What is happening inside Canada?
There has been a lot of commentary and debate during the past 10 years over whether the culture of Canada is shifting in a way that is driving down Canadian productivity and thereby negatively impacting Canadian competitiveness worldwide.
If measured by GDP and GDP growth, Canada currently ranks ninth in the entire world country GDP and eighth in GDP annual growth over the past decade compared to all G20 countries. By many measures, Canada is doing well, and yet there are also some concerning trends.
There are 34-hour work weeks deemed to be full-time. There are hybrid work arrangements that only require 25 hours of work for full-time pay. Some organizations have reported workers arrive at work one or two hours late without pay consequences and the same employee demands to be paid for their absence because of “circumstances outside their control.” Some workers expect to be paid because those circumstances beyond their control are somehow the employer's obligation to pay for. There have been reports of employees working two jobs remotely and simultaneously; working 20-25 hours per week for each job and yet receiving full-time pay and benefits for both. Each employer is covering their health care benefits and Workers Compensation benefits. These employers, rather than re-structuring the job descriptions to ensure 40 hours of work are attained, may not be willing to address this lower productivity, and instead, are accepting lower profitability, and passing that cost onto their customers, the Canadian public.
Canada has some productivity challenges, a debt issue and our standards of work excellence are seen by some as worsening when viewed by some measures of productivity and cost competitiveness, when compared to other countries.
So, what has been the Canadian formula to help Canada reach our historical good productivity status on the world stage? This is not some old-fashioned view, but rather the formula of the past that is seen by some as slowly eroding.
The formula included working a 40-hour week and expecting to be paid for 40 (not many years ago, this was 44 hours).
The formula included getting paid for 40 hours and also working 40 hours.
The formula included always working hard and helping those underprivileged.
The formula included “one hour work for one hour pay.”
The formula included work hard and play hard.
The formula included accepting work that is dirty, laborious and difficult.
The formula included washing our own windows at work, taking out our own garbage, and cleaning our own work offices.
The formula meant that if you were not five minutes early for work, you were late.
The formula included breaks being a total of one hour per day, including lunch, coffee breaks, and included travel time to and from those breaks.
The formula meant that if you work hard, you have earned your time off.
Work-life balance existed in 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000. Work-life balance is not some new invention but today it might be being used as an excuse to under-deliver.
The formula included if you work hard and pay your dues, you will be promoted and earn more pay and more privileges.
The formula included if you pay your dues over a period of 10 or 20 years you will be rewarded even more. Today many expect that timeframe to be more immediate, perhaps 2 or 3 years.
The formula included that if we work hard, we need fewer employees. Today we need more workers to help fill the increased employer needs. This is due in part because of lower productivity.
Being Canadian meant this and much more. The formula was not complex.
And that folks, is how it has always worked and it remains as to how it should still work.
