David A
Senior Member
Yes. I don't know exactly how it happened, but in a decade or so we seem to have went from a city brimming with confidence to someone who can't even be bothered to get out bed.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
policyenthusiast
Active Member
I will continue to blame remote work with no evidence whatsoever.
thommyjo
Senior Member
A great spot for tactical urban gardening!
Buy a little fence for the perimeter. Get some soil in there. Plant some hardy perennials!
We need a boulevard gardening volunteer program like Vancouver has. Much of their west end is planted and cared for by residents. Almost like community gardens, but for non edible plants.
Some small grants/resources to help provide dirt/tools/plants would be cool!
policyenthusiast
Active Member
The City offers up to 750$ worth of graffiti removal per land title in the City, per year. For businesses and residential properties.
https://www.edmonton.ca/programs_se...m_source=virtualaddress&utm_campaign=graffiti
All you have to do is take a picture and apply. They don't offer this service when it's below -10 out, and they ask that you don't try to fix it yourself before applying.
https://www.edmonton.ca/programs_se...m_source=virtualaddress&utm_campaign=graffiti
All you have to do is take a picture and apply. They don't offer this service when it's below -10 out, and they ask that you don't try to fix it yourself before applying.
northlands
Senior Member
GoA next?
"Employees of the Ontario Public Service and its provincial agencies, boards and commission will "increase their attendance to four days per week" starting Oct. 20 and transition to full-time hours in-office effective Jan. 5, 2026."
"Employees of the Ontario Public Service and its provincial agencies, boards and commission will "increase their attendance to four days per week" starting Oct. 20 and transition to full-time hours in-office effective Jan. 5, 2026."
CplKlinger
Senior Member
I work in the office full-time, but I'd avoid spending money downtown where possible if they managed to lobby government into spending more money on leases and forcing employees to spend more on transportation, child care, etc. just so that downtown shops get more business. These decisions should be evidence-based in the best interests of government and employees, not the financial interests of businesses. At that point, it's just a taxpayer subsidy with extra steps, and using employees as pawns. And remember that a lot of workers were pushed far away from Toronto because of the housing market; I wonder how many of them will be forced to rent, or lose their jobs altogether because they can't afford to live close enough to their office to juggle a daily commute.
Last edited:
policyenthusiast
Active Member
The entire public sector is funded by, and liable to, the taxpayer. Not the convenience of the staff. This mindset is part of the growing concern that government employees are held to a significantly lower standard than private employees.
CplKlinger
Senior Member
Yes, they're funded by taxpayers (of-which I'm one), not only those businesses. So policies should be based on what gets the best value for taxpayer dollars. Spending hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars extra on leases just to try and get employees to spend their own money within a pretty small geographic area does not meet that bar. Remember, we're talking about a not-insignificant pot of money that could instead go towards funding education, healthcare, or a number of other priorities.
If non-hybrid work gets better productivity, more integrated teams, increased efficiency, or whatever, then I'm 100% all for it. Heck, I'd even be fine if they ended it just because they think it should have just been a pandemic measure. But making people work downtown just to increase the odds that they spend their money at certain businesses is gross to me. If people want government to subsidize downtown businesses, then the government should just give them loans or grants.
And I really don't care about whether we're talking about public or private workers, but at least the private sector businesses, like banks, have the decency to talk about efficiencies and teamwork or whatever, instead of flat-out saying "business owners downtown really want their money and this is easier than trying to make structural changes like encouraging more downtown housing." If this article were about a private business giving the same reason, I'd give the exact same response.
By the way, when it comes to Alberta, some AUPE members make so little that they need to use food banks; if you're going to compare public servants to private sector workers, I hope you hold the GOA to that same standard in regards to how they treat their workforce.
Last edited:
Gus Haynes
Active Member
You know, there's some serious productivity downsides to return-to-the-office mandates. I'll tell ya a story: I've got a guy on my team who's been sick for the past two weeks. He only took two sick days (his choice). The only reason he's been able to work is that he's set up to work from home. If he had to show up to the office, I'd be sending him home because I don't want him getting the rest of my employees sick. I myself have been able to work from home when I'm feeling 60%, in circumstances where I would have otherwise taken a sick day had I been forced to report to the office.
I'm glad I work somewhere where we can make these sorts of accommodations. But I guess if productivity is a secondary or tertiary concern to other interests, then that's the way it is.
I'm glad I work somewhere where we can make these sorts of accommodations. But I guess if productivity is a secondary or tertiary concern to other interests, then that's the way it is.
Last edited:
itom987
Active Member
The government already owns the buildings employees work in; It is in the best interest of the public and government to make sure those buildings are being used.
If you want to support a political party that will lay off all government employees in favour of using AI, go ahead! I can imagine a society where AI does all the work, while we run around in parks eating grass.
If you want to support a political party that will lay off all government employees in favour of using AI, go ahead! I can imagine a society where AI does all the work, while we run around in parks eating grass.
CplKlinger
Senior Member
That's just not true though. I have access to the reports about this stuff because I work in the ministry responsible for managing government's properties; the GOA pays tens of millions of dollars every year to landlords for leased space. When they need to renovate offices now, they're making the workspaces smaller and literally designing them around hybrid work; there aren't enough desks to have everyone in the office at the same time. This will save them to save millions of dollars in rent by fitting more ministries into fewer buildings, but even then they'll still need to lease buildings because they don't own enough to fit everyone.
And this isn't anything new or confidential; it's literally a performance metric in Infrastructure's Annual Report and has been for years: 2.a, cost per occupant. Would you not agree that one of the more efficient ways to reduce cost per occupant is to reduce square footage per occupant, leading to fewer buildings needed?
Here's a direct quote in case you still think I'm some grass-eating hippie for some reason:
"While the total number of government occupants is outside of ministry influence, the cost of operating government-owned and operated office facilities can be lowered by improving density, reducing reliance on costlier leased office facilities, and consolidating offices in alignment with asset management principles."
And wouldn't you know, paying for less office space does indeed save taxpayers money, and government is supposed to answer to the taxpayers as stated previously in this discussion, right?
"Cost per occupant decreased by $540 compared to the prior year, as the number of occupants increased by over six per cent and operating costs decreased by 0.6 per cent."
But sure, I'm the one not thinking of taxpayers by saying we shouldn't be making them foot that bill only for the sake of supporting certain private businesses. I'm all for supporting downtown; I wrote to literally every member of council in favour of the CRL extension; I champion downtown to the people I know and encourage them to visit it; but I will not support an initiative that sees taxpayers paying millions extra just to give public servants the opportunity to spend money downtown. There are more efficient, cost-effective, and easier ways to subsidize businesses that need the help.
Last edited:
Gus Haynes
Active Member
I mean, @CplKlinger said it already, but just pause for a moment and think about all the GOA worksites in downtown Edmonton.
You think the Province of Alberta owns Commerce Place? The Peace Hills Trust Building? Telus House? 44 Capital Blvd? TD Tower? etc etc
Offworld
Active Member
IanO
Superstar
Love Dialog's little window piece 'Our impact'.
archited
Senior Member
Misleading in the sense that Dialog was not the design architect on most of the projects they are claiming.