If it really is going to be back to the office but not back to the office as most employers and employees knew it pre-pandemic, then far more will have to change than work schedules and the mix of in-office and at-home hours.
The pandemic has changed everything almost overnight, but traditional workplaces are not geared up to change everything overnight. Neither are laws governing how those workplaces operate.
The pre-pandemic number of employees who worked from home more than they worked at the office ranged around 10%. Sixteen months later, that percentage is 50 or higher.
In his Future Workforce Report posted on the Social Science Research Network last December, economist Adam Ozimek estimated that 56.8% of Americans were still working from home at least some of the time, and he predicted that the number of remote workers will double in the next five years.
The percentages in Canada will likely be similar – not just because employees appreciate remote work’s flexibility, but also because remote work arrangements have been more productive than many employers feared they would be.
But while many employees and employers might be on board with post-vaccination-economy working arrangements, the labour laws that govern their relationship are not. The Fraser Institute points out in a recently released research paper that many of Canada’s labour laws are not remote-work friendly. It points, for example, to employment standards legislation governing such things as hours of work, overtime and workers’ compensation, all of which are difficult to apply and administer when some or all of an employee’s work is done at home.
But rather than extend legislation to further complicate remote work arrangements, the Fraser Institute argues for removing barriers that inhibit working from home and by extension erode the efficiencies it can provide employers and employees.
That is prudent, because flexibility, efficiency and agility will separate winners from losers in the post-pandemic economy.
