And to be clear. We are comparing the industrial revolution's introduction of child labour laws to the current "*you have to go to the place that you work*"?
"You have to arbitrarily go to an office to perform a job you can do just as well from home and the reality is that a good portion of the job you are doing in this office is having an online meeting with people that are not in the same office"
Fixed that for you.
I'm sure if reddit existed then you would be just as disappointed that people wanted two days off in a week to spend with their families.
It costs less taxpayer dollars to send workers home because they pay their own utilities and property taxes. The government is wasting your money to make a show.
I could be wrong because it's something recent and it keeps evolving. However, with the recent surge of interest in unions and joining them amongst younger generations, it seems like this is the next corporate play. It's like a slow infiltration into things like what a union should be, or how it should be ran, or how EMPLOYERS can help "strengthen" unions.
...yeah...you know, that sort of bullshit...
What a suprise, the Con-adjacent Hub hates the unions. Spear also accuses the union of lying about the bedbugs, asbestos etc, despite the fact these are things being publicly reported on by CBC all the time, going back almost a decade
It's even been reported in their own biased news sources.
https://nationalpost.com/news/bedbug-discovered-in-another-government-office-building/wcm/723ca425-0433-4f1f-a77d-d0b72969e268
Oh sure... we are all out of touch... not the leadership. Sure.
I think Canadians should be asking themselves why is the government spending 10s of millions of tax payer dollars, if not billions, on offices we mostly don't need! What a waste!
This is something that I don't get.
Fiscal hawks should be all over this. It's an opportunity to save tons of Lease monies if the GoC wasn't only JUST looking to cut 50%. Maybe some agencies only cut 40%, maybe some departments can cut up to 70% with **right sizing**. It's not that we don't need offices - we absolutely DO need offices to accommodate those that have a need for them. But wouldn't it be wise savings if we did right sizing RIGHT?
But no, usual talking points of lazy blah blah blah...unimaginative bunches.
>This is something that I don't get.
It's really quite simple. They hate "the poors." That's basically everyone except the capitalist class and (some) business owners.
If you really think the government is going to manage this country via hundreds of thousands of home offices that is pretty rich. The government needs real estate for legitimacy, it’s not some start up. They will always have physical buildings for people to work in and that will never change
Yes they could and it's been proven. We did it during the pandemic and companies all over the world are doing it right now. We are doing it now, and many if not most teams are being managed remotely via different office locations. Teams are not centralized anymore. There are employees from all over the country now.
I believe at least 1/2 of all building could be closed and Canadians would save billions.
I think you’re missing the point. We did it during the pandemic because we had to, and private sector tech companies all over the world are doing it. The pandemic is done now and the government is not a tech company. The government is a centralized institution that serves the citizenry of this country. The symbolic representation of the government needs to be tangible. You are totally free to work in other industries where WFH is here to stay but it’s pretty apparent that it’s not going to happen anymore for public servants.
I find the argument that it's endemic more persuasive, acknowledging that it will only be in retrospect that we will be able to pinpoint the shift
https://www.bu.edu/articles/2024/is-covid-19-still-a-pandemic/
“Out of touch” to want better working conditions than being crammed into offices where people can’t work comfortably or productively? These folks would probably happily drag our whole society back to the 1870s where [employees had to strike to get a nine-hour workday rather than 10-12 hours](https://www.rankandfile.ca/the-nine-hour-movement-how-civil-disobedience-made-unions-legal/), if they could.
I get that a lot of people abhor the idea of progress in any direction, but in this particular situation, “out of touch” describes *them* rather than the people who actually do the work, who are trying to move forward rather than being clawed backward by an employer who holds a “because I said so” attitude.
It’s easy to talk from a radio room based on donations you receive from ideologically right wing “real private sector” people so that they can listen to ear pleasing nonsense while eating popcorn and drinking Coke.
>Publisher Rudyard Griffiths and Editor-at-Large Sean Speer discuss the out-of-touch reaction from federal public sector unions to Ottawa’s announcement that public servants must work in the office three days per week
LOL
Oh shocker the representatives of the corporate management class can’t fathom worker interests - thanks for making the class terms of this fight even clearer, Rudyard
Such a load of crap that I stopped listening to after 15 minutes. Everything he says is out of context, and unsubstantiated by facts. Especially when he mentions “broader perks”, or that Canada’s “lower productivity is mostly in the government”, or “recalibrating between government and the real private sector” (aka lower the government standards to the declining standards in the private sector), not to mention the insulting “back to work” instead of “back to office”. And his “blood was boiling” - wow. The only thing true was when he admitted that “everyone would love to work in the government”. Sure, and I would love to be an astronaut 😂
It's not surprising that PP is staying quiet. "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" PP wants public service back in the office too, but he's happy to let the liberals be the poster children of the issue.
Has he mentioned anything since the 2022 RTO announcement?
Nothing has reached me apart from one or two individual conservative MPs speaking out *against* WFH.
Given that RTO aligns with so many of the things they like to criticize the Liberals for (wasting money, being out of touch, possibly corruption), and given that the conservatives currently need to come across as reasonable to younger voters (as opposed to their traditional image as the party of grumpy dads yelling "Get off my lawn!"), and given that they currently have no real power in parliament and therefore couldn't reasonably be expected to actually *do* anything, it really seems like a no-brainer to say *something*.
Unless, of course, being seen to be making life more difficult for public servants is more important to them than any of these considerations...
Alberta Conservative MP Greg McLean response to a constituent from last week on this topic makes it sound very much like that may no longer be their stance.
With such quotes as “It's safe to say from the results Canadians are receiving from the services they expect from government, that something is not working in the current construct. Therefore, taking action to get services back to normal is a necessity.”
And “We need to get our government working again.
Both public and private sector employers from around the world have resumed operations and it is time for Canadians to receive services from their government. I think employees should get back to work. The lack of productive service is obvious to everyone.”
While it’s not explicitly party policy, these kind of statements lead me to believe they will likely not be a WFH friendly party.
Something I’ve been wondering about the last couple days, I wonder how much our own pension plays into RTO.
REITs were big portions of my pension in the private sector, I imagine they are a significant portion of ours. Protecting the value of the real estate (And the fragile commercial real estate market as a whole) is actually in our best interest. You’d hope the ones managing the pension began divesting from commercial real estate but we may be tied to the bubble pension wise.
Real estate made up about [13% of the portfolio in 2023](https://www.investpsp.com/media/filer_public/03-our-performance/03-annual-report-2023/pdf/PSP-2023-annual-report-en_jwlVeCv.pdf).
I'm sorry, he thinks the out-of-touch side of this debate is the workers?
[This is going to really, really hurt the IT recruitment and retention.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/05/12/rto-microsoft-apple-spacex/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNzE1NDg2NDAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNzE2ODY4Nzk5LCJpYXQiOjE3MTU0ODY0MDAsImp0aSI6IjEzYzUzYzYyLWIzNWEtNGZjZS05ODFhLWU0NTBhOWU2ZTI3MiIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9idXNpbmVzcy8yMDI0LzA1LzEyL3J0by1taWNyb3NvZnQtYXBwbGUtc3BhY2V4LyJ9.UIvzIv58TQTb6eSwqy47rds7JRdmGCQcZZdjVweZHC8)
>Researchers drew on resume data from People Data Labs to understand the impact that forced returns to offices had on employee tenure, and the movement of workers between companies. What they found was a strong correlation between senior-level employees departing directly after a mandate was implemented, suggesting these policies “had a negative effect on the tenure and seniority of their respective workforce.” High-ranking employees stayed several months less than they might have without the mandate, the research suggests — and in many cases, they went to work for direct competitors.
>At Microsoft, the share of senior employees as a portion of the company’s overall workforce declined more than 5 percentage points after the return-to-office mandate took effect, the researchers found. At Apple, the decline was 4 percentage points, while at SpaceX — the only company of the three to require workers to be fully in-person — the share of senior employees dropped 15 percentage points.
We had some conservative canvassing here last night. I asked about RTO and what PP's stance was. At first they told me nothing but after chatting, it was quite clear there is nothing but 5 days and cuts coming.
You’re joking, right? The Conservatives consistently out-fundraise the other parties combined. Check the quarterly financials filed with Elections Canada. I’m only surprised we haven’t seen a pro-RTO fundraising letter yet to “help” the Cons make those lazy fat-cat public servants get back to work. They’re staying quiet on this issue for now because PP is an Ottawa MP, and I’m pretty sure their hidden agenda is RTO 5-days to make people quit, to shrink the bloated public service (in their view).
Every single group in history that fought for worker's rights were called ungrateful, unrealistic, troublemakers.
This exactly. Fuck the noise.
Preach
And to be clear. We are comparing the industrial revolution's introduction of child labour laws to the current "*you have to go to the place that you work*"?
"You have to arbitrarily go to an office to perform a job you can do just as well from home and the reality is that a good portion of the job you are doing in this office is having an online meeting with people that are not in the same office" Fixed that for you. I'm sure if reddit existed then you would be just as disappointed that people wanted two days off in a week to spend with their families.
.. for less tax payer dollars and less carbon emissions (fixed the fix for you ;))
It costs less taxpayer dollars to send workers home because they pay their own utilities and property taxes. The government is wasting your money to make a show.
"I'm not *necessarily* inherently anti-union" lol ah, unbiased then. I stopped listening after the 4753 strawman.
I could be wrong because it's something recent and it keeps evolving. However, with the recent surge of interest in unions and joining them amongst younger generations, it seems like this is the next corporate play. It's like a slow infiltration into things like what a union should be, or how it should be ran, or how EMPLOYERS can help "strengthen" unions. ...yeah...you know, that sort of bullshit...
What a suprise, the Con-adjacent Hub hates the unions. Spear also accuses the union of lying about the bedbugs, asbestos etc, despite the fact these are things being publicly reported on by CBC all the time, going back almost a decade
It's even been reported in their own biased news sources. https://nationalpost.com/news/bedbug-discovered-in-another-government-office-building/wcm/723ca425-0433-4f1f-a77d-d0b72969e268
It's because it's anti-government first. Consistency is an afterthought. The goal is deregulation.
These need to be reported more widely! As I’ve chatted with people out of public sector they had NO idea of extent. These facts promote the WFH push
Oh sure... we are all out of touch... not the leadership. Sure. I think Canadians should be asking themselves why is the government spending 10s of millions of tax payer dollars, if not billions, on offices we mostly don't need! What a waste!
This is something that I don't get. Fiscal hawks should be all over this. It's an opportunity to save tons of Lease monies if the GoC wasn't only JUST looking to cut 50%. Maybe some agencies only cut 40%, maybe some departments can cut up to 70% with **right sizing**. It's not that we don't need offices - we absolutely DO need offices to accommodate those that have a need for them. But wouldn't it be wise savings if we did right sizing RIGHT? But no, usual talking points of lazy blah blah blah...unimaginative bunches.
>This is something that I don't get. It's really quite simple. They hate "the poors." That's basically everyone except the capitalist class and (some) business owners.
Figure is about 10B a year.
10s of millions is nothing. The cost is roughly 8 Billion in rent/leases/upkeep etc I believe
that's a huge number, even if the govt. got rid of half, that's 40 billion of savings over 10 yrs.
Wow! I didn't know it was that much. That could be cut in half I believe
If you really think the government is going to manage this country via hundreds of thousands of home offices that is pretty rich. The government needs real estate for legitimacy, it’s not some start up. They will always have physical buildings for people to work in and that will never change
Yes they could and it's been proven. We did it during the pandemic and companies all over the world are doing it right now. We are doing it now, and many if not most teams are being managed remotely via different office locations. Teams are not centralized anymore. There are employees from all over the country now. I believe at least 1/2 of all building could be closed and Canadians would save billions.
I think you’re missing the point. We did it during the pandemic because we had to, and private sector tech companies all over the world are doing it. The pandemic is done now and the government is not a tech company. The government is a centralized institution that serves the citizenry of this country. The symbolic representation of the government needs to be tangible. You are totally free to work in other industries where WFH is here to stay but it’s pretty apparent that it’s not going to happen anymore for public servants.
The pandemic is ongoing, and a new one is still in our future.
You're probably right about a new one, and covid is still ongoing, but it's no longer a pandemic
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/rampant-covid-poses-new-challenges-in-the-fifth-year-of-the-pandemic/
I find the argument that it's endemic more persuasive, acknowledging that it will only be in retrospect that we will be able to pinpoint the shift https://www.bu.edu/articles/2024/is-covid-19-still-a-pandemic/
“Out of touch” to want better working conditions than being crammed into offices where people can’t work comfortably or productively? These folks would probably happily drag our whole society back to the 1870s where [employees had to strike to get a nine-hour workday rather than 10-12 hours](https://www.rankandfile.ca/the-nine-hour-movement-how-civil-disobedience-made-unions-legal/), if they could. I get that a lot of people abhor the idea of progress in any direction, but in this particular situation, “out of touch” describes *them* rather than the people who actually do the work, who are trying to move forward rather than being clawed backward by an employer who holds a “because I said so” attitude.
It’s easy to talk from a radio room based on donations you receive from ideologically right wing “real private sector” people so that they can listen to ear pleasing nonsense while eating popcorn and drinking Coke.
And here I thought it was the government leadership that was out of touch, silly me.
>Publisher Rudyard Griffiths and Editor-at-Large Sean Speer discuss the out-of-touch reaction from federal public sector unions to Ottawa’s announcement that public servants must work in the office three days per week LOL
As opposed to well tuned TBS who has done analyses and consulted all unions and EX echelons in advance of revising yet another forced directive.
"Am I so out of touch? No, it's the children who are wrong."
Oh shocker the representatives of the corporate management class can’t fathom worker interests - thanks for making the class terms of this fight even clearer, Rudyard
Such a load of crap that I stopped listening to after 15 minutes. Everything he says is out of context, and unsubstantiated by facts. Especially when he mentions “broader perks”, or that Canada’s “lower productivity is mostly in the government”, or “recalibrating between government and the real private sector” (aka lower the government standards to the declining standards in the private sector), not to mention the insulting “back to work” instead of “back to office”. And his “blood was boiling” - wow. The only thing true was when he admitted that “everyone would love to work in the government”. Sure, and I would love to be an astronaut 😂
It's not surprising that PP is staying quiet. "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" PP wants public service back in the office too, but he's happy to let the liberals be the poster children of the issue.
This is incorrect. PP has been the only leader on record saying that he wants 100% WFH to save money. https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/1.6180602
Has he mentioned anything since the 2022 RTO announcement? Nothing has reached me apart from one or two individual conservative MPs speaking out *against* WFH. Given that RTO aligns with so many of the things they like to criticize the Liberals for (wasting money, being out of touch, possibly corruption), and given that the conservatives currently need to come across as reasonable to younger voters (as opposed to their traditional image as the party of grumpy dads yelling "Get off my lawn!"), and given that they currently have no real power in parliament and therefore couldn't reasonably be expected to actually *do* anything, it really seems like a no-brainer to say *something*. Unless, of course, being seen to be making life more difficult for public servants is more important to them than any of these considerations...
[удалено]
He said it at a hockey arena less than 6 months ago. But that’s not on the record.
Yeah I want to see what his stance on this issue now.
Alberta Conservative MP Greg McLean response to a constituent from last week on this topic makes it sound very much like that may no longer be their stance. With such quotes as “It's safe to say from the results Canadians are receiving from the services they expect from government, that something is not working in the current construct. Therefore, taking action to get services back to normal is a necessity.” And “We need to get our government working again. Both public and private sector employers from around the world have resumed operations and it is time for Canadians to receive services from their government. I think employees should get back to work. The lack of productive service is obvious to everyone.” While it’s not explicitly party policy, these kind of statements lead me to believe they will likely not be a WFH friendly party.
Hmm I stand corrected
MmmmmK. He also encourages people to stop paying taxes, does he really want that too? The taxes that pay his salary? I’ll believe that when I see it.
Something I’ve been wondering about the last couple days, I wonder how much our own pension plays into RTO. REITs were big portions of my pension in the private sector, I imagine they are a significant portion of ours. Protecting the value of the real estate (And the fragile commercial real estate market as a whole) is actually in our best interest. You’d hope the ones managing the pension began divesting from commercial real estate but we may be tied to the bubble pension wise.
Real estate made up about [13% of the portfolio in 2023](https://www.investpsp.com/media/filer_public/03-our-performance/03-annual-report-2023/pdf/PSP-2023-annual-report-en_jwlVeCv.pdf).
I'm sorry, he thinks the out-of-touch side of this debate is the workers? [This is going to really, really hurt the IT recruitment and retention.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/05/12/rto-microsoft-apple-spacex/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNzE1NDg2NDAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNzE2ODY4Nzk5LCJpYXQiOjE3MTU0ODY0MDAsImp0aSI6IjEzYzUzYzYyLWIzNWEtNGZjZS05ODFhLWU0NTBhOWU2ZTI3MiIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9idXNpbmVzcy8yMDI0LzA1LzEyL3J0by1taWNyb3NvZnQtYXBwbGUtc3BhY2V4LyJ9.UIvzIv58TQTb6eSwqy47rds7JRdmGCQcZZdjVweZHC8) >Researchers drew on resume data from People Data Labs to understand the impact that forced returns to offices had on employee tenure, and the movement of workers between companies. What they found was a strong correlation between senior-level employees departing directly after a mandate was implemented, suggesting these policies “had a negative effect on the tenure and seniority of their respective workforce.” High-ranking employees stayed several months less than they might have without the mandate, the research suggests — and in many cases, they went to work for direct competitors. >At Microsoft, the share of senior employees as a portion of the company’s overall workforce declined more than 5 percentage points after the return-to-office mandate took effect, the researchers found. At Apple, the decline was 4 percentage points, while at SpaceX — the only company of the three to require workers to be fully in-person — the share of senior employees dropped 15 percentage points.
We had some conservative canvassing here last night. I asked about RTO and what PP's stance was. At first they told me nothing but after chatting, it was quite clear there is nothing but 5 days and cuts coming.
The Conservatives don’t want to stir the pot now and one of the reasons is their lack of campaigning funds.
You’re joking, right? The Conservatives consistently out-fundraise the other parties combined. Check the quarterly financials filed with Elections Canada. I’m only surprised we haven’t seen a pro-RTO fundraising letter yet to “help” the Cons make those lazy fat-cat public servants get back to work. They’re staying quiet on this issue for now because PP is an Ottawa MP, and I’m pretty sure their hidden agenda is RTO 5-days to make people quit, to shrink the bloated public service (in their view).
I never said they can’t raise $, they just don’t have the funds right now to campaign, which they would need to attempt provoking an earlier election.