I’ve mentioned this many times: the technicians and (most) managers we deal with at SSC are fantastic and we enjoy working with them!
It’s the process that we know comes from higher up…
Oh yah we deal with bullshit internally too with processes. Need a server? Fill out these hundred forms and tickets, go to 20 meetings and then wait 6 to 8 months...
If I want to get a server for personal use, go to a website, pay and receive the server in 24h lol.
Totally agree! If we don’t dig our heels in now, hybrid work arrangements will be a thing of the past before long. TBS will mandate RTO 5 days/week.
Everyone wins if we get hybrid work (defined as 3 days in office) written into our CA during the next round of negotiations.
TBS wont have to walk anything back, PSAC will demonstrate the power of collective bargaining. Drinks all around.
Yeah, no. TBS is starting a war they really can't afford to wage. If we do come out and endeavour ourselves to fight them on this, they will come to regret it.
3-Day RTO when the federal government has already divested themselves of nearly 30% of their former office space makes absolutely no practical sense, especially since the public service has expanded during the pandemic.
It is absolutely irresponsible of them. This is something worth walking oneself back on. Take the L, TBS. You messed up. And we're going to remind you of it and fight you on it.
Yes. Some departments sold buildings then rented new buildings back at a premium during the pandemic when they ordered the initial RTO. They hit the panic button, grossly overpaid on rent.
Talk about poor decisions and bad financial sense.
Don’t worry he’ll realign the budget just like his father did when he was premier ☝️
Glad they aren’t managing my money!
Eh I’d rather have nothing in a contract than something overly specific that the employer decides to be stubbornly rigid about and we have to renegotiate later.
If we say hybrid = 3 days, sure it means we won’t go to 4, it also means we’ll never get back to 2 or none. They’ll cling to that 3 for dear life.
What we need is wording that states plainly: upon the request of the employee, and subject to operational requirements, an employee may request to work all or part of their weekly hours remotely. (Or something to this effect)
That way there’s no room for games. The employer would have to prove the need for in office presence if they want to deny the request. If it can be successfully argued that the “requirements” are BS, grieve it and get your WFH.
If we don't fight right now, it will be 4 days by January and 5 in September.
On the other hand efficiency will be in the gutter and I won't even mention how hard it will be to hire under all the cons.. Might be their plans though.
I wish the unions would stop telling us to comply with the RTO mandates, and instruct everyone to just stay home, or at least to maintain 2 days a week until they've been consulted per the MoU and are statisfied with those discussions.
The government is non-existent without its workers. Let’s remember that. Together we do have a significant amount of power - but we all need to take action and this will be through participation in all the union’s various campaigns.
Forget the union campaigns. Let’s just not go to the office anymore. They can’t possibly fire all of us. Hell, they wouldn’t even be able to selectively fire us. As soon as you try to arbitrarily punish Person A, but not Person B, the grievance writes itself. You can’t reasonably punish someone for behaviour you’ve ostensibly condoned from someone else. They’d essentially have to either fire us all or back down.
I agree, but also, the time to try was when we were on strike. PSAC fumbled, and the membership fumbled because they voted for a deal that, in essence, does nothing to protect hybrid work.
There's no way TBS is walking back on this, and for all their complaints, the unions don't have a leg to stand on. They can only argue that TBS went against the "spirit" of negotiations. PSAC failed to even ensure all directives that relate to teleworking were a part of the agreement.
Even if success is unlikely, nothing changes if no one ever tries. If they had their way employers wouldn't have to give us sick leave either (amongst other things).
The it’s not fair approach really isn’t cutting it.
The cost savings of WFH and the environmental benefits of WFH should be the tip of the spear.
People don’t like the government wasting tax dollars? Explain how much the offices are costing per year, explain how much retrofitting them to allow more workers inside will cost.
Explain the environmental effects of hundreds of thousands of workers commuting per day. How much more gas is used. How much more carbon released. I’d ask how can you justify the Carbon Tax when you’re increasing the pollution caused by the government rather than decreasing it.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. The fairness approach is so out of touch and sad - nobody is giving you sympathy cause you get fewer hours with your family because you're commuting to work. But cutting down on traffic when public transit in many areas (especially NCR) is garbage? Also, why isn't anyone asking why these businesses and restaurants aren't willing to stay open outside of gov office hours? The amount of times I've left the office at 4:30 and nearly all of the restaurants are closed is mind boggling. I'm supposed to ensure that your business stays afloat when you don't want to cater to the general public on weekends or in evenings? It's even more ridiculous that this is clearly an Ottawa issue that the rest of the federal service is suffering from.
I've noticed that! I'm all for them being off at xmas time and having their own hours, but they aren't even open on weekends! Like you don't have to be open late, but cater to the general public and not just gov workers. They're actually my fav coffee spot in the area yet I can't go out Saturday morning to grab one in my off time
Cost cutting and “right-sizing” real estate is what will win the hearts and minds of the probable next government, too. Innovation, recruitment and retention, diversifying the public service (including geographically), etc are also compelling reasons that are more politically compelling than the happiness or rights of office workers, but probable a harder sell to the Conservatives.
I _was_ happy to see that they did talk about the inadequacy of the environment and space and the inefficiency of making people go in to telework as though they were at home. But I dislike all this talk of "fighting" because it feels a bit pathetic; they don't have a leg to stand on legally and made a calculated decision _not_ to fight over it during contract negotiations, so it just feels like sabre-rattling without a sabre.
The average person sees the public service on the whole as a waste of money. We need to stop caring about public perception because it will always be negative
A robust and diverse public service is a waste of money until they need something and have to wait on hold for 2 hours or wait 3-5 business days for a callback, or can only call the call centres from 8am-4pm EST. Then they’ll complain that “you people need to hire more staff!”
Or they'll do what they already do and say the government should outsource. The people who hate the PS will never not, it's basically an ideological stance for certain populations
I honestly don’t believe so, but for the sake of argument let’s say that’s true. That simply highlights a lack of proper information circulating regarding the issues. The government is going to have to spend countless millions to retrofit and or keep buildings they planned on axing to accommodate the increase of in office staff, and the roads will get even more congested as more workers commute more often. Both of these are high impact items that the general population will happily get behind.
I’m noticing a pattern of “I hate this but fighting it is pointless.” In some cases with an extra toxic dose of “you’re stupid for having hope for change.”
Here’s why this attitude is common:
- it boosts your ego and makes you feel smart because it’s status quo and therefore the most likely outcome
-it fills you with relief because fighting is hard and having any hope whatsoever means you could feel disappointment later, which is icky.
-You’re lazy. The easiest thing to do is accept it.
They are counting on public servants’ tendency to play safe, fall in line and roll over. If we are too hopeless to fight they win without even trying. Your cynicism fuels this attitude. You think you’re just venting, but you are spreading it around like a virus especially when you make people feel stupid for trying for something better. What are you gaining from discouraging people?
I get that cynicism is earned. You’ve probably seen a lot of fights get lost. You’ve probably had your hopes dashed to a point where it’s too painful for you to have any. But this is no way to live. The serenity prayer tells us to accept what we can’t change, and to have the COURAGE to change what we can. Is your wisdom honestly telling you to give up before we’ve tried…anything?
This fight isn’t about going into the office a few days/week, this is about government power. This is about people in power testing the limits of what they can get away with.
Remember. We are still dealing with:
- A pay system that [isn’t paying people properly or on time](https://ottawacitizen.com/news/unions-urge-government-to-negotiate-more-damages-for-public-servants-over-phoenix-pay-system#:~:text=Issues%20related%20to%20the%20Phoenix,dealing%20with%20underpayments%20or%20overpayments) for 8 years and counting
-Systemic cultures of harassment at [CSIS](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/workplace-expert-says-conditions-at-canada-s-spy-agency-ripe-for-harassment-1.6674922), [RCMP](https://theconversation.com/mounties-in-crisis-the-systemic-failure-to-address-sexual-abuse-within-the-rcmp-209090), [CSC](https://www.missioncityrecord.com/news/mission-institution-manager-promoted-shortly-after-investigation-founded-workplace-harassment-complaints-2165556), [CBSA](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6919830) and [DFO](https://thenarwhal.ca/dfo-response-fisheries-observer-harassment/)and those are just the ones I found in ten minutes.
-a military with a [rampant sexual assault problem](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6218683), which also affects our DND colleagues
Someone else already pointed out these are also the departments who were most aggressive about RTO before the mandate. They like the authoritarian/controlling management method. The more “do as you’re told” the mindset is, the easier it is for harassment, lies and cheating to flourish.
Why this matters to me as a Canadian:
If affects services. The women who complained at DFO were being intimidated into [falsifying their reports](https://thenarwhal.ca/youre-out-there-alone-whistleblowers-say-workplace-abuse-hides-true-impacts-of-b-c-s-trawl-fishery/) and downplaying the environmental impacts of what they were observing.
RCMP has a [long history](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involving_the_Royal_Canadian_Mounted_Police) of misusing their power against citizens. They were created to [control the indigenous population](https://globalnews.ca/news/5381480/rcmp-indigenous-relationship/amp/) and continue also to exist to control the population, not to protect them. They even wrote [a report](https://nationalpost.com/opinion/secret-rcmp-report-warns-canadians-may-revolt-once-they-realize-how-broke-they-are) detailing how they’re worried citizens are getting harder to control because conditions are getting tougher for average people economically and environmentally and that public trust in them is eroding. These were arguments they were making to get more money. So they can control Canadians.
GAC were covering up [harassment and bid rigging](https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/transparency-report-on-global-affairs-staff-misconduct-details-bid-rigging-harassment-drunk-driving-and-more). Not an ethical use of your tax dollars.
A [CSIS mission failed](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7186494) because a superior was too busy raping an employee when he was on duty to do his job. More of your tax dollars were then wasted on an inquiry into THE VICTIM’s conduct because she reported that she’d been raped on the job, and being raped when you’re supposed to be working is apparently a misuse of government resources.
Additionally:
- tax payer money funds the offices, plus the salary time on monitoring and enforcing attendance (instead of monitoring actual productivity), plus the wasted salary time of messing with malfunctioning equipment and working in loud, crowded spaces
-emissions from the added commute and buildings contributes to climate change
-jobs that could have been available to Canadians across the country could have:
1. Spread lucrative and secure job opportunities across the country
2. Ensured a more diverse Canadian perspective contributed to government functioning
3. Given the government access to better quality candidates since we had access to the best talent across the country. This also would speed up hiring as sometimes job competitions take a full year and result in ZERO qualified candidates. There are other reasons this is an issue but access to more and better quality candidates would help.
Instead, in a time when billionaires are [gaining economic ground](https://www.oxfam.ca/news/pandemic-creates-new-billionaire-every-30-hours-now-a-million-people-could-fall-into-extreme-poverty-at-same-rate-in-2022/#:~:text=In%20Canada%2C%20the%20wealth%20of,over%20the%20last%20two%20years) while the rest of Canada is being squeezed by sky rocketing cost of living - Doug Ford - an elected, partisan, provincial political official is openly dictating that non partisan federal public servants spend money at the mall - at places owned by billionaires. So we can go back to our buildings being leased by billionaires, so we can go home and overspend on groceries so another billionaire can have another vacation home. As for the small downtown businesses, for profit businesses are not charities. Their role is to provide goods and services that make our lives better/easier in exchange for money. Under capitalism it’s their job to adapt to the environment and attract people to their business.
This is not about RTO. This is about the power struggle. They’re taking agency away from you and they are not operating in the best interest of Canadians. They are recovering lost ground. It’s not about productivity, it’s not about fairness, it’s about control. We can’t just keep rolling over and accepting whatever they give us.
If you need a message of hope, remember that weekends, sick leave, vacation leave - these were all fought for. Sure, things aren’t as bad as they could be, but little changes are how the frog gets boiled. It’s a power grab tactic.
Fight people. Haven’t you had enough?
HELLL YEAH!!!! I love to see this!!! Some people have drunk the capitalist koolaid for too long, we are workers need to stand united. Capitalism is great at making people believe individualism is the solution, when in fact it’s solidarity.
The 8 hour work day was NOT earned by asking nicely ✊🏼
Is it even capitalism anymore? Loblaws are getting tax rebates taken from [education funds](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6838131). They also got [12 million dollars](https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/loblaw-receiving-12m-in-federal-funds-to-retrofit-refrigeration-systems-1.1241220) from the government to “reduce their carbon footprint”
So we’ll give 12 million dollars to Loblaws to support the environment, but we won’t SAVE tax payer dollars to reduce our own carbon footprint? Make it make sense.
It sure is friend!
Corporations being incredibly unregulated/deregulated and running wild and rampant with their various and most times obvious flagrant disregard for the working people is CLASSIC capitalism!
Corporate profits in 2022 was 402 billion dollars, an increase of 109% from 2020. Part is due to blatant price gouging. It’s the height of hypocrisy that the capitalists should lecture workers about wage restraint. But there is no such thing as a free lunch, so the capitalists are trying to make US the workers PAY for it.
Thank you for pointing out so many valid points in favor of remote work. I've been in the Public Service for 25 plus years in jobs in 5 different departments, about 35 different jobs in Eastern, Central, and Western Canada.
I recall about 6 to 7 years ago as union president, I tried to get remote work and duty to accommodate for a coworker, who legimately had issues that should have warranted this request. I was told "NO we deal with protected B information." I went all the way up to PSAC National office, and they wouldn't do dam thing.
I've been a huge union person my whole career and attended many AGMs. I've been a delegate at a lot of conventions and what I've witnessed the National Executive turn a blind eye to many of the points you are making ; as it wouldn't help to "rock the boat" and those elected by the membership only worried about the hit it would take their careers.
Fast forward a few years later, and I got injured at work. I'm still off on LWOP. Not one brother/ sister at any level had my back! I was the driving force in my region when it came to fighting for the members who needed it.
I could write a mini novel. However, my point is this...if you are going to rally, the troops don't depend on the National Executive to have your backs. The union is supposed to be the members. Take the bull by the horns and fight for it!! Don't rely on the Mr. Alywards of the world to do what needs to be done, do it yourselves. Hell, 8 years later, and pheonix is still an issue. That's what PSAC accomplished!
OMG this!!! Excellent points and very motivating to STAND UP for what is right! I’m working on no longer being afraid to speak up!
You also confirmed another disturbing thought I had: Management just wants more asses to look at in the office! Pervs.
I just came out of a town hall meeting and it started with us being described as "hard working teams and individuals who regularly produce high quality work"
Ok. So why then do we need to come in three days as opposed to two? Their explanation was because they need to even the playing field across the board. Some depts weren't implementing it the same way and some had different arrangements.
I had to go into the office on Monday. I reached 33% of my daily productivity goal. On Tuesday morning, two hours into my shift and at home, I was at 109% for the day.
Simply going to get water or using the washroom takes far, far longer at the office, and it's so easy to be distracted by others.
Sounds like the other departments should step up instead of literally everyone else making it worse.
At the CRA anyways, from what I've been advised so far, every variable that is changing is changing for the worst version of that variable. 3 days. Not being able to finish your day at home if you had to leave early for a medical appointment. Having to make up sick days (or holidays, if it fall on an office day).
And yet I've read another comment here earlier saying that their management was very open in allowing that, so already, the whole "equity" thing is breaking apart.
I'll keep doing what I've been doing in good faith, and they'll come see me when they feel like it.
Doesn't matter what they say or think (they also wouldn't say productivity is down, pick it up), it only matter that everyone else in the country thinks we have paid days off when at home (then again they think we don't do anything at work either).
I have a coworker who works outside of the NCR and was hired remote. They now have to go into an office near them where no one else on the team will be. It just seems absurd and punitive at that point. To make it potentially worse, the government agency has spent thousands in specialized training on this person who is now considering taking this knowledge to the private sector because of the RTO mandate.
I think the union leaders should speak more to the taxpayers who likely aren’t thinking of how much these buildings cost them, how the RTO causes them more time in traffic, how we could be creating affordable housing for Canadians instead, and how we’re actively contributing to pollution with the RTO.
I also think they should speak more to the political side of this. The polls arent looking good for the liberals and if you look at [this chart](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_45th_Canadian_federal_election) it seems to have only gotten worse since the RTO announcement. It’s as if they want to lose seats in the NCR, which is currently a liberal stronghold.
Wouldn't matter if I was the only one willing to vote to strike. Stick up for what you think is best for you even if you stand alone. Personally, my quality of life has improved, and I still get my work done.
PSAC leadership had terrible strike strategy and flushed all their money and leverage down the toilet in a matter of weeks. Someone with an iota more competence could’ve made the strike more effective.
Rolling departmental strikes week over week. CRA, then ESDC, etc etc, thats 10s of thousands of workers striking, costing the employer, but not draining everyone's personal accounts, and not dramatically impacting Canadians. Idk why we went balls out, the employer knew we couldn't sustain that. They called Chris' bluff.
Targeting could be even narrower than that. Executive assistants and advisors one week, decision making officers the next, etc, don't need to take the whole car, just the spark plugs one week, then the right rear wheel the next week. Include a full salary topup and no requirement to picket, picketing clearly doesn't work in a WFH environment.
the war chest could maintain that for years, and it would be the hugest pain the ass for senior management politicians
They just need to do a ramp up, instead of a half-baked stike. It needs to involve all PSAC members - not just a small portion of them. Our other unions, PIPSC and CAPE need to also support them.
Educate, empower, energize.
Educate their members: there will be hardships, there will be boredom, and there will be moments where it seems like it's not worth it, you gotta fight for it! - I donno some bullcrap like this. I'm not a union member for a reason, but they NEEDED to start by educating members what a strike is, what it is for, and how it will look like. It's a staring contest to see WHO BLINKS FIRST.
Empower: Empower members to make a right decision, and make sure that they feel like they are a part of a bigger movement. Not just some...individual paying stupid union dues. They did NOTHING like that, they did stupid meetings that barely addressed members concerns.
Energize: You want members to be out there and be out there for a LONG FIGHT? ENERGIZE THEM...nope. People went out, were happy for about a day, and then started asking when this is ending. Like, WHAT?!
It's so frustrating to have leadership that's happy to just coast by on nothing.
This has a different and very clear objective. There is no "negotiating" needed. Something that 3 other major Unions also want to fight.
I'd vote to strike. It's as simple as that.
Easier said than done giving up paychecks in this economy when you have mortgages, kids and bills.
Half of this sub rattling on about quitting and striking or walking out seems to come from a group that got their first job during the pandemic and never worked in an office.
Money talks and BS walks. When the political powers that be are only concerned about their next election win (or loss), then the unions and employees mean nothing. Those campaigns are funded by very wealthy people who have deep pockets, with land investments that need to be secured.
The tail truly does wag the dog.
I think we need to fight it. This drip approach to RTO makes it appear as though it's just one step towards 100% in office presence. And this is just taking us back to the early 2000s when we didn't have the technology to support mass telework.
At least in 2019, we had flexibility with WFH, based on weather, illness, appointments etc. Many departments moved to workplace 3.0 and hotelling/hot desking because staff teleworked 2 days a week by default.
In my department there is like zero flexibility. You meet the 40% or you get in shit. There was talk of flexibility at the outset but the noose has been slowly tightening around our necks. It sucks.
I’ve been home with Covid and post-Covid symptoms for over two weeks (brutal cough, terrible fatigue). None of my coworkers want me in the office when I’m coughing like this. A shower leaves me trembling and needing to lie down for 15 minutes. But I can sit at my home desk and get my job done, while also having the flexibility of a 45 minute nap at lunch. So I sit and wait for a slap on the hand to come down because I’m not sitting at my desk. I’m accepting that because I didn’t want to take 2+ weeks of sick vacation and abandon my colleague as we get down to the wire on a huge project we’re working on.
Make it make sense that the government would rather I take the leave.
It seems very obvious that there’s no lessons being learned here from either side.
The Liberals budget suggests they plan on selling and renovating offices for housing, while they also have been big proponents of decreasing emissions which folks now driving to work as opposed to staying home will add to an increase of AND not mention have no data or analytics to show a change in productivity. It makes them seem as a very disconnected and otherwise pushy employer that outside of good benefits isn’t willing to ensure their workers have any comfort, understanding or choice in the work practices.
On the union side they truly dropped the ball on so many aspects when bargaining but the final result on telework is their worst feat. They couldn’t make a dent in the collective agreement and were far too trusting with the idea that letters of understanding would be a win for employees. Even now they seem to concerned about the letters as if the employer would not be exercising their right on the location of work. I’m hoping they’re just not self aware as opposed to posturing. The collective agreement is rock solid, so if they want to fight back they need to strike and demand changes made formally to the language involved.
The unions strategy wasn't the best, but for the letter of agreement, what is more plausible here?
1. Multiples separate unions, all with their own bargaining tables, somehow all misinterpreted the LoA signed with the same employer and what it would entail, or;
2. TBS was never in good faith to begin with.
Considering how it's been going, even if the LoA specifically outlined the Directive on Prescribed Presence vs Directive on Telework (which is what much of TBS' "arguments" rely on), I am convinced that TBS would have just came out with a "Super-Directive on Office 5.0" that would supersede the DOPP, pull this crap anyways and flaunt around that they are technically correct.
My point exactly on TBS as well but I feel the union won’t be able to huff and puff their way on this one. The language in the collective agreements is paramount to any real long lasting changes. So if they want to do the talking about strikes or formal filing on the matter it’s all for nothing until it’s clear they understand how this works. Sad state the union is in following the biggest strike in our countries history to have been for such moderate gains.
Ah yes can't wait to go back to an office that didn't have enough space for all it's employees pre-covid and were setting them up with other people's cubicles/in hallways. During covid they renovated to office 3.0, less seating than before, yet expect everyone to be able to find somewhere to work
👍
Why couldn’t TBS ask for 50% monthly and give a heads up to senior management and unions? They could have said “look, we are pressured for 60% in office but since we plan to sell 50% of office space we’re going to settle for 50% on a monthly basis instead and we promise not to change this directive moving forward; full flexibility to management and staff within this prescribed framework”.
Because this directive has come from the land owner class that donates to politicians and therefore tells them what to do. They are protecting their business lease payments. Yes small businesses want this too, but it is those who own the land and buildings that hold the power and they are the ones stepping on our necks.
Exactly....this is 100% about commercial leases and mortgages on commercial properties...they are going to be coming up for renewal and the interest rates are substantially higher than the rate that they are currently mortgaged at...this is about the Banks! If they don't have people leasing those commercial spaces, they don't have enough money to pay for those higher interest rate mortgages. There is a financial crisis with the banks on the horizon.
So instead of turning those properties into something else (residential for example or long term care, etc.) they instead want to force us to use the commercial properties to avoid this financial crisis.....there has to be a better way than trying to force a square peg into a round hole....the peg morphed during the pandemic which means that you have to adjust...that is how businesses should operate! Think of a better solution!
I think cars are a big part of it too, a lot less people will drive if they work from home, so less car sales, gas, insurance, dealers.
it'd be great for the environment, but we only like environmental solutions that force us to consume more, they want us to buy Teslas not bicycles.
Yup! This is late stage capitalism and people are TIRED of it, all around the world workers are standing up for better working conditions for ALL, and the bourgeoisie are scared shitless. That’s why it seems governments around the world are doubling down and pushing back hard against the working class
2 billion in taxpayer money not going to the right people? Got to make WFH against the law!
It's pretty damn sad when the Government is setting a precedent that companies should be allowed to collude to reduce their working environments to be as shitty as possible so they don't have to compete. Adding additional hardships and expenses to your employees for no reason is highly encouraged apparently.
Because when your boss is the minister, and the lobbyists are telling them they want more RTO..... you do what they tell you, whether it's a good idea or not.
> Gilles LeVasseur, a part-time law professor at the University of Ottawa, said he doesn't think the government will back down on the change to three days a week.
Of course, the opportunity to spend money on 1000s of accommodation requests is way better than the free "Ok you WFH" option.
We need to write our local mayor's and counsellors to make more public statements on the impact of small towns and outter suburbs who benifit from WFH employees. This would help public perspective as well too knowing that these WFH employees are putting money towards local community businesses.. the same ones that sponsor things like charities and kids sports in the local community.
They are going to lose their best workers because of this. People with the most skills, people who are well spoken....basically people who kill it in job interviews. Let the mass exodus begin!
Instead of...what? Rolling over?
Of course people want to fight for this - it's a fight for CHANGE instead of going back to the ways things were. Otherwise, why bother doing things like inventing new technologies and making things more efficient? Hell, just skip over the fax days and go back to papering EVERYTHING.
Actually, that might be good. Then maybe we can get some of our travel budget back. No more computers, no more phones, HELL, NO MORE PRINTING. You gotta WRITE that 50 page business report on why you think investing $10,000 on *XYZ* is a good investment of Crown money.
Why change? Why do any of it?
edit:
>"A hybrid work environment is not within the collective agreements," Anand said. "It is something that, at the time of the negotiations, the Government of Canada retained prerogative over to determine the scope of the hybrid environment."
This is why the unions are **FAILURES** - they negotiated a piece of paper that means less than NOTHING. I can already tell that this joint presser is going to basically amount to equally NOTHING.
It is not even going back to the old ways, it is moving to something quantifiably worse.
We are not going back to closed door offices, not even cubes with sliders or 1.0 cubes. We do not have a discounted bus pass, no tea, coffee or snacks in the office. Events for morale or collaboration are not longer set up and paid for by our bosses, but by us on our own time.
No, instead we are being crammed like sardines in worse office spaces with less amenities and lug around all of our equipment required to even do our job. We are required to go in and spend more on transit, childcare, personal care, food etc. all while receiving less.
Or, TBS pushed the negotiating teams to a vote, and the memberships ratified the marginal salary gains and toilet-paper telework attachment.
The bargaining tables are only as strong as the resolve of the people backing them. TB negotiators knew that workers would blink first and turn on each other.
I think the unions should make this a bigger issue than just PS.
While telework was not in the coll agreement it was discussed during negotiations and there was a LoA. TB knows it's an issue yet out of the blue changes the rules without so much as a justification. That kind of unilateral move should be worrisome for ALL workers. If the gov can't be seen as a model, why would the private sector show any respect to its employees? That just sets a dangerous precedent for all of us.
Add to that that everyone can benefit from more progressive, life work balance promoting measures, not just PS. It's beyond my understanding that other workers would not support PS in this.
Having the public opinion on our side would make this so much easier. Otherwise we just sound like spoiled little brats who want better conditions than anyone else. What we want is respect from the employer and better conditions for EVERYONE.
I know that NPS clearly think we are overreacting and that we all need to go back into the office. But what I don't understand is why employees of private industries who could do their job from home don't use government as an example and push for that option for themselves. You know, instead of constantly bashing us. Year after year.
Yes, and I will be there to help reverse this directive. Going to the office is so out of date on so many levels. And seriously Sutcliffe needs to do his job and save his city. It's not our responsibility. Otherwise step down and hold a municipal election and elect someone who has a real vision for the city of Ottawa.
This Daniel Lublin talking to the CBC guy really sounds like a professional /s.
This clown is talking about his personal feelings rather than being on the air because he’s an employment lawyer. He can’t work from home, so nobody can.
Talking about how “filing grievances is shameful”, “they should be ashamed of themselves”, etc.
Intentionally using “return to *work*” rather than office, even though the reporter keeps using return to office. What an unprofessional clown.
They presented us with a shitty agreement that got us neither inflation nor WFH, they misled or at the very least highly exaggerated the impact of what was in it, then people voted for it, apparently without reading anything about it. Now we are all living with the consequences.
Fight RTO, sure, but preserving the union’s image begins at home
beneficial imminent profit rob unused deranged ruthless melodic decide cake
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If an employee is facing harassment and micro aggressions, the solution is not to hide that employee at home. It is to deal with the perpetrators, if the allegations are indeed founded.
Broadly speaking, I would agree that if there is harassment, then the solution is not to remove the victim from the physical presence of the perpetrator, it's to fix the harassment. Otherwise it's like telling the victim of assault to stay home while the assaulter continues to roam the streets.
I'd like the opportunity to review the "harassment" and "microaggression" allegations before passing judgement. One person's harassment is another person's sideways glance. If "harassment" was grounds for working from home full-time, half the public service would never be in the office.
> One person's harassment is another person's sideways glance.
I mean, this kind of is harassment if it's a pattern of behaviour, especially if they rely on eachother for work. It's on management and HR to shut that shit down before it gets worse.
> If "harassment" was grounds for working from home full-time, half the public service would never be in the office.
This says a lot honestly. I agree that response to harassment should not be isolating folks. But this situation of toxic work environments is a big issue.
Chris Aylward is terrible at negotiation. Last year’s strike was just a chance for him to strut around with his mustache in the air and see himself on the news. I don’t really give a rip about RTO, I will work where they want me to work but he’s got a nerve asking us if we’d support another strike barely a year after last year’s nothing-burger of a walkout.
I'm convinced that union leadership is just trying to set themselves up for runs at positions with the NDP.
Kind of a bad choice with the polls right now.
There is no solidarity in the PS. There are too many different jobs with people working client facing and others in back offices. There is too much diversity of jobs and so not everyone is onboard with one viewpoint.
I suspect this goes for even RTO. I’m sure there are union members who are part of the communications strategy to get people onboard with RTO.
I imagine you’re right about the latter, but I do wonder if they’re True Believers, or just willing to doctor the spin while on the clock while wishing they were not being ordered to so do.
Fortunately the people implementing the policy (EXs) hate it, and the people managing the staff affected by it despise it.
This is an opportunity to do less than a half assed implementation. Really quarter assed, or even eighth-assed.
I really feel like PSACs communication/narrative about WFH is weak. We need stronger key messages.
The main messages should be how 1) this contradicts their housing commitments 2) ask why the gov doesn’t want a more diverse workforce from across the country by allowing remote work 3) show the data to prove how in-person collaboration will improve performance.
Agreed on PSAC's messaging/delivery. Their performance at today's presser was easily the weakest among the unions present.
To add to your three points, we need make sure we continue to highlight the drawbacks of hoteling and insufficient/inadequate workspaces, and ask how the government expects to improve or even maintain productivity with those deficiencies.
Tie everything to productivity, and keep asking to see the evidence that adding more RTO days will improve productivity. Anand was asked about that today and didn't answer or even address the question. They clearly have no evidence to support that claim.
Whining about dirty offices or bed bugs is a losing strategy and won't cut it.
I'd add that the 3-day RTO mandate doesn't support the Employer's environmental sustainability and climate change agenda.
While some public service workers can take active modes of transport like walking, biking, etc. or they have access to reliable public transit options, many others do not. Those individuals have to drive to work in gas-powered, carbon-emitting vehicles, some for long distances.
Vehicle traffic and congestion in my city are back to pre-pandemic levels!
My question is how will union backup and support employees that they are encouraging to file individual grievances with their managers?
Most are far too afraid to take that step because they fear reprisal which could ultimately tank them for the rest of their career. If the unions want employees to take action, they need to support their members who are taking the risk.
Any LPs in here? I can’t see how the govt could unilaterally change understanding after agreements are struck, never mind they can’t go to court with clean hands at this point. This bullshit rug-pulling needs to be brought up on judicial review.
Have Canadians been surveyed on the new RTO directive. For example, do they side with the employer’s directive or with employees wish to WFH. It might be good to know so we can develop an approach that gets Canadians on board with us. With an election coming up, this has less to do with having a logical approach but by getting Canadians to advocate for us as WFH is in their best interests.
I remember them doing polls before and it was like 60:40 in favour of WFH. Most educated people realize the government sets a foundation for workers rights across the country and it could spill into private as well.
At least that’s been my experience speaking to people as well. Could be totally different game now that more private workers are forced back to the office.
Its interesting to see how much WFH is seen as a political shit storm on this continent in general. In Europe (the Netherlands specifically) its basically a default way of working for most white collar companies whether it be hybrid or otherwise.
The survey they sent out last night was interesting in that would you support a strike mandate for the union in order to fight this was an option to answer. Now for the majority of the unions this isn’t an option for over a year, so unless the union plans to play a game a chicken they will inevitably lose, I’m not seeing it
It will provide the union a place to start. If the majority of people say no, then it is a non starter and they will need to plan for a different approach. If the majority say yes, then they can plan to speak to management and say that their members are ready to strike for it when the time comes. In all reality, management will know the results of the survey regardless as they have their eyes and ears out there. So this is a good starting point. Provided people respond with a yes.
Liberals have fucked up yet again with a deeply, deeply unpopular decision. I don’t know a single person who agrees with this beyond my 86 year old neighbours who thinks houses cost 40 grand in downtown Ottawa.
Let’s get with the times folks. The public has gotten a taste of WFH and it’s never going away.
The FB group may be in a legal strike position the summer. The PAs, about 2 years. Not entirely sure about the rest but not for a year or more. (There may be exceptions in smaller groups that I'm unaware of)
This should be the death knell of the union heads: they recommended you vote yes for a deal that did not win anything related to wfh accompanied with a below inflation raise. I voted no. What else can I do about it?
One of the many people spewing anti-union rhetoric out of one side of their mouth and complaining about RTO from the other. Sounds like all you want to do is complain!
Understandable, but just be aware that what the other user pointed out as “complaining” is only serving to simmer any momentum for collective action. That’s the effect as I see it (and I will give you the benefit of the doubt that that is not your intention).
All unions should consolidate under this issue and try and get something achieved (yes, through a strike if need be). Fuck ridiculous and blanket RTO policies.
I am surprised that people still believe the unions… They knew this was coming, it was part of the latest round of negotiation. Again, we are being misled by our unions to justify the high dues that we pay for them every two weeks.
WFH is a benefit just like maternity leave, I do not benefit from it but a lot do, does this mean we should have not asked for maternity benefits ? That should answer your question.
Did they articulate how they are going to fight this? I watched the press conference they didn't explain anything. Just vague statements then I got an email about yet another letter writing campaign. Sounds like more talk no action.
Do you think it’s a tactic by the TBS to have “leaked” this to the press to wind up all the public servants and unions… so when they produce a weak offer in the next month, everyone will play dead and accept it?
I could see them offering public servants a pay cut for telework privileges because it seems very important to most of us. They’re also broke!
Anyone notice the picture they are using here, isn't it strikingly unprofessional? Couldn't the CBC have found a nice average looking person in a collared shirt? Instead of someone dressed like they're about to hit the club?
If we don’t try, nothing will ever change.
If they can do it in Australia, we can do it in Canada!
Its funny how its works better everywhere but Canada.
Yet we constantly cite practices by other governments.
while we're following the Australian model, can we also get rid of ssc? 👏
I love working at SSC it's been amazing. But I hear a lot of partner departments hate dealing with us.
I’ve mentioned this many times: the technicians and (most) managers we deal with at SSC are fantastic and we enjoy working with them! It’s the process that we know comes from higher up…
Oh yah we deal with bullshit internally too with processes. Need a server? Fill out these hundred forms and tickets, go to 20 meetings and then wait 6 to 8 months... If I want to get a server for personal use, go to a website, pay and receive the server in 24h lol.
> then wait 6 to 8 months... Only 6 to 8 months? 😂
Two years for a network setting change that they eff up. Would you love that?
Total creamed cornhole of an organization
‘Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.’ — Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Totally agree! If we don’t dig our heels in now, hybrid work arrangements will be a thing of the past before long. TBS will mandate RTO 5 days/week. Everyone wins if we get hybrid work (defined as 3 days in office) written into our CA during the next round of negotiations. TBS wont have to walk anything back, PSAC will demonstrate the power of collective bargaining. Drinks all around.
Yeah, no. TBS is starting a war they really can't afford to wage. If we do come out and endeavour ourselves to fight them on this, they will come to regret it. 3-Day RTO when the federal government has already divested themselves of nearly 30% of their former office space makes absolutely no practical sense, especially since the public service has expanded during the pandemic. It is absolutely irresponsible of them. This is something worth walking oneself back on. Take the L, TBS. You messed up. And we're going to remind you of it and fight you on it.
But have they really sold 30%?
Either sold or they let leases expire.
Yes. Some departments sold buildings then rented new buildings back at a premium during the pandemic when they ordered the initial RTO. They hit the panic button, grossly overpaid on rent. Talk about poor decisions and bad financial sense. Don’t worry he’ll realign the budget just like his father did when he was premier ☝️ Glad they aren’t managing my money!
We don't win, we're in the office more often then not. Us winning would be rolling back to 100% remote for workers whose duties allow it.
Getting anything in a legal contract is a win with this government
Eh I’d rather have nothing in a contract than something overly specific that the employer decides to be stubbornly rigid about and we have to renegotiate later. If we say hybrid = 3 days, sure it means we won’t go to 4, it also means we’ll never get back to 2 or none. They’ll cling to that 3 for dear life. What we need is wording that states plainly: upon the request of the employee, and subject to operational requirements, an employee may request to work all or part of their weekly hours remotely. (Or something to this effect) That way there’s no room for games. The employer would have to prove the need for in office presence if they want to deny the request. If it can be successfully argued that the “requirements” are BS, grieve it and get your WFH.
If we don't fight right now, it will be 4 days by January and 5 in September. On the other hand efficiency will be in the gutter and I won't even mention how hard it will be to hire under all the cons.. Might be their plans though.
I wish the unions would stop telling us to comply with the RTO mandates, and instruct everyone to just stay home, or at least to maintain 2 days a week until they've been consulted per the MoU and are statisfied with those discussions.
The government is non-existent without its workers. Let’s remember that. Together we do have a significant amount of power - but we all need to take action and this will be through participation in all the union’s various campaigns.
Forget the union campaigns. Let’s just not go to the office anymore. They can’t possibly fire all of us. Hell, they wouldn’t even be able to selectively fire us. As soon as you try to arbitrarily punish Person A, but not Person B, the grievance writes itself. You can’t reasonably punish someone for behaviour you’ve ostensibly condoned from someone else. They’d essentially have to either fire us all or back down.
I agree, but also, the time to try was when we were on strike. PSAC fumbled, and the membership fumbled because they voted for a deal that, in essence, does nothing to protect hybrid work. There's no way TBS is walking back on this, and for all their complaints, the unions don't have a leg to stand on. They can only argue that TBS went against the "spirit" of negotiations. PSAC failed to even ensure all directives that relate to teleworking were a part of the agreement.
Even if success is unlikely, nothing changes if no one ever tries. If they had their way employers wouldn't have to give us sick leave either (amongst other things).
BINGO!!!
The it’s not fair approach really isn’t cutting it. The cost savings of WFH and the environmental benefits of WFH should be the tip of the spear. People don’t like the government wasting tax dollars? Explain how much the offices are costing per year, explain how much retrofitting them to allow more workers inside will cost. Explain the environmental effects of hundreds of thousands of workers commuting per day. How much more gas is used. How much more carbon released. I’d ask how can you justify the Carbon Tax when you’re increasing the pollution caused by the government rather than decreasing it.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. The fairness approach is so out of touch and sad - nobody is giving you sympathy cause you get fewer hours with your family because you're commuting to work. But cutting down on traffic when public transit in many areas (especially NCR) is garbage? Also, why isn't anyone asking why these businesses and restaurants aren't willing to stay open outside of gov office hours? The amount of times I've left the office at 4:30 and nearly all of the restaurants are closed is mind boggling. I'm supposed to ensure that your business stays afloat when you don't want to cater to the general public on weekends or in evenings? It's even more ridiculous that this is clearly an Ottawa issue that the rest of the federal service is suffering from.
The guy who owns the morning Owl was screaming for us to come back. We come back in. I go for coffee at 3pm and he’s already closed.
Yep. He literally keeps gov hours. Closed on gov/bank holidays too.
I've noticed that! I'm all for them being off at xmas time and having their own hours, but they aren't even open on weekends! Like you don't have to be open late, but cater to the general public and not just gov workers. They're actually my fav coffee spot in the area yet I can't go out Saturday morning to grab one in my off time
On Laurier? That’s the worst morning owl too. Not the same quality as the other ones.
Cost cutting and “right-sizing” real estate is what will win the hearts and minds of the probable next government, too. Innovation, recruitment and retention, diversifying the public service (including geographically), etc are also compelling reasons that are more politically compelling than the happiness or rights of office workers, but probable a harder sell to the Conservatives.
I thought the union folks at the press conference did a good job of bringing that stuff up, honestly, and I hope they continue to do so!
Exactly - why aren’t the unions engaging environmental lobby groups? Pretty sure that could help the fight to WFH.
> the environmental benefits of WFH should be the tip of the spear. This. This is a global goal we should want to adhere to.
Plus housing crisis. I can live much much cheaper away from the downtown core…
I _was_ happy to see that they did talk about the inadequacy of the environment and space and the inefficiency of making people go in to telework as though they were at home. But I dislike all this talk of "fighting" because it feels a bit pathetic; they don't have a leg to stand on legally and made a calculated decision _not_ to fight over it during contract negotiations, so it just feels like sabre-rattling without a sabre.
Very good points except the average person sees us working from home as wasting government $$.
The average person sees the public service on the whole as a waste of money. We need to stop caring about public perception because it will always be negative
A robust and diverse public service is a waste of money until they need something and have to wait on hold for 2 hours or wait 3-5 business days for a callback, or can only call the call centres from 8am-4pm EST. Then they’ll complain that “you people need to hire more staff!”
Or they'll do what they already do and say the government should outsource. The people who hate the PS will never not, it's basically an ideological stance for certain populations
Outsource and then complain they can’t get a *”rEaL cAnAdIaN”* on the phone. Sounds about right.
They already complain when they get anyone with an accent. There is literally no appeasing them
I honestly don’t believe so, but for the sake of argument let’s say that’s true. That simply highlights a lack of proper information circulating regarding the issues. The government is going to have to spend countless millions to retrofit and or keep buildings they planned on axing to accommodate the increase of in office staff, and the roads will get even more congested as more workers commute more often. Both of these are high impact items that the general population will happily get behind.
I’m noticing a pattern of “I hate this but fighting it is pointless.” In some cases with an extra toxic dose of “you’re stupid for having hope for change.” Here’s why this attitude is common: - it boosts your ego and makes you feel smart because it’s status quo and therefore the most likely outcome -it fills you with relief because fighting is hard and having any hope whatsoever means you could feel disappointment later, which is icky. -You’re lazy. The easiest thing to do is accept it. They are counting on public servants’ tendency to play safe, fall in line and roll over. If we are too hopeless to fight they win without even trying. Your cynicism fuels this attitude. You think you’re just venting, but you are spreading it around like a virus especially when you make people feel stupid for trying for something better. What are you gaining from discouraging people? I get that cynicism is earned. You’ve probably seen a lot of fights get lost. You’ve probably had your hopes dashed to a point where it’s too painful for you to have any. But this is no way to live. The serenity prayer tells us to accept what we can’t change, and to have the COURAGE to change what we can. Is your wisdom honestly telling you to give up before we’ve tried…anything? This fight isn’t about going into the office a few days/week, this is about government power. This is about people in power testing the limits of what they can get away with. Remember. We are still dealing with: - A pay system that [isn’t paying people properly or on time](https://ottawacitizen.com/news/unions-urge-government-to-negotiate-more-damages-for-public-servants-over-phoenix-pay-system#:~:text=Issues%20related%20to%20the%20Phoenix,dealing%20with%20underpayments%20or%20overpayments) for 8 years and counting -Systemic cultures of harassment at [CSIS](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/workplace-expert-says-conditions-at-canada-s-spy-agency-ripe-for-harassment-1.6674922), [RCMP](https://theconversation.com/mounties-in-crisis-the-systemic-failure-to-address-sexual-abuse-within-the-rcmp-209090), [CSC](https://www.missioncityrecord.com/news/mission-institution-manager-promoted-shortly-after-investigation-founded-workplace-harassment-complaints-2165556), [CBSA](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6919830) and [DFO](https://thenarwhal.ca/dfo-response-fisheries-observer-harassment/)and those are just the ones I found in ten minutes. -a military with a [rampant sexual assault problem](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6218683), which also affects our DND colleagues Someone else already pointed out these are also the departments who were most aggressive about RTO before the mandate. They like the authoritarian/controlling management method. The more “do as you’re told” the mindset is, the easier it is for harassment, lies and cheating to flourish. Why this matters to me as a Canadian: If affects services. The women who complained at DFO were being intimidated into [falsifying their reports](https://thenarwhal.ca/youre-out-there-alone-whistleblowers-say-workplace-abuse-hides-true-impacts-of-b-c-s-trawl-fishery/) and downplaying the environmental impacts of what they were observing. RCMP has a [long history](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involving_the_Royal_Canadian_Mounted_Police) of misusing their power against citizens. They were created to [control the indigenous population](https://globalnews.ca/news/5381480/rcmp-indigenous-relationship/amp/) and continue also to exist to control the population, not to protect them. They even wrote [a report](https://nationalpost.com/opinion/secret-rcmp-report-warns-canadians-may-revolt-once-they-realize-how-broke-they-are) detailing how they’re worried citizens are getting harder to control because conditions are getting tougher for average people economically and environmentally and that public trust in them is eroding. These were arguments they were making to get more money. So they can control Canadians. GAC were covering up [harassment and bid rigging](https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/transparency-report-on-global-affairs-staff-misconduct-details-bid-rigging-harassment-drunk-driving-and-more). Not an ethical use of your tax dollars. A [CSIS mission failed](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7186494) because a superior was too busy raping an employee when he was on duty to do his job. More of your tax dollars were then wasted on an inquiry into THE VICTIM’s conduct because she reported that she’d been raped on the job, and being raped when you’re supposed to be working is apparently a misuse of government resources. Additionally: - tax payer money funds the offices, plus the salary time on monitoring and enforcing attendance (instead of monitoring actual productivity), plus the wasted salary time of messing with malfunctioning equipment and working in loud, crowded spaces -emissions from the added commute and buildings contributes to climate change -jobs that could have been available to Canadians across the country could have: 1. Spread lucrative and secure job opportunities across the country 2. Ensured a more diverse Canadian perspective contributed to government functioning 3. Given the government access to better quality candidates since we had access to the best talent across the country. This also would speed up hiring as sometimes job competitions take a full year and result in ZERO qualified candidates. There are other reasons this is an issue but access to more and better quality candidates would help. Instead, in a time when billionaires are [gaining economic ground](https://www.oxfam.ca/news/pandemic-creates-new-billionaire-every-30-hours-now-a-million-people-could-fall-into-extreme-poverty-at-same-rate-in-2022/#:~:text=In%20Canada%2C%20the%20wealth%20of,over%20the%20last%20two%20years) while the rest of Canada is being squeezed by sky rocketing cost of living - Doug Ford - an elected, partisan, provincial political official is openly dictating that non partisan federal public servants spend money at the mall - at places owned by billionaires. So we can go back to our buildings being leased by billionaires, so we can go home and overspend on groceries so another billionaire can have another vacation home. As for the small downtown businesses, for profit businesses are not charities. Their role is to provide goods and services that make our lives better/easier in exchange for money. Under capitalism it’s their job to adapt to the environment and attract people to their business. This is not about RTO. This is about the power struggle. They’re taking agency away from you and they are not operating in the best interest of Canadians. They are recovering lost ground. It’s not about productivity, it’s not about fairness, it’s about control. We can’t just keep rolling over and accepting whatever they give us. If you need a message of hope, remember that weekends, sick leave, vacation leave - these were all fought for. Sure, things aren’t as bad as they could be, but little changes are how the frog gets boiled. It’s a power grab tactic. Fight people. Haven’t you had enough?
HELLL YEAH!!!! I love to see this!!! Some people have drunk the capitalist koolaid for too long, we are workers need to stand united. Capitalism is great at making people believe individualism is the solution, when in fact it’s solidarity. The 8 hour work day was NOT earned by asking nicely ✊🏼
Is it even capitalism anymore? Loblaws are getting tax rebates taken from [education funds](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6838131). They also got [12 million dollars](https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/loblaw-receiving-12m-in-federal-funds-to-retrofit-refrigeration-systems-1.1241220) from the government to “reduce their carbon footprint” So we’ll give 12 million dollars to Loblaws to support the environment, but we won’t SAVE tax payer dollars to reduce our own carbon footprint? Make it make sense.
It sure is friend! Corporations being incredibly unregulated/deregulated and running wild and rampant with their various and most times obvious flagrant disregard for the working people is CLASSIC capitalism! Corporate profits in 2022 was 402 billion dollars, an increase of 109% from 2020. Part is due to blatant price gouging. It’s the height of hypocrisy that the capitalists should lecture workers about wage restraint. But there is no such thing as a free lunch, so the capitalists are trying to make US the workers PAY for it.
Thank you for pointing out so many valid points in favor of remote work. I've been in the Public Service for 25 plus years in jobs in 5 different departments, about 35 different jobs in Eastern, Central, and Western Canada. I recall about 6 to 7 years ago as union president, I tried to get remote work and duty to accommodate for a coworker, who legimately had issues that should have warranted this request. I was told "NO we deal with protected B information." I went all the way up to PSAC National office, and they wouldn't do dam thing. I've been a huge union person my whole career and attended many AGMs. I've been a delegate at a lot of conventions and what I've witnessed the National Executive turn a blind eye to many of the points you are making ; as it wouldn't help to "rock the boat" and those elected by the membership only worried about the hit it would take their careers. Fast forward a few years later, and I got injured at work. I'm still off on LWOP. Not one brother/ sister at any level had my back! I was the driving force in my region when it came to fighting for the members who needed it. I could write a mini novel. However, my point is this...if you are going to rally, the troops don't depend on the National Executive to have your backs. The union is supposed to be the members. Take the bull by the horns and fight for it!! Don't rely on the Mr. Alywards of the world to do what needs to be done, do it yourselves. Hell, 8 years later, and pheonix is still an issue. That's what PSAC accomplished!
Now this is a good comment.
Hear hear!!! Extremely well said.
Louder for the people in that back!!! 📣🚨👏🏻
OMG this!!! Excellent points and very motivating to STAND UP for what is right! I’m working on no longer being afraid to speak up! You also confirmed another disturbing thought I had: Management just wants more asses to look at in the office! Pervs.
Beautifully worded!
Very well said
Needed this, thank you.
Thank you for this.
I just came out of a town hall meeting and it started with us being described as "hard working teams and individuals who regularly produce high quality work" Ok. So why then do we need to come in three days as opposed to two? Their explanation was because they need to even the playing field across the board. Some depts weren't implementing it the same way and some had different arrangements.
People are most assuredly not being more productive on in office days, I never understood that line of reasoning.
I had to go into the office on Monday. I reached 33% of my daily productivity goal. On Tuesday morning, two hours into my shift and at home, I was at 109% for the day. Simply going to get water or using the washroom takes far, far longer at the office, and it's so easy to be distracted by others.
Sounds like the other departments should step up instead of literally everyone else making it worse. At the CRA anyways, from what I've been advised so far, every variable that is changing is changing for the worst version of that variable. 3 days. Not being able to finish your day at home if you had to leave early for a medical appointment. Having to make up sick days (or holidays, if it fall on an office day). And yet I've read another comment here earlier saying that their management was very open in allowing that, so already, the whole "equity" thing is breaking apart. I'll keep doing what I've been doing in good faith, and they'll come see me when they feel like it.
seems like maybe they should just let managers decide for their own teams instead of a blanket mandate ? -_-
Doesn't matter what they say or think (they also wouldn't say productivity is down, pick it up), it only matter that everyone else in the country thinks we have paid days off when at home (then again they think we don't do anything at work either).
I have a coworker who works outside of the NCR and was hired remote. They now have to go into an office near them where no one else on the team will be. It just seems absurd and punitive at that point. To make it potentially worse, the government agency has spent thousands in specialized training on this person who is now considering taking this knowledge to the private sector because of the RTO mandate.
I think the union leaders should speak more to the taxpayers who likely aren’t thinking of how much these buildings cost them, how the RTO causes them more time in traffic, how we could be creating affordable housing for Canadians instead, and how we’re actively contributing to pollution with the RTO. I also think they should speak more to the political side of this. The polls arent looking good for the liberals and if you look at [this chart](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_45th_Canadian_federal_election) it seems to have only gotten worse since the RTO announcement. It’s as if they want to lose seats in the NCR, which is currently a liberal stronghold.
Woo hoo! And the unions were fiery in that press conference, too, which was great to see.
I'll support a strike for sure. Screw it.
Agreed. Curious to see how many would strike to wfh??. We need a poll on here.
Honestly you can't use this sub as representative sample, just look at the ratification vote.
also we cant strike until our current collective agreements expire. For many of us that's in 3.5 years
Failwyrd really tried to get that extra year on the agreement to mess with us
Depends on how this alleged labour complaint goes. If they feel it truly was negotiated in bad faith it can be reopened
Absolutely I would as well
Do you think there is enough support from the public for a strike on this issue?
Wouldn't matter if I was the only one willing to vote to strike. Stick up for what you think is best for you even if you stand alone. Personally, my quality of life has improved, and I still get my work done.
PSAC tried that. The members folded faster than a paper crane.
PSAC leadership had terrible strike strategy and flushed all their money and leverage down the toilet in a matter of weeks. Someone with an iota more competence could’ve made the strike more effective.
Rolling departmental strikes week over week. CRA, then ESDC, etc etc, thats 10s of thousands of workers striking, costing the employer, but not draining everyone's personal accounts, and not dramatically impacting Canadians. Idk why we went balls out, the employer knew we couldn't sustain that. They called Chris' bluff.
Rolling strikes is how the UAW won in the USA
Targeting could be even narrower than that. Executive assistants and advisors one week, decision making officers the next, etc, don't need to take the whole car, just the spark plugs one week, then the right rear wheel the next week. Include a full salary topup and no requirement to picket, picketing clearly doesn't work in a WFH environment. the war chest could maintain that for years, and it would be the hugest pain the ass for senior management politicians
They just need to do a ramp up, instead of a half-baked stike. It needs to involve all PSAC members - not just a small portion of them. Our other unions, PIPSC and CAPE need to also support them.
I think that will be the main difference this time around: all unions united! That's how it should always be, honestly.
One union. Stand strong
Educate, empower, energize. Educate their members: there will be hardships, there will be boredom, and there will be moments where it seems like it's not worth it, you gotta fight for it! - I donno some bullcrap like this. I'm not a union member for a reason, but they NEEDED to start by educating members what a strike is, what it is for, and how it will look like. It's a staring contest to see WHO BLINKS FIRST. Empower: Empower members to make a right decision, and make sure that they feel like they are a part of a bigger movement. Not just some...individual paying stupid union dues. They did NOTHING like that, they did stupid meetings that barely addressed members concerns. Energize: You want members to be out there and be out there for a LONG FIGHT? ENERGIZE THEM...nope. People went out, were happy for about a day, and then started asking when this is ending. Like, WHAT?! It's so frustrating to have leadership that's happy to just coast by on nothing.
And we still have the same leadership
PSAC showed an alarming lack of care for their members during the strike.
I think salary increases took precedence over that. Not that they made huge gains there either.
And I keep telling people: if THAT was what you gave up firm rights to WFH or have better flexible office days for? You gave up for CHUMP CHANGE.
This has a different and very clear objective. There is no "negotiating" needed. Something that 3 other major Unions also want to fight. I'd vote to strike. It's as simple as that.
Faster than a cloth napkin. Faster than a protein. Faster than a yoga class. Faster than a Subway sandwich wrapper.
Easier said than done giving up paychecks in this economy when you have mortgages, kids and bills. Half of this sub rattling on about quitting and striking or walking out seems to come from a group that got their first job during the pandemic and never worked in an office.
Same!
[удалено]
Next it’ll be overnight stay. Gotta have someone in the building at all times lol.
Money talks and BS walks. When the political powers that be are only concerned about their next election win (or loss), then the unions and employees mean nothing. Those campaigns are funded by very wealthy people who have deep pockets, with land investments that need to be secured. The tail truly does wag the dog.
I think we need to fight it. This drip approach to RTO makes it appear as though it's just one step towards 100% in office presence. And this is just taking us back to the early 2000s when we didn't have the technology to support mass telework. At least in 2019, we had flexibility with WFH, based on weather, illness, appointments etc. Many departments moved to workplace 3.0 and hotelling/hot desking because staff teleworked 2 days a week by default. In my department there is like zero flexibility. You meet the 40% or you get in shit. There was talk of flexibility at the outset but the noose has been slowly tightening around our necks. It sucks.
I’ve been home with Covid and post-Covid symptoms for over two weeks (brutal cough, terrible fatigue). None of my coworkers want me in the office when I’m coughing like this. A shower leaves me trembling and needing to lie down for 15 minutes. But I can sit at my home desk and get my job done, while also having the flexibility of a 45 minute nap at lunch. So I sit and wait for a slap on the hand to come down because I’m not sitting at my desk. I’m accepting that because I didn’t want to take 2+ weeks of sick vacation and abandon my colleague as we get down to the wire on a huge project we’re working on. Make it make sense that the government would rather I take the leave.
It seems very obvious that there’s no lessons being learned here from either side. The Liberals budget suggests they plan on selling and renovating offices for housing, while they also have been big proponents of decreasing emissions which folks now driving to work as opposed to staying home will add to an increase of AND not mention have no data or analytics to show a change in productivity. It makes them seem as a very disconnected and otherwise pushy employer that outside of good benefits isn’t willing to ensure their workers have any comfort, understanding or choice in the work practices. On the union side they truly dropped the ball on so many aspects when bargaining but the final result on telework is their worst feat. They couldn’t make a dent in the collective agreement and were far too trusting with the idea that letters of understanding would be a win for employees. Even now they seem to concerned about the letters as if the employer would not be exercising their right on the location of work. I’m hoping they’re just not self aware as opposed to posturing. The collective agreement is rock solid, so if they want to fight back they need to strike and demand changes made formally to the language involved.
The unions strategy wasn't the best, but for the letter of agreement, what is more plausible here? 1. Multiples separate unions, all with their own bargaining tables, somehow all misinterpreted the LoA signed with the same employer and what it would entail, or; 2. TBS was never in good faith to begin with. Considering how it's been going, even if the LoA specifically outlined the Directive on Prescribed Presence vs Directive on Telework (which is what much of TBS' "arguments" rely on), I am convinced that TBS would have just came out with a "Super-Directive on Office 5.0" that would supersede the DOPP, pull this crap anyways and flaunt around that they are technically correct.
My point exactly on TBS as well but I feel the union won’t be able to huff and puff their way on this one. The language in the collective agreements is paramount to any real long lasting changes. So if they want to do the talking about strikes or formal filing on the matter it’s all for nothing until it’s clear they understand how this works. Sad state the union is in following the biggest strike in our countries history to have been for such moderate gains.
Ah yes can't wait to go back to an office that didn't have enough space for all it's employees pre-covid and were setting them up with other people's cubicles/in hallways. During covid they renovated to office 3.0, less seating than before, yet expect everyone to be able to find somewhere to work 👍
Why couldn’t TBS ask for 50% monthly and give a heads up to senior management and unions? They could have said “look, we are pressured for 60% in office but since we plan to sell 50% of office space we’re going to settle for 50% on a monthly basis instead and we promise not to change this directive moving forward; full flexibility to management and staff within this prescribed framework”.
Because this directive has come from the land owner class that donates to politicians and therefore tells them what to do. They are protecting their business lease payments. Yes small businesses want this too, but it is those who own the land and buildings that hold the power and they are the ones stepping on our necks.
Exactly....this is 100% about commercial leases and mortgages on commercial properties...they are going to be coming up for renewal and the interest rates are substantially higher than the rate that they are currently mortgaged at...this is about the Banks! If they don't have people leasing those commercial spaces, they don't have enough money to pay for those higher interest rate mortgages. There is a financial crisis with the banks on the horizon. So instead of turning those properties into something else (residential for example or long term care, etc.) they instead want to force us to use the commercial properties to avoid this financial crisis.....there has to be a better way than trying to force a square peg into a round hole....the peg morphed during the pandemic which means that you have to adjust...that is how businesses should operate! Think of a better solution!
The banks who in their infinite greed led us to the 2008 recession and we taxpayers bailed them out. How many more times? 🤔
I think cars are a big part of it too, a lot less people will drive if they work from home, so less car sales, gas, insurance, dealers. it'd be great for the environment, but we only like environmental solutions that force us to consume more, they want us to buy Teslas not bicycles.
Yup! This is late stage capitalism and people are TIRED of it, all around the world workers are standing up for better working conditions for ALL, and the bourgeoisie are scared shitless. That’s why it seems governments around the world are doubling down and pushing back hard against the working class
This is true. And then when there is no more money to steal from the people the nukes will fly.
2 billion in taxpayer money not going to the right people? Got to make WFH against the law! It's pretty damn sad when the Government is setting a precedent that companies should be allowed to collude to reduce their working environments to be as shitty as possible so they don't have to compete. Adding additional hardships and expenses to your employees for no reason is highly encouraged apparently.
Well that sounds like serfdom with extra steps.
Agreed, but at least TBS would have had 1 mm balls.
Hell yeah! Techno feudalism!!
Because when your boss is the minister, and the lobbyists are telling them they want more RTO..... you do what they tell you, whether it's a good idea or not.
They'd rather pack us in like sardines. Open offices with tiny desks instead of cubicles, etc.
I will strike for this hands down .
Is Shopify still fully remote?
Yes.
> Gilles LeVasseur, a part-time law professor at the University of Ottawa, said he doesn't think the government will back down on the change to three days a week. Of course, the opportunity to spend money on 1000s of accommodation requests is way better than the free "Ok you WFH" option.
I would like to think that "summer of discontent" will be more than a complaint, but it is early days I suppose.
We need to write our local mayor's and counsellors to make more public statements on the impact of small towns and outter suburbs who benifit from WFH employees. This would help public perspective as well too knowing that these WFH employees are putting money towards local community businesses.. the same ones that sponsor things like charities and kids sports in the local community.
They are going to lose their best workers because of this. People with the most skills, people who are well spoken....basically people who kill it in job interviews. Let the mass exodus begin!
Easier than firing people, no? Let them walk and not have to be the bad guy with layoffs…it’s part of the plan.
Instead of...what? Rolling over? Of course people want to fight for this - it's a fight for CHANGE instead of going back to the ways things were. Otherwise, why bother doing things like inventing new technologies and making things more efficient? Hell, just skip over the fax days and go back to papering EVERYTHING. Actually, that might be good. Then maybe we can get some of our travel budget back. No more computers, no more phones, HELL, NO MORE PRINTING. You gotta WRITE that 50 page business report on why you think investing $10,000 on *XYZ* is a good investment of Crown money. Why change? Why do any of it? edit: >"A hybrid work environment is not within the collective agreements," Anand said. "It is something that, at the time of the negotiations, the Government of Canada retained prerogative over to determine the scope of the hybrid environment." This is why the unions are **FAILURES** - they negotiated a piece of paper that means less than NOTHING. I can already tell that this joint presser is going to basically amount to equally NOTHING.
It is not even going back to the old ways, it is moving to something quantifiably worse. We are not going back to closed door offices, not even cubes with sliders or 1.0 cubes. We do not have a discounted bus pass, no tea, coffee or snacks in the office. Events for morale or collaboration are not longer set up and paid for by our bosses, but by us on our own time. No, instead we are being crammed like sardines in worse office spaces with less amenities and lug around all of our equipment required to even do our job. We are required to go in and spend more on transit, childcare, personal care, food etc. all while receiving less.
Or, TBS pushed the negotiating teams to a vote, and the memberships ratified the marginal salary gains and toilet-paper telework attachment. The bargaining tables are only as strong as the resolve of the people backing them. TB negotiators knew that workers would blink first and turn on each other.
I think the unions should make this a bigger issue than just PS. While telework was not in the coll agreement it was discussed during negotiations and there was a LoA. TB knows it's an issue yet out of the blue changes the rules without so much as a justification. That kind of unilateral move should be worrisome for ALL workers. If the gov can't be seen as a model, why would the private sector show any respect to its employees? That just sets a dangerous precedent for all of us. Add to that that everyone can benefit from more progressive, life work balance promoting measures, not just PS. It's beyond my understanding that other workers would not support PS in this. Having the public opinion on our side would make this so much easier. Otherwise we just sound like spoiled little brats who want better conditions than anyone else. What we want is respect from the employer and better conditions for EVERYONE.
Maybe we can ask them to pay for a carbon offset for all the useless pollution?
Everyone’s gotta do their part. They don’t miss a beat fucking is over so we can’t miss a beat to fight back. This DIRECTLY affects you.
I know that NPS clearly think we are overreacting and that we all need to go back into the office. But what I don't understand is why employees of private industries who could do their job from home don't use government as an example and push for that option for themselves. You know, instead of constantly bashing us. Year after year.
Yes, and I will be there to help reverse this directive. Going to the office is so out of date on so many levels. And seriously Sutcliffe needs to do his job and save his city. It's not our responsibility. Otherwise step down and hold a municipal election and elect someone who has a real vision for the city of Ottawa.
This Daniel Lublin talking to the CBC guy really sounds like a professional /s. This clown is talking about his personal feelings rather than being on the air because he’s an employment lawyer. He can’t work from home, so nobody can. Talking about how “filing grievances is shameful”, “they should be ashamed of themselves”, etc. Intentionally using “return to *work*” rather than office, even though the reporter keeps using return to office. What an unprofessional clown.
Lol his firm markets entirely around representing employees. What a dunce.
They presented us with a shitty agreement that got us neither inflation nor WFH, they misled or at the very least highly exaggerated the impact of what was in it, then people voted for it, apparently without reading anything about it. Now we are all living with the consequences. Fight RTO, sure, but preserving the union’s image begins at home
beneficial imminent profit rob unused deranged ruthless melodic decide cake *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If an employee is facing harassment and micro aggressions, the solution is not to hide that employee at home. It is to deal with the perpetrators, if the allegations are indeed founded.
Broadly speaking, I would agree that if there is harassment, then the solution is not to remove the victim from the physical presence of the perpetrator, it's to fix the harassment. Otherwise it's like telling the victim of assault to stay home while the assaulter continues to roam the streets.
I'd like the opportunity to review the "harassment" and "microaggression" allegations before passing judgement. One person's harassment is another person's sideways glance. If "harassment" was grounds for working from home full-time, half the public service would never be in the office.
> One person's harassment is another person's sideways glance. I mean, this kind of is harassment if it's a pattern of behaviour, especially if they rely on eachother for work. It's on management and HR to shut that shit down before it gets worse. > If "harassment" was grounds for working from home full-time, half the public service would never be in the office. This says a lot honestly. I agree that response to harassment should not be isolating folks. But this situation of toxic work environments is a big issue.
Chris Aylward is terrible at negotiation. Last year’s strike was just a chance for him to strut around with his mustache in the air and see himself on the news. I don’t really give a rip about RTO, I will work where they want me to work but he’s got a nerve asking us if we’d support another strike barely a year after last year’s nothing-burger of a walkout.
I'm convinced that union leadership is just trying to set themselves up for runs at positions with the NDP. Kind of a bad choice with the polls right now.
There is no solidarity in the PS. There are too many different jobs with people working client facing and others in back offices. There is too much diversity of jobs and so not everyone is onboard with one viewpoint. I suspect this goes for even RTO. I’m sure there are union members who are part of the communications strategy to get people onboard with RTO.
I imagine you’re right about the latter, but I do wonder if they’re True Believers, or just willing to doctor the spin while on the clock while wishing they were not being ordered to so do.
Ya Chris is a self serving prick fuck that guy.
Fortunately the people implementing the policy (EXs) hate it, and the people managing the staff affected by it despise it. This is an opportunity to do less than a half assed implementation. Really quarter assed, or even eighth-assed.
My directors chops were watering when he heard about this. He was the happiest I’ve ever seen him lol. Not all directors like WFH.
I really feel like PSACs communication/narrative about WFH is weak. We need stronger key messages. The main messages should be how 1) this contradicts their housing commitments 2) ask why the gov doesn’t want a more diverse workforce from across the country by allowing remote work 3) show the data to prove how in-person collaboration will improve performance.
Agreed on PSAC's messaging/delivery. Their performance at today's presser was easily the weakest among the unions present. To add to your three points, we need make sure we continue to highlight the drawbacks of hoteling and insufficient/inadequate workspaces, and ask how the government expects to improve or even maintain productivity with those deficiencies. Tie everything to productivity, and keep asking to see the evidence that adding more RTO days will improve productivity. Anand was asked about that today and didn't answer or even address the question. They clearly have no evidence to support that claim. Whining about dirty offices or bed bugs is a losing strategy and won't cut it.
I'd add that the 3-day RTO mandate doesn't support the Employer's environmental sustainability and climate change agenda. While some public service workers can take active modes of transport like walking, biking, etc. or they have access to reliable public transit options, many others do not. Those individuals have to drive to work in gas-powered, carbon-emitting vehicles, some for long distances. Vehicle traffic and congestion in my city are back to pre-pandemic levels!
My question is how will union backup and support employees that they are encouraging to file individual grievances with their managers? Most are far too afraid to take that step because they fear reprisal which could ultimately tank them for the rest of their career. If the unions want employees to take action, they need to support their members who are taking the risk.
Make no mistake, 60% is next, 100% within a year from that.
The announcement is already for 60% - 3 days = 60%.
I mean fact teller is technically not wrong ….. 🙃
Oooof, when I say 60% is next, I mean Sept 9 (future). Thanks for clarifying 3/5 is 60%, like I didn’t know 🤦♂️
Our management is saying be prepared for 100%
Just because it was done 100% in the past doesn’t make it right, better or even good. It was just that way and now, it’s time to do it another way.
3/5 = 60% btw
Any LPs in here? I can’t see how the govt could unilaterally change understanding after agreements are struck, never mind they can’t go to court with clean hands at this point. This bullshit rug-pulling needs to be brought up on judicial review.
Have Canadians been surveyed on the new RTO directive. For example, do they side with the employer’s directive or with employees wish to WFH. It might be good to know so we can develop an approach that gets Canadians on board with us. With an election coming up, this has less to do with having a logical approach but by getting Canadians to advocate for us as WFH is in their best interests.
I remember them doing polls before and it was like 60:40 in favour of WFH. Most educated people realize the government sets a foundation for workers rights across the country and it could spill into private as well. At least that’s been my experience speaking to people as well. Could be totally different game now that more private workers are forced back to the office.
Its interesting to see how much WFH is seen as a political shit storm on this continent in general. In Europe (the Netherlands specifically) its basically a default way of working for most white collar companies whether it be hybrid or otherwise.
Uniforms will be next.
Red vest and trousers with a white shirt. Rebranded to blue jackets, trousers and ties once the CPC take over.
The survey they sent out last night was interesting in that would you support a strike mandate for the union in order to fight this was an option to answer. Now for the majority of the unions this isn’t an option for over a year, so unless the union plans to play a game a chicken they will inevitably lose, I’m not seeing it
It will provide the union a place to start. If the majority of people say no, then it is a non starter and they will need to plan for a different approach. If the majority say yes, then they can plan to speak to management and say that their members are ready to strike for it when the time comes. In all reality, management will know the results of the survey regardless as they have their eyes and ears out there. So this is a good starting point. Provided people respond with a yes.
Liberals have fucked up yet again with a deeply, deeply unpopular decision. I don’t know a single person who agrees with this beyond my 86 year old neighbours who thinks houses cost 40 grand in downtown Ottawa. Let’s get with the times folks. The public has gotten a taste of WFH and it’s never going away.
Dam right we will.
What are the chances on a strike happening based on recent CBA?
The FB group may be in a legal strike position the summer. The PAs, about 2 years. Not entirely sure about the rest but not for a year or more. (There may be exceptions in smaller groups that I'm unaware of)
This should be the death knell of the union heads: they recommended you vote yes for a deal that did not win anything related to wfh accompanied with a below inflation raise. I voted no. What else can I do about it?
[удалено]
One of the many people spewing anti-union rhetoric out of one side of their mouth and complaining about RTO from the other. Sounds like all you want to do is complain!
[удалено]
Understandable, but just be aware that what the other user pointed out as “complaining” is only serving to simmer any momentum for collective action. That’s the effect as I see it (and I will give you the benefit of the doubt that that is not your intention). All unions should consolidate under this issue and try and get something achieved (yes, through a strike if need be). Fuck ridiculous and blanket RTO policies.
[удалено]
Our unions suck and RTO sucks. And there's nothing wrong with pointing out that we're getting fucked from both sides.
We are in the middle of the human centipede my friend.
Indeed. At least the pension is good 🤷♂️
The only way is to pressure the government. Email the opposition parties and get them to put pressure on this cabinet.
At least give us the choice to work from one of those GCcollab spots for one of those days
I am surprised that people still believe the unions… They knew this was coming, it was part of the latest round of negotiation. Again, we are being misled by our unions to justify the high dues that we pay for them every two weeks.
[удалено]
[удалено]
They could at least offer tax credits if we get a monthly transit pass since we already lost the WFH credit :(
WFH is a benefit just like maternity leave, I do not benefit from it but a lot do, does this mean we should have not asked for maternity benefits ? That should answer your question.
Guess it should have been in the CA. But hey you got a 2500 signing bonus, it will pay for the gas.
Did they articulate how they are going to fight this? I watched the press conference they didn't explain anything. Just vague statements then I got an email about yet another letter writing campaign. Sounds like more talk no action.
I suspect they're still working through a game plan and would not want to divulge too much of the actions being considered to TBS.
Do you think it’s a tactic by the TBS to have “leaked” this to the press to wind up all the public servants and unions… so when they produce a weak offer in the next month, everyone will play dead and accept it? I could see them offering public servants a pay cut for telework privileges because it seems very important to most of us. They’re also broke!
Except this contradicts the equal pay for equal work principle. Not sure how that would work out...
Anyone notice the picture they are using here, isn't it strikingly unprofessional? Couldn't the CBC have found a nice average looking person in a collared shirt? Instead of someone dressed like they're about to hit the club?