Originally published in the Ottawa Citizen on September 19, 2024 in English.
In 2020, the federal public sector showcased an extraordinary level of adaptability and efficiency through the sudden and mass adoption of remote work. It took a minute, but it worked. In the years since, federal employees have achieved remarkable success and have been able to roll out large national programs at a record pace to ensure Canadians continue to receive the support they need.
We had nearly two years before the initial return-to-office order to learn which jobs worked fine remotely, and which actually required an in-person presence. Remote work has not only allowed essential services to continue without interruption but also led to significant improvements in employee satisfaction, which is key to productivity. Statistics Canada’s own data shows that productivity has consistently increased since 2021, and through an access to information request, the Public Service Alliance of Canada found internal emails from Treasury Board officials in agreement that there had been no drop in productivity.
Yet, despite this backdrop of innovation and accomplishment, it seems that the federal government has lost interest in evidence to make critical decisions with massive impacts on the public purse. What else could explain ignoring the past five years of success by ordering thousands of non-frontline employees to work from an office that is now more ill-equipped than before the pandemic and totally unfit to meet the needs of workers? Never mind the traffic mayhem resulting from forcing thousands more people onto roads unnecessarily.
Even more puzzling, Treasury Board President Anita Anand has announced that a new task force will be studying public sector productivity, implying in a recent Ottawa Citizen interview that it was in decline along with private sector productivity. We must ask – why, minister, after having already made the decision to force in-office presence, are you now doing the initial productivity studies that might have informed that decision? It is hard to imagine that any study done now will yield useful results, as no baseline study was completed while employees were working remotely fulltime – and their productivity working at home compared to in the office will not even be considered.
What can we realistically expect from a study that assesses employee productivity without looking at the biggest factor: remote work vs. in-office presence? Federal employees are consistent in stating that remote work flexibility improves their productivity and working in an office building negatively impacts it – especially considering that today’s federal office buildings do not even meet the most basic standards.
Minister Anand says she plans to engage with unions around this study, but her track record suggests the exact opposite. After all, if she had worked with us before unilaterally announcing this mandate, we wouldn’t be in the mess we now find ourselves in.
At this point in time, we would like to see the minister get back to the objectives laid out in her mandate letter, specifically: “to strengthen and modernize the Public Service for the twenty-first century by bringing forward a coherent and coordinated plan for the future of work within the Public Service, including developing flexible and equitable working arrangements.” It would surely be more ‘productive’ for the Treasury Board and the Privy Council to focus on how to meet the needs of today and tomorrow.
A stronger, modernized public sector makes remote work flexibility a necessity. That is the reality of the 21st century and federal public sector employees across the country are ready to embrace it.
Nathan Prier
President, Canadian Association of Professional Employees
