Two federal public service unions have raised concerns about an increasing number of employees facing denials for remote work accommodations, particularly for medical reasons, alleging that the government’s approach is unreasonable.
Marc Brière, the president of the Union of Taxation Employees (UTE), has received numerous complaints from members being refused permission to work from home, including individuals with anxiety forced to work in open-plan offices and others dealing with incontinence. Brière criticized the current approval process as chaotic, stating that employees are only allowed to work remotely after incidents in the office occur.
Sean O’Reilly, president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC), echoed Brière’s sentiments, noting that some accommodation requests are being turned down for reasons that lack clarity.
Sancho Angulo, co-chair of the Infinity network supporting public servants with neurodiversity, highlighted challenges faced by employees in securing accommodations promptly and effectively due to delays, misunderstandings, or disagreements about reasonable solutions.
Data requested from 10 government departments by Radio-Canada showed varying processes, making it difficult to confirm an increase in refusals. However, several departments experienced a surge in accommodation requests. For instance, Employment and Social Development Canada saw requests spike from 50 in 2021 to 7,267 in 2025, with a significant number related to medical accommodations for teleworking.
While federal guidelines emphasize the duty to accommodate without bias, some employees report inconsistent treatment in handling requests, with experiences varying based on teams, managers, or departments. This lack of uniformity has led to frustrations among public servants, with some feeling unsupported or facing bureaucratic hurdles in accessing necessary accommodations.
Legal experts, like Charles Tremblay Potvin from Université Laval, note the subjectivity in determining what constitutes a “reasonable” accommodation, with decision-makers having discretion based on individual circumstances. Employers must demonstrate constraints if refusing an accommodation, with obligations extended following a Supreme Court of Canada ruling in 2000 broadening the definition of disability.
The unions have observed a stricter stance from the government in recent months, with a perceived reluctance to grant accommodations, even to those previously approved before the pandemic. This shift has led to additional burdens on employees facing return-to-office mandates, potentially influencing decisions to leave the government or take sick leave.
Despite assertions from the Treasury Board Secretariat that there have been no policy changes, concerns persist over the impact of return-to-office requirements on employees, especially amid job uncertainties and spending cuts.
Overall, stakeholders emphasize the importance of fair and consistent treatment in processing accommodation requests, ensuring employees’ well-being and inclusivity within the federal public service.