Second Federal Public Service Union Files Unfair Labour Practice Complaint Over Four-Day Office Mandate
The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) has become the second major federal public-service union to file an unfair labour practice complaint against the federal government's controversial four-day in-office mandate. This action follows a similar complaint filed earlier by the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), creating significant labor tension within the federal public service.
Complaint Targets Treasury Board During Active Bargaining
The complaint has been formally submitted to the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board and specifically challenges the Treasury Board Secretariat's decision to announce the return-to-office directive while actively engaged in collective bargaining with PIPSC. The Treasury Board Secretariat serves as the primary department responsible for managing human resources and most contract negotiations across the federal public service.
Unfair labour practice complaints represent serious legal challenges that question unilateral changes to wages, benefits, or working conditions during active bargaining periods. PIPSC has additionally filed a separate policy grievance against the four-day office order, demonstrating the union's comprehensive legal strategy to combat the government's workplace directive.
Timeline and Implementation of Office Mandate
On February 5, the federal government announced that public servants would be required to return to physical offices four days per week beginning in July, while executives face an even stricter mandate requiring five days in-office starting in May. This represents a significant escalation from previous post-pandemic arrangements, where public servants had been working three days in-office (four for executives) since September 2024.
"The government is required to bargain in good faith," emphasized PIPSC President Sean O'Reilly in an official news release. "Imposing significant workplace changes in the middle of negotiations, without proper consultation, fundamentally undermines that obligation and violates the rights of our members."
Growing Union Opposition and Legal Context
In the weeks following the controversial announcement, multiple public service unions have strongly criticized the federal government's decision. Union leaders have particularly condemned what they describe as a complete lack of meaningful consultation and the problematic timing of the directive, which arrived shortly after thousands of public servants received notices about potential job losses as part of the government's multi-year spending review.
Public-service unions are also pointing to a recent labour board decision that established individual remote-work rights as legitimate subjects for collective bargaining negotiations. This legal precedent directly contradicts the federal government's position that working from home or in-office arrangements should remain exclusively within management's discretion.
Broader Union Response and Engagement Concerns
The Canadian Association of Professional Employees (CAPE) has taken a more drastic approach by completely rejecting further consultation meetings with the federal government regarding the return-to-office order. In contrast, PIPSC has indicated it will continue attending these sessions, though President O'Reilly described them as "very frustrating" and predominantly one-sided in an interview with the Ottawa Citizen.
"They're asking for substantial information from us, but they're not providing meaningful information during these engagement sessions," O'Reilly explained. He noted that PIPSC is conducting "internal discussions" about whether continued participation in these meetings remains valuable or if the union should eventually withdraw from the process entirely.
Practical Concerns and Negotiation Objectives
O'Reilly highlighted several practical concerns regarding the four-day mandate, including questions about adequate office space capacity and the reality that many public servants who physically report to offices still spend most of their workdays participating in virtual meetings with colleagues. This raises questions about the actual purpose and effectiveness of mandatory in-office requirements.
PIPSC's primary negotiation objectives include establishing formal remote work provisions and ensuring that any required in-office days genuinely serve practical purposes for both public servants and Canadian citizens. "We've advocated since day one for presence with purpose," O'Reilly stated, emphasizing the union's commitment to creating reasonable, effective workplace arrangements through proper collective bargaining processes.
