Federal Government & Union spar over returning to office

[Furniture]

It would be fun to ask this question, alot

I ask people that, in exactly the same tone and cadence weekly... I am lucky enough to work with people who get the reference.

 

[Halifax Tar]

It would be fun to ask this question, alot

I used to count socks. Now I'm in charge of the folks who count the socks.

 

[Cloud Cover]

You're on mute.

Please turn off your camera if you're not speaking.

Try the mute button on your headset, not in Teams.

Someone has a hot mic, please mute yourself.

Apparently today, in a London Ontario courtroom where a SCJ judge was reading out a verdict for a series of sexual exploitation and human trafficking offences, the session was on Zoom and “zoom bombed” with about 10 minutes of streaming from Pornhub, which the court room staff could not block with the meeting host seemingly locked out of her account.
Questions are being asked with a phone book and rubber hose …

 

[Remius]

Documents suggest federal government focused on public scrutiny over productivity when mandating return to office policy

Newly revealed documents suggest officials focused on public scrutiny in its decision to mandate workers back to the office, despite many workers reporting they feel more productive working from home.

ottawa.ctvnews.ca

I’m sure this is going to go over well for some lol.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Personally I think PSAC should encourage all their members to show up at the exact same time, log in at the same time and just overwhelm the offices and systems the government happily has cut back and not improved over the last 4 years.

 

[QV]

It's quite the situation.... where the employer has too many employees that it can't even provide office space for them all.

Maybe a game of musical chairs ensues... whomever is left standing gets a pink slip.

Would we even notice?

 

[Furniture]

It's quite the situation.... where the employer has too many employees that it can't even provide office space for them all.

Maybe a game of musical chairs ensues... whomever is left standing gets a pink slip.

Would we even notice?

Yes, because the people who actually do things are the ones who would be cut. The senior people have assigned work spaces, and would rig the game in their favour.

To achieve a smaller and more effective PS the rules and red tape need to be changed. Otherwise you're just making less people even less effective.

 

[Good2Golf]

The senior people have assigned work spaces, and would rig the game in their favour.

That could also include shaping enormous golden handshakes for them, leaving the new inexperienced public servants holding the ‘unproductive and worsening PS’ bag…

 

[childs56]

Personally I think PSAC should encourage all their members to show up at the exact same time, log in at the same time and just overwhelm the offices and systems the government happily has cut back and not improved over the last 4 years.

There is no reason why its members should not show up to work on time and be logged in (or attempting to log in) Once they get that out of the way on the issues and concerns, one can move forward with pushing working from home. The down side is the employer might actually fix the problems and then those people have to attend the work site daily. I doubt it.
I may come across as cold to many, but the employer dictates the employment. Time, place and pay. The employee signs the agreement, some times there are changes/ exceptions to the employment that are agreed to by both parties. But the employer can always resort back to the original terms within reason.
When that reason makes no sense, and is not workable, then the employees need to follow the terms of the agreement and literally hit them in the pocket book. File the applicable complaints as per their collective agreements, OH&S and labor board , failure to provide a proper work site. etc.

They way the union is fighting this I think is the wrong way, I doubt they will win going down the route they are going.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It's quite the situation.... where the employer has too many employees that it can't even provide office space for them all.

Maybe a game of musical chairs ensues... whomever is left standing gets a pink slip.

Would we even notice?

yes because it's always the people you want to get rid of succeed in dodging the axe, because their whole career is about saving their own skin and doing as little as possible work. The people working hard are to busy to notice the axe.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

There is no reason why its members should not show up to work on time and be logged in (or attempting to log in) Once they get that out of the way on the issues and concerns, one can move forward with pushing working from home. The down side is the employer might actually fix the problems and then those people have to attend the work site daily. I doubt it.
I may come across as cold to many, but the employer dictates the employment. Time, place and pay. The employee signs the agreement, some times there are changes/ exceptions to the employment that are agreed to by both parties. But the employer can always resort back to the original terms within reason.
When that reason makes no sense, and is not workable, then the employees need to follow the terms of the agreement and literally hit them in the pocket book. File the applicable complaints as per their collective agreements, OH&S and labor board , failure to provide a proper work site. etc.

They way the union is fighting this I think is the wrong way, I doubt they will win going down the route they are going.

Except the employer reduced the amount of office space on the assumption that a percentage were going to WFH. You are talking about an employer that FUBARED the payroll for the last 6 years and can't correct the policy mistakes that led to the current situation anytime soon.

 

[Remius]

The irony is that many departments were already moving to wfh options before COVID.

 

[Quirky]

This country is funny.

 

[Remius]

This country is funny.

Plenty of other not funny countries people can go to.

 

[childs56]

Except the employer reduced the amount of office space on the assumption that a percentage were going to WFH.

But they are now demanding people go to the office. So go, let it mess up so bad that they have to either fix it by opening more office space and support or allow WFH. Either way things get addressed better then they are now.

You are talking about an employer that FUBARED the payroll for the last 6 years and can't correct the policy mistakes that led to the current situation anytime soon.

it originally was not a policy mistake, it was a systems mistake. Which they tried to protect their own butts and made a few policies that made things worse.
Members that had pay issues should have been supported by their Unions better, they should have stood their ground and sued. But some let the system work for them which failed. Here we are, I have many friends who pay has not been fixed. A few who went to work else where because of the failure of the government to pay them correctly, then keep making basic mistakes.

 

[OldSolduer]

yes because it's always the people you want to get rid of succeed in dodging the axe, because their whole career is about saving their own skin and doing as little as possible work. The people working hard are to busy to notice the axe.

the guardhouse lawyer enters the chat:

THEY CAN'T DO THAT!!!

 

[Navy_Pete]

The crazy thing is they are continuing to reduce the office footprint even further, with no actual plan where people will go. My new section is full everyday, and that's with a number of people traveling or on leave, so expect we'll be overflowing soon. It's just weird.

 

[QV]

Personally I think PSAC should encourage all their members to show up at the exact same time, log in at the same time and just overwhelm the offices and systems the government happily has cut back and not improved over the last 4 years.

I'm all for following the rules explicitly until the system breaks. That is usually the only way to get rid of bad policy.

 

[brihard]

I'm all for following the rules explicitly until the system breaks. That is usually the only way to get rid of bad policy.

“Malicious compliance”. Sometimes it’s the only way to force a frigged up system to course correct.

 

[QV]

“Malicious compliance”. Sometimes it’s the only way to force a frigged up system to course correct.

Holy shit we agree on something.