A ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to RTO ‘doesn't work and doesn't make sense’
The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) applauded a recent federal labour board decision that ordered a government department to pay $28,000 in damages and back pay for "recklessly" denying a disability accommodation request in favour of a blanket return-to-office (RTO) policy.
The decision from the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board (FPSLREB) found Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) discriminated against a computer engineer diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) when it denied his request to continue working remotely, according to a report from Ottawa Citizen.
PIPSC – which represents more than 80,000 federal public sector professionals – said the ruling confirms that "the duty to accommodate takes precedence over return-to-office requirements."
In July, the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) said the Bank of Canada's handling of remote work during the strike contradicts the rationale behind the Treasury Board's four-day in-office mandate,
Board finds employer ignored medical evidence
Board member Christopher Rootham – who authored the decision – wrote that ISED "acted recklessly in failing to properly accommodate the grievor's disability," awarding $10,000 in damages for that conduct plus $18,000 for pain and suffering, on top of full back pay dating to May 2024, the Ottawa Citizen reported.
Rootham found no evidence ISED had read letters from the employee's therapist and psychiatrist warning that a forced return to the office could trigger a relapse, according to the report. An internal ISED committee had instead proposed in-office measures such as a noise-cancelling headset and an isolated cubicle, despite a psychiatrist's assessment that the employee was fit to work only remotely.
The employee, whose identity was withheld by the board, had been working from his hometown outside Ottawa since the pandemic, in part to help care for his autistic brother. Rootham wrote that ISED "ignored the cognitive dissonance of its approach" by treating telework as a last resort while proposing to isolate the employee in the office instead, according to the report.
Union calls for negotiated telework policy
PIPSC said the case reinforces its long-standing position that a "one-size-fits-all" approach to RTO "doesn't work and doesn't make sense," pointing to member reports of overcrowded workspaces and inadequate workstations tied to the policy.
The union said it supports a "presence with purpose" principle, under which employees would attend the office only when operational needs justify it, rather than under fixed mandatory schedules.
PIPSC is calling on the federal government to work with unions on what it called a "fair, practical, and evidence-based approach to telework and workplace presence," rather than continuing to apply RTO rules uniformly across departments.
The federal government moved to a four-days-in-the-office per week set up in July, but the move had been met with criticism and difficulties.
