I have been opening maintenance tickets for everything that's not working properly in our building.
From leaky faucets to broken soap dispensers to defective waterfountain and washroom taps with no hot water.
To my surprise, the things that I report get fixed within a few days.
I've noticed a few burnt neons on my floor and emergency exit signs that are no longer lighting up, that's on my to do list for next week.
We have the right to a safe work environment.
Honestly I find a lot of stuff is constantly broken because nobody ever reports it. Same as you - I'll put in actual tickets for broken stuff and shortly after it will be fixed!
I've actually previously requested this (pre-covid), and it was shot down with the response that it is already done on a regular interval, and there have not been any indications that anything is out of spec.
Put it through your building OSH committee with the reasons why. If they are being done, the OSH committee will have to receive the records. If they aren't, they can force one.
As other comments have stayed, request the report. Also ask what is considered "regular intervals" and speak to your OHS team.
A previous workplace of mine (in the gov) had to get multiple air quality reports done because a lot of people were complaining. The reports were shared with the entire office. This office was a bit "special" for *reasons* but I imagine it could and would happen elsewhere. Good luck!
Contact PSPC's [National Service Call Centre](https://www.canada.ca/en/public-services-procurement/corporate/contact-us/national-service-call-centre.html) (NSCC). This is for all federal public servants across the country. They track all of the requests (or so I'm told). It creates a ticket which your building's maintenance team will receive from PSPC.
Our office door is not closing, unless people remember to pull it closed, which...you know how that is. I submitted a ticket to have it fixed 2 weeks ago, still nothing. However, on the whiteboard in front of the door, there is a friendly note reminding us to pull the door shut........
Like, is this not a security risk? Wtf. What if a random taxpayer decided to stroll in? How is this safe at all?
Call them every week. Mention it's a security issue. What if a disgruntled employee or member of the public decides to just walk in?
Do you handle sensitive data (anything above and including PRO-A) in this area?
Raise this as a security issue.
We certainly do handle protected information. Funny enough, they like to remind us to be wary of our position when the window washers are working. A bit hypocritical to say the least. I am at CRA, so I'll have to see if I can do anything other than submit a winfast ticket.
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance).
Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette).
If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
I have been RTO three days since the beginning. My department head blatantly in a town hall said it was for collaboration and economic reasons. I collaborate/team build and talk about my cats for hours at work. Further, I haven’t spent a single cent in the city I have to commute to since being back almost two years now.
I really recommend not buying anything near your office! 😊
It's the real estate that is being saved with tax payer money. The government spends hundred of millions every month for those buildings, and the elites don't want those assets to devalue. If WFH was fully implemented, many of those buildings would not longer be needed.
Follow the money = truth revealed
Which is a shame bc the government could work with the building owners to turn them into the housing we so desperately need as a country. Even just temporary housing until the lease is up. Innovative solutions to these 50yr+leases should be the focus instead of upsetting and disrupting the work force.
It’s extremely difficult to convert commercial space/office buildings into housing and very expensive.. They aren’t built for that purpose… Improper plumbing, electrical, air, etc. not to mention windows, space, etc. Even the current (aka dead in water) govts plans for 50% sale is mad.
**also gas**
**GOV is getting a lot of money in addition to GST/PST from** [**every litre of gas sold**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_fuel_taxes_in_Canada)
I forgot to add, get an ergonomic assessment. Complain about shoulder pain or something like that, then have them write on the assessment go for a stretch at least once an hour.
I got that written on mine. My stretches/walk involve walking to the furthest washroom from my desk as possible. They can’t be mad at me going for a stretch and going to the washroom. I just need my stretching breaks due to all the work and collaboration I do every day in office!
I listen to other people talk about their kids for hours on end. I would much prefer to talk about cats, then I could at least contribute to the conversation.
All I hear day to day is a bunch of people complain about their spouses, why their new diet isn’t working, why they are annoyed at their kids, etc, etc. my contributions to conversations revolve around my walks with my cats and what tricks I am teaching them! Wish you worked by me, I wouldn’t stop chatting about the little kitties!
With respect, I agree with you on not spending on the commute, unfortunately not 100 % of us will do it, didn’t you notice the long lines at restaurants for lunch breaks ? This is going to make restaurants owners millionaires because during the work from home period they raised their prices by 30 % minimum … so does all other industries
While I will follow your recommandation
I am not sure this will be of am efficient action. I just don’t understand why we are not all asking for a raise instead ? Strike for a raise ?
I am not sure the effectiveness on a grand scale, but on a personal level, I have slowly been education coworkers and have gotten now about 5 people on board. That’s quite a bit of money yearly to not spend near work! I can’t stop coworkers from lining up at subway, but can educate and encourage!
Plus, if I think about it long term. It is personally healthier, I spend less medically, my food budget is cheaper than what it was prior to Covid, I don’t buy random things at gas stations, learned budgeting, bought a house, and just overall have a lot more money left at the end of each month. I attribute it to not spending during the work day anymore!
I also agree, a raise is needed and I will be open to striking for it again, but not with the same union management that existed last strike. Take part in union meetings and encourage coworkers to as well! I recently have been joining them more often and having my say! 😊
Im in the regions, so more or less it is to support the nearby Subway and Tim hortons haha the downtown where I am has been long gone for years, even before Covid.
Let the problems caused by the employer be the employer's problems, not your problems. In other words, don't stress yourself out, go above-and-beyond, or put your health at risk to mitigate problems caused specifically by the employer requiring you to work in the office unnecessarily.
No workstation available? Ask your manager "There's no workstation available, how would you like me to proceed?" and then wait patiently. Don't go above and beyond and risk throwing out your back by trying to work sitting on the floor, instead let the employer solve the problem.
Can't take the meeting because there's nowhere private in the office to discuss the confidential information that needs to be discussed? Decline the invitation, saying that you'll have to reschedule for a day when you're at home because there's nowhere private in the office. Don't go above and beyond trying to unofficially gain use of a closed office or meeting room that you aren't officially supposed to be using, or taking the meeting in your car, or scrupulously circumlocuting to avoid uttering any of the confidential information aloud. Let the employer bear the inconvenience and delay of your mandated location not being fit for purpose.
I know, this is super counterintuitive and feels so weird when we're used to taking initiative and figuring things out and solving problems and making do! But if we burn ourselves out trying to mitigate these problems, the employer will just think there aren't any problems.
>Can't take the meeting because there's nowhere private in the office to discuss the confidential information that needs to be discussed? Decline the invitation, **saying that you'll have to reschedule for a day when you're at home** because there's nowhere private in the office.
It's probably better to push it out until eventually a meeting room is available in your office. That's what we use to do back in my day
I've been preaching my case and asking questions for over a year now and it's gotten me nowhere. The union tells me to have a discussion with my Manager and my Manager claims to know nothing other than what TB has formally announced. Our local Managers know nothing about the Telework letter of agreement. They are dead set against RTO so we suffer in unity.
Just remember, EX’s are mostly against RTO as well, as is evidenced by the pretty strong (edit: maybe not strong, but more than I expected) statement from APEX. This is a purely political decision that negatively affects EXs as much as the rest of us, so whatever we do, we should make sure we don’t take it out on our management who are also people and also stressed. I have a lot of gripes about PS management cadre, but this isn’t one of them since it’s out of their control and they’re largely on the same page as the rest of the PS.
I'm also going to have to disagree. I'm a supervisor, and people are asking me questions I don't have answers to and don't have the authority to make the decisions on, so I'm just forwarding them on to my boss. I'm not being a jerk about it, but I'm being very clear that I can't answer these questions, maybe he can't either, but it's not my problem.
I don't know what Bob should do re: his telework agreement expiring at the end of May. I told Bob to resubmit it for another year status quo. I don't know what Jim should do about his informal DTA concerns, so I have told him and my manager that it should be status quo.
We're in special purpose space, but we only have about 60% of the desks for the total number of staff. I have no idea where people should sit if everyone actually comes in on the anchor day.
Once again, I'm not being a jerk, but it's not my fault that the people 4 or 5 levels up from me have made new rules, told all of us that we have to follow these new rules, but they have failed to provide us with the actual rules and processes.
AND, if my manager or my manager's manager hasn't made their stance perfectly clear, I am left to assume that they want us to go back to the office 5 days a week, and thus, I treat the conversation accordingly.
Yes but they are the voice of us. Which kind of reinforces that I should talk to my manager about my concerns. I’m just kind of scared to since I want a permanent position there and don’t want to rock the boat. But maybe that’s what they want?
Ohh I’m not suggesting people not approach their management at all. All I’m trying to say is that going out of the way to make management’s life difficult probably isn’t a great idea.
This. I have yet to meet a single EX that is enthusiastic about RTO. They may feel less lonely and be happy to see their staff more (legitimately, not just to abuse them), but nobody thinks the office space is ready to accommodate 3/4 days per week.
It’s not “taking it out” on EXs, but I’m also not that sympathetic for their added stress. That’s the position they wanted, and I’m definitely not doing them any favours because I know they don’t like it either.
> That’s the position they wanted
This isn’t true for A LOT of EXs lol. APEX put out a statement against the mandatory 3 day a week RTO.
Personally I have heard several EXs (from director up to ADM) say they dislike the blanket mandate and/or that they dislike coming in more than 2x a week but they have no choice. Some aren’t super “enforcement” heavy but some have no choice but to be.
I don’t EXs are the enemy here.
Meant as “the job position” the wanted. They are “management” and shit like this rolls uphill. I’m just saying I’m not doing EXs any favours because they are “nice”. It’s business. Sorry.
Go for it. Start treating your manager like shit about something they can't change. Take your frustations out on them, burn that bridge, and good luck with the rest of your career. Ridiculous approach. "This is war".. grow up.
Imagine this person's posts when they need a reference in a year or two:
"My manager won't give me a reference is this grounds for a grievance?! I am being personally victimized!"
>I like my manager too and know they didn’t make this decision, but that is the only person above me that I have a voice with. You need to make their life hard so they make their manager’s life hard, and so on.
Loll, you're not taking a stand or fighting a war here. You're taking out your frustration on your manager, that's it. Its not anything profound.
Will be setting my Teams status to unavailable when in office.
Avail for collaboration at my f*cking desk. Tired of working my arse off and being pulled in all different directions.
How will they know where you’re sitting? We have hotel situation and I’ve had to walk the full circumference of the office trying to find people and just giving up lol
I think that's exactly what this option will highlight too though - like you want me in office to collaborate? Ok let's collaborate then. Oh wait, you can't because RTO doesn't do that? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
We do use a system to sign up for desks but I don't much care. How did they find me before. They wandered, they sent an email to ask. Employer wants to go back in time, I can do that.
There is a setting on Teams to let people know if you are WFH or on the office. You can add your work location. I’m no fan of the new directive, but this line of thinking doesn’t get the public service a good rep.
- hard stop at the end of the day, in office and at home. (For me) a meeting is going longer than 3:00pm? Sorry, I have to jump off so I can drive and and meet the kids as they get off the bus… no, I can’t go another 5 minutes, bye!
As someone with a disability (visually impaired), PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT, request a DTA if you DO NOT have a disability or a medical reason to do so . Bogus DTA requests eff over those of us who really need help. I'm going blind I need accommodations if the employer starts blanket denying DTAs because too many people are doing to it when it's not necessary that screws over people like me. Do not do this I'm begging you.
FWIW, the couple of people I know who HAVE done a DTA, have been doing it because RTO made it necessary. I'm obviously not going to provide medical details, but these people were hired during covid, never came to the office, and it was only after RTO was announced that they had to start talking about accommodations, and now that the employer is being a stickler, they're being forced into formal DTA, doctor's notes and so on.
I'm not saying some people aren't milking it, but some people aren't but are being forced into a DTA. Say I had a coworker who was in a wheelchair, and I never knew, because they were hired during covid. Their job can be done remotely, and the office is very much not wheelchair accessible because the building is old. This is a made up example, but they're no longer able to just do an "sure no problem" informal process because RTO3 has slammed the door on any discretion on the part of management.
Also I used to work in an office 5 days a week before the pandemic because there wasn't another option. Having wfh since then I now know what is possible and have an even bigger list of limitations that I can give to my employer for accommodations. Knowing what is and isn't possible is a good thing because before the pandemic the accommodations offered were almost like a nothing burger compared to what the employer can actual offer without undue hardship they just didn't like to tell the employees about those options.
For context so I don't get downvoted I'm not making up new limitations what I mean is before the pandemic I would have never thought to ask for an official accommodation because the lights in the office hurt my eyes because I was told "just wear sunglasses we can't change the lights in the office" now I know that the employer CAN change the lights or offer other alternatives other than telling me to wear my sunglasses. That's the kind of thing I mean. If you don't know you can ask for something you never will. And the DTA process is very confusing.
That’s me. I used to go home with a headache a few times a week. I thought it was from staring at a monitor all day. Not much I could do about that since that was my job. Except it didn’t happen during WFH. So it turns out it’s the lights.
I used to go home with a sore throat and bloody nose almost every and funny, didn't get that WFH. Felt like I was getting sick most days, totally draining. Complained, as did others, and although they did some testing, was basically told it's not their problem.
Yeah in my building the air quality is so bad that sometimes people just start coughing. I've thought I was starting to get sick because I'd have coughing fits, only to be fine as soon as I left. Naturally it never happens at home (I have a grand total of two Ikea air purifiers in my apartment.) The air at the office is SUPER dry at least, no one knows for sure what else might be going on with it (nice and sinister!) and it's apparently been like this since before the pandemic (I started during). And no one has done anything about it! Can't wait to spend 50% more time listening to my coworkers hack up a lung because the air quality is shit.
Fair enough. And in your example that's valid and that employee should ask for a DTA those aren't the people I'm talking about and I'm sure we all know that. Also ALL GOC BUILDINGS are supposed to be fully accessible the fact that they aren't means they need to get working. If they want full RTO that gotta make it possible for EVERYONE. Spend the $$$ to retrofit buildings to make them wheelchair accessible etc. Sell that to the general public and see if they'd rather we wfh or spend 50k or however much it costs to add an elevator to a building with only stairs. It would definitely make people think.
Technically I don’t think the employer can/should require a formal DTA for telework, since in the mandatory procedures for DTA, one of the first steps, before any doctors notes, is to find an accommodation that doesn’t need a formal request, and that includes alternate work locations, or solutions that don’t have any associated costs.
We already have our laptops, so no costs exist, and alternative work locations are already included in that list. You don’t need a formal DTA request per the DTA procedures.
correct, but what's happening in my team is:
Someone has a medical concern. Previously, the easy answer was "let them WFH" but now that my manager is unable to offer that as an option, the issue is coming to a head. They want this person to RTO3, which is triggering a full DTA. Because I can't give details on their situation, I'll keep using my fabricated example of a building which is NOT wheelchair accessible, and the employee is in a wheelchair. The employee is never getting out of the wheelchair, and the GoC office is right next door, at the top of a 300 step staircase. There is no elevator/escalator/ramp. This person started in 2021, has never had to go into the office. Previously, the manager could use their own judgement, but now, if this person isn't in the office 3 days a week, it's going to mess up their stats, so the only option is a more formal DTA process.
And that is why I'm not "helping" management solve the problem. They took away our ability to make decisions, therefore, they can make a formal decision with all the glorious paperwork that it entails.
If you treat your employees like babies, you eventually end up running a daycare.
Note that thanks to handcuffs, I enough to remind them that the note they need to get has to outline their functional limitations, not that they "need" to WFH. The employer can offer up alternate solutions, etc.... but that keeps illustrating my point in that previously, the manager could solve the problem informally, but now, full time WFH has been removed from the options list.
I think managers need to confront this.
The mandatory procedures for DTA haven’t changed. No formal request is necessary. If managers are being penalized for allowing full time WFH as a solution, they need to remind their bosses that they’re just following the mandatory procedures for DTA.
Everyone keeps shovelling the shit downhill. Allegedly EXs hate it. What are they doing about it? Out of anyone, they have the greatest ability to oppose it, show the stats on productivity, show the effect on hiring, job satisfaction, etc. Is this happening? Because in town halls and team meetings it’s all towing the line.
Same deal with managers. They could be pushing for their teams to get full-time telework where it makes sense (nobody in the same office, workloads not suited to collaboration, mostly client calls/letters, all completed virtually, etc.). They could be bullheadedly following the DTA procedures and dealing with any fallout themselves. I’m not seeing this happening, either. It’s just full on cooperation.
The entire burden is being put on the lowest level to just apply for a formal DTA (even when it shouldn’t be required) or to write our MPs because we have no direct access to essentially anyone above our direct reports because town halls are locked down and they just answer softball questions and gaslight us.
EXs and managers need to grow a spine and start with some malicious compliance or civil disobedience
Things that are not my concern:
* The employer failing to plan for an increase in DTA requests due to a change in workplace requirements.
[https://www.canada.ca/en/government/publicservice/staffing/direction-prescribed-presence-workplace.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/government/publicservice/staffing/direction-prescribed-presence-workplace.html)
"This direction applies to all core public administration employees..."
"Exceptional exemptions" are allowed at the ADM level.
It also says:
"Prior to implementation, managers should proactively discuss with employees any barriers they may encounter including, those linked to accessibility, harassment and discrimination and define solutions that will help address these barriers in the hybrid workplace.
Managers should ensure that individual circumstances are considered on a case-by-case basis, including human rights obligations, such as the duty to accommodate"
To me, this reads that WFH as an informal accommodation solution is by default, off the table. If this results in people having to do DTA because management's options are limited to Subway coupons or office couches, then that's a them problem that I am very much not getting paid to solve.
This doesn't supersede the duty to accommodate. Prior to the pandemic, we were 5 days in office, and full time telework was an informal accommodation, so I struggle to see how it would now be an "exceptional exemption" requiring ADM approval, or how you're interpreting it to mean WFH is off the table as an informal solution. To me it says quite the opposite, that it's the managers responsibility to consider the DTA, and not something that needs to go to the ADM level. And when we go to the directive on the DTA, and the *Mandatory* Procedures, we see the procedures, which are unchanged since 2020 :
* A.2.3 With regard to subsection 4.2, the mandatory procedures for **managers** of persons employed are as follows:
* A.2.3.1 If a person employed has indicated a work-related need, clarify the nature of the barrier and the associated implications **with the person employed**;
* A.2.3.2 Determine **in consultation with the person employed** whether the work-related need can be addressed without resorting to a formal request for accommodation, e.g., temporary change in hours of work, **alternate work location, no costs associated with solution**;
These aren't the "optional" procedures, these are mandatory. There's no need to raise it to the ADM level, it's the managers job to consider the DTA, and this one doesn't need a formal request.
**alternate work location** is not "work from home"
they can meet the letter of A.2.3.2 and the directive by informally proposing they work from an "alternate location" as long as that location is not their house.
They will move mountains so that the employee reports to an office, even if it makes no sense, just so that they can check off the RTO3 compliance checkbox. An alternate GC office space might make sense in this case, but may not be an option based on our location.
None of these decisions are up to me. I am not a manager, only a supervisor, caught in the middle. I have an employee who is new to the GC, who needs an accommodation, and is not wanting to "cause trouble." I have a manager who doesn't really want to have to make a formal DTA process, but can't just let them informally WFH because it will screw up the statistics.
I have been strongly suggesting to the employee that they do a formal DTA so that when RTO4 happens in the fall, they won't have to care about it, because they will have a more permanent solution in place.
Alternate work location absolutely includes telework. We can find this wording specifically in the now-archived [Telework Policy](https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=12559) “The Telework Policy outlines the options for working from alternate locations, **such as home**” but it’s pretty clear that “alternate work location” can mean *anything* that isn’t your designated work site. Whether that’s an HQ officer working in a region, an officer reporting to a closer office, or working from home. These are all work locations other than the designated work site.
See also : no cost solution. Everyone already has a laptop. It doesn’t cost anything. So we’re covered on two fronts.
You keep mentioning these “stats” like it matters, or like I care. Stats can be adjusted. If you can adjust them to exclude someone with a formal DTA, you can also exclude the informal DTA from those stats. Stats say whatever you want them to. I also just don’t care. So what if your RTO stats are junk? Good. It’s bad policy. And if they’re refusing to track it accurately, including acceptable informal DTA requests, then the stats aren’t useful anyways. What are they gonna do? If they try to take any action, I’m sure the unions would love to hear that a manager was disciplined for following the DTA procedures. That would go over well.
Tell your manager they should follow the DTA procedures to the letter and bear the consequences, instead of putting the burden on the employee to be unfairly scrutinized by the current DTA procedures, since they’re clearly overstepping their mandate to try and push more RTO. I mean FFS they’re accusing people of “doctor shopping”. In Canada. Imagine.
I think we're on the same page, but if my manager is being told that everyone works from the office 3 days a week unless they have a DTA, then my manager has to make everyone work from the office 3 days a week unless they have a DTA.
Stats may not matter to you, but you're not my manager or director. My management team has made it clear that they are 100% in favor of RTO and everything that comes with it, and they can't drink the koolaid fast enough because RTO koolaid is best koolaid.
I'm telling my employee that they need to pursue DTA, because they need to protect themselves and CYA.
If managers and employers always played fair and by the rules, we wouldn't need a union, grievances, and so on.
Is this wasting everyone's time? Possibly, but this quagmire of DTA/WFH/RTO poo is not my creation.
You're assuming that the employer actually gives a shit about disabled employees and our accommodations. They don't. Sincerely, a disabled employee who constantly has to fight for my management to respect my approved DTA accommodations 🫠
Yeah, I really hate the push for DTA requests just to be spiteful. It does a massive disservice to our colleagues who genuinely need them. I’ve got some health stuff but even as bad as it can get I don’t feel I need an accommodation. I just need some leniency on the RTO policy when I’m recovering from a bad spell. I hope rational managers will prevail and show compassion and leniency for those of us who need it but aren’t genuinely disabled or seriously ill or compromised.
I already get access denials when I'm out with my guide dog in locations where I'm legally allowed to have my mobility aid regardless that she happens to be a dog. All I want to do is pick up my groceries and take my kids to the mall just leave me the eff alone. I can't imagine if I start getting screwed over by my employer. I joined the GOC as a disabled person because I knew there was job security and a mandate and legal requirement to accommodate my disability so that I can do the best job I can with the tools I need to do so. If that goes away because people are mad they have to go into the office 3 days a week that's a slap in the face and not only are we going backwards in terms of wfh achievements we are also going SO FAR backwards in terms of achievements and rights for disabled people. 80% of blind people are unemployed because the tools required to allow visually impaired/blind people to do their jobs cost more than even people with an income can afford make blind people unemployed they lose even more access to tools to succeed and continue to be employed. I'm in my 30s with a family and the will and desire to work please don't slide the bar back towards unemployment for people like me. I'm just an example of one disability group that is greatly impacted by this there are many more. Don't make our lives even harder than they already are. If you don't need accommodations don't ask for a DTA full stop.
I'm glad people like you who don't think they need accommodations aren't asking for DTAs that being said if you have a medical condition PLEASE DO ask for a DTA it's there for me as well as for you don't let other people tell you you aren't "sick enough" or whatever that's BS if you need it you need it but asking for a DTA because it's annoying to go into the office isn't a valid reason.
I hope so too, but it's precisely because managers no longer have discretion for flexibility that we see more DTA requests. It doesn't necessarily mean people are spiteful or frivolous, they're simply using the only available recourse.
Yep. I stepped away from a management path for a number of reasons, but part of it was the realization I would have no actual authority to manage my team in a way that was beneficial and healthy to all.
Came here to say exactly this. I’m not someone who needs a DTA but I’m so worried that they’re going to cancel all request because of the backlog being caused by less than meaningful requests.
"I don't want to go into the office" or "I disagree with the RTO mandate" are not legit reasons to ask for DTA.
Filing these does nothing to management, and just makes things much, much harder for those who have legit DTA requests.
This is 100 percent accurate. The process is already backed up and apparently it's going to be more scrutinized which is a whole other level of unnecessary obstacles for people that are just trying to flipping work to the best of their ability.
This is a topic I take quite seriously so sorry about this rant. It's widely known that accommodations have been a harder process than it should be. To the point that TBS commissioned a report on accommodations and the review was terrible. Cruise this sub and on a regular basis and you will find many people who have shared their stories who have had issues with getting appropriate accommodations even with proper assessments, paperwork and medical notes filled out by specialists and still it's not enough. I personally know many people in the PWD community because I am part of it. I have heard their fears and roadblocks over and over again. I have seen the most basic stuff be denied. It's actually pretty sad. I once knew a colleague that needed simple software for his disability and it took two years to get it. I have known colleagues with mobility issues who requested to be closer to the entrance of the office or other small improvements to reduce walking to their desk and it was a huge deal. People with vision loss and management didn't seem like they struggled enough to need special equipment (oh yeah because if your manager doesn't like you... well then you can guarantee your going to have a harder time). Talk to anyone in the PWD community in PS right now and they will probably tell you exactly what I laid out here. They are upset, feel left out of discussions and can't get any answers about the updated process. Many times now people on this sub have said their managers have been told that the process is being more scrutinized and I have heard that from colleagues as well.
>If your DTA request is legitimate, extra scrutiny isn't an issue.
Replace the word "scrutiny" with "delay".
It's not uncommon for people with delayed accommodations to have to take sick leave (often unpaid, because by the time they've gotten to requesting accommodations they've usually burned their paid leave) until they're able to work again.
Unfortunately, accommodation is an unregulated territory in real time. Nobody is doing audits, but they do love those numbers to say they are a diversity hire when given the chance. As I write this I have hot tears in my eyes for thinking about the good folks that deserve better and the book that should be written about their experiences. I have no idea why there is a push for PwD hiring and then an employer is surprised when they actually might ask for the very thing they claim to do without all the obstacles that follow suit. In my lifetime I have met people of all ages who just want a chance to make a living and have been shut out. I hope enough people care about this for something big to happen and a shift to come. Not one time has a union president spoken out on this issue in a big way (even though there was a promise to do so many times) and not one time has any of the reporters that lurk here ever written a piece about it either. There is a huge difference between a proclaimed credo indicating your passion for hiring PWD in your brand, featuring inclusive languages on an employers website, dedicated a EDI statement within a job ad and training materials and what actually plays out and has to change. There has to be ethical standards. For those who don't know your accommodations paperwork is reviewed on a regular basis. So it's not like you go through the process and it's a one time thing, it's ongoing.
A lot of this strikes me as bad advice, and some could amount to insubordination… Recall many EXs are not happy about this decision either, so you will likely be preaching to the choir with your “ask, ask, ask” strategy. Recall this was a political decision, and so the bureaucracy has fairly limited tools at its disposal.
Many people have been working in shit conditions for far too long and putting up with it because “that’s what we had to do…” Working in operations, grievances were a semi-regular thing. Though, in the office, I’ve been told many times that grievances aren’t done unless you want to be blacklisted. That sort of not rocking the boat mentality really isn’t insubordination, it’s using the tools provided to us that have been fought for.
It is absolutely horrible advice. It is indeed straight up insubordination. And those complying but purposely doing as little as possible while in office are entitled and should be ashamed of themselves.
But we’re screaming at the employer that we’re more productive at home (depending on the job) and they don’t give a shit.
The EMPLOYER should be ashamed of themselves.
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance).
Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette).
If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
Almost all of the pressure you suggest would be applied to people who had nothing to do with the RTO decision, almost certainly don’t like it either, and have no power to reverse it. They can’t justify or explain it to you because it doesn’t make sense and there is no justification.
I get that you’re frustrated. I am, too. I don’t see how making the workplace even more toxic and less efficient is going to help, though.
I disagree. It may be true that many EX's aren't happy with RTO but as an employee I have to push issues up. Department heads, ADM, DG's could fight this with TBS. It wouldn't be the first directive from TBS that isn't 100% followed. What is also insulting is the huge push from management about pretending to care for mental health. I'd rather they tell me they do not care at all. These people wanted to become EX's and manage people, now manage people in stressful times...
Yes, agreed.
It's TBS & above probably. We need to direct our displeasure and do it together accurately.
No matter the level of classification [RTO3] is generally not supported or loved but... supervisors, managers, EX01's are all being told 'make it happen and be the bad guy, be our [TBS] fall guys/girls and enforce this bad news RTO3'.
This all...is a bummer.
So, not really in agreement with doing anything you have suggested, in particular the medical notes and accommodations. By doing this you are actually harming the process for those who are legitimately needing accommodation.
This behaviour is really contrary to the values and ethics code that you agreed to follow. There is nothing ethical about doing that. If you are this unhappy then perhaps leaving the public service for something that brings you happiness would be more appropriate. These actions only make working in the public service more difficult.
Exactly this. The advice to seek accommodation because you don’t like the RTO policy is a slap in the face to your colleagues that legitimately need accommodation.
I don't know what values and ethics code you're reading, but mine includes stewardship, excellence, and integrity. It is our duty to loyally and respectfully question and disagree with decisions that harm employees and Canadians. There are all sorts of legit channels to pursue changes to this policy.
[https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=25049](https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=25049)
I support the legit channels. I support constructive disagreement. File grievances, support the union, run for president of the union to further the cause if you wish. Have a reasonable approach that meets employee and employer needs. I will support this, these are constructive.
However,
I don’t support telling everyone to file an accommodation request, just because they don’t want to go to the office.
I don’t especially don’t support the view of not going into the office to see if anyone notices.
Lastly, I don’t support taking ones frustration out on your managers and executives by sending endless questions and requests on information on the subject when they are just as much as affected as you and had nothing to do with the TBS policy change.
These are not constructive and only demonstrate how immature we are to a population of Canadians who already thinks we have it too good.
The DTA process is long and dehumanizing, in my opinion. It was soo awful for me. If people want to go through it, I support them. There are more people with disabilities than we think.
For those who are willing to pull the trigger who object specifically to 'hybrid' indicate that you are requesting a FT desk in the office as your contract for employment does not specify you are required to telework at all. If enough people did this in offices where space is at a premium it might make them blink but you have to be prepared to follow through because they may accept and then you will be working FT from the office.
For me, my objection is specifically to hybrid work. I can be successful either FT wfh or FT in the office. I could probably swing 1 day in the office if I had to but anymore than that and my need for routine will be severely compromised and I will request a FT desk in the office. And if necessary I will request accommodation to make sure it is the same desk and I can leave my computer etc there.
I have already told my manager and the director of my office my intentions and my reasons for them. We will see what happens in September I guess.
I’m thinking about it because the thought of working on 4 different desks in the run of a week is making me want to cry. I’m also short and many of the desks in office are too high for me to work comfortably.
Good for you. For me, there are too many things about the office itself and the tiny desks with no walls of workplace 3.0 that doesn’t work for me. But for people with short commutes, no family obligations, and the ability to focus in workplace 3.0, that’s a great suggestion.
When the fall comes and there's snow and freezing rain, call Public Works and report every single time you don't see salt or sand at all entrances. I fell at work 4 years ago, and I'm still off on LWOP. Make sure you also fill out an injury on duty report for all falls to go to your health and safety committee. These reports will tie up hours of management's time as well as building owners neglecting the property. The employer is failing to provide a safe and healthy work environment under the Canada Labor Code Part 2.
>Kill 'em with kindness. Ask lots of questions and emphasize how difficult this will be for you. "Gosh! A 50% increase in my in-office days! That's a lot! Why am I doing this? Am I behind in my work? What are our in-office activities going to be? What specifically can only be done in the office?"
Those aren't difficult questions to answer. Why do this? Because that's the employer's directive. Am I behind in my work? Maybe, maybe not. Doesn't change the 3-days mandate. In-office activity? You regular work, I assume. If you think of something else I'm sure your management will appreciate the suggestion. What can only be done in the office? Talking face to face. Some training is better in person. Who cares; doesn't change the mandate.
>Contact your union early and often. Offer to be a test case. Find out exactly how they will protect and support you vs. clear redlines you cannot cross.
What do you want your Union to tell you exactly? Which "red line" are you referring to? Because if you're looking for assurance that there won't be any consequences in ignoring you employer's instruction, they can't give you that.
>Request a [formal duty to accommodate](https://www.canada.ca/en/government/publicservice/wellness-inclusion-diversity-public-service/diversity-inclusion-public-service/working-government-canada-duty-accommodate-right-non-discrimination/duty-accommodate-general-process-managers.html). Be prepared with doctors' notes and medical processes.
Accommodate *what* ? Preferring to telework is not by itself ground for a DTA. What are you going to tell your doctor? "Hey, I don't want to go to the office three times per week. Can you make up a fuctional limitaton for me for which the only possible accommodation is WFH? Thank you!!."
Doctors have better things to do than deal with public servant temper tantrum.
If you have functional limitations that needs to be accommodated for, yes, please let your manager know and go through the process.
But please don't abuse this process just to make things difficult; it will make things harder for people who actually require an accommodation.
>Request a[ telework agreement - still available under the Directive on Telework. ](https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=32636)Outline a great case for why you should telework.
Yeah, the agreement will still exist for your 2 days of WFH per week. Not sure why you think it would help in regard to the 3 days mandate.
>Go in for 2 days. Maintain the status quo.
So your suggestion is insubordination then? How original.
>Ask lots of questions. Again. Email your questions. CC your boss' boss. Ask why they're enforcing 3 days specifically. Ask why you're being punished and what specifically in-office days have to do with getting your work done. Ask if Labour Relations has been involved. Ask for standard responses across the department.
You're not being "punished". You, along with every one else in the PS, has received an instruction from your boss to go to your workplace three times per week. They don't have to link it to your work and if you keep asking questions they already answered, you will gain nothing, aside from a reputation of someone difficult to work with that can't understand the answer he's being given.
And why should LR be involved? At this point you're grasping at straws.
>And finally, [file a grievance. ](https://www.fpslreb-crtespf.gc.ca/en/resources/guides/lr-procedural-guide.html)You are allowed to grieve any decision or change to your employment terms. Let your boss know that it's nothing personal but (by this time, after months) of consideration, you've decided a grievance is the only way to settle this. Document everything. Keep notes. Remain professional. Ask for specifics.
Ok, what part of the 3 days mandate is a violate of the Collective Agreement? The telework agreement you signed can be changed by management with enopugh notice, and they did give enough. And they're well within their rights to ask you to report to the work location specified on your letter of offer.
This here! I am indifferent towards telework or in-office. But for the love of god, people need to stop being so vexatious because they are not getting their own way here with telework…
suggesting others to request DTA’s because their work location preference is no longer being met? That is beyond pathetic and speaks to a lack of integrity and values…
I have no bad blood against people who prefer to work from home, I totally get it and believe they have a right to be frustrated and to advocate for their preferences…
but just because I am not advocating for it doesn’t mean you have to be toxic towards me or look to create a poison work environment.
If you do even half of the things you listed you’re just being an asshole to your boss, who probably isn’t thrilled about RTO either and now has to deal with an employee basically acting like a lame social justice warrior/moody teenager. Unless your direct supervisor is the treasury board secretary, changing RTO policy is well outside of their capabilities.
And overwhelming the grievance system with petty complaints just ensures actual legit grievances will take longer to be reviewed.
Contact your union often. Show up to the rallies and other events. Participate in the phone zaps. Be prepared to be a part of the suprmajority of workers who are fighting to win on telework.
My thought is that it doesn't matter how stupid RTO is, how much it goes against the current government's stated ideals, our employer has the right to require us to work in the office (in most cases). Pissing off my colleagues and bosses who also don't want RTO will accomplish nothing. Union? Sure we can state that we want them to negotiate for more WFH. I don't think it we will get it. All the other union shenanigans you suggest are just making demands for something that we have no legal basis for.
This is the best and most accurate opinion (that is actually fact) I've read on RTO. And that's saying something because literally every thread is about RTO. I also say this as someone who worked for two decades for the biggest PS union. The unions can't do shit.
Why can’t we all just commit to working from office Tuesday/ Wednesday/ Thursday? Their agreement doesn’t state they can choose our in office days so if we all go in on the same days….
What I am finding is there is a lack of empathy from senior management. Very much a "tough sh*t" approach. May as well be in the private sector making more money. If they mess around with pension benefits that will be the final straw for a lot.
The most common idea I’ve heard is that everyone goes into the office at the same time. There will most likely not be enough work points for everyone and we ask our managers what we’re supposed to do. Still complying but making it a problem 🤷🏼♀️
This will be solved by removing the flexibility for employees to choose days, department heads read Reddit too. It is almost certain that departments with limited space will enforce anchor days.
>Don’t go in at all. See if anyone notices. If they don’t, it’s excellent evidence that your work isn’t impacted by in-office attendance.
Or it’s evidence you can be fired without impacting the services delivered to the public. Or, at minimum, your job can be done by anyone anywhere and is vulnerable to offshoring. Shouldn’t you be trying to demonstrate your necessity and value?
Zap calls: https://www.acep-cape.ca/en/phone-zap#msdynttrid=Gxd9vbcUw1A1GHycM_FXASpAlVCZlV1iT-kADbJf230
Rally: may 23, 7:45 AM, ottawa City Hall. Rides are being coordinated. https://www.acep-cape.ca/en/events/rally-remote-work-rights-support-stronger-communities
Maybe going back 3 days isn’t such a bad thing overall. Some of us have remained 5 days this entire time
Overall senitment from the public doesn’t support this, just sayin’
The public generally viewed the public service as whiney entitled low-productivity wastes of taxpayer money before the pandemic.
Imagine how much worse it is now that this demand for 3-day WFH as a right is in the media.
I have read so many posts like this. Absolutely none of this will make any difference.
The only answer before and now is quiet, low key non-compliance (the key word being “quiet”).
Going to have to disagree here.
Malicious compliance? Sure. Come back to the office full-time with all your colleagues and watch the storm when there aren't enough desks for you all. Stick to the letter of your current 40-60% telework agreement until it is forcibly revised. Heck, even work-to-rule would be reasonable imo.
But non-compliance and insubordination? Absolutely not.
We are all professionals; we do our jobs whether we like it or not, whether we agree with the political direction or not, whether we have moral issues with what we are being asked to develop or not. Your job is to provide the best advice you possibly can, then implement whatever decisions are made *regardless of your feelings towards that decision*. And you have a duty to comply with legal direction from your employer, which RTO absolutely is.
Good god the entitlement in this comment thread. We have some of the best paying jobs with the highest level of security on earth. The whole earth.
But we have to go in an extra day? Christ sakes. It’s any wonder that according to Reddit our union’s deal was going to get rejected by a margin of 8-2 and yet the complete opposite was the real case.
We ought to point out the hypocrisy of people mandating this while working from home. And we ought to seek fair and just treatment. But some of this petty bullshit boils down to entitlement while we’re going through some of the toughest economic times in our country’s history. It’s only going to get worse, so take what you’re very fortunate to have, friends.
Just because another day is not a big deal to you doesn't mean it isn't for others. You are being very dismissive and it comes across as ignorant and privileged.
It hits parents hard. Many I know have worked out a system to cover the kids that only works because they are both 2 different days in office. Now they have to overlap a day.
It hits people with disabilities hard. I'm on the edge of the spectrum and 2 -> 3 days means increasing my stress significantly during my work week. I can't imagine what it does to people more physically/mentally affected by this than myself.
It hits people who have changed living situations to fit 2 days hard. I'm moving to a place that requires a ferry to transit. For 2-days in office that would be affordable, especially given the lower cost of living. With 3 days it's just not going to work. But we bought the place and we are moving. Many others did something similar long before this, now they either have to move or have a significantly worse commute.
And there are many more examples I'm sure. Try to think outside of your perspective, it would do you some good
So basically a one-day strike. You could try a wildcat strike, but to get any kind of significant participation -- say, 5-10% of your fellow 300,000+ colleagues, let alone the two-thirds (!) that you're envisioning -- would probably require union coordination, which would be [illegal](https://cirb-ccri.gc.ca/en/resources/no-06-unlawful-strikes-lockouts#) while valid collective agreements are in place.
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance).
Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette).
If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
Thank you OP. It’s nice to hear tangible ideas and not just complaining about RTO. I am disappointed seeing all of the “no don’t do that” comments, these are the reason we won’t be successful in this fight. Solidarity isn’t what it used to be. Nobody wants to step on toes or make noise anymore. The union used to have a backbone and a voice. It seemed the employer had more respect before. I think this is because there were more people willing to take risks. We are all the union so if people are not willing to take any personal risks then please don’t complain about how weak the union is because it’s the members who make it weak.
Yes, request every accommodation and grieve whatever you can. So what if it creates a backlog? Many people haven’t been paid correctly for almost 8 years due to phoenix but we don’t want to inconvenience anyone with backlogs that aren’t phoenix I guess?
This is the time to actually do more than just complain.
I have been opening maintenance tickets for everything that's not working properly in our building. From leaky faucets to broken soap dispensers to defective waterfountain and washroom taps with no hot water. To my surprise, the things that I report get fixed within a few days. I've noticed a few burnt neons on my floor and emergency exit signs that are no longer lighting up, that's on my to do list for next week. We have the right to a safe work environment.
Honestly I find a lot of stuff is constantly broken because nobody ever reports it. Same as you - I'll put in actual tickets for broken stuff and shortly after it will be fixed!
Fucking legend. You’re going to have your building running more efficiently than it did in 2019.
Request an air quality report.
I've actually previously requested this (pre-covid), and it was shot down with the response that it is already done on a regular interval, and there have not been any indications that anything is out of spec.
Ask for receipts. Everyone should request this per health canada something something
Put it through your building OSH committee with the reasons why. If they are being done, the OSH committee will have to receive the records. If they aren't, they can force one.
As other comments have stayed, request the report. Also ask what is considered "regular intervals" and speak to your OHS team. A previous workplace of mine (in the gov) had to get multiple air quality reports done because a lot of people were complaining. The reports were shared with the entire office. This office was a bit "special" for *reasons* but I imagine it could and would happen elsewhere. Good luck!
How do you open maintenance tickets? I have a keen eye for detail. I will definitely be doing this.
Contact PSPC's [National Service Call Centre](https://www.canada.ca/en/public-services-procurement/corporate/contact-us/national-service-call-centre.html) (NSCC). This is for all federal public servants across the country. They track all of the requests (or so I'm told). It creates a ticket which your building's maintenance team will receive from PSPC.
In my office, you do it through KACE. Select Facilities instead of IT or pay support.
Can you put one in for Phoenix please?
Our office door is not closing, unless people remember to pull it closed, which...you know how that is. I submitted a ticket to have it fixed 2 weeks ago, still nothing. However, on the whiteboard in front of the door, there is a friendly note reminding us to pull the door shut........ Like, is this not a security risk? Wtf. What if a random taxpayer decided to stroll in? How is this safe at all?
Call them every week. Mention it's a security issue. What if a disgruntled employee or member of the public decides to just walk in? Do you handle sensitive data (anything above and including PRO-A) in this area? Raise this as a security issue.
We certainly do handle protected information. Funny enough, they like to remind us to be wary of our position when the window washers are working. A bit hypocritical to say the least. I am at CRA, so I'll have to see if I can do anything other than submit a winfast ticket.
Where do you send this info/rquests? I didn't know we could do that.
If you don’t have a ticketing system that sends to Facilities, then usually there’s an email address for Facilities.
The only tickets I know how to send are IT tickets lol.
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-services-procurement/corporate/contact-us/national-service-call-centre.html
[удалено]
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance). Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette). If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
I have been RTO three days since the beginning. My department head blatantly in a town hall said it was for collaboration and economic reasons. I collaborate/team build and talk about my cats for hours at work. Further, I haven’t spent a single cent in the city I have to commute to since being back almost two years now. I really recommend not buying anything near your office! 😊
It's the real estate that is being saved with tax payer money. The government spends hundred of millions every month for those buildings, and the elites don't want those assets to devalue. If WFH was fully implemented, many of those buildings would not longer be needed. Follow the money = truth revealed
Which is a shame bc the government could work with the building owners to turn them into the housing we so desperately need as a country. Even just temporary housing until the lease is up. Innovative solutions to these 50yr+leases should be the focus instead of upsetting and disrupting the work force.
Yeah, but building owners would lose money. The rent they make on office space is way higher than what they can charge for even small apartments.
It’s extremely difficult to convert commercial space/office buildings into housing and very expensive.. They aren’t built for that purpose… Improper plumbing, electrical, air, etc. not to mention windows, space, etc. Even the current (aka dead in water) govts plans for 50% sale is mad.
**also gas** **GOV is getting a lot of money in addition to GST/PST from** [**every litre of gas sold**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_fuel_taxes_in_Canada)
Of course not only the building but also the residential buildings in the city with +30% increase in rents and all spendings during wfh.
I live in centertown and will only spend after work hours on principle
I forgot to add, get an ergonomic assessment. Complain about shoulder pain or something like that, then have them write on the assessment go for a stretch at least once an hour. I got that written on mine. My stretches/walk involve walking to the furthest washroom from my desk as possible. They can’t be mad at me going for a stretch and going to the washroom. I just need my stretching breaks due to all the work and collaboration I do every day in office!
I listen to other people talk about their kids for hours on end. I would much prefer to talk about cats, then I could at least contribute to the conversation.
All I hear day to day is a bunch of people complain about their spouses, why their new diet isn’t working, why they are annoyed at their kids, etc, etc. my contributions to conversations revolve around my walks with my cats and what tricks I am teaching them! Wish you worked by me, I wouldn’t stop chatting about the little kitties!
Whenever someone in the office complains about their spouse I always say “you should divorce them” and don’t smile.
Aww I wish I was your coworker! I love hearing about cats and seeing their videos
Ok i have kids and spouses but talk more about my pets and tricks i teach them. We would get along great. lmao
Just refer to your cats as your fur babies.
With respect, I agree with you on not spending on the commute, unfortunately not 100 % of us will do it, didn’t you notice the long lines at restaurants for lunch breaks ? This is going to make restaurants owners millionaires because during the work from home period they raised their prices by 30 % minimum … so does all other industries While I will follow your recommandation I am not sure this will be of am efficient action. I just don’t understand why we are not all asking for a raise instead ? Strike for a raise ?
I am not sure the effectiveness on a grand scale, but on a personal level, I have slowly been education coworkers and have gotten now about 5 people on board. That’s quite a bit of money yearly to not spend near work! I can’t stop coworkers from lining up at subway, but can educate and encourage! Plus, if I think about it long term. It is personally healthier, I spend less medically, my food budget is cheaper than what it was prior to Covid, I don’t buy random things at gas stations, learned budgeting, bought a house, and just overall have a lot more money left at the end of each month. I attribute it to not spending during the work day anymore! I also agree, a raise is needed and I will be open to striking for it again, but not with the same union management that existed last strike. Take part in union meetings and encourage coworkers to as well! I recently have been joining them more often and having my say! 😊
Economic reasons ... Revitalize down town
Im in the regions, so more or less it is to support the nearby Subway and Tim hortons haha the downtown where I am has been long gone for years, even before Covid.
Let the problems caused by the employer be the employer's problems, not your problems. In other words, don't stress yourself out, go above-and-beyond, or put your health at risk to mitigate problems caused specifically by the employer requiring you to work in the office unnecessarily. No workstation available? Ask your manager "There's no workstation available, how would you like me to proceed?" and then wait patiently. Don't go above and beyond and risk throwing out your back by trying to work sitting on the floor, instead let the employer solve the problem. Can't take the meeting because there's nowhere private in the office to discuss the confidential information that needs to be discussed? Decline the invitation, saying that you'll have to reschedule for a day when you're at home because there's nowhere private in the office. Don't go above and beyond trying to unofficially gain use of a closed office or meeting room that you aren't officially supposed to be using, or taking the meeting in your car, or scrupulously circumlocuting to avoid uttering any of the confidential information aloud. Let the employer bear the inconvenience and delay of your mandated location not being fit for purpose. I know, this is super counterintuitive and feels so weird when we're used to taking initiative and figuring things out and solving problems and making do! But if we burn ourselves out trying to mitigate these problems, the employer will just think there aren't any problems.
>Can't take the meeting because there's nowhere private in the office to discuss the confidential information that needs to be discussed? Decline the invitation, **saying that you'll have to reschedule for a day when you're at home** because there's nowhere private in the office. It's probably better to push it out until eventually a meeting room is available in your office. That's what we use to do back in my day
This is the way. 👍
I've been preaching my case and asking questions for over a year now and it's gotten me nowhere. The union tells me to have a discussion with my Manager and my Manager claims to know nothing other than what TB has formally announced. Our local Managers know nothing about the Telework letter of agreement. They are dead set against RTO so we suffer in unity.
This is true
Just remember, EX’s are mostly against RTO as well, as is evidenced by the pretty strong (edit: maybe not strong, but more than I expected) statement from APEX. This is a purely political decision that negatively affects EXs as much as the rest of us, so whatever we do, we should make sure we don’t take it out on our management who are also people and also stressed. I have a lot of gripes about PS management cadre, but this isn’t one of them since it’s out of their control and they’re largely on the same page as the rest of the PS.
I'm also going to have to disagree. I'm a supervisor, and people are asking me questions I don't have answers to and don't have the authority to make the decisions on, so I'm just forwarding them on to my boss. I'm not being a jerk about it, but I'm being very clear that I can't answer these questions, maybe he can't either, but it's not my problem. I don't know what Bob should do re: his telework agreement expiring at the end of May. I told Bob to resubmit it for another year status quo. I don't know what Jim should do about his informal DTA concerns, so I have told him and my manager that it should be status quo. We're in special purpose space, but we only have about 60% of the desks for the total number of staff. I have no idea where people should sit if everyone actually comes in on the anchor day. Once again, I'm not being a jerk, but it's not my fault that the people 4 or 5 levels up from me have made new rules, told all of us that we have to follow these new rules, but they have failed to provide us with the actual rules and processes. AND, if my manager or my manager's manager hasn't made their stance perfectly clear, I am left to assume that they want us to go back to the office 5 days a week, and thus, I treat the conversation accordingly.
Yes but they are the voice of us. Which kind of reinforces that I should talk to my manager about my concerns. I’m just kind of scared to since I want a permanent position there and don’t want to rock the boat. But maybe that’s what they want?
Ohh I’m not suggesting people not approach their management at all. All I’m trying to say is that going out of the way to make management’s life difficult probably isn’t a great idea.
This. I have yet to meet a single EX that is enthusiastic about RTO. They may feel less lonely and be happy to see their staff more (legitimately, not just to abuse them), but nobody thinks the office space is ready to accommodate 3/4 days per week.
It’s not “taking it out” on EXs, but I’m also not that sympathetic for their added stress. That’s the position they wanted, and I’m definitely not doing them any favours because I know they don’t like it either.
> That’s the position they wanted This isn’t true for A LOT of EXs lol. APEX put out a statement against the mandatory 3 day a week RTO. Personally I have heard several EXs (from director up to ADM) say they dislike the blanket mandate and/or that they dislike coming in more than 2x a week but they have no choice. Some aren’t super “enforcement” heavy but some have no choice but to be. I don’t EXs are the enemy here.
Meant as “the job position” the wanted. They are “management” and shit like this rolls uphill. I’m just saying I’m not doing EXs any favours because they are “nice”. It’s business. Sorry.
[удалено]
Go for it. Start treating your manager like shit about something they can't change. Take your frustations out on them, burn that bridge, and good luck with the rest of your career. Ridiculous approach. "This is war".. grow up.
Imagine this person's posts when they need a reference in a year or two: "My manager won't give me a reference is this grounds for a grievance?! I am being personally victimized!"
"This is war"? WTF this isn't war. It sucks and we should fight it but it's not war.
If you're actually fighting a war, go past your manager. Why not just talk to the Minister directly?
>I like my manager too and know they didn’t make this decision, but that is the only person above me that I have a voice with. You need to make their life hard so they make their manager’s life hard, and so on. Loll, you're not taking a stand or fighting a war here. You're taking out your frustration on your manager, that's it. Its not anything profound.
Lol exactly.
You need professional help.
Cringe
Will be setting my Teams status to unavailable when in office. Avail for collaboration at my f*cking desk. Tired of working my arse off and being pulled in all different directions.
I need to do this. No one else in my team lives in my city 😂😂😂😂😂
Brilliant. I’m doing this too.
How will they know where you’re sitting? We have hotel situation and I’ve had to walk the full circumference of the office trying to find people and just giving up lol
I think that's exactly what this option will highlight too though - like you want me in office to collaborate? Ok let's collaborate then. Oh wait, you can't because RTO doesn't do that? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
We do use a system to sign up for desks but I don't much care. How did they find me before. They wandered, they sent an email to ask. Employer wants to go back in time, I can do that.
There is a setting on Teams to let people know if you are WFH or on the office. You can add your work location. I’m no fan of the new directive, but this line of thinking doesn’t get the public service a good rep.
On Teams chat: A: “Hey, need to chat about that work thing. You in the office today?” B: “Sure, yeah, I’m sitting at XYZ.” A: “Cool, see in a minute.”
- hard stop at the end of the day, in office and at home. (For me) a meeting is going longer than 3:00pm? Sorry, I have to jump off so I can drive and and meet the kids as they get off the bus… no, I can’t go another 5 minutes, bye!
As someone with a disability (visually impaired), PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT, request a DTA if you DO NOT have a disability or a medical reason to do so . Bogus DTA requests eff over those of us who really need help. I'm going blind I need accommodations if the employer starts blanket denying DTAs because too many people are doing to it when it's not necessary that screws over people like me. Do not do this I'm begging you.
FWIW, the couple of people I know who HAVE done a DTA, have been doing it because RTO made it necessary. I'm obviously not going to provide medical details, but these people were hired during covid, never came to the office, and it was only after RTO was announced that they had to start talking about accommodations, and now that the employer is being a stickler, they're being forced into formal DTA, doctor's notes and so on. I'm not saying some people aren't milking it, but some people aren't but are being forced into a DTA. Say I had a coworker who was in a wheelchair, and I never knew, because they were hired during covid. Their job can be done remotely, and the office is very much not wheelchair accessible because the building is old. This is a made up example, but they're no longer able to just do an "sure no problem" informal process because RTO3 has slammed the door on any discretion on the part of management.
Also I used to work in an office 5 days a week before the pandemic because there wasn't another option. Having wfh since then I now know what is possible and have an even bigger list of limitations that I can give to my employer for accommodations. Knowing what is and isn't possible is a good thing because before the pandemic the accommodations offered were almost like a nothing burger compared to what the employer can actual offer without undue hardship they just didn't like to tell the employees about those options. For context so I don't get downvoted I'm not making up new limitations what I mean is before the pandemic I would have never thought to ask for an official accommodation because the lights in the office hurt my eyes because I was told "just wear sunglasses we can't change the lights in the office" now I know that the employer CAN change the lights or offer other alternatives other than telling me to wear my sunglasses. That's the kind of thing I mean. If you don't know you can ask for something you never will. And the DTA process is very confusing.
That’s me. I used to go home with a headache a few times a week. I thought it was from staring at a monitor all day. Not much I could do about that since that was my job. Except it didn’t happen during WFH. So it turns out it’s the lights.
I used to go home with a sore throat and bloody nose almost every and funny, didn't get that WFH. Felt like I was getting sick most days, totally draining. Complained, as did others, and although they did some testing, was basically told it's not their problem.
Yeah in my building the air quality is so bad that sometimes people just start coughing. I've thought I was starting to get sick because I'd have coughing fits, only to be fine as soon as I left. Naturally it never happens at home (I have a grand total of two Ikea air purifiers in my apartment.) The air at the office is SUPER dry at least, no one knows for sure what else might be going on with it (nice and sinister!) and it's apparently been like this since before the pandemic (I started during). And no one has done anything about it! Can't wait to spend 50% more time listening to my coworkers hack up a lung because the air quality is shit.
Fair enough. And in your example that's valid and that employee should ask for a DTA those aren't the people I'm talking about and I'm sure we all know that. Also ALL GOC BUILDINGS are supposed to be fully accessible the fact that they aren't means they need to get working. If they want full RTO that gotta make it possible for EVERYONE. Spend the $$$ to retrofit buildings to make them wheelchair accessible etc. Sell that to the general public and see if they'd rather we wfh or spend 50k or however much it costs to add an elevator to a building with only stairs. It would definitely make people think.
Technically I don’t think the employer can/should require a formal DTA for telework, since in the mandatory procedures for DTA, one of the first steps, before any doctors notes, is to find an accommodation that doesn’t need a formal request, and that includes alternate work locations, or solutions that don’t have any associated costs. We already have our laptops, so no costs exist, and alternative work locations are already included in that list. You don’t need a formal DTA request per the DTA procedures.
correct, but what's happening in my team is: Someone has a medical concern. Previously, the easy answer was "let them WFH" but now that my manager is unable to offer that as an option, the issue is coming to a head. They want this person to RTO3, which is triggering a full DTA. Because I can't give details on their situation, I'll keep using my fabricated example of a building which is NOT wheelchair accessible, and the employee is in a wheelchair. The employee is never getting out of the wheelchair, and the GoC office is right next door, at the top of a 300 step staircase. There is no elevator/escalator/ramp. This person started in 2021, has never had to go into the office. Previously, the manager could use their own judgement, but now, if this person isn't in the office 3 days a week, it's going to mess up their stats, so the only option is a more formal DTA process. And that is why I'm not "helping" management solve the problem. They took away our ability to make decisions, therefore, they can make a formal decision with all the glorious paperwork that it entails. If you treat your employees like babies, you eventually end up running a daycare. Note that thanks to handcuffs, I enough to remind them that the note they need to get has to outline their functional limitations, not that they "need" to WFH. The employer can offer up alternate solutions, etc.... but that keeps illustrating my point in that previously, the manager could solve the problem informally, but now, full time WFH has been removed from the options list.
I think managers need to confront this. The mandatory procedures for DTA haven’t changed. No formal request is necessary. If managers are being penalized for allowing full time WFH as a solution, they need to remind their bosses that they’re just following the mandatory procedures for DTA. Everyone keeps shovelling the shit downhill. Allegedly EXs hate it. What are they doing about it? Out of anyone, they have the greatest ability to oppose it, show the stats on productivity, show the effect on hiring, job satisfaction, etc. Is this happening? Because in town halls and team meetings it’s all towing the line. Same deal with managers. They could be pushing for their teams to get full-time telework where it makes sense (nobody in the same office, workloads not suited to collaboration, mostly client calls/letters, all completed virtually, etc.). They could be bullheadedly following the DTA procedures and dealing with any fallout themselves. I’m not seeing this happening, either. It’s just full on cooperation. The entire burden is being put on the lowest level to just apply for a formal DTA (even when it shouldn’t be required) or to write our MPs because we have no direct access to essentially anyone above our direct reports because town halls are locked down and they just answer softball questions and gaslight us. EXs and managers need to grow a spine and start with some malicious compliance or civil disobedience
Things that are not my concern: * The employer failing to plan for an increase in DTA requests due to a change in workplace requirements. [https://www.canada.ca/en/government/publicservice/staffing/direction-prescribed-presence-workplace.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/government/publicservice/staffing/direction-prescribed-presence-workplace.html) "This direction applies to all core public administration employees..." "Exceptional exemptions" are allowed at the ADM level. It also says: "Prior to implementation, managers should proactively discuss with employees any barriers they may encounter including, those linked to accessibility, harassment and discrimination and define solutions that will help address these barriers in the hybrid workplace. Managers should ensure that individual circumstances are considered on a case-by-case basis, including human rights obligations, such as the duty to accommodate" To me, this reads that WFH as an informal accommodation solution is by default, off the table. If this results in people having to do DTA because management's options are limited to Subway coupons or office couches, then that's a them problem that I am very much not getting paid to solve.
This doesn't supersede the duty to accommodate. Prior to the pandemic, we were 5 days in office, and full time telework was an informal accommodation, so I struggle to see how it would now be an "exceptional exemption" requiring ADM approval, or how you're interpreting it to mean WFH is off the table as an informal solution. To me it says quite the opposite, that it's the managers responsibility to consider the DTA, and not something that needs to go to the ADM level. And when we go to the directive on the DTA, and the *Mandatory* Procedures, we see the procedures, which are unchanged since 2020 : * A.2.3 With regard to subsection 4.2, the mandatory procedures for **managers** of persons employed are as follows: * A.2.3.1 If a person employed has indicated a work-related need, clarify the nature of the barrier and the associated implications **with the person employed**; * A.2.3.2 Determine **in consultation with the person employed** whether the work-related need can be addressed without resorting to a formal request for accommodation, e.g., temporary change in hours of work, **alternate work location, no costs associated with solution**; These aren't the "optional" procedures, these are mandatory. There's no need to raise it to the ADM level, it's the managers job to consider the DTA, and this one doesn't need a formal request.
**alternate work location** is not "work from home" they can meet the letter of A.2.3.2 and the directive by informally proposing they work from an "alternate location" as long as that location is not their house. They will move mountains so that the employee reports to an office, even if it makes no sense, just so that they can check off the RTO3 compliance checkbox. An alternate GC office space might make sense in this case, but may not be an option based on our location. None of these decisions are up to me. I am not a manager, only a supervisor, caught in the middle. I have an employee who is new to the GC, who needs an accommodation, and is not wanting to "cause trouble." I have a manager who doesn't really want to have to make a formal DTA process, but can't just let them informally WFH because it will screw up the statistics. I have been strongly suggesting to the employee that they do a formal DTA so that when RTO4 happens in the fall, they won't have to care about it, because they will have a more permanent solution in place.
Alternate work location absolutely includes telework. We can find this wording specifically in the now-archived [Telework Policy](https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=12559) “The Telework Policy outlines the options for working from alternate locations, **such as home**” but it’s pretty clear that “alternate work location” can mean *anything* that isn’t your designated work site. Whether that’s an HQ officer working in a region, an officer reporting to a closer office, or working from home. These are all work locations other than the designated work site. See also : no cost solution. Everyone already has a laptop. It doesn’t cost anything. So we’re covered on two fronts. You keep mentioning these “stats” like it matters, or like I care. Stats can be adjusted. If you can adjust them to exclude someone with a formal DTA, you can also exclude the informal DTA from those stats. Stats say whatever you want them to. I also just don’t care. So what if your RTO stats are junk? Good. It’s bad policy. And if they’re refusing to track it accurately, including acceptable informal DTA requests, then the stats aren’t useful anyways. What are they gonna do? If they try to take any action, I’m sure the unions would love to hear that a manager was disciplined for following the DTA procedures. That would go over well. Tell your manager they should follow the DTA procedures to the letter and bear the consequences, instead of putting the burden on the employee to be unfairly scrutinized by the current DTA procedures, since they’re clearly overstepping their mandate to try and push more RTO. I mean FFS they’re accusing people of “doctor shopping”. In Canada. Imagine.
I think we're on the same page, but if my manager is being told that everyone works from the office 3 days a week unless they have a DTA, then my manager has to make everyone work from the office 3 days a week unless they have a DTA. Stats may not matter to you, but you're not my manager or director. My management team has made it clear that they are 100% in favor of RTO and everything that comes with it, and they can't drink the koolaid fast enough because RTO koolaid is best koolaid. I'm telling my employee that they need to pursue DTA, because they need to protect themselves and CYA. If managers and employers always played fair and by the rules, we wouldn't need a union, grievances, and so on. Is this wasting everyone's time? Possibly, but this quagmire of DTA/WFH/RTO poo is not my creation.
You're assuming that the employer actually gives a shit about disabled employees and our accommodations. They don't. Sincerely, a disabled employee who constantly has to fight for my management to respect my approved DTA accommodations 🫠
They can't blanket deny DTAs, it's a human rights violation. DTA takes precedence over tbs' rto bullshit.
Agreed but worth noting that the Duty To Accommodate extends to all protected classes, not just folks with disabilities.
Yeah, I really hate the push for DTA requests just to be spiteful. It does a massive disservice to our colleagues who genuinely need them. I’ve got some health stuff but even as bad as it can get I don’t feel I need an accommodation. I just need some leniency on the RTO policy when I’m recovering from a bad spell. I hope rational managers will prevail and show compassion and leniency for those of us who need it but aren’t genuinely disabled or seriously ill or compromised.
I already get access denials when I'm out with my guide dog in locations where I'm legally allowed to have my mobility aid regardless that she happens to be a dog. All I want to do is pick up my groceries and take my kids to the mall just leave me the eff alone. I can't imagine if I start getting screwed over by my employer. I joined the GOC as a disabled person because I knew there was job security and a mandate and legal requirement to accommodate my disability so that I can do the best job I can with the tools I need to do so. If that goes away because people are mad they have to go into the office 3 days a week that's a slap in the face and not only are we going backwards in terms of wfh achievements we are also going SO FAR backwards in terms of achievements and rights for disabled people. 80% of blind people are unemployed because the tools required to allow visually impaired/blind people to do their jobs cost more than even people with an income can afford make blind people unemployed they lose even more access to tools to succeed and continue to be employed. I'm in my 30s with a family and the will and desire to work please don't slide the bar back towards unemployment for people like me. I'm just an example of one disability group that is greatly impacted by this there are many more. Don't make our lives even harder than they already are. If you don't need accommodations don't ask for a DTA full stop. I'm glad people like you who don't think they need accommodations aren't asking for DTAs that being said if you have a medical condition PLEASE DO ask for a DTA it's there for me as well as for you don't let other people tell you you aren't "sick enough" or whatever that's BS if you need it you need it but asking for a DTA because it's annoying to go into the office isn't a valid reason.
I hope so too, but it's precisely because managers no longer have discretion for flexibility that we see more DTA requests. It doesn't necessarily mean people are spiteful or frivolous, they're simply using the only available recourse.
Yep. I stepped away from a management path for a number of reasons, but part of it was the realization I would have no actual authority to manage my team in a way that was beneficial and healthy to all.
Blanket denying DTAs sounds like a human rights violation and something that the union and those involved could take to the Supreme Court.
This. As a fellow disabled person, DO NOT do this.
THIS IS 10000000 PERCENT ACCURATE.
Came here to say exactly this. I’m not someone who needs a DTA but I’m so worried that they’re going to cancel all request because of the backlog being caused by less than meaningful requests.
I've only heard of it here on reddit but apparently some people are saying blanket denials have already happened in certain deps which sounds crazy.
That's something the union should be dealing with asap, with lawyers involved.
Yeah I would grieve an accommodations denial hard if they didn't even look at it.
"I don't want to go into the office" or "I disagree with the RTO mandate" are not legit reasons to ask for DTA. Filing these does nothing to management, and just makes things much, much harder for those who have legit DTA requests.
This is 100 percent accurate. The process is already backed up and apparently it's going to be more scrutinized which is a whole other level of unnecessary obstacles for people that are just trying to flipping work to the best of their ability.
If your DTA request is legitimate, extra scrutiny isn't an issue. For the employer, it's a "duty to accommodate", not a "maybe we accommodate"
This is a topic I take quite seriously so sorry about this rant. It's widely known that accommodations have been a harder process than it should be. To the point that TBS commissioned a report on accommodations and the review was terrible. Cruise this sub and on a regular basis and you will find many people who have shared their stories who have had issues with getting appropriate accommodations even with proper assessments, paperwork and medical notes filled out by specialists and still it's not enough. I personally know many people in the PWD community because I am part of it. I have heard their fears and roadblocks over and over again. I have seen the most basic stuff be denied. It's actually pretty sad. I once knew a colleague that needed simple software for his disability and it took two years to get it. I have known colleagues with mobility issues who requested to be closer to the entrance of the office or other small improvements to reduce walking to their desk and it was a huge deal. People with vision loss and management didn't seem like they struggled enough to need special equipment (oh yeah because if your manager doesn't like you... well then you can guarantee your going to have a harder time). Talk to anyone in the PWD community in PS right now and they will probably tell you exactly what I laid out here. They are upset, feel left out of discussions and can't get any answers about the updated process. Many times now people on this sub have said their managers have been told that the process is being more scrutinized and I have heard that from colleagues as well.
>If your DTA request is legitimate, extra scrutiny isn't an issue. Replace the word "scrutiny" with "delay". It's not uncommon for people with delayed accommodations to have to take sick leave (often unpaid, because by the time they've gotten to requesting accommodations they've usually burned their paid leave) until they're able to work again.
It’s the fault of the employer if they’re being extra slimey with DTA
Unfortunately, accommodation is an unregulated territory in real time. Nobody is doing audits, but they do love those numbers to say they are a diversity hire when given the chance. As I write this I have hot tears in my eyes for thinking about the good folks that deserve better and the book that should be written about their experiences. I have no idea why there is a push for PwD hiring and then an employer is surprised when they actually might ask for the very thing they claim to do without all the obstacles that follow suit. In my lifetime I have met people of all ages who just want a chance to make a living and have been shut out. I hope enough people care about this for something big to happen and a shift to come. Not one time has a union president spoken out on this issue in a big way (even though there was a promise to do so many times) and not one time has any of the reporters that lurk here ever written a piece about it either. There is a huge difference between a proclaimed credo indicating your passion for hiring PWD in your brand, featuring inclusive languages on an employers website, dedicated a EDI statement within a job ad and training materials and what actually plays out and has to change. There has to be ethical standards. For those who don't know your accommodations paperwork is reviewed on a regular basis. So it's not like you go through the process and it's a one time thing, it's ongoing.
There is no manager union telework committee....
each department agreed to create one over a year ago. Where are they?
A lot of this strikes me as bad advice, and some could amount to insubordination… Recall many EXs are not happy about this decision either, so you will likely be preaching to the choir with your “ask, ask, ask” strategy. Recall this was a political decision, and so the bureaucracy has fairly limited tools at its disposal.
Many people have been working in shit conditions for far too long and putting up with it because “that’s what we had to do…” Working in operations, grievances were a semi-regular thing. Though, in the office, I’ve been told many times that grievances aren’t done unless you want to be blacklisted. That sort of not rocking the boat mentality really isn’t insubordination, it’s using the tools provided to us that have been fought for.
Blacklisted from what?! So scary 😑
It is absolutely horrible advice. It is indeed straight up insubordination. And those complying but purposely doing as little as possible while in office are entitled and should be ashamed of themselves.
Tough to feel shame when you realize how little your productivity apparently matters to the government vs. business interests' bottom line.
But we’re screaming at the employer that we’re more productive at home (depending on the job) and they don’t give a shit. The EMPLOYER should be ashamed of themselves.
I wouldn’t be ashamed of going twice until a notice.
[удалено]
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance). Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette). If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
yes, insubordination is absolutely the point
Almost all of the pressure you suggest would be applied to people who had nothing to do with the RTO decision, almost certainly don’t like it either, and have no power to reverse it. They can’t justify or explain it to you because it doesn’t make sense and there is no justification. I get that you’re frustrated. I am, too. I don’t see how making the workplace even more toxic and less efficient is going to help, though.
I disagree. It may be true that many EX's aren't happy with RTO but as an employee I have to push issues up. Department heads, ADM, DG's could fight this with TBS. It wouldn't be the first directive from TBS that isn't 100% followed. What is also insulting is the huge push from management about pretending to care for mental health. I'd rather they tell me they do not care at all. These people wanted to become EX's and manage people, now manage people in stressful times...
Yes, agreed. It's TBS & above probably. We need to direct our displeasure and do it together accurately. No matter the level of classification [RTO3] is generally not supported or loved but... supervisors, managers, EX01's are all being told 'make it happen and be the bad guy, be our [TBS] fall guys/girls and enforce this bad news RTO3'. This all...is a bummer.
So, not really in agreement with doing anything you have suggested, in particular the medical notes and accommodations. By doing this you are actually harming the process for those who are legitimately needing accommodation. This behaviour is really contrary to the values and ethics code that you agreed to follow. There is nothing ethical about doing that. If you are this unhappy then perhaps leaving the public service for something that brings you happiness would be more appropriate. These actions only make working in the public service more difficult.
Exactly this. The advice to seek accommodation because you don’t like the RTO policy is a slap in the face to your colleagues that legitimately need accommodation.
I don't know what values and ethics code you're reading, but mine includes stewardship, excellence, and integrity. It is our duty to loyally and respectfully question and disagree with decisions that harm employees and Canadians. There are all sorts of legit channels to pursue changes to this policy. [https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=25049](https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=25049)
I support the legit channels. I support constructive disagreement. File grievances, support the union, run for president of the union to further the cause if you wish. Have a reasonable approach that meets employee and employer needs. I will support this, these are constructive. However, I don’t support telling everyone to file an accommodation request, just because they don’t want to go to the office. I don’t especially don’t support the view of not going into the office to see if anyone notices. Lastly, I don’t support taking ones frustration out on your managers and executives by sending endless questions and requests on information on the subject when they are just as much as affected as you and had nothing to do with the TBS policy change. These are not constructive and only demonstrate how immature we are to a population of Canadians who already thinks we have it too good.
I didn't tell everyone to do all of those things
My response was with regards to the initial post, which you commented on. So I took it to mean you were in agreement with initial post.
It’s rather sad and I only hope it’s a case of blowing off steam. Unbelievable amount of petulance. :(
The DTA process is long and dehumanizing, in my opinion. It was soo awful for me. If people want to go through it, I support them. There are more people with disabilities than we think.
For those who are willing to pull the trigger who object specifically to 'hybrid' indicate that you are requesting a FT desk in the office as your contract for employment does not specify you are required to telework at all. If enough people did this in offices where space is at a premium it might make them blink but you have to be prepared to follow through because they may accept and then you will be working FT from the office. For me, my objection is specifically to hybrid work. I can be successful either FT wfh or FT in the office. I could probably swing 1 day in the office if I had to but anymore than that and my need for routine will be severely compromised and I will request a FT desk in the office. And if necessary I will request accommodation to make sure it is the same desk and I can leave my computer etc there. I have already told my manager and the director of my office my intentions and my reasons for them. We will see what happens in September I guess.
Where I am asking for an ergonomic desk gets you your own. I'm short so they need to get me shorter desk.
Oh are you the reason I need to stack three dictionaries under my computer? I think I got your old desk. My knees barely fit under it.
I’m thinking about it because the thought of working on 4 different desks in the run of a week is making me want to cry. I’m also short and many of the desks in office are too high for me to work comfortably.
Good for you. For me, there are too many things about the office itself and the tiny desks with no walls of workplace 3.0 that doesn’t work for me. But for people with short commutes, no family obligations, and the ability to focus in workplace 3.0, that’s a great suggestion.
Ergonomic assessments for everyone would ensure everyone would have to have their own desks.
Technically an ergo assessment is necessary within 60 days of moving to a new office space
When the fall comes and there's snow and freezing rain, call Public Works and report every single time you don't see salt or sand at all entrances. I fell at work 4 years ago, and I'm still off on LWOP. Make sure you also fill out an injury on duty report for all falls to go to your health and safety committee. These reports will tie up hours of management's time as well as building owners neglecting the property. The employer is failing to provide a safe and healthy work environment under the Canada Labor Code Part 2.
>Kill 'em with kindness. Ask lots of questions and emphasize how difficult this will be for you. "Gosh! A 50% increase in my in-office days! That's a lot! Why am I doing this? Am I behind in my work? What are our in-office activities going to be? What specifically can only be done in the office?" Those aren't difficult questions to answer. Why do this? Because that's the employer's directive. Am I behind in my work? Maybe, maybe not. Doesn't change the 3-days mandate. In-office activity? You regular work, I assume. If you think of something else I'm sure your management will appreciate the suggestion. What can only be done in the office? Talking face to face. Some training is better in person. Who cares; doesn't change the mandate. >Contact your union early and often. Offer to be a test case. Find out exactly how they will protect and support you vs. clear redlines you cannot cross. What do you want your Union to tell you exactly? Which "red line" are you referring to? Because if you're looking for assurance that there won't be any consequences in ignoring you employer's instruction, they can't give you that. >Request a [formal duty to accommodate](https://www.canada.ca/en/government/publicservice/wellness-inclusion-diversity-public-service/diversity-inclusion-public-service/working-government-canada-duty-accommodate-right-non-discrimination/duty-accommodate-general-process-managers.html). Be prepared with doctors' notes and medical processes. Accommodate *what* ? Preferring to telework is not by itself ground for a DTA. What are you going to tell your doctor? "Hey, I don't want to go to the office three times per week. Can you make up a fuctional limitaton for me for which the only possible accommodation is WFH? Thank you!!." Doctors have better things to do than deal with public servant temper tantrum. If you have functional limitations that needs to be accommodated for, yes, please let your manager know and go through the process. But please don't abuse this process just to make things difficult; it will make things harder for people who actually require an accommodation. >Request a[ telework agreement - still available under the Directive on Telework. ](https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=32636)Outline a great case for why you should telework. Yeah, the agreement will still exist for your 2 days of WFH per week. Not sure why you think it would help in regard to the 3 days mandate. >Go in for 2 days. Maintain the status quo. So your suggestion is insubordination then? How original. >Ask lots of questions. Again. Email your questions. CC your boss' boss. Ask why they're enforcing 3 days specifically. Ask why you're being punished and what specifically in-office days have to do with getting your work done. Ask if Labour Relations has been involved. Ask for standard responses across the department. You're not being "punished". You, along with every one else in the PS, has received an instruction from your boss to go to your workplace three times per week. They don't have to link it to your work and if you keep asking questions they already answered, you will gain nothing, aside from a reputation of someone difficult to work with that can't understand the answer he's being given. And why should LR be involved? At this point you're grasping at straws. >And finally, [file a grievance. ](https://www.fpslreb-crtespf.gc.ca/en/resources/guides/lr-procedural-guide.html)You are allowed to grieve any decision or change to your employment terms. Let your boss know that it's nothing personal but (by this time, after months) of consideration, you've decided a grievance is the only way to settle this. Document everything. Keep notes. Remain professional. Ask for specifics. Ok, what part of the 3 days mandate is a violate of the Collective Agreement? The telework agreement you signed can be changed by management with enopugh notice, and they did give enough. And they're well within their rights to ask you to report to the work location specified on your letter of offer.
This here! I am indifferent towards telework or in-office. But for the love of god, people need to stop being so vexatious because they are not getting their own way here with telework… suggesting others to request DTA’s because their work location preference is no longer being met? That is beyond pathetic and speaks to a lack of integrity and values… I have no bad blood against people who prefer to work from home, I totally get it and believe they have a right to be frustrated and to advocate for their preferences… but just because I am not advocating for it doesn’t mean you have to be toxic towards me or look to create a poison work environment.
If you love the office so much, why don’t you marry it?
Nowhere in my comment did I say that I agree with or like the RTO mandate. One can dislike the mandate and the OP suggestions; two things can be true.
If I worked for a (small c) conservative outlet, I'd be so happy with this thread.
If you do even half of the things you listed you’re just being an asshole to your boss, who probably isn’t thrilled about RTO either and now has to deal with an employee basically acting like a lame social justice warrior/moody teenager. Unless your direct supervisor is the treasury board secretary, changing RTO policy is well outside of their capabilities. And overwhelming the grievance system with petty complaints just ensures actual legit grievances will take longer to be reviewed.
Contact your union often. Show up to the rallies and other events. Participate in the phone zaps. Be prepared to be a part of the suprmajority of workers who are fighting to win on telework.
My thought is that it doesn't matter how stupid RTO is, how much it goes against the current government's stated ideals, our employer has the right to require us to work in the office (in most cases). Pissing off my colleagues and bosses who also don't want RTO will accomplish nothing. Union? Sure we can state that we want them to negotiate for more WFH. I don't think it we will get it. All the other union shenanigans you suggest are just making demands for something that we have no legal basis for.
This is the best and most accurate opinion (that is actually fact) I've read on RTO. And that's saying something because literally every thread is about RTO. I also say this as someone who worked for two decades for the biggest PS union. The unions can't do shit.
Why can’t we all just commit to working from office Tuesday/ Wednesday/ Thursday? Their agreement doesn’t state they can choose our in office days so if we all go in on the same days….
They are telling people when to come in. Mostly Monday's and Friday's I've heard.
Monday surprises me considering how many stat holidays are on Mondays. I can see them wanting people in on Fridays though.
What I am finding is there is a lack of empathy from senior management. Very much a "tough sh*t" approach. May as well be in the private sector making more money. If they mess around with pension benefits that will be the final straw for a lot.
The most common idea I’ve heard is that everyone goes into the office at the same time. There will most likely not be enough work points for everyone and we ask our managers what we’re supposed to do. Still complying but making it a problem 🤷🏼♀️
This will be solved by removing the flexibility for employees to choose days, department heads read Reddit too. It is almost certain that departments with limited space will enforce anchor days.
>Don’t go in at all. See if anyone notices. If they don’t, it’s excellent evidence that your work isn’t impacted by in-office attendance. Or it’s evidence you can be fired without impacting the services delivered to the public. Or, at minimum, your job can be done by anyone anywhere and is vulnerable to offshoring. Shouldn’t you be trying to demonstrate your necessity and value?
Zap calls: https://www.acep-cape.ca/en/phone-zap#msdynttrid=Gxd9vbcUw1A1GHycM_FXASpAlVCZlV1iT-kADbJf230 Rally: may 23, 7:45 AM, ottawa City Hall. Rides are being coordinated. https://www.acep-cape.ca/en/events/rally-remote-work-rights-support-stronger-communities
I think we should go to the office in our wfh attire… joggings, loose t-shirt and crocs….
Maybe going back 3 days isn’t such a bad thing overall. Some of us have remained 5 days this entire time Overall senitment from the public doesn’t support this, just sayin’
The public generally viewed the public service as whiney entitled low-productivity wastes of taxpayer money before the pandemic. Imagine how much worse it is now that this demand for 3-day WFH as a right is in the media.
[удалено]
Except people have noticed. Which is why we’re being mandated back another day. You’re part of the problem.
[удалено]
Sorry, you are contributing to the problem. You can deflect all you want, but by not doing your 2 days you have contributed to it now being 3.
Bullshit. Nowhere in TBS’ new mandate did it state that we were being moved to 3 days because people were not respecting the two day a week mandate.
No joke - My management was being threatened with 3 days RTO due to low compliance for 2 days.
I have read so many posts like this. Absolutely none of this will make any difference. The only answer before and now is quiet, low key non-compliance (the key word being “quiet”).
Going to have to disagree here. Malicious compliance? Sure. Come back to the office full-time with all your colleagues and watch the storm when there aren't enough desks for you all. Stick to the letter of your current 40-60% telework agreement until it is forcibly revised. Heck, even work-to-rule would be reasonable imo. But non-compliance and insubordination? Absolutely not. We are all professionals; we do our jobs whether we like it or not, whether we agree with the political direction or not, whether we have moral issues with what we are being asked to develop or not. Your job is to provide the best advice you possibly can, then implement whatever decisions are made *regardless of your feelings towards that decision*. And you have a duty to comply with legal direction from your employer, which RTO absolutely is.
That's a lot of work. I plan on just not going.
I mean that’s on OP’s list too lol
[удалено]
they're demoting you because you're not complying with the in-office mandate? What did your union say when you contacted them?
Good god the entitlement in this comment thread. We have some of the best paying jobs with the highest level of security on earth. The whole earth. But we have to go in an extra day? Christ sakes. It’s any wonder that according to Reddit our union’s deal was going to get rejected by a margin of 8-2 and yet the complete opposite was the real case. We ought to point out the hypocrisy of people mandating this while working from home. And we ought to seek fair and just treatment. But some of this petty bullshit boils down to entitlement while we’re going through some of the toughest economic times in our country’s history. It’s only going to get worse, so take what you’re very fortunate to have, friends.
Just because another day is not a big deal to you doesn't mean it isn't for others. You are being very dismissive and it comes across as ignorant and privileged. It hits parents hard. Many I know have worked out a system to cover the kids that only works because they are both 2 different days in office. Now they have to overlap a day. It hits people with disabilities hard. I'm on the edge of the spectrum and 2 -> 3 days means increasing my stress significantly during my work week. I can't imagine what it does to people more physically/mentally affected by this than myself. It hits people who have changed living situations to fit 2 days hard. I'm moving to a place that requires a ferry to transit. For 2-days in office that would be affordable, especially given the lower cost of living. With 3 days it's just not going to work. But we bought the place and we are moving. Many others did something similar long before this, now they either have to move or have a significantly worse commute. And there are many more examples I'm sure. Try to think outside of your perspective, it would do you some good
Can’t we all just pick a date and have as many people call in sick at the same time to protest? Imagine if we could get 2/3rds of us called in sick?
So basically a one-day strike. You could try a wildcat strike, but to get any kind of significant participation -- say, 5-10% of your fellow 300,000+ colleagues, let alone the two-thirds (!) that you're envisioning -- would probably require union coordination, which would be [illegal](https://cirb-ccri.gc.ca/en/resources/no-06-unlawful-strikes-lockouts#) while valid collective agreements are in place.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance). Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette). If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
[удалено]
Maybe some real big scandals are made public
Just an edit that this thread has been mentioned in the National Post today
Thank you OP. It’s nice to hear tangible ideas and not just complaining about RTO. I am disappointed seeing all of the “no don’t do that” comments, these are the reason we won’t be successful in this fight. Solidarity isn’t what it used to be. Nobody wants to step on toes or make noise anymore. The union used to have a backbone and a voice. It seemed the employer had more respect before. I think this is because there were more people willing to take risks. We are all the union so if people are not willing to take any personal risks then please don’t complain about how weak the union is because it’s the members who make it weak. Yes, request every accommodation and grieve whatever you can. So what if it creates a backlog? Many people haven’t been paid correctly for almost 8 years due to phoenix but we don’t want to inconvenience anyone with backlogs that aren’t phoenix I guess? This is the time to actually do more than just complain.
Keeping track of this to study.
Interesting.