The Official No Need To Start a New Thread, Thread

[Hondaracer]

Because most people have poor work ethic if they aren’t monitored?

Although honestly I feel more sympathy for you and your dog than the person with 2 kids crying about going back. It’s not your employers job to sort out your personal affairs.

[68style]

No it's definitely not... and even prior to this, there was an "unfair" swing of time off for people who elected to have kids / importance assigned to them somehow.

That said, the unmonitored thing is hit and miss. On one side of things, we are monitored... ie: we use MS Teams and we can't control our computer settings, so your online status is definitely monitored if you don't touch the keyboard or mouse every 5 minutes it's going to switch to "Away" and a manager is going to heat you up pretty quick. I'm sure you could devise some kind of fun solution to keep your mouse moving around or something, but anyone who goes to those extremes is going to do the same in an actual workplace too.

There are also a lot of ways to determine what workers are doing productivity wise by monitoring usage of shared MS Office applications and see when and where people updated things. We also use SAP and that is all logged and monitored. It comes down to whether your manager trusts you or not and wants to put the screws to anyone. It's definitely no free-for-all.

I personally feel like I get a lot more done and at a different pace... like sometimes I'll switch on the work computer at 10pm at night if I'm bored and go through stuff knowing nobody is going to be bothering me constantly on Teams etc.

I will say I might be a bit of an extreme example though, I do have like 1700hrs of sick leave built up so I've used basically no time off calling in sick and stuff, but I am aware of people who started around the same time I did that are at 0 hours.... so they've essentially been off almost a year more of time than I have lol

[underscore]

Originally Posted by Great68

I'm not sure what you mean by a difference between "never" and "suddenly"?

You don't have to be expecting to never go back into the office for suddenly having to go back to be inconvenient for you.

Originally Posted by Great68

They never had the right to expect permanent wfh, so any smart person would always expect they could be recalled at anytime, which could in fact be "suddenly", and should have prepared for that reality. Although come on, this isn't that "suddenly", only a moron doesn't look around and see other workplaces recalling workers over the last year and think that they'd be somehow immune to the same from happening in the near future.

That's pretty easy to say after it's already happened lol. Without being involved in their internal correspondence it's difficult to say what they should've expected. If things had gone the other way the people who were paying for nothing for the last 3 years would be getting called morons.

Originally Posted by Great68

The ones losing their mind are in here: https://www.reddit.com/r/VictoriaBC/..._to_office_in/

It's representative because a huge number of members on that forum are the government workers.

So not the link you originally posted. I only skimmed it but I don't see anyone losing their minds on Reddit either. Which is actually surprising, being Reddit and all.

Originally Posted by Great68

My work did actually move its office to a further location back in 2011. I wasn't annoyed or bitch about it at all actually, it was what it was.

So you're this upset that someone else is annoyed at it happening to them, but you weren't annoyed at all when it happened to you? Forgive me for not believing you.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by underscore

You don't have to be expecting to never go back into the office for suddenly having to go back to be inconvenient for you.

Life structure shouldn't have changed to become inconvenient to have to go back. I didn't change how I operated my life around the pandemic. I expected one day it would be over and things would be back to normal.

That's pretty easy to say after it's already happened lol. Without being involved in their internal correspondence it's difficult to say what they should've expected.

But this would be outlined in the collective agreement. Unless provisions were added in there, there would be no reason to expect otherwise.

So not the link you originally posted. I only skimmed it but I don't see anyone losing their minds on Reddit either. Which is actually surprising, being Reddit and all.

The link I posted is the subject of the Reddit thread, come on man. Lots of people in there claiming the only reason for back to office is to support local businesses downtown. That's just absurd.

So you're this upset that someone else is annoyed at it happening to them, but you weren't annoyed at all when it happened to you? Forgive me for not believing you.

Like I understand going back to the office can be a pain in the ass, and sucks, especially if you're not outward facing and just feel like you're warming a desk. So, make that a negotiation factor and put it into the next damned agreement. But right now to everyone else on the outside it looks like a kid throwing a temper tantrum.

And no, I was not annoyed at all. My drive while longer was better, parking was better, and the office itself was better

Just FYI, I'm not biased being a private sector worker myself. My wife is BC Gov

[underscore]

Originally Posted by Great68

Life structure shouldn't have changed to become inconvenient to have to go back.

Life structure changes for people either way. Kids didn't stop being born or parents growing older just because of the pandemic. Not everyone was changing based on things that were preexisting.

Originally Posted by Great68

But this would be outlined in the collective agreement. Unless provisions were added in there, there would be no reason to expect otherwise.

People are still going to form expectations based on what they're told to expect from future agreements though. Acting on it before it's on paper is presumptuous but that's not exclusive to people in the public section lol.

Originally Posted by Great68

The link I posted is the subject of the Reddit thread, come on man.

Right but you based your post on the comments posted in the Reddit thread, while posting a link just to the article. So it looked like you were commenting on the quotes in the article, not Reddit comments. This is hard to convey coherently so if what I'm saying doesn't make sense I'm not surprised.

Originally Posted by Great68

Lots of people in there claiming the only reason for back to office is to support local businesses downtown. That's just absurd.

Tbf that's not overly surprising when the article leads with that. If it's not for local businesses what's the reason for sending them back then?

Originally Posted by Great68

Like I understand going back to the office can be a pain in the ass, and sucks, especially if you're not outward facing and just feel like you're warming a desk. So, make that a negotiation factor and put it into the next damned agreement.

You could say the same going the other way too. I know they don't have to wait until the next agreement but it seems like it would be an easy way to win favour with the union by not making people bounce back and forth between setups needlessly. Upsetting 86% of your workforce generally seems like a bad idea.

Originally Posted by Great68

But right now to everyone else on the outside it looks like a kid throwing a temper tantrum.

That's how I view mandating people back to an office "because I said so".

edit: fuck me that's a lot of split quotes.

[westopher]

The thing is WFH was never some agreement or contract negotiation that the employer is going back on. It was to keep people from getting sick or losing their jobs, or both. It was done in good faith to protect people and never should have gone on this long, at least in this case.

[EvoFire]

This whole thing is a bit of a pickle really.

This work thing, an unwritten expectation is that an employee expects the employer to provide a space for work. When the pandemic happened the employer no longer upheld their side, and the employee had to deal with it themselves.
A lot of them had to move farther away to afford a home with the right mixture of price and space to be able to work properly. Now on a whim the employers want to bring them back into the office.
To say that I have more sympathy for the employees I think is fair. A lot of these decisions were made a year into the pandemic with no end in sight and we are closing in on 3 years and all of sudden, come back to the office. No option.

/rambling

[68style]

Originally Posted by westopher

The thing is WFH was never some agreement or contract negotiation that the employer is going back on. It was to keep people from getting sick or losing their jobs, or both. It was done in good faith to protect people and never should have gone on this long, at least in this case.

This is partially true. It was done as a way to not spread the virus, and done very hastily at that. When the pandemic started, I had no laptoip, just a desktop, and they very quickly had to find a laptop for me... it was up tp me to figure out a desk and chair and whatever else at home. I received no compensation for this, though some agencies were nicer ie: RCMP I believe reimbursed people up to $400-500 for various expenditures... my agency did nothing whatsoever. Also, I am now the one providing my own internet and phone for work purposes too. The government is saving a lot of money from this and the burden was placed on employees to ensure they could still work.

That said, at the same time as the pandemic happened, we were in the middle of a review to convert to a hotel system for desks where you no longer have a desk and you sign in for the day and take a laptop out and get a space given to you. This is called Office 2.0 I believe in the Real Property circles... ergo the government was very seriously heading toward a direction where they are reducing their footprint office wise. Transport Canada has all but closed all its offices now and is entirely remote working save for a few locations.

I can remember meetings as long as 4 years ago where the CFO of my organization said they wanted us to get laptops and work from home 1-2 days a week due to not enough desk space as well, so plans were definitely in place prior to the pandemic... the pandemic just hastened them.

[whitev70r]

Actually, I think 2-3 days a week is just perfect hybrid blend. I love WFH but I go batty if I don't see anyone for like 5 days straight (other than family), I've gained weight (kitchen is too tempting) so 2-3 days at office and the other 2 or 3 days at home is the perfect blend. WFH pluses - save time commuting, save gas, can work in your PJ's ... even if company doesn't mandate a couple of days in the office, I think I would do that on my own.

[whitev70r]

nvm

[donk.]

Originally Posted by 68style

. Also, I am now the one providing my own internet and phone for work purposes too. The government is saving a lot of money from this and the burden was placed on employees to ensure they could still work.

Considering most people drive 30 mins to and from work, not to mention alot of them 1hr, the amount of gas, maintenance and depreciation saved is huge
100$ a week in gas, say 20$ for maintenance, 40$ for depreciation.
160$/week saved in car expenses
If you were really smart, and got rid of one of the two cars for a household, the savings would be massive. This is what one of my friends did, they only have one car even until this day

The 100$ extra in internet and 50$ for a phone plan is peanuts vs car expenses, you needed faster internet and a landline? I figure most people would just keep using their existing internet and phone, most people I know have unlimited calling and unlimited internet before the pandemic

I wouldn't call it a burden, I would call it a blessing that you had the ability to still be employed. Many people locally that lost their job from the pandemic, would have begged for a job at the start of the pandemic

People in the tourism industry, globally, got raped, back to rice farming and agriculture for them

Cue first world problems

[whitev70r]

Reports came out today that the recommended amount of alcohol consumption should be 2 or less drinks per week. Don't shoot the messenger

[MarkyMark]

Can't wait till there's a picture of someone on their deathbed saying don't drink on my bottle of whisky

[underscore]

Originally Posted by westopher

never should have gone on this long, at least in this case.

Why not?

[GLOW]

which one of you on here lost their car?

Street racers crash both their BMWs after being clocked at 145 km/h in 80 zone in North Vancouver

[westopher]

Originally Posted by underscore

Why not?

because it was to prevent transmission of an illness they thought was going to kill everyone on the planet at some point, then we all got vaccinated. If we can travel across the world on a vacation, we can go to work.

[donk.]

Originally Posted by westopher

because it was to prevent transmission of an illness they thought was going to kill everyone on the planet at some point, then we all got vaccinated. If we can travel across the world on a vacation, we can go to work.

Only the antivaxxers thought everyone would die, and that's because of vaccines

[ilovebacon]

YouTube

he dissed Trudeau and now they are after him

[underscore]

Originally Posted by westopher

because it was to prevent transmission of an illness they thought was going to kill everyone on the planet at some point, then we all got vaccinated. If we can travel across the world on a vacation, we can go to work.

People are going to work, they just aren't being forced to commute to do it. "because I don't like it" isn't a justification to mandate it.

No offense but some of you guys just sound salty that your jobs aren't WFH. Be honest about the reason you're supporting a mandate that has a negative impact on other people and zero impact on you.

[westopher]

You can't honestly believe that wfh is good for business though. Are some people more efficient? I'm sure they are. Are most? I'm sure we can quantify that's a no. Private sector can do what they want without me caring. These are government employees, so really, everyone in here has a right to an opinion on it.

[RiceIntegraRS]

I thought WFH benefitted both sides. The company no longer needed to provide big office space for there employees to work out of and the employees.... well they have a shitload of benefits. Honestly ive never worked in an office where it was possible to WFH but isnt there a supervisor or manager that asks the employee "What the fuck did u do all day?" If shit wasnt getting done. Or is it because its a government job where this kind of logic is thrown out the window.

[westopher]

The thing about WFH is for it to work properly the systems that create the benefit need to be in place. Everything from equipment budgets for the people, standards of productivity, communication lines and expectations for such, reduction in office space and leases. It can't be just "ok go home and do your shit."
It's going to be a long process for some places and a short process for others with more modern practices already in place for the businesses.
We all have seen how poorly that the public sector adapts to changing their systems and practices.

[EvoFire]

How poorly they adapt and change doesn't mean they can get away with not doing it. There are sectors of gov't work that honestly would benefit from WFH.

[68style]

Does part of what you're against come from the fact that you're in an industry where it would be impossible to work from home? Your wife is as well.

That is definitely a problem for sure. If everyone was working from home and I'm the one out there at the hospital caring for their sick or I'm making their food or showing up to fix something at their house... I'd be pretty bitter about that in some ways.

I'm not sure what the answer is for that... but if a job doesn't require any customer service then I'm not sure what the rationale is besides the "you automatically don't work as had when you're at home" argument.. which is like saying that nobody does anything right unless they're being watched... which is kinda the opposite of what I think you normally would believe in society wise.

And as donk mentioned above, I'm aware that some people lost jobs during the pandemic, I have friends that did too, so I'm not complaining about the expenses but just saying it wasn't free or without cost. I did it happily, but I was answering a question. I walked/took the Canada Line every day myself, so fuel wasn't a factor, but that's still like $7-8 a day of train costs I didn't have to pay anymore. And I got 2 hours back in my life every day that I didn't have before. Sort of. Sometimes being at home all the time isn't a great thing either -- it can lead to depression and antisocial behaviours.

MOST agencies have gone back to work. Mine goes in 1 day a week right now and it will be 2 days a week starting in March. Some are not going back, but they're in a minority.

There are pros and cons to every workplace and type of work. I can be envious of people who create things... like art or food. I can be envious of people who work for big corporations or private companies that get a Christmas bonus or big parties for holiday seasons with prizes and stuff. I can be envious of more dynamic workplaces that reward people for hard work rather than being in a system where no matter how had you work you get paid the same as the person next to you. I can be envious of places outside the government that have much more upward mobility or aren't so bottom heavy -- government tends to pay a lot for stupid jobs and not enough for complicated ones. I could probably make twice as much as I am right now in private doing the same type of work. And that's where I'm headed fairly soon actually... I put in my time and I've had enough, time for a change.

But the thing is it's a choice, I mean if anyone wants a government job and thinks it's all that, jobs.gc.ca is your church and for me I see there are different things I want, it's up to me to change it.

[Badhobz]

dont give up your GOLDEN RICE BOWL (golden bread bowl?. golden bread box?) in pursuit of work satisfaction. its still work at the end of the day and you'll get sick of that new thing sooner or later. Id stick it out for the great govt pension and the "who gives a shit" relaxed attitudes.

Private sector is brutal. They can fire you without cause, they can demote you, they can demean you, etc etc. Yes the money might be better, but the work/life balance is often a lot worse. Job security and satisfaction is also quite low.

That being said, i did give a similar remark to Dark when he wanted to switch jobs and now he's doing great. so i should probably shut my damn yap.