Neil Malik
Are government return-to-office mandates worth the fuss?
Olena Hromova / Shutterstock
The Topline
- The Ontario government has ordered provincial public servants back to the office full time as of this week
- Alberta implemented similar return-to-office (RTO) requirements for its public service starting in February to "strengthen collaboration, accountability and service delivery for Albertans," a spokesperson for the Alberta government told the Canadian Press
- The B.C. government, on the other hand, is opting instead to keep flexible hybrid arrangements
Switch sides,
back and forth
For innovation's sake
If office life is the company’s engine, it appears senior executives are done idling.
In KPMG’s 2024 CEO survey , 83 per cent of Canadian executives said they expect a full return to office within three years. When those with the power to issue the directive are saying they expect it to happen, well, you know where this is headed.
Supporters frame RTO as essential to both employee and organizational growth alike. TD Bank said in a memo to employees that working in person helps collaboration, decision-making, learning and outcomes, as well as aids in career development and company culture.
And those employers might have a point, according to Jelena Zikic, a professor at the School of Human Resources Management at York University. “We know there is some data to support this rationale,” Zikic told CTV News.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford, meanwhile, described it as something you just gotta do “like every other normal citizen.” He went on to say “You know, you go out there, and you show up five days a week.”
There’s a belief that says breakthroughs tend to come from accidents – overheard conversations, hallway debates, and spontaneous whiteboard sessions. Pixar, the creator of some of the highest-grossing films of all time, was a pioneer in designing its offices to maximise inadvertent encounters.
There’s also the value of job shadowing. Young workers can learn how to handle a crisis or a difficult client by watching more experienced colleagues in action. By missing out on that during the early years, it risks setting young workers up for challenges later on when experience is called upon.
Then there’s the urban angle. Empty towers hurt small businesses and municipal tax bases. Governments argue that RTO isn’t just about work culture – it’s about preventing economic decay in city centres built around office density.
And finally, the unspoken truth: trust. Some managers simply don’t believe people are working from home. RTO shrinks the gap between perceived and actual productivity — and perception, in corporate life, often is reality. That matters for promotions, pay, and recognizing the most valuable workers.
A waste of everyone’s time
The pandemic taught us, if nothing else, that remote work is viable.
When COVID-19 hit, office workers quickly adapted to a new normal of staying home by using technology to keep productivity alive. Meetings still took place. Presentations and spreadsheets were still made. Code was still written.
At the same time, employees had more time with their families, saved money on commuting, and allowed many to move farther away in search of more affordable housing.
If there’s enough evidence now to suggest office work can be done remotely, why are employers fixing something that’s not broken? As reported in The Walrus, it’s about control , if not simply nostalgia for a bygone era, and/or propping up commercial real estate.
Multiple studies show RTO mandates are associated with lower job satisfaction and higher turnover, not performance gains.
Ontario unions are, obviously, not happy. “A blanket mandate for five days a week, it makes no sense in this day and age,” JP Hornick, president of the Ontario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU) told CBC News. “The return to work seems to be based on pressure from perhaps corporate landlords from other municipalities.”
As for the “save downtown” argument, that’s not the worker’s problem to solve. Employees didn’t cause the high office rents, or bet finances on perpetual office demand. Asking workers to absorb the cost of those decisions is entirely unfair.
The reality is simple: work has changed. People have built lives around new patterns that function, in many cases, better than the old ones. Forcing a rollback nearly six years later isn’t innovation. It simply makes the C-suite feel better.
