Public Servants Should Resist Return-to-Office Mandates Amid Transit Woes
In an unprecedented stance, columnist Brigitte Pellerin has called on public servants to resist the federal government's return-to-office mandate, citing systemic failures in Ottawa's public transit system and logistical impracticalities. The controversial policy, set to take effect in July, requires federal employees to work from their cubicles four days per week, despite years of successful remote work during the pandemic.
The Transit Crisis and Logistical Nightmares
The article highlights the profound unreliability of OC Transpo, Ottawa's public transit system, as a primary reason to oppose the mandate. With frequent bus cancellations and inadequate light rail service, commuting downtown has become an exercise in frustration. Pellerin describes the situation as "frog-crawling" rather than marching back to offices, emphasizing that employees will waste up to two hours daily on unreliable transportation.
Compounding the transit issues are severe logistical challenges. Downtown Ottawa lacks sufficient parking to accommodate thousands of additional vehicles, and widespread construction further impedes traffic flow. Moreover, many government offices were reconfigured during the pandemic to support remote work, leaving insufficient desk space for a full-scale return.
Questioning the Purpose and Impact
"What exactly is the purpose of this mandate? What problem is it the solution to?" Pellerin asks pointedly. She argues that there is little evidence that forced office returns improve productivity or service quality for Canadians. Instead, the mandate appears to be an arbitrary exercise of employer authority that creates large-scale misery without tangible benefits.
The impact extends beyond federal public servants to include employees of national associations and non-profit organizations in Ottawa, whose employers often follow government lead. This creates a ripple effect of unnecessary disruption across the capital's workforce.
Political Opposition and Gender Considerations
The mandate has sparked unusual political dissent, with Liberal MP Bruce Fanjoy publicly opposing his own government's policy. Representing Carleton riding—home to many public servants—Fanjoy cites three key objections:
- It increases government operating costs without addressing affordability or environmental concerns
- There is minimal evidence of productivity or service improvement
- It undermines work-life balance for public servants
Pellerin emphasizes that work-life balance concerns disproportionately affect women, though the issue impacts all genders. She questions why flexibility shouldn't be maintained when employees have demonstrated their ability to perform effectively remotely.
The Case for Continued Flexibility
The article notes that employees who prefer office work are already there, as are those whose jobs require physical presence. Those still working remotely generally do so by choice and have proven their effectiveness. Pellerin concludes that until Ottawa develops a fully functional transit system, the return-to-office mandate represents poor policy that should be resisted by both public servants and their representatives.
