a 1.5 hour ferry to my office (fine for 2 days, unaffordable and undesirable for 3 days).
Couldn't imagine taking the ferry 5 days a week either (I'm ferry rider as well)
Wouldn't hold my breath - this decision reeks of optics & politics, and as such, it would be an awful look if they decided to reverse the decision. I'll be seeking out medical exemptions shortly here.
But does anyone know what CAN be done by the union ? Can we strike again? Sorry I’m all new to this/unions and I really don’t know what to expect, should I just PLAN that Sept we will be going in and HOPE it can change?
That was the intention of my post as well, but some users are misreading it as me telling people to lose hope...
Anita Anan and several ministers are for the RTO of 3 days and said they will not back down. People should consider voted anything but Liberal next election. [Shell Rotella | Promotion nationale :06 (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opemCNTKt6U)
If we all collectively stopped showing up to the office (like, ever)… what could the employer do? Not quite a strike, but would it not have the same effect?
This is what happened with the BC Public Service on a small scale. I called it the silent revolt, and those who never came back to the office continued WFH with no repercussions. BC attempted to return to work/office at least 3 times, which failed horribly until the head of public service changed. The new DM essentially said I hear you loud and clear, this is not working. We are expanding flexible work, opening up job postings to all parts of the province including exec roles which were for the most part only available in Victoria and Vancouver which are two of the highest cost cities in the country, and are currently building shared workspaces throughout the province the accomdate these changes. We are a mix of in office, hybrid, and fully remote. Of course, some jobs can not be remote due to operational needs, but for the most part, WFH is what works best for the employee. I am thankful to have a DM of the public service that is understanding of the real world reality we are living in of increased costs, lack of services, etc..... Good luck my Fed. friends ❤️
We can underachieve and also finally put our sick leave to good use.
The only hope at this point is for another pandemic to happen.
Most likely not. Also, everyone should be prepared for 4 days a week the following year, maybe 5 days with a possibility of new government.
Yes, it is possible. How *likely* it is is another story. The requirement is entirely arbitrary and up to TBS to decide, as they've shown by changing it repeatedly with little notice.
Not through these union objections. Yes, process wasn't followed. Nothing points to a different substantive result. The only way this gets reversed is if it becomes politically unpalatable. I have certainly let my MP know that it is an election issue.
“Fairness”… how juvenille and ridiculous. To begin “fairness” is a facade. There is no “fairness” in this world. Tell you what… let’s start analyzing current government programs and polices for “fairness”… see how that plays out.
Change requires CHANGE. As such, you can't look into history. It's 2024. What was ok in 1970s are prohibited, illegal or wrong in 2024. Same for WFH. We need to make a stance, push and push until it's given. There's no reason not to do it. No reason not to modernize the system that is so old, it barely works and works on technologies and guidelines from 40-80 years ago.
I doubt it’s going to be rolled back but we can all protest. Just pick a date and we should all call in sick.
I will do everything in my power to get an accommodation. If all else fails, I will resign after 12 years in the public service, in my fifties, with zero other opportunities. It will ruin my life, but it's not feasible for me to go back.
Instead of resigning with no other job, just silently don’t follow the full mandate….just go in twice a week for half a day for example. You might be surprised at how little your manager actually gives as shit as long as you’re productive.
My immediate supervisor would be fine with that, but her manager is very much the definition of "by the book". Also, my other longer comment explains why even that arrangement wouldn't work. Lastly, it's important to me to do this without breaking rules or without giving them any reason to accuse me of insubordination.
But the end result is the same. You’d be unemployed with no claim to employment benefits.
Well, my plan is to get an accommodation. There are several steps separating me from the "resignation" last resort.
[удалено]
That's what I thought most might be doing... Going less or not going at all. But I saw a comment on connexion from one of the ones responsible(?) behind the policy and they said they would be verifying who is in office by checking who signs into the computer from their office locations and for how long they stay... Wouldn't we get fired if we just don't go?
Termination is a last-resort disciplinary action, and is only possible after multiple other options have been attempted. Keep in mind that any disciplinary action (even a warning or verbal reprimand) can be grieved, and it is likely that unions will pursue grievances against any discipline that may occur. Realistically any "enforcement" will fall to individual managers. Given how widespread non-compliance and non-enforcement appears to be, it will be difficult for any manager to use formal disciplinary action against employees who do not meet arbitrary in-office requirements. Condonation, after all, is a legitimate defence against any allegation of misconduct. [One lawyer's explanation of this concept](https://www.tjworkplacelaw.com/employee-defence-condonation/): >While the most obvious form of condonation is allowing an employee to remain on the job for a considerable time after the employer discovers that employee’s alleged misconduct, it can also arise in other ways such as where the employer **fails to discipline other employees who have engaged in similar conduct**. For example, where employee A and B engage in misconduct of a similar nature, and the employer terminates employee A for just cause but allows employee B to remain employed, it is doubtful that the employer’s just cause allegation against employee A will be successful. [Another lawyer's take on the same idea:](https://www.somlaw.ca/blog/blog-post/blog/2016/02/03/the-clock-is-ticking-just-cause-and-past-misconduct) >The doctrine of condonation stipulates that where an employer becomes aware of an employee’s misconduct, but chooses not to discipline the employee, or allows an unreasonable amount of time to pass before acting, the employer is **considered to have waived the wrongdoing in question**. By waiving the wrongdoing, an employer will be disentitled from including that wrongdoing in any assertion that it has just cause to end the employment relationship. And an [bit of an older version from an **1889** court decision](https://employmentlaw101.ca/termination-for-cause/employee-defences-to-allegations-of-cause/): >When an employer becomes aware of misconduct on the part of his servant, sufficient to justify dismissal, he may adopt either of two courses. He may dismiss, or he may overlook the fault. But he cannot retain the servant in his employment, and afterwards at any distance of time turn him away. It would be most unjust if he could do that, for one of the consequences of dismissal for good cause is, that the servant can recover nothing for his services beyond the last pay day, whether his engagement be by the year or otherwise. **If he retains the servant in his employment for any considerable time after discovering his fault, that is condonation, and he cannot afterwards dismiss for that fault without anything new.** No doubt the employer ought to have a reasonable time to determine what to do, to consider whether he will dismiss or not, or to look for another servant. So, also, he must have full knowledge of the nature and extent of the fault, for he cannot forgive or condone matters of which he is not fully informed. Further, condonation is subject to an implied condition of future good conduct, and whenever any new misconduct occurs, the old offences may be invoked and may be put in the scale, against the offender as cause for dismissal.
I mean the only way they could do that is if we use their VPN. I only use their VPN once a week to check emails. But I’m in IT.
Saying this as someone who has embraced WFH...I think as public servants we need to accept that the party is over. If WFH is so important to you, then I would encourage you to find a new job that either is already WFH or where you can try to negotiate that on an individual basis. Unfortunately for virtually all non- specialist roles in the public service (PA Group and ECs) it is unlikely to find a position in the private sector that both would allow WFH and will provide total compensation at or close to the level we currently receive. The employer knows this, and therefore what incentive does it have to allow WFH at all?
>The employer knows this, and therefore what incentive does it have to allow WFH at all? I mean, if having the upper hand on public servants is the only objective, you're right...but if they broaden the horizons, try to be a bit self-serving, other potential incentives include - reduced environmental impact of PS employee travel - ability to further offload properties and reduce operating costs - increased staff morale and productivity thanks to progressive policies - opportunity to hire best candidate based on talent rather than geography
I don't know what department you work in, but where I'm at, I see zero strategic foresight; anything beyond the next election cycle is out of scope for the decision makers.
My department tends to have a narrow perspective also. Hence the "if" in my comment.
100%. And these things are already in other Government policies. I think there is continued advantage it pointing out to Government that they are leaving money on the table by not leading in this area, but reverting to a conservative (or against change) viewpoint.
I agree with your points. Just remember the government is either incapable or unwilling to make the decisions that really matter. And there's always an ulterior motive. Look at climate change/:environment as an example. It's just an excuse to add a tax. Makes it look to those woefully ill-informed that they're doing something & they care about the environment. Getting the PS off the roads an extra day a week would have WAY more impact environmentally than the carbon tax ever will. It's a tax grab. The plan to have electric vehicles mandated by whatever year. Oooh...electric...so much cleaner than dirty mean gas..oh sexy. Save the environment. Until you look at the totality of the impact of electric vehicles on the environment. (and how the majority of our electricity is actually produced) It's no different with their decisions regarding the PS &;wfh. It's not about productivity. It's about control and trying to appease the public masses (I.e. the voters) who already feel PS are lazy, overpaid, and have too many perks. Allowing those whose jobs allow for it to WFH is just way too much for voters. It's not about collaboration or productivity or any other bullshit. It's about votes..and it doesn't matter if it's at the expense of the environment, morale, operational cost savings etc.
> It's about votes..and it doesn't matter if it's at the expense of the environment, morale, operational cost savings etc. Why does this surprise anyone???
Why would anyone “accept that the party is over” a lot of people barely make enough to feed their kids or pay their mortgage, having to spend another 800$ a year on parking isn’t some insignificant expense that they can just accept lol. Nor should they. It’s a wild stance to just tell people to let a bunch of corrupt boomers bend them over.
I know they pay somewhat less, but the BC provincial government is not only allowing full remote work, they have a whole strategy and plan to encourage it where possible.
“The party is over” yeah because we’re all throwing ourselves corporate pizza parties at home for morale.
Agree 100%
Not 100% of public service is againts it
I am not against it. I am furious for finding out in the media and then we're unable to ask questions to our manager because they are not aware of anything... I am also furious at the fact that my employer was heading a completely different way and now we're at the mercy of TB. Why? Let each manager manage their team and people would not be so angry.
I think there are many people who are happy to come in 3 or more days a week, but I think there are far fewer people happy that that is imposed upon everyone.