Concordia’s WFH Whine-Fest

Yesterday, I had the inconvenience of passing through the Concordia University strike. As a management specialist with firsthand knowledge of Concordia’s inner workings, I find this strike disturbing – and not just because of the incessant noise. Certainly, the CU administration is responsible for this unsightly development, as the saying goes: “There are no bad soldiers, only bad officers.” But those good soldiers among Concordia employees must realize that the principal claim of CUPEU-SCN – “the ‘inequitable’ access to hybrid work” – is absurd, and their justifications of the extended WFH approach are nothing but a thinly veiled attempt to avoid actual work.

Flawed Justifications

The striking employees’ justifications for their extended work-from-home approach are unconvincing. Let’s examine their points that I quote from a LinkedIn post by one of the strike’s enthusiasts.

❌ “NOT INNOVATIVE” – innovation is a popular buzzword, but it can’t create a “happy remote-work schedule” while nourishing a vibrant campus community, simply because a vibrant campus community requires personal – not virtual – interaction.

❌ “NOT FOR EQUITY & DIVERSITY” – another concoction of buzzwords that has nothing to do with the sticking issue of remote work. True, CU toutes equity, diversity & inclusion and has wasted a lot of money and effort on those. But the focus of every respected university should be on achieving best academic and research results. Diversity for diversity’s sake is good for a fledging Zoo. The problem is that CU leaders are afraid or unable to challenge that.

❌ “NOT LEADING-EDGE” – another buzzword B/S having nothing to do with remote work. Sure CU is far from being “a workplace-of-the-future” – but not because of insufficient %% of remote work.

❌ “CLIMATE ACTION HYPOCRITICAL” I bet they are, fully agree! This is another mainstream malaise similar to the “equity” point above. Both points are important – but they should not be treated as raison d’être of a university. And of course, climate change has nothing to do with the desire of its staff not to show up at work.

❌ “NON RESEARCH-FOCUSED” – more buzzword nonsense. The university DOES NOT deny “research on remote-work benefits,” not at all. Because research confirms that work-from-home undermines effectiveness in people-intensive roles, which comprise the majority of ‘professional’ roles at universities.

❌ “Remote work isn’t just a perk—it’s progress!” – I couldn’t disagree more! How would you react if 911 offered you “telemedicine” instead of dispatching an ambulance? This is an extreme example, but unless you’re a data-entry clerk or hermit-philosopher, direct communication with the people you’re serving is essential.

ONE THING I AGREE WITH THE AUTHOR: “A win-win IS POSSIBLE!” – yes indeed! Here it is.

A Solution

My advice to CU leadership and disenchanted employees: let go of those who refuse to come to work. There are better roles where personal human contact is not required – elsewhere. The fact that Concordia lacks a university-wide hybrid work policy and can’t finalize a collective agreement with the union confirms that the entire hierarchy is inefficient. Letting go of employees who are unproductive working on-site will improve efficiency, boost morale and bump the salaries of those professionals who are genuinely dedicated to their socially critical roles. I assure you that the same scope of work can be done by half the current workforce.

Granted, implementing this change will take time, requiring tough decisions at the top, a clear Mission, engaging Vision, and meaningful shared Values – not just vague statements. Most importantly, it demands a relentless, coordinated effort from all, achievable only through face-to-face communication.

If, however, underperforming employees are retained and continue working at 50% capacity (or less with extended WFH), the university will struggle to survive. In five years, there will be no one left to have another whine-fest and disrupt the downtown life. Mark the date.