Canada’s Public Sector Fighting For Data-Driven RTO Decisions

• With their own statistics showing a rise in productivity and members voicing a strong preference for remote work, CAPE and other unions feel RTO mandates lack a rational, evidence-based foundation.
• A legal challenge demands that the federal government justify its RTO mandate with concrete evidence. 
• The unions argue that policy changes of this magnitude should be grounded in transparent, data-driven decision-making rather than subjective judgments about productivity and employee well-being.

In recent months, the push for Canada’s federal employees to return to office (RTO) has sparked vigorous debate across Canada’s public service sector. 

This tension, according to Nathan Prier, President of the Canadian Association of Professional Employees (CAPE), is fueled by a troubling lack of data. With a policy shift toward increased in-office mandates, Prier questions the evidence—or lack thereof—behind the government’s approach to RTO. 

Prier unpacked his perspective on the issues CAPE members face, from productivity and recruitment to workplace flexibility and evolving labor expectations, in our recent conversation,.

A Policy Without Proof: Where’s the Evidence?

One of the most striking aspects of the federal government’s RTO push is the lack of productivity data to support the need for such a policy shift. 

“When the demand for office workers to return to the office emerged,” Prier explained, “there was a noticeable absence of productivity studies or baseline data to justify this demand.” 

He noted that the argument for a return to “normalcy” post-pandemic felt disconnected from the reality CAPE members had experienced. Many found they could work effectively from home, and CAPE’s internal surveys indicated no measurable decline in productivity.

Prier pointed out that in prior negotiations, unions had anticipated a collaborative approach toward defining the future of work, yet the government’s rollout of an RTO policy came with no formal consultation. 

According to Prier, “This decision feels arbitrary and unsupported, as if the government moved from data-driven to decision-driven practices.” 

With their own statistics showing a rise in productivity and CAPE members voicing a strong preference for remote work, CAPE and other unions feel RTO mandates lack a rational, evidence-based foundation.

The Reality on the Ground: Deteriorated Office Conditions

Returning to the office has presented additional challenges as employees encountered conditions far from ideal. 

Many offices had been partially downsized, with previously assigned desks now repurposed for “hoteling” or “hot desking,” where employees must reserve a workstation daily. 

For workers accustomed to dedicated spaces pre-pandemic, these changes came as an unwelcome surprise. 

Furthermore, amenities like lockers were often unavailable, forcing employees to transport their laptops and other equipment to and from the office.

This dynamic, compounded by a strained transit system in major urban areas like the National Capital Region, has left employees frustrated and questioning the purpose behind their commute. 

Prier observed, “Our members, especially those involved in policy analysis and translation, are essentially working remotely but doing so from an office with worse conditions than before.” 

Employees face increased costs for transportation and meals without any improvement in their productivity or job satisfaction.

Missed Opportunities in Workforce Optimization and Recruitment

The remote work model allowed CAPE members to widen their recruitment pool, with Prier’s own experience offering a compelling example. 

During the pandemic, federal departments such as Innovation, Science, and Economic Development Canada could hire top candidates from across the country, including highly talented graduates who might not have relocated to Ottawa. 

“Many of these new hires are still working remotely because their managers don’t want to risk losing top talent,” Prier shared. “We realized remote work helps us tap into a deeper talent pool, which not only benefits individual departments but also supports diversity and inclusion goals.”

For some employees, especially those from indigenous communities or those with caregiving responsibilities, remote work offers a chance to remain close to their communities or family members.

This is not just a matter of convenience, Prier added, but a critical factor in recruitment and retention. By prioritizing flexibility, the federal government could address diverse needs that might otherwise go unmet in a traditional office environment.

This is not just a matter of convenience, Prier added, but a critical factor in recruitment and retention.

An Employer Out of Step with Broader Trends

CAPE and other unions have pointed to global examples like Australia and the United Kingdom, where governments are shifting toward policies that respect employees’ preferences for remote work. 

In Australia, for example, the default position is remote work unless a manager can provide a compelling, evidence-based reason for in-office attendance. 

“In other jurisdictions, remote work policies reflect a modern approach to employee well-being, efficiency, and urban planning. Yet here in Canada, we are being asked to conform to a policy that feels like a relic of the past,” Prier commented.

Additionally, Prier noted that provincial and municipal public sector unions in Canada, as well as public sectors globally, are beginning to explore flexible and remote work rights as part of their collective bargaining. 

This evolving trend challenges the federal government’s inflexible stance, suggesting the possibility of broader reforms that could align Canada’s public sector policies with international best practices.

Challenges in Managerial Training and Adaptation

While some local governments have taken steps to train managers on hybrid work management, the federal government has reportedly fallen short in this area. 

According to Prier, CAPE’s members, some of whom are managers, have not received any specific training on how to effectively manage remote or hybrid teams. 

Prier mentioned that this lack of training was indicative of a broader problem within the federal approach to hybrid work. 

“The government appears focused on bringing people back into offices without equipping managers to handle the unique dynamics of hybrid or remote work environments.”

In Prier’s view, providing training to managers would not only support a smoother transition for employees but also help managers understand the potential benefits of a flexible work model. 

The absence of such training speaks to a lack of preparedness and a missed opportunity to optimize the hybrid model—a move that other governments and organizations around the world have embraced with demonstrated success.

Judicial Review: The Push for Accountability

The frustration felt by CAPE and other unions led to a judicial review initiated by the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC). This legal challenge demands that the federal government justify its RTO mandate with concrete evidence. 

Prier sees this review as a necessary step to address what he describes as a “bad faith exercise” in policy-making. 

“We expect the government to finally disclose whatever evidence they have or don’t have to support this decision,” he said. 

The unions argue that policy changes of this magnitude should be grounded in transparent, data-driven decision-making rather than subjective judgments about productivity and employee well-being.

Prier emphasized that CAPE, while not the primary plaintiff, has a vested interest in the outcome of this case and is closely coordinating with PSAC. 

“This is more than a labor issue; it’s a benchmark for the future of work in Canada’s public sector,” he stated.

“This is more than a labor issue; it’s a benchmark for the future of work in Canada’s public sector,“. 

The judicial review, if successful, could redefine how the government balances the needs of its employees with operational objectives, setting a precedent for data-backed policy decisions.

Conclusion: A Call for Evidence-Based Policy and Flexibility

Prier and CAPE members have seen the benefits of remote work firsthand, from increased productivity to a deeper talent pool and enhanced employee well-being. 

The RTO mandate, in contrast, appears poorly aligned with these insights and, notably, lacks the data needed to justify a shift from flexible work to a more rigid in-office model.

As the judicial review unfolds, CAPE and other unions remain hopeful that this will force a comprehensive re-evaluation of federal workplace policies. 

This isn’t simply a matter of where public sector employees work but a larger conversation about the government’s accountability to its workforce and Canadian taxpayers. 

For CAPE members, the stakes are high: they are advocating not only for their own work-life balance and productivity but for a federal government that leads by example, embracing a future-oriented approach that meets the needs of Canada’s evolving workforce and society.