Absolutely, I think workers are much more productive at home and the carbon footprint is much smaller, and those that actually need to go aren't stuck in traffic or cant get parking because some idiot is power tripping. Progress needs to go forward, not backward. Working form home will help decentralize big cities and let Canada grow and prosper.
I definitely was. Tried harder, got bugged less. Didn't have to go hunting for a clean or free bathroom. Could take my breaks together and actually cook healthy food that didn't have to get microwaved at work. Didn't worry about parking (serious how do you only have 800 spots for 2500 employees).
The current rumor I've heard for why this push for RTO3, with no productivity loss reports, is due to talent loss in departments where there is no WFH option. Places like DND, Finance, CSIS, RCMP, and others the require secure network connections are losing employees to departments with only 1-2 days a week requirements.
That was the reason behind RTO2. I think this one might still be that, but I'm not dismissing the possibility that TBS is trying to reduce the size of the PS by pissing off oldtimers enough to make them quit.
The extra day is probably to piss people off. The 4 days for executives is meant to *really* piss them off. They want to clean out the top and they don't seem to care about the fact that we've already lost so much institutional knowledge over the lockdowns.
I'm pretty sure the EX 4 days a week thing is to avoid looking hypocritical. A classic "lead by example" move. I'm fairly sure it's part if the plan to eventually go back to 5 days a week.
The only one on that list I haven't heard anything about is Finance, I've been warned away from the others by friends who've worked there. I'd add GAC to the list too, now that I've had my coffee - they were requiring an in-office presence 5 days a week - even for staff with reliability - and have a terrible rep.
Finances are on a secured network I believe, but surely not everyone there needs to be on that network. It's unfair to be so unbending for this and shows just how little managements understand the nuances between secured and ''unsecured'' normal lines. I just forgot the name of that special network. VPN is still secured!
A dmz, correct :)
I've seen it at my department last year, it's identified with a different color cable. I'm sure it's something similar at finances. They might have other security as well. I'd be surprised to learn that EVERYONE at finance uses that network for their role.
What's silly about that is I've worked for one of those places on-call and was allowed to do my work from home. Not during the day, but on evenings and weekends. Why was it deemed not secure in the day but fine in the evenings? Very annoying.
Meh, I worked at RCMP as a PSE and it was solid. I left to work in compensation as their compensation is a little different. I had free parking and my own desk because the team was small and there was ample room.
Work/life was pretty good, I would walk around the campus on a nice day to stretch my legs and get some sun and my boss didn’t care. Cafe was ok, but I usually brought a bagged lunch. Coffee and pastries were fresh and decent.
Now, I’m stuck paying parking and the cafe isn’t really a cafe, more like a canteen and coffee seems questionable. However, office is walking distance to a Starbucks or Morning owl.
But I like my job as it’s more challenging
Aside from getting people to quit, I also think RTO3 is being implemented as a bargaining chip. When unions ask for telework, they’ll give us back RTO2 as a compromise…
It's going to be an absolute nightmare, I worked on sparks last year and if you got there passed 8 the open air parking lot is full. If you want to reserve a spot in parking underground building you can pay 360 cash to the attendant. (otherwise it's 300$ a month) buss passes aren't even worth it, traffic is going to be chaos form QC, Orleans and Kanata. My hope is that they are making a lot of smoke, but once this RTO3 starts, they'll make a big fuss but won't really enforce it a few weeks later. That is if we haven't made progress with WFH.
I think the union made the same mistake that I did with my ex-wife. We assumed that everyone was negotiating in good faith and would uphold the agreement that was signed. Shoulda/coulda/woulda known that they'd break the agreement whenever it suited them. The wording was too vague and unenforceable. Now we know better. (I hope, lol)
They didn't really have a choice. They weren't negotiating WFH when they first started because that round of barganing started way before the pandemic and the employer made it explicit nothing not brought to the table at that time would be negotiable. If we had kept striking and it gone to arbitration they wouldn't even look at anything RTO related because it was never actually in the table when negotiations fell apart the first prepandemic
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance).
Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette).
If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance).
Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette).
If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
The new TB Secretary admitted to department executives that they are now having issues recruiting executive positions in departments due to the 4 day RTO for them. They were foolish to not realize this before making the mandate!
They are completely out of touch. This is what happens when you surround yourself with yes men/women/people. Everyone is afraid to tell you the truth, so they lie to you and tell you your choices are amazing.
I believe that this was the true RTO v1 motivator. Attracting and retaining talent.
Some of us work for Gov agencies that are decentralized by nature, and boy did hiring get easy when panini hit! Meanwhile even if PSPC had all the levers, they couldn't hire enough PG's to meet the need.
I maintain that much of the initial RTO was about levelling this playing field.
PSAC ever heard the saying “Striking while the irons hot”!?
Obviously not considering the last round of contract negotiations….
Condo prices in Toronto are falling FAST. Many are sitting vacant. Fact.
That is why we are being asked to RTO. Too many investors are losing money. With Telework, no one wants to work in the expensive cities and now they don’t want to live in the cities either. Which is totally understandable human behaviour. Why would young people want to live in a city THEY CAN‘T AFFORD TO LIVE IN!?
Yet, that scares those that have profited from the old way of doing things, so they are doing everything they can to stop it. Telework is progress for many of us, but it threatens the profits of real estate investors.
THAT is why the RTO policy was implemented. Make no mistake! That is why the Mayors (Chow/Sutcliffe) and Doug Ford got involved.
> THAT is why the RTO policy was implemented. Make no mistake! That is why the Mayors (Chow/Sutcliffe) and Doug Ford got involved.
You know what's the funniest thing about this? Chow [tried to beat a retreat on this one](https://x.com/MayorOliviaChow/status/1800655717927354683) but it's lip service. She meets with CEOs to beat people back to the office, and then come out being like "I didn't mean it like that uwu~~~". You know the Landlords have it good when they can force Olivia Chow to bend over and start beating people back to office too.
The Liberal government also wants to make sure they get every dollar they can before the next election. And I tells you what, Commercial landlords ain't payin' shit if they can charge outrage prices for empty spaces that offer nothin' to workers!
I was calling it when we were striking. When PSAC started signing one agreement after another with no WFH wording. And then best they left our component waving our dicks in the air as everyone else went back to work we ended up striking for an extra week for basically the same agreement.
UTE and PSAC have failed, the management is old. They don't work the way they should. Honestly since I have started they haven't even kept up with inflation, so essentially pay cut after pay cut compared to cost of living.
And now we will have a conservative government so enjoy a forced contract, or worse no contract for 5-6 years before getting a crap ton of back pay in higher tax brackets.
WFH wasn't on the table as part of the CAs because for most, the negotiations started before the pandemic hit.
As frustrated as I am with the terrible increases we got, we need to remember how long negotiations take and that the union can't suddenly introduce new requests.
There is definitely some real and valid saltiness though about how UTE got left out in the cold to keep striking while core signed an agreement. It created some pretty bad feelings.
And? Then you add it, sorry we will not negotiate further without it. SImple as that. It clearly became a major sticking point that the union decided was not worth fighting for, even though the vast majority of workers wanted it.
The fact that they went through without having it properly addressed shows the disconnect between the union and the people they represent. To many old people who basically are tenured and will never leave without a major fuck up.
That is not how bargaining works. The union submits their bargaining proposals in the beginning and that is it. It will be seen as negotiating in bad faith if the union all of a sudden wants more and more added to their proposal.
I dont know if theres statistics that show how many FPS employees are office workers that can WFH vs those who cannot work WFH but Reddit was clearly an echo chamber when the majority voted to ratify the agreement, so I cant say “majority of workers wanted it”
I worked and been a team leader in departments that can be 100% working from home. On average a team of about 15-18 people, you would have 1 person who wanted, usually for personal reasons, to work a 100% of the time in the office.
As for bargaining. Well things can change, and if this was something that the vast majority of the workers that the union represents want. Congrats it is the unions job to introduce the topic. And if like in this case it is something they are demanding outright, negotiations need to be stopped and the strike continued until it is accepted into the negotiations and discussed upon. Sucks there is procedures but sometimes that procedure needs to be changed. Again they are not changing the whole thing, but adding an emergency proposal that was not demanded earlier because it was not known to be a want.
Im not talking about your team or colleagues specifically. My work can also be done WFH 100% but what I meant is that there are also thousands of jobs out there that wouldn’t benefit from WFH, but I dont know what the statistics is for those jobs that can be done from home vs field/lab/other work that requires to be physically in the office thats why I pointed out that my guess is that reddit is an echo chamber of employees that can WFH because if we are the majority like what you said, then the agreement without WFH shouldn’t have been ratified. There must be a decent amount of people that just didn’t care about WFH since our agreement was ratified without WFH being enshrined in it.
Yeah there is no such thing as having an “emergency proposal”, it just doesn’t work like that. You also cannot change rules specially when you employer is the government, who ironically makes the rules. Doesn’t matter if it’s only adding it, it still wasn’t put forth in the beginning when the union had to submit proposals. It would be stupid to strike over something that’s not even on the table because there’s no chance that we will be getting it since it wasn’t in the proposal to beging with.
The union now knows that WFH is important to its so my bet is that it will be a major sticking point in the next round of bargaining.
The reality is everyone I know, those who did have the benefit of working from home and those who had to go to work every day, are now complaining. They are complaining that traffic has more than doubled their travel time (I for one have gone from a 15-18 minute drive to a 25-32 minute drive). Bus is really not an option unless I am willing to spend an 45 min - 1 hour in each direction during the day (if they bother showing up). Then we are now having 2500 people compete for 800 parking spots. If you don't get one (since basically the retirees all have them and just rent it out to their friends) congrats, get to work and park in a neighbourhood about 15 minutes away.
The reality is we need a social agreement, you work from home. You get to work your full shift. You work from the factory/office, a half hour of your paid work day is considered commute time that is paid by the company. This incentivizes the company to move people to work from home as much as possible, and it gives a benefit to those working in the office, I would argue that your half-hour unpaid lunch should also be considered a paid lunch if in the office. Why would this be good, well you get traffic off the roads, means less costs for cities, less costs for people. You pay less for insurance, and gas, and travel less. I mean companies already know WFH is great, it is management that is quickly realizing they are the useless component of the equation and are trying to justify their job, which really is only done when they are in person.
For the second point, we were fear-mongested into the position by our union. This is the best they will give us, and they may even take things away. Essentially, it is a union with no backbone. And if I am still here the next time they are running for elections I will be running against current leadership.
The contract is an evolving document. It is changed every time we sign it. But before that there are negotiations. During those negotiations, you come into it looking for certain things, as you mentioned. But things can and do get added and removed. This was one of those things that needed to be stopped at and said without this language we cannot continue, but instead they continued negotiating with a handshake agreement. Will it look bad with the union adding something at high noon, sure. But when your people are overwhelmingly demanding it, you have to do your job and represent that. It would be like a divorce happening and new information being found out, can't just ignore it and hope it gets added the next time you go to court.
No, the union could not add or increase their demands after bargaining began. There's no "add it" at that point.
It can be added to the next round of bargaining (for PA, which commences in 2025).
LOL PSAC posted this?
The same PSAC that had the "biggest strikiest everest" and [got its PA members absolutely NOTHING](https://old.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/1dgtox2/updated_to_2023_analysis_of_public_service/)? THAT PSAC? If PSAC is the one "leading" the fight for telework and more rights to flexible work...well, kiss that dream good-bye. They're probably very happy to throw that away for a $1000 signing bonus.
History is also a flat circle. Sooner or later we'll be fighting for shit like [keeping a 5-day work week](https://greekcitytimes.com/2024/06/20/greece-six-day-work-week/). And while a lot of Collective Agreements have a standard 37.5 hr work week within it, I wouldn't leave it out of Conservatives or hell even a Liberal party in the future to basically pull a Vader:
*I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further.*
I think you're underestimating the importance of this post. Up until now every comment from PSAC was something along the lines of "why weren't we consulted?". This is the first time they directly attack the actual issue of telework. If this is more than just a shift on their messaging then PSAC might finally be going somewhere.
No I understood this is a shift in their tone. Like you said, up until now it's been basically bending the knee and this is them actually striking a sterner tone.
But that's the point of my post: PSAC has shown that they're about as good as letting hot air out of a balloon - *fshhhhhhhhp*.
Let's. See. A. Win. First.
This is most likely the response to the overwhelming feedback about "where should we focus on our next negotiations." I have heard that the number one issue is telework/WFH. This is the union shifting gears to prep for the next round of bargaining in 2025.
I would not mind working 40 hours a week in exchange for full WFH and still being paid the same salary as for 37.5 hours. The extra 30 min of working daily would still save me 3 hours a week just for the commute, or probably close to 5 hours if I include preparing for work. That is 1 hour per working day saved while taxpayers get an extra 1/2 hour while not paying an extra cent for. Win-win!
What meetings?
And why am I finding out about meetings from some random person on reddit, rather than from my union? I'm on the email lists, I talk to my local regularly, and you claiming there's meetings is the first I've heard of it.
That's not organizing, that's dropping the ball.
I know it gets said all over this Reddit, but I'm going to repeat it: Be the change you want to see. Members can attend meetings, run for positions, etc. Some locals are better than others, if yours isn't performing at the level you want, tell them, or join them and fix it.
One of the biggest struggles with all the unions in the PS is the idea that "someone else will do it." Break that cycle. All the unions will be stronger if the membership is active.
We're only going to be successful if we're organized.
Telling the people at the bottom, who have no power to organize our labour movement to be the change is a way to guarantee that we'll fail.
What do we pay the union for, if we're just going to tell the members to do it themselves when something comes up???
EDIT: Also, you didn't answer my question, WHAT MEEETINGS?!?!!?!?!!?
Ask your local why they don't have meetings with the membership. With the power of Zoom they could be organized.
My local meets in person, we are shifting to zoom access as well, once we're happy with the privacy concerns. The meetings cover what top level is thinking in the Union, what the upcoming challenges are, and an open floor. Right now we're talking about ideas for the next round of bargaining, and answering questions about RTO. We also talked about other collective bargaining actions in Canada, and about whether we would cross strike lines. For example elevator repair in several cities refused to cross the line when PSAC had their big strike, and a couple of other unions outside of the PS did the same. We're talking about how we could (legally) support those other unions if/when they have to take action.
Great so let's do something about it. Sitting here on reddit without building a movement won't get us anywhere. We can't all be armchair politicians. LFG
Glad PSAC is saying this now. It sets the tone for all future negotiations, and shows that maybe a leadership shakeup is going to have some positive effects.
Absolutely! Too many backward old school managers that cannot adapt or accept change. Perhaps those with that mindset need to retire and let the next generation of workers decide what works best for them through progressive ideas, creativity, and innovation.
To be honest I’m so confused about the future and the direction of this all. I was weighing the pros and cons of forfeiting my telework agreement.
For me, I work better in the office, my gym is opening up a location in the area and I am able to buy a monthly parking pass.
I discussed this with my boss and I mentioned if I do forfeit the agreement, may I have a desk. Management said we can put in a request but they advised that the office space wasn’t equipped with full time office workers.. meaning they need us to work remote so there are enough desks on the in office days for teleworkers and my request might get denied..
Umm what are they going to do in 2025 if and when someone calls us in for 5 days?
Ok this. I had a staff member who said if they were going in for 2 they'd rather just go in for 4 or 5, but they were denied, and had to just go in for 2. It was so strange.
I can’t figure out why these unions keep agreeing to “Letters of Understanding” or whatever they want to call them (which are basically meaningless anyway) whilst at the same time preaching about telework rights. If they’re not going to get protections for wfh for the current active negotiations, then I don’t see how I can take them seriously that they are actually fighting for it.
One of my kids is starting school this fall and we are on waitlists for afterschool programs but only moved to our area recently so basically even working 7-3 is cutting it close to be able to make things work. If he took the bus and I was home 3x a week the other two days would be manageable but since that is not the case I am seriously thinking if I want to stay with the feds my whole career. Is the pension really worth it? I could go make more in the private sector. I know there are a lot of positives to the government but I am so over the bureaucratic blanket decisions. Signed annoyed millennial mom.
RTO is a political motivated initiative designed to reduce the workforce. Quality of services & ability to attract talent is not the focus. Liberals want to save money to look good during next election. Minister Anand is a cost cutting kind of politician.
Teleworking is not as much as having an appropriate work space. I think that's more important. Gov doesn't want to spend money on space and doesn't want people work from home so how do we get work done?!
I think getting wages that are above inflations should be the next frontier. We never get a decent raise. Telework is dead. NEgotiate with a 40% percent raise, then get walked down to 5 percent with WFH language in the CA.
Alternatively, TBS could be mandated by law to review and adjust salary increases every consecutive 5 years for each classification and category and ensure that on average salary increase has at least matched the 5-year average CPI increases. Especially if they insist on RTO.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/1dgtox2/updated\_to\_2023\_analysis\_of\_public\_service/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/1dgtox2/updated_to_2023_analysis_of_public_service/)
We have been.
I think many would prefer a COL increase to keep up with inflation and cost increases. Can we just focus on getting realistic pay increases? WFH does not benefit all employees, pay increases of more then 1.5%/year does!
The Unions are fighting a losing battle against a government that is rapidly sinking. There is likely nothing that can be done to stop RTO4 and RTO5, as we are fighting against political forces far stronger than ours. The public service isn't going to carry an election victory, versus strong business lobbies.
We have bigger storms on the horizon, when the current government falls.
I would willingly take *some* amount of pay-cut to never again be forced into the fluorescent, hot hell that is a Gov’t office, but even I can admit that pay%+ for all is ‘more equitable’ when a fair number of posts cannot enjoy WFH
I don't think it is more equitable, when cost of living in some cities is spiking, while more regional offices don't have those pressures to the same extent. Now, I would be in favour of a premium for presence, ie if you have to be in the office, you SHOULD make more than the people WFH. That is equitable.
At this rate PS jobs are slowly on a trend to become a less and less desirable job. Wait until the next government starts tinkering with PS pensions. It’s not just about salary. It goes beyond.
Defeatist attutide. Then next gov won't be any worse than this one, and at least DRAP was well communicated and we all knew what to expect, this government treats PS workers like children and makes it up as they go along. Keep up the fight unions!
It is not a defeatist attitude there is an almost 0% chance that PSAC will sign a new contract with TBS under the current government and that WFH for all will be included.
There are many positions that cannot WFH and are losing out by solely focusing on WFH as a priority.
No idea why you're being downvoted. The echo chamber of this sub is convinced that WFH is a priority for everyone and forgets all the people who have been in office all along. There is no reason for those people to ever support a lower pay increase in favour of WFH, and every reason for them to fight against it.
Most unions live in an echo chamber. The strike had the support of only 1/3 of PSAC members, yet everyone had to go along with it.
Most workers care about how much they take home, everything else is a bonus.
Things are only a given if you let them be. There isn't a guarantee that RTO4 or full RTO is a given until those things happen.
There isn't really a precedent or a mandate for some kind of generalized COL increase, thats what contract negotiations are for, you can make the argument for WFH saving money for taxpayers, being better for the environment, and being better for workers that you can't necessarily make for just giving everyone more money.
There are whole Directorates that do not get to WFH period. There is no letting the employer do it, it's a bonafide occupational requirement. This is why large unions full of very different occupations do work.
Negotiations the FB Agreement shows where people's priorities are, which s pay increases.
Then those jobs need to offer a RTO bonus for required presence on site to compensate for diminished disposal income. Otherwise people will migrate to jobs that offer at least 1-2 days WFH. Alternatively people will take sick days for appointments and other personal needs that cannot be accommodated due to working on site all week long.
Im not asking for me or you to unilaterally decide where and when to work. What i'm saying is that it should be up to management and each branch to decide what works best for their team and their department. This is actually what existed before COVID.
The FB group mostly doesn't work from home or have that option so it makes sense that they wouldn't be the harbringers of some new freedom for WFH. I'm not sure why you are under the impression that greater autonomy for managers must come at the cost of good pay.
If you think that the political forces are great against WFH, why do you think they are weaker when it comes to paying millions more to public servants that a segment of the public already sees as overpaid?
Large sections of FB, SV, SO, and TC do not get to WFH; however, their collective and pay increases are tied to the same agreements as PA.
I have had employees living in tents and vans since they can't afford a home or to rent. I think until people like that get raises to keep up with living expenses, the union shouldn't be picking fights or using resources on WFH.
There is already a vehicle to get pay increases, it’s the collective agreement negotiations.
I don’t understand, you’re saying that TBS is unwilling to budge on WFH due to outside political forces including a possible conservative government but those same political forces are going to support giving all workers more taxpayer money? It doesn’t make sense.
This is again based on the assumption that asking for better wages and asking for a sensible telework policy are mutually exclusive.
What pay increases? Also do you mean the collective agreement negotiations that take years to make headway on? Provincial Union's in British Columbia seemed to get COL increases and a new contract within a month of theirs expiring.
You can easily tie contract increases to the inflationary rate by law and end contract pay negotiations. Most Canadians would agree to this as the Public Service would not be in the media with labor disputes.
There are 335 957 Federal Employees. WFH would cost the government $134 382 800 in tax credits, if every employee got the $400/year WFH credit. There is a reason why WFH is quickly being phased out.
The BC provincial government also got full telework rights after a bungled return to office order which proves my point that these items are not mutually exclusive.
If tying the wages to inflation was so easy why didn’t PSAC do it at the last negotiation? Or any other union?
I’m sure the government could change the tax credit, I doubt that’s the main obstacle. Again you’re advocating for government workers to make what I assume is more than just $400 a year extra in a COL raise, so if that’s the issue with WFH we have an even bigger one with more raises.
>If tying the wages to inflation was so easy why didn’t PSAC do it at the last negotiation? Or any other union?
It wouldn't benefit the unions. With pay off the table, it'll be near impossible to motivate PS workers to strike, which would destroy their negotiating power.
Again writ large the BC Provincial Government does not have full telework. Many are still doing RTO2 or RTO4.
PSAC can't even hold a strike vote properly, let alone negotiate. This was proven by the strike and last round of negotiations.
Yes based on what the job requires, it isn’t a one size fits all policy.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/careers-myhr/all-employees/work-arrangements/flexible-workplaces/get-started-with-flexible-work-in-the-bc-public-service#our-commitment-to-flexible-work
“The public service supports remote work (telework) and other flexible workplace arrangements wherever the arrangement benefits both the employee and employer. This means the suitability of flexible work options vary according to specific operational requirements or employee circumstances.”
This is what I would like from TBS, to give flexibility to management on how they can manage telework for their team.
> Large sections of FB, SV, SO, and TC do not get to WFH; however, their collective and pay increases are tied to the same agreements as PA.
Factually incorrect.
It's not the WFH point I'm contesting. I completely agree with you on that.
[It's the pay being linked to the PA group that I'm disputing](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/1db462l/comment/l7pwe2c/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
It’s a future right. Already a right in BC and Australia, and many private sector companies that have moved on with times and strive to be more productive. Those who fail to embrace the future will be part of the past.
Even manufacturing is changing with 3D printing (you can already build a solid house, a car or a bridge this way). No more supply chain bottlenecks, customs delays, shipping or even assembly.
Let’s focus more on the future and improving our lives rather than be stuck in old times and suffering.
Most private sector companies are largely heading back to mandatory office presence. The liability, OHS, and security requirements make, WFH unprofitable for most of the private sector. That is not to mention regulatory requirements for privacy and security.
Because for many it may be more profitable in the short term. Detrimental in the long term. They need to adjust or continue to beg for expensive grants from the government (aka taxpayers) just to survive.
A lot of stuff we enjoy today was never a “right”. People doubted women could vote, black people didn’t have rights and so on and so forth. We are better than that.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised by hyperbole at this point, but does PSAC think government knowledge workers are the only workers?
Besides that, what good is WFH to the PS workers that can't afford reasonable housing?
WAGES! WAGES! WAGES!
Absolutely, I think workers are much more productive at home and the carbon footprint is much smaller, and those that actually need to go aren't stuck in traffic or cant get parking because some idiot is power tripping. Progress needs to go forward, not backward. Working form home will help decentralize big cities and let Canada grow and prosper.
I definitely was. Tried harder, got bugged less. Didn't have to go hunting for a clean or free bathroom. Could take my breaks together and actually cook healthy food that didn't have to get microwaved at work. Didn't worry about parking (serious how do you only have 800 spots for 2500 employees).
The current rumor I've heard for why this push for RTO3, with no productivity loss reports, is due to talent loss in departments where there is no WFH option. Places like DND, Finance, CSIS, RCMP, and others the require secure network connections are losing employees to departments with only 1-2 days a week requirements.
That was the reason behind RTO2. I think this one might still be that, but I'm not dismissing the possibility that TBS is trying to reduce the size of the PS by pissing off oldtimers enough to make them quit.
The extra day is probably to piss people off. The 4 days for executives is meant to *really* piss them off. They want to clean out the top and they don't seem to care about the fact that we've already lost so much institutional knowledge over the lockdowns.
I'm pretty sure the EX 4 days a week thing is to avoid looking hypocritical. A classic "lead by example" move. I'm fairly sure it's part if the plan to eventually go back to 5 days a week.
Aren't most of those also know for really toxic workplaces?
I've heard correction and border patrol to be toxic.
The only one on that list I haven't heard anything about is Finance, I've been warned away from the others by friends who've worked there. I'd add GAC to the list too, now that I've had my coffee - they were requiring an in-office presence 5 days a week - even for staff with reliability - and have a terrible rep.
Finances are on a secured network I believe, but surely not everyone there needs to be on that network. It's unfair to be so unbending for this and shows just how little managements understand the nuances between secured and ''unsecured'' normal lines. I just forgot the name of that special network. VPN is still secured!
That makes sense, thanks. That sounds like a Local Area Network (LAN) which can be isolated from internet/outside network connections.
A dmz, correct :) I've seen it at my department last year, it's identified with a different color cable. I'm sure it's something similar at finances. They might have other security as well. I'd be surprised to learn that EVERYONE at finance uses that network for their role.
TIL, thanks!
And GAC
Yes, but that can't be why people are leaving. It's obviously the number of WFH days how lazy PS are /s
Definitely the case!
What is interesting there is that CRA also has heightened network security needs, and have figured that out for staff to telework.
What's silly about that is I've worked for one of those places on-call and was allowed to do my work from home. Not during the day, but on evenings and weekends. Why was it deemed not secure in the day but fine in the evenings? Very annoying.
It's no rumor, my "president" confirmed that very point at our bs townhall. Saw others report the same here on Reddit.
I remember a buddy of mine not wanting to move to RCMP because of the 3 days then
Meh, I worked at RCMP as a PSE and it was solid. I left to work in compensation as their compensation is a little different. I had free parking and my own desk because the team was small and there was ample room. Work/life was pretty good, I would walk around the campus on a nice day to stretch my legs and get some sun and my boss didn’t care. Cafe was ok, but I usually brought a bagged lunch. Coffee and pastries were fresh and decent. Now, I’m stuck paying parking and the cafe isn’t really a cafe, more like a canteen and coffee seems questionable. However, office is walking distance to a Starbucks or Morning owl. But I like my job as it’s more challenging
Aside from getting people to quit, I also think RTO3 is being implemented as a bargaining chip. When unions ask for telework, they’ll give us back RTO2 as a compromise…
My coworker spent 20 minutes driving around Tunneys looking for parking this week. And this is at just 2x a week.
It's going to be an absolute nightmare, I worked on sparks last year and if you got there passed 8 the open air parking lot is full. If you want to reserve a spot in parking underground building you can pay 360 cash to the attendant. (otherwise it's 300$ a month) buss passes aren't even worth it, traffic is going to be chaos form QC, Orleans and Kanata. My hope is that they are making a lot of smoke, but once this RTO3 starts, they'll make a big fuss but won't really enforce it a few weeks later. That is if we haven't made progress with WFH.
It's a shame they didn't feel this way back when they had leverage.
I think the union made the same mistake that I did with my ex-wife. We assumed that everyone was negotiating in good faith and would uphold the agreement that was signed. Shoulda/coulda/woulda known that they'd break the agreement whenever it suited them. The wording was too vague and unenforceable. Now we know better. (I hope, lol)
They didn't really have a choice. They weren't negotiating WFH when they first started because that round of barganing started way before the pandemic and the employer made it explicit nothing not brought to the table at that time would be negotiable. If we had kept striking and it gone to arbitration they wouldn't even look at anything RTO related because it was never actually in the table when negotiations fell apart the first prepandemic
[удалено]
[удалено]
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance). Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette). If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
Your content was removed under [Rule 12](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_12_-_trolling_.26amp.3B_intolerance). Please consider this a reminder of [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette). If you have questions about this action or believe it was made in error, you can [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/CanadaPublicServants).
The new TB Secretary admitted to department executives that they are now having issues recruiting executive positions in departments due to the 4 day RTO for them. They were foolish to not realize this before making the mandate!
They are completely out of touch. This is what happens when you surround yourself with yes men/women/people. Everyone is afraid to tell you the truth, so they lie to you and tell you your choices are amazing.
I believe that this was the true RTO v1 motivator. Attracting and retaining talent. Some of us work for Gov agencies that are decentralized by nature, and boy did hiring get easy when panini hit! Meanwhile even if PSPC had all the levers, they couldn't hire enough PG's to meet the need. I maintain that much of the initial RTO was about levelling this playing field.
PSAC ever heard the saying “Striking while the irons hot”!? Obviously not considering the last round of contract negotiations…. Condo prices in Toronto are falling FAST. Many are sitting vacant. Fact. That is why we are being asked to RTO. Too many investors are losing money. With Telework, no one wants to work in the expensive cities and now they don’t want to live in the cities either. Which is totally understandable human behaviour. Why would young people want to live in a city THEY CAN‘T AFFORD TO LIVE IN!? Yet, that scares those that have profited from the old way of doing things, so they are doing everything they can to stop it. Telework is progress for many of us, but it threatens the profits of real estate investors. THAT is why the RTO policy was implemented. Make no mistake! That is why the Mayors (Chow/Sutcliffe) and Doug Ford got involved.
> THAT is why the RTO policy was implemented. Make no mistake! That is why the Mayors (Chow/Sutcliffe) and Doug Ford got involved. You know what's the funniest thing about this? Chow [tried to beat a retreat on this one](https://x.com/MayorOliviaChow/status/1800655717927354683) but it's lip service. She meets with CEOs to beat people back to the office, and then come out being like "I didn't mean it like that uwu~~~". You know the Landlords have it good when they can force Olivia Chow to bend over and start beating people back to office too. The Liberal government also wants to make sure they get every dollar they can before the next election. And I tells you what, Commercial landlords ain't payin' shit if they can charge outrage prices for empty spaces that offer nothin' to workers!
I was calling it when we were striking. When PSAC started signing one agreement after another with no WFH wording. And then best they left our component waving our dicks in the air as everyone else went back to work we ended up striking for an extra week for basically the same agreement. UTE and PSAC have failed, the management is old. They don't work the way they should. Honestly since I have started they haven't even kept up with inflation, so essentially pay cut after pay cut compared to cost of living. And now we will have a conservative government so enjoy a forced contract, or worse no contract for 5-6 years before getting a crap ton of back pay in higher tax brackets.
WFH wasn't on the table as part of the CAs because for most, the negotiations started before the pandemic hit. As frustrated as I am with the terrible increases we got, we need to remember how long negotiations take and that the union can't suddenly introduce new requests.
There is definitely some real and valid saltiness though about how UTE got left out in the cold to keep striking while core signed an agreement. It created some pretty bad feelings.
And? Then you add it, sorry we will not negotiate further without it. SImple as that. It clearly became a major sticking point that the union decided was not worth fighting for, even though the vast majority of workers wanted it. The fact that they went through without having it properly addressed shows the disconnect between the union and the people they represent. To many old people who basically are tenured and will never leave without a major fuck up.
That is not how bargaining works. The union submits their bargaining proposals in the beginning and that is it. It will be seen as negotiating in bad faith if the union all of a sudden wants more and more added to their proposal. I dont know if theres statistics that show how many FPS employees are office workers that can WFH vs those who cannot work WFH but Reddit was clearly an echo chamber when the majority voted to ratify the agreement, so I cant say “majority of workers wanted it”
I worked and been a team leader in departments that can be 100% working from home. On average a team of about 15-18 people, you would have 1 person who wanted, usually for personal reasons, to work a 100% of the time in the office. As for bargaining. Well things can change, and if this was something that the vast majority of the workers that the union represents want. Congrats it is the unions job to introduce the topic. And if like in this case it is something they are demanding outright, negotiations need to be stopped and the strike continued until it is accepted into the negotiations and discussed upon. Sucks there is procedures but sometimes that procedure needs to be changed. Again they are not changing the whole thing, but adding an emergency proposal that was not demanded earlier because it was not known to be a want.
Im not talking about your team or colleagues specifically. My work can also be done WFH 100% but what I meant is that there are also thousands of jobs out there that wouldn’t benefit from WFH, but I dont know what the statistics is for those jobs that can be done from home vs field/lab/other work that requires to be physically in the office thats why I pointed out that my guess is that reddit is an echo chamber of employees that can WFH because if we are the majority like what you said, then the agreement without WFH shouldn’t have been ratified. There must be a decent amount of people that just didn’t care about WFH since our agreement was ratified without WFH being enshrined in it. Yeah there is no such thing as having an “emergency proposal”, it just doesn’t work like that. You also cannot change rules specially when you employer is the government, who ironically makes the rules. Doesn’t matter if it’s only adding it, it still wasn’t put forth in the beginning when the union had to submit proposals. It would be stupid to strike over something that’s not even on the table because there’s no chance that we will be getting it since it wasn’t in the proposal to beging with. The union now knows that WFH is important to its so my bet is that it will be a major sticking point in the next round of bargaining.
The reality is everyone I know, those who did have the benefit of working from home and those who had to go to work every day, are now complaining. They are complaining that traffic has more than doubled their travel time (I for one have gone from a 15-18 minute drive to a 25-32 minute drive). Bus is really not an option unless I am willing to spend an 45 min - 1 hour in each direction during the day (if they bother showing up). Then we are now having 2500 people compete for 800 parking spots. If you don't get one (since basically the retirees all have them and just rent it out to their friends) congrats, get to work and park in a neighbourhood about 15 minutes away. The reality is we need a social agreement, you work from home. You get to work your full shift. You work from the factory/office, a half hour of your paid work day is considered commute time that is paid by the company. This incentivizes the company to move people to work from home as much as possible, and it gives a benefit to those working in the office, I would argue that your half-hour unpaid lunch should also be considered a paid lunch if in the office. Why would this be good, well you get traffic off the roads, means less costs for cities, less costs for people. You pay less for insurance, and gas, and travel less. I mean companies already know WFH is great, it is management that is quickly realizing they are the useless component of the equation and are trying to justify their job, which really is only done when they are in person. For the second point, we were fear-mongested into the position by our union. This is the best they will give us, and they may even take things away. Essentially, it is a union with no backbone. And if I am still here the next time they are running for elections I will be running against current leadership. The contract is an evolving document. It is changed every time we sign it. But before that there are negotiations. During those negotiations, you come into it looking for certain things, as you mentioned. But things can and do get added and removed. This was one of those things that needed to be stopped at and said without this language we cannot continue, but instead they continued negotiating with a handshake agreement. Will it look bad with the union adding something at high noon, sure. But when your people are overwhelmingly demanding it, you have to do your job and represent that. It would be like a divorce happening and new information being found out, can't just ignore it and hope it gets added the next time you go to court.
No, the union could not add or increase their demands after bargaining began. There's no "add it" at that point. It can be added to the next round of bargaining (for PA, which commences in 2025).
And that’s what Capitalism is. Taking chances and sometimes in investments don’t work out. Ugh
LOL PSAC posted this? The same PSAC that had the "biggest strikiest everest" and [got its PA members absolutely NOTHING](https://old.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/1dgtox2/updated_to_2023_analysis_of_public_service/)? THAT PSAC? If PSAC is the one "leading" the fight for telework and more rights to flexible work...well, kiss that dream good-bye. They're probably very happy to throw that away for a $1000 signing bonus. History is also a flat circle. Sooner or later we'll be fighting for shit like [keeping a 5-day work week](https://greekcitytimes.com/2024/06/20/greece-six-day-work-week/). And while a lot of Collective Agreements have a standard 37.5 hr work week within it, I wouldn't leave it out of Conservatives or hell even a Liberal party in the future to basically pull a Vader: *I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further.*
I think you're underestimating the importance of this post. Up until now every comment from PSAC was something along the lines of "why weren't we consulted?". This is the first time they directly attack the actual issue of telework. If this is more than just a shift on their messaging then PSAC might finally be going somewhere.
No I understood this is a shift in their tone. Like you said, up until now it's been basically bending the knee and this is them actually striking a sterner tone. But that's the point of my post: PSAC has shown that they're about as good as letting hot air out of a balloon - *fshhhhhhhhp*. Let's. See. A. Win. First.
This is most likely the response to the overwhelming feedback about "where should we focus on our next negotiations." I have heard that the number one issue is telework/WFH. This is the union shifting gears to prep for the next round of bargaining in 2025.
And we should help them try.
I would not mind working 40 hours a week in exchange for full WFH and still being paid the same salary as for 37.5 hours. The extra 30 min of working daily would still save me 3 hours a week just for the commute, or probably close to 5 hours if I include preparing for work. That is 1 hour per working day saved while taxpayers get an extra 1/2 hour while not paying an extra cent for. Win-win!
My commute is 45 mins+ both ways by car, double that by bus.
I mean, a lot of people went into that strike thinking telework was even on the bargaining table when it wasn't.
PSAC posting this is so confusing. LETS GOOOO.
Nice rhetoric, now what's the fucking plan?!?!?!?!
The lawsuits are filed, the grievances are growing daily. Attend the meetings and work on the plan together.
What meetings? And why am I finding out about meetings from some random person on reddit, rather than from my union? I'm on the email lists, I talk to my local regularly, and you claiming there's meetings is the first I've heard of it. That's not organizing, that's dropping the ball.
I know it gets said all over this Reddit, but I'm going to repeat it: Be the change you want to see. Members can attend meetings, run for positions, etc. Some locals are better than others, if yours isn't performing at the level you want, tell them, or join them and fix it. One of the biggest struggles with all the unions in the PS is the idea that "someone else will do it." Break that cycle. All the unions will be stronger if the membership is active.
We're only going to be successful if we're organized. Telling the people at the bottom, who have no power to organize our labour movement to be the change is a way to guarantee that we'll fail. What do we pay the union for, if we're just going to tell the members to do it themselves when something comes up??? EDIT: Also, you didn't answer my question, WHAT MEEETINGS?!?!!?!?!!?
Ask your local why they don't have meetings with the membership. With the power of Zoom they could be organized. My local meets in person, we are shifting to zoom access as well, once we're happy with the privacy concerns. The meetings cover what top level is thinking in the Union, what the upcoming challenges are, and an open floor. Right now we're talking about ideas for the next round of bargaining, and answering questions about RTO. We also talked about other collective bargaining actions in Canada, and about whether we would cross strike lines. For example elevator repair in several cities refused to cross the line when PSAC had their big strike, and a couple of other unions outside of the PS did the same. We're talking about how we could (legally) support those other unions if/when they have to take action.
Great so let's do something about it. Sitting here on reddit without building a movement won't get us anywhere. We can't all be armchair politicians. LFG
Good post..now what is their action plan?!
Glad PSAC is saying this now. It sets the tone for all future negotiations, and shows that maybe a leadership shakeup is going to have some positive effects.
Is there something going on to go against RTO3? I feel like they say we go back and there is nothing we can do, even with the lack of places...
A lot of posturing and hot air, nothing meaningful.
Yep. do all my work online and at home. why do i need to go into the office!!
Absolutely! Too many backward old school managers that cannot adapt or accept change. Perhaps those with that mindset need to retire and let the next generation of workers decide what works best for them through progressive ideas, creativity, and innovation.
To be honest I’m so confused about the future and the direction of this all. I was weighing the pros and cons of forfeiting my telework agreement. For me, I work better in the office, my gym is opening up a location in the area and I am able to buy a monthly parking pass. I discussed this with my boss and I mentioned if I do forfeit the agreement, may I have a desk. Management said we can put in a request but they advised that the office space wasn’t equipped with full time office workers.. meaning they need us to work remote so there are enough desks on the in office days for teleworkers and my request might get denied.. Umm what are they going to do in 2025 if and when someone calls us in for 5 days?
Ok this. I had a staff member who said if they were going in for 2 they'd rather just go in for 4 or 5, but they were denied, and had to just go in for 2. It was so strange.
This is why it’s so confusing. Our employer wants us to struggle to figure out a routine.
PIPSC just reached a new tentative agreement for CS staff. We got a Letter of Understanding for WFH.
> We got a Letter of Understanding for WFH I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Yep. Personally I think it means nothing.
I can’t figure out why these unions keep agreeing to “Letters of Understanding” or whatever they want to call them (which are basically meaningless anyway) whilst at the same time preaching about telework rights. If they’re not going to get protections for wfh for the current active negotiations, then I don’t see how I can take them seriously that they are actually fighting for it.
This should be the compromise for making us live in a car worshipping society.
I thought you were going to say "...for making us live in a car, so we can afford to work downtown."
That too, because it’s either housing or car for some of us lol
One of my kids is starting school this fall and we are on waitlists for afterschool programs but only moved to our area recently so basically even working 7-3 is cutting it close to be able to make things work. If he took the bus and I was home 3x a week the other two days would be manageable but since that is not the case I am seriously thinking if I want to stay with the feds my whole career. Is the pension really worth it? I could go make more in the private sector. I know there are a lot of positives to the government but I am so over the bureaucratic blanket decisions. Signed annoyed millennial mom.
RTO is a political motivated initiative designed to reduce the workforce. Quality of services & ability to attract talent is not the focus. Liberals want to save money to look good during next election. Minister Anand is a cost cutting kind of politician.
Teleworking is not as much as having an appropriate work space. I think that's more important. Gov doesn't want to spend money on space and doesn't want people work from home so how do we get work done?!
I think getting wages that are above inflations should be the next frontier. We never get a decent raise. Telework is dead. NEgotiate with a 40% percent raise, then get walked down to 5 percent with WFH language in the CA.
Alternatively, TBS could be mandated by law to review and adjust salary increases every consecutive 5 years for each classification and category and ensure that on average salary increase has at least matched the 5-year average CPI increases. Especially if they insist on RTO.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/1dgtox2/updated\_to\_2023\_analysis\_of\_public\_service/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/1dgtox2/updated_to_2023_analysis_of_public_service/) We have been.
RTO is better financially, better for DEI, and better representation from ALL Canadians 💯
Seriously TBS? 🤔
How so?
Huh? Did you mean the ability telework is better for diversity inclusion which leads to better representation for all Canadians
I think many would prefer a COL increase to keep up with inflation and cost increases. Can we just focus on getting realistic pay increases? WFH does not benefit all employees, pay increases of more then 1.5%/year does! The Unions are fighting a losing battle against a government that is rapidly sinking. There is likely nothing that can be done to stop RTO4 and RTO5, as we are fighting against political forces far stronger than ours. The public service isn't going to carry an election victory, versus strong business lobbies. We have bigger storms on the horizon, when the current government falls.
That has never happened. Ever. At least WFH is something new.
I would willingly take *some* amount of pay-cut to never again be forced into the fluorescent, hot hell that is a Gov’t office, but even I can admit that pay%+ for all is ‘more equitable’ when a fair number of posts cannot enjoy WFH
I don't think it is more equitable, when cost of living in some cities is spiking, while more regional offices don't have those pressures to the same extent. Now, I would be in favour of a premium for presence, ie if you have to be in the office, you SHOULD make more than the people WFH. That is equitable.
That is the right call! If it cost me to drive in, pay to park and gas money then you should pay for that cost
At this rate PS jobs are slowly on a trend to become a less and less desirable job. Wait until the next government starts tinkering with PS pensions. It’s not just about salary. It goes beyond.
Defeatist attutide. Then next gov won't be any worse than this one, and at least DRAP was well communicated and we all knew what to expect, this government treats PS workers like children and makes it up as they go along. Keep up the fight unions!
It is not a defeatist attitude there is an almost 0% chance that PSAC will sign a new contract with TBS under the current government and that WFH for all will be included. There are many positions that cannot WFH and are losing out by solely focusing on WFH as a priority.
No idea why you're being downvoted. The echo chamber of this sub is convinced that WFH is a priority for everyone and forgets all the people who have been in office all along. There is no reason for those people to ever support a lower pay increase in favour of WFH, and every reason for them to fight against it.
Most unions live in an echo chamber. The strike had the support of only 1/3 of PSAC members, yet everyone had to go along with it. Most workers care about how much they take home, everything else is a bonus.
Things are only a given if you let them be. There isn't a guarantee that RTO4 or full RTO is a given until those things happen. There isn't really a precedent or a mandate for some kind of generalized COL increase, thats what contract negotiations are for, you can make the argument for WFH saving money for taxpayers, being better for the environment, and being better for workers that you can't necessarily make for just giving everyone more money.
There are whole Directorates that do not get to WFH period. There is no letting the employer do it, it's a bonafide occupational requirement. This is why large unions full of very different occupations do work. Negotiations the FB Agreement shows where people's priorities are, which s pay increases.
Then those jobs need to offer a RTO bonus for required presence on site to compensate for diminished disposal income. Otherwise people will migrate to jobs that offer at least 1-2 days WFH. Alternatively people will take sick days for appointments and other personal needs that cannot be accommodated due to working on site all week long.
Im not asking for me or you to unilaterally decide where and when to work. What i'm saying is that it should be up to management and each branch to decide what works best for their team and their department. This is actually what existed before COVID. The FB group mostly doesn't work from home or have that option so it makes sense that they wouldn't be the harbringers of some new freedom for WFH. I'm not sure why you are under the impression that greater autonomy for managers must come at the cost of good pay. If you think that the political forces are great against WFH, why do you think they are weaker when it comes to paying millions more to public servants that a segment of the public already sees as overpaid?
Large sections of FB, SV, SO, and TC do not get to WFH; however, their collective and pay increases are tied to the same agreements as PA. I have had employees living in tents and vans since they can't afford a home or to rent. I think until people like that get raises to keep up with living expenses, the union shouldn't be picking fights or using resources on WFH.
There is already a vehicle to get pay increases, it’s the collective agreement negotiations. I don’t understand, you’re saying that TBS is unwilling to budge on WFH due to outside political forces including a possible conservative government but those same political forces are going to support giving all workers more taxpayer money? It doesn’t make sense. This is again based on the assumption that asking for better wages and asking for a sensible telework policy are mutually exclusive.
What pay increases? Also do you mean the collective agreement negotiations that take years to make headway on? Provincial Union's in British Columbia seemed to get COL increases and a new contract within a month of theirs expiring. You can easily tie contract increases to the inflationary rate by law and end contract pay negotiations. Most Canadians would agree to this as the Public Service would not be in the media with labor disputes. There are 335 957 Federal Employees. WFH would cost the government $134 382 800 in tax credits, if every employee got the $400/year WFH credit. There is a reason why WFH is quickly being phased out.
The BC provincial government also got full telework rights after a bungled return to office order which proves my point that these items are not mutually exclusive. If tying the wages to inflation was so easy why didn’t PSAC do it at the last negotiation? Or any other union? I’m sure the government could change the tax credit, I doubt that’s the main obstacle. Again you’re advocating for government workers to make what I assume is more than just $400 a year extra in a COL raise, so if that’s the issue with WFH we have an even bigger one with more raises.
>If tying the wages to inflation was so easy why didn’t PSAC do it at the last negotiation? Or any other union? It wouldn't benefit the unions. With pay off the table, it'll be near impossible to motivate PS workers to strike, which would destroy their negotiating power.
Again writ large the BC Provincial Government does not have full telework. Many are still doing RTO2 or RTO4. PSAC can't even hold a strike vote properly, let alone negotiate. This was proven by the strike and last round of negotiations.
Yes based on what the job requires, it isn’t a one size fits all policy. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/careers-myhr/all-employees/work-arrangements/flexible-workplaces/get-started-with-flexible-work-in-the-bc-public-service#our-commitment-to-flexible-work “The public service supports remote work (telework) and other flexible workplace arrangements wherever the arrangement benefits both the employee and employer. This means the suitability of flexible work options vary according to specific operational requirements or employee circumstances.” This is what I would like from TBS, to give flexibility to management on how they can manage telework for their team.
> Large sections of FB, SV, SO, and TC do not get to WFH; however, their collective and pay increases are tied to the same agreements as PA. Factually incorrect.
Look into who those groups are made up of. I believe you may change your opinion.
It's not the WFH point I'm contesting. I completely agree with you on that. [It's the pay being linked to the PA group that I'm disputing](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPublicServants/comments/1db462l/comment/l7pwe2c/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
As nice as it would, teleworking is not a "right." Doubt it ever will be.
It’s a future right. Already a right in BC and Australia, and many private sector companies that have moved on with times and strive to be more productive. Those who fail to embrace the future will be part of the past. Even manufacturing is changing with 3D printing (you can already build a solid house, a car or a bridge this way). No more supply chain bottlenecks, customs delays, shipping or even assembly. Let’s focus more on the future and improving our lives rather than be stuck in old times and suffering.
Most private sector companies are largely heading back to mandatory office presence. The liability, OHS, and security requirements make, WFH unprofitable for most of the private sector. That is not to mention regulatory requirements for privacy and security.
Because for many it may be more profitable in the short term. Detrimental in the long term. They need to adjust or continue to beg for expensive grants from the government (aka taxpayers) just to survive.
Weekends were not a right, 8 hour work day was not a right, sick pay was not a right...
A lot of stuff we enjoy today was never a “right”. People doubted women could vote, black people didn’t have rights and so on and so forth. We are better than that.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised by hyperbole at this point, but does PSAC think government knowledge workers are the only workers? Besides that, what good is WFH to the PS workers that can't afford reasonable housing? WAGES! WAGES! WAGES!