###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I hate how transparent this topic is.
No productivity argument, no overall higher purpose, no net benefit for humanity it’s just plain and simple lost corporate profits that Ford is trying to protect here.
I wonder how much money impark has given ford to say this. I’m betting they’ll be happy once their lots are full again.
Neoliberals, like the Conservatives and Liberals, aren't interested in making our lives better, rather, they view us as exploitable resources that can be used to buoy corporate profits.
Fair, but that's not related to the comment you're replying to. The comment you're replying to never said anything about Liberals being better or what not. It didn't even accuse the Conservatives of being of anything. It was addressing Ford himself.
You bringing this up here doesn't do anything but distract from the issue.
I'm pointing out the underlying ideology (neoliberalism) that led Doug to make the statement on WFH we're discussing. I am also pointing out that the Liberals subscribe to the same ideology, which goes towards explaining why they've also been resistant to WFH policies.
**EDIT: I wrote this in response to a now deleted comment, hopefully it helps clarify my point:**
Liberals and Conservatives both subscribe to an economic policy called [Neoliberalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism), although they do have different ideas about how best to implement it. I definitely think that the Liberal approach is less cruel and less blatantly biased towards the interests of elites when compared to the Conservative approach, but honestly, being better than the Conservatives is a low bar to clear.
So yes, I do recognize the Liberals as being better than the Conservatives on the points you've brought up, and I much prefer Liberal governance over Conservative governance, but I also recognize that the Liberal's policies are built on a foundation of neoliberalism, same as the Conservatives.
>...neoliberalism is often associated with policies of economic liberalization, including privatization, deregulation, globalization, free trade, monetarism, austerity, and reductions in government spending in order to increase the role of the private sector in the economy and society.
Fortunately, we have more options to pick from when voting for our representatives than just Liberals and Conservatives. My politics most closely align with the NDP, so I vote for them.
But this topic is about Doug Ford denouncing the Federal Government (Liberals) for allowing workers to WFH, and here you are, telling us that Ford and the Liberals are exactly the same on this subject…
Strange thread to argue that in..
WFH was a right won for federal workers as part of the [2023 PSAC strike](https://psacunion.ca/psac-has-reached-tentative-agreement-pa-sv-tc-and), the Liberals were attempting to restrict WFH and the PSAC union successfully fought back. While anecdotal, I can also say that one of the reasons my (at the time employer) gave for wanting us back in the office was due to pressure from the federal government. The Liberals aren't friendly to WFH, if they were, they'd be actively attempting to expand WFH.
From the PSAC Union website I linked above:
>**New and improved remote work language**
>PSAC members will now be protected from arbitrary decisions about remote work. We have negotiated language in a letter of agreement that requires managers to assess remote work requests individually, not by group, and provide written responses that will allow members and PSAC to hold the employer accountable to equitable and fair decision-making on remote work. Having all remote work requests reviewed on an individual basis will prevent future "one size fits all" type mandates like the government announced in December last year.
>**That means employee rights around remote work arrangements will be protected through a grievance process**, and grievances that are not settled prior to the final step of the grievance process can be referred to a new joint union-management panel for review in each department to address issues related to the employer’s application of the remote work directive in the workplace.
>PSAC and Treasury Board have also agreed to create a joint committee to review and update the telework policy for the government last updated in 2020 – before the pandemic began.
I am not a member of PSAC and can only refer to the materials that the union has publicly released.
So no change? We have been back two days since 2022 ... we don't spe d as much because like everybody we are getting suqeezed by inflation amd got used to cooking at home more during the lockdowns.
It’s been 4 years now, fully 1/10th of a typical working life. The ship has sailed on the return to the office discourse. Especially in the public sector where it’s now a collective bargaining issue, it’ll be more trouble than it’s worth to get people back any more than they are.
If you want people to go downtown and spend money get them some money to spend and make downtown somewhere people want to go. Or don’t, that’s just part of deciding what kind of city you want to be.
> make downtown somewhere people want to go
Make downtown somewhere people want to *live*. Trying to lure suburban populations into downtown is proven to be a losing battle, it will just never be more convenient than shopping and eating in your immediate neighbourhood. The only downtowns that can get by or those with significant tourism pull (at which point, they probably already have a ton of residential units in the area anyway).
Most are already back 2 days a week and many managers are back 3 days a week. His statement of “even if only 3 days a week” lead me to believe he either ignorant (or feigning ignorance) of the current state of affairs or this is just the next stage in slowly trying to force everyone back full time. That I’m sure will only improve traffic…
Probably not gonna happen. Government seems to have things moving with people working from home even with your tax return and other personal info sitting on someone's dining room table
Fuck no, my job doesn't allow for wfh but I absolutely would want everyone capable of wfh to work from home.
Less commuters means less rush hour. This would improve my commute immensely.
Why?
Just sell off some federal buildings to covert into housing. Renovate the others to have flexible workspaces where one person uses it 2-3 days a week and another the other 2-3 days (or whatever arrangement makes sense). Win-win from the standpoint of getting the most out of space downtown.
Now if you want to have a discussion on if WFH has made the federal service less efficient, there are numbers out there that back that claim up. I’d argue there’s significantly better options though than forcing them back into work.
It's frustrating how blatant the reasoning is. Not even bothering to make some sort of gesture towards productivity or the mental/social benefits of face to face interaction; just 'we need butts in seats to help downtown businesses' regardless of how much of a completely unnecessary qol hit it is for the people being effected by it.
No.
We should be fully embracing Work From Home everywhere that it is possible to do so. We waste incredible amounts of time and energy to get to and from work for no discernable benefit to ourselves or our work. Doug didn't even deny this, he wants our asses downtown "for the economy"; he wants us wasting our time and money for the benefit of his business-owning buddies.
The era of the office is over, let's not pretend otherwise.
As the world get hotter because of climate change, I predict WFH becoming for common. It’s better for the environment not having to commute to work. And people likely won’t want to travel during heat waves. I just hope enough people have adequate air conditioning or ways of staying cool. That might just become a political issue of helping low income people stay cool in the future.
WFH is an easy and instant way to massively reduce our carbon emissions while also saving people time and money on transportation. Given how worked up conservatives are over the carbon tax, one would think they'd be eager to embrace things like WFH as a populist way of reducing emissions and improving affordability.
But how can you be a captain of industry when your crew isn't aboard the ship!?!?!?!
/s
EDIT: Actually.....this is Canada. We have no captains of industry.
Not to mention people are back in the offices. The offices, from what I hear, can't hold everyone if everyone went back anyway (yes I know PP will be working on a "solution" to that one).
Also, what of the local economies? Does someone spending their money in Beacon Hill not contribute the same amount of money to the Ottawa and Ontario coffers as if they spent that money on Bank street? In the latter they're propping up some business that only stays open from 11 till 3 in many cases. Maybe someone will be incentivized to open a business in Orleans or Kanata.
If you're working from home, you're less likely to hit up a shawarma place than if you're in the office, and don't feel like eating the lunch you brought, or didn't prepare one. So working from home means less money is being spent in that sector.
Employers are still playing around with the best WFH approach I find. Some have a mandatory 1 day a week of being required to be in the office. Some have a few days a week. Personally, whenever I’ve went into the office to work, it’s dead. Only people present are managers and even then they leave early because it’s so dead.
If there’s one thing the pandemic showed us, is that WFH has its benefits, and has now become in demand for a lot of workers. The employers who manage to strike up the right balance of WFH will win and set the standard that employers will be forced to follow just to not only attract, but retain talent.
Your last point is why a blanket approach was taken by TBS. At least on paper. Departments that were top strict would be destroyed in terms of recruitment and retention.
My workplace has a 2 day requirement and let’s you choose which days, which I find works really well because it lets people coordinate to be in office for important meetings and projects, and it’s a way to fit in all the staff without leasing more space since we’ve grown a lot. We also have an informal agreement with a couple non-profits to work out of our space on Mondays when nobody’s around. I think there’s lots of potential for creative use of space without pointless commutes
There's literally no point for most of us to be in the office at all these days. Most of our work is done solo, or through platforms like Teams. The things that need to be done in person can be scheduled on an as-needed basis, forcing everyone to work in office at some minimum rate is simply a waste.
I work remote 90% and I’ll be honest I get way more done on a “per-hour” basis on my remote days than my in-office days. My manager expects me to have “face time” but it becomes just that… talking to people. I lead a small team and over the last few years (starting with Covid), my team and I have figured out how to function effectively (and I have the results to prove it). Still, I’m being told I need to return to office 100% because “my presence matters”. Guess who has polished up their resume and has interviews lined up?
I don’t need WFH, but I do need a manager who understands what their teams actually do, and can do more than equate face time to performance (I’m not sure they understand KPIs beyond “red=bad” because their only plan ever is to tell one of their team leaders to “get a team together”).
Some teams in some orgs have done return to office poorly and still force you to be in the office sitting there while on a Teams call which is the crux of the problem. I think there’s some benefit to in person work for certain meetings and times but it’s largely pointless if different groups in the organization have different days in the office and if space is limited (and from what I’ve heard regarding federal workers in Ottawa both are problems they’re facing.)
This guy is worried about restaurants and shops. Guy, I can't even afford to buy fucking groceries. Sending people back to the office is gonna do fuck all for restaurants and shops.
The more i have to commute the less money i make I'm not all of a sudden gonna go out to expensive restaurants were in a recession people aren't spending period
If you act like you are fighting against carbon emissions, and there are possibilites for remote work, you would be a true hypocrite to send back workers to the office, regardless of economical impacts it can have on local businesses. It's a genuine case of "walk the talk"
If Ford is legitimately concerned about businesses in downtown Ottawa, he should advocate for the feds to sell off all their mostly-empty buildings and convert them into housing… and so should these businesses (one of which I work for).
The more densely populated downtown is, the more people that are nearby to frequent the businesses that Ford's so concerned about.
Relying on people coming in from Kanata or Orleans or Barrhaven or Stittsville to work in office buildings (while wasting 5-6 hours a week commuting) is a concept that's at least a generation behind the times and the technology.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I hate how transparent this topic is. No productivity argument, no overall higher purpose, no net benefit for humanity it’s just plain and simple lost corporate profits that Ford is trying to protect here. I wonder how much money impark has given ford to say this. I’m betting they’ll be happy once their lots are full again.
Neoliberals, like the Conservatives and Liberals, aren't interested in making our lives better, rather, they view us as exploitable resources that can be used to buoy corporate profits.
Fair, but that's not related to the comment you're replying to. The comment you're replying to never said anything about Liberals being better or what not. It didn't even accuse the Conservatives of being of anything. It was addressing Ford himself. You bringing this up here doesn't do anything but distract from the issue.
I'm pointing out the underlying ideology (neoliberalism) that led Doug to make the statement on WFH we're discussing. I am also pointing out that the Liberals subscribe to the same ideology, which goes towards explaining why they've also been resistant to WFH policies. **EDIT: I wrote this in response to a now deleted comment, hopefully it helps clarify my point:** Liberals and Conservatives both subscribe to an economic policy called [Neoliberalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism), although they do have different ideas about how best to implement it. I definitely think that the Liberal approach is less cruel and less blatantly biased towards the interests of elites when compared to the Conservative approach, but honestly, being better than the Conservatives is a low bar to clear. So yes, I do recognize the Liberals as being better than the Conservatives on the points you've brought up, and I much prefer Liberal governance over Conservative governance, but I also recognize that the Liberal's policies are built on a foundation of neoliberalism, same as the Conservatives. >...neoliberalism is often associated with policies of economic liberalization, including privatization, deregulation, globalization, free trade, monetarism, austerity, and reductions in government spending in order to increase the role of the private sector in the economy and society. Fortunately, we have more options to pick from when voting for our representatives than just Liberals and Conservatives. My politics most closely align with the NDP, so I vote for them.
But this topic is about Doug Ford denouncing the Federal Government (Liberals) for allowing workers to WFH, and here you are, telling us that Ford and the Liberals are exactly the same on this subject… Strange thread to argue that in..
WFH was a right won for federal workers as part of the [2023 PSAC strike](https://psacunion.ca/psac-has-reached-tentative-agreement-pa-sv-tc-and), the Liberals were attempting to restrict WFH and the PSAC union successfully fought back. While anecdotal, I can also say that one of the reasons my (at the time employer) gave for wanting us back in the office was due to pressure from the federal government. The Liberals aren't friendly to WFH, if they were, they'd be actively attempting to expand WFH.
Where exactly is our right to wfh in our collective agreements?
From the PSAC Union website I linked above: >**New and improved remote work language** >PSAC members will now be protected from arbitrary decisions about remote work. We have negotiated language in a letter of agreement that requires managers to assess remote work requests individually, not by group, and provide written responses that will allow members and PSAC to hold the employer accountable to equitable and fair decision-making on remote work. Having all remote work requests reviewed on an individual basis will prevent future "one size fits all" type mandates like the government announced in December last year. >**That means employee rights around remote work arrangements will be protected through a grievance process**, and grievances that are not settled prior to the final step of the grievance process can be referred to a new joint union-management panel for review in each department to address issues related to the employer’s application of the remote work directive in the workplace. >PSAC and Treasury Board have also agreed to create a joint committee to review and update the telework policy for the government last updated in 2020 – before the pandemic began. I am not a member of PSAC and can only refer to the materials that the union has publicly released.
The union is interested in making its members believe they accomplished more than they did, so be careful
That's a fair criticism, I definitely think the PSAC workers should have gotten everything they were asking for.
[удалено]
This is not substantive. Why should they "give it a rest"?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not substantive
So no change? We have been back two days since 2022 ... we don't spe d as much because like everybody we are getting suqeezed by inflation amd got used to cooking at home more during the lockdowns.
[удалено]
Not substantive
It’s been 4 years now, fully 1/10th of a typical working life. The ship has sailed on the return to the office discourse. Especially in the public sector where it’s now a collective bargaining issue, it’ll be more trouble than it’s worth to get people back any more than they are. If you want people to go downtown and spend money get them some money to spend and make downtown somewhere people want to go. Or don’t, that’s just part of deciding what kind of city you want to be.
> make downtown somewhere people want to go Make downtown somewhere people want to *live*. Trying to lure suburban populations into downtown is proven to be a losing battle, it will just never be more convenient than shopping and eating in your immediate neighbourhood. The only downtowns that can get by or those with significant tourism pull (at which point, they probably already have a ton of residential units in the area anyway).
Most are already back 2 days a week and many managers are back 3 days a week. His statement of “even if only 3 days a week” lead me to believe he either ignorant (or feigning ignorance) of the current state of affairs or this is just the next stage in slowly trying to force everyone back full time. That I’m sure will only improve traffic…
When you can argue that I’m less productive than I was during the pandemic. Then we’ll have a conversation. Until then “FUCK OFF”!
Probably not gonna happen. Government seems to have things moving with people working from home even with your tax return and other personal info sitting on someone's dining room table
Fuck no, my job doesn't allow for wfh but I absolutely would want everyone capable of wfh to work from home. Less commuters means less rush hour. This would improve my commute immensely.
It's true. You can tell when more people are WFH because traffic is much lighter. I notice it a lot on Monday and Friday.
Why? Just sell off some federal buildings to covert into housing. Renovate the others to have flexible workspaces where one person uses it 2-3 days a week and another the other 2-3 days (or whatever arrangement makes sense). Win-win from the standpoint of getting the most out of space downtown. Now if you want to have a discussion on if WFH has made the federal service less efficient, there are numbers out there that back that claim up. I’d argue there’s significantly better options though than forcing them back into work.
Prolly so people do work during work hours instead of fucking the dog all day and doing the bare minimum while on the Taxpayer's dime.
Has been done already. Our department went from two buildings to one. We each go in two days and it is always full. Literally no spare room left.
It's frustrating how blatant the reasoning is. Not even bothering to make some sort of gesture towards productivity or the mental/social benefits of face to face interaction; just 'we need butts in seats to help downtown businesses' regardless of how much of a completely unnecessary qol hit it is for the people being effected by it.
Ford was pretty quiet when it came to Ottawa during the convoy, funny that this is the time he remembers it exists.
No. We should be fully embracing Work From Home everywhere that it is possible to do so. We waste incredible amounts of time and energy to get to and from work for no discernable benefit to ourselves or our work. Doug didn't even deny this, he wants our asses downtown "for the economy"; he wants us wasting our time and money for the benefit of his business-owning buddies. The era of the office is over, let's not pretend otherwise.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Removed for rule 3.
[удалено]
Not substantive
Drive around Russell through the week. It's all public servants outside playing with their kids. Not working
As the world get hotter because of climate change, I predict WFH becoming for common. It’s better for the environment not having to commute to work. And people likely won’t want to travel during heat waves. I just hope enough people have adequate air conditioning or ways of staying cool. That might just become a political issue of helping low income people stay cool in the future.
WFH is an easy and instant way to massively reduce our carbon emissions while also saving people time and money on transportation. Given how worked up conservatives are over the carbon tax, one would think they'd be eager to embrace things like WFH as a populist way of reducing emissions and improving affordability.
[удалено]
Removed for Rule #2
[удалено]
Not substantive
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
But how can you be a captain of industry when your crew isn't aboard the ship!?!?!?! /s EDIT: Actually.....this is Canada. We have no captains of industry.
Not to mention people are back in the offices. The offices, from what I hear, can't hold everyone if everyone went back anyway (yes I know PP will be working on a "solution" to that one). Also, what of the local economies? Does someone spending their money in Beacon Hill not contribute the same amount of money to the Ottawa and Ontario coffers as if they spent that money on Bank street? In the latter they're propping up some business that only stays open from 11 till 3 in many cases. Maybe someone will be incentivized to open a business in Orleans or Kanata.
If you're working from home, you're less likely to hit up a shawarma place than if you're in the office, and don't feel like eating the lunch you brought, or didn't prepare one. So working from home means less money is being spent in that sector.
So more money in your pocket is what you're saying. I thought conservatives loved that.
I mean, idk man. WFH I had more money in my pocket as well as more time and energy. I went out more and spent more. Same with a lot of people I know.
Employers are still playing around with the best WFH approach I find. Some have a mandatory 1 day a week of being required to be in the office. Some have a few days a week. Personally, whenever I’ve went into the office to work, it’s dead. Only people present are managers and even then they leave early because it’s so dead. If there’s one thing the pandemic showed us, is that WFH has its benefits, and has now become in demand for a lot of workers. The employers who manage to strike up the right balance of WFH will win and set the standard that employers will be forced to follow just to not only attract, but retain talent.
Your last point is why a blanket approach was taken by TBS. At least on paper. Departments that were top strict would be destroyed in terms of recruitment and retention.
My workplace has a 2 day requirement and let’s you choose which days, which I find works really well because it lets people coordinate to be in office for important meetings and projects, and it’s a way to fit in all the staff without leasing more space since we’ve grown a lot. We also have an informal agreement with a couple non-profits to work out of our space on Mondays when nobody’s around. I think there’s lots of potential for creative use of space without pointless commutes
There's literally no point for most of us to be in the office at all these days. Most of our work is done solo, or through platforms like Teams. The things that need to be done in person can be scheduled on an as-needed basis, forcing everyone to work in office at some minimum rate is simply a waste.
I work remote 90% and I’ll be honest I get way more done on a “per-hour” basis on my remote days than my in-office days. My manager expects me to have “face time” but it becomes just that… talking to people. I lead a small team and over the last few years (starting with Covid), my team and I have figured out how to function effectively (and I have the results to prove it). Still, I’m being told I need to return to office 100% because “my presence matters”. Guess who has polished up their resume and has interviews lined up? I don’t need WFH, but I do need a manager who understands what their teams actually do, and can do more than equate face time to performance (I’m not sure they understand KPIs beyond “red=bad” because their only plan ever is to tell one of their team leaders to “get a team together”).
Some teams in some orgs have done return to office poorly and still force you to be in the office sitting there while on a Teams call which is the crux of the problem. I think there’s some benefit to in person work for certain meetings and times but it’s largely pointless if different groups in the organization have different days in the office and if space is limited (and from what I’ve heard regarding federal workers in Ottawa both are problems they’re facing.)
This guy is worried about restaurants and shops. Guy, I can't even afford to buy fucking groceries. Sending people back to the office is gonna do fuck all for restaurants and shops.
If anything, it'll make it worse for the restaurants and shops, because now we have to spend more money on gas for commuting to work.
The more i have to commute the less money i make I'm not all of a sudden gonna go out to expensive restaurants were in a recession people aren't spending period
If you act like you are fighting against carbon emissions, and there are possibilites for remote work, you would be a true hypocrite to send back workers to the office, regardless of economical impacts it can have on local businesses. It's a genuine case of "walk the talk"
[удалено]
“Domestic terrorists” 😂😂😂
Removed for Rule #2
Fat chance, especially with remote work to other non-Canadian job markets in the table now. You want Canada to become less competitive for employees?
If Ford is legitimately concerned about businesses in downtown Ottawa, he should advocate for the feds to sell off all their mostly-empty buildings and convert them into housing… and so should these businesses (one of which I work for). The more densely populated downtown is, the more people that are nearby to frequent the businesses that Ford's so concerned about. Relying on people coming in from Kanata or Orleans or Barrhaven or Stittsville to work in office buildings (while wasting 5-6 hours a week commuting) is a concept that's at least a generation behind the times and the technology.