Article content
Alberta is likely a week or so away from allowing its two NHL teams to return to full capacity crowds, but as it turns out, Manitoba got there first.
Alberta is likely a week or so away from allowing its two NHL teams to return to full capacity crowds, but as it turns out, Manitoba got there first.
The Winnipeg Jets played before a full house last Wednesday night, with Canada’s other NHL teams still playing to 50 per cent or less. The catch, however, was that Winnipeg fans still needed to wear masks.
It’s an interesting reminder of how masking requirements need not get in the way of loosening other restrictions. Arguably, mask mandates could be the last restriction to be lifted since they are the least intrusive. Businesses do indeed suffer from other restrictions and public health measures, but it would be hard to argue that mask mandates have that effect.
However, masking is an inconvenience, one that most are surely rather to be done with. And that was the essence of the dilemma facing Calgary city council last week as it contemplated the fate of the city’s mask bylaw.
The decision to end the mask bylaw at the same time the provincial mandate expires will be welcomed by many, but it will come as a disappointment to many others. On balance, though, it was probably the right decision.
Unless things go sideways over the next week, Alberta’s mask mandate is set to end a week from today. The province already prioritized the end of masking in schools, as well as all mask requirements for those aged 12 and under.
Clearly, the Kenney government senses that enough Albertans want to be done with masking that they see a political payoff in leading with that approach. Masks also seem to embody some broader significance about how one views the threat from COVID-19 or the degree to which we need to take it seriously.
Part of determining whether masking needs to go is whether people would prefer that it go. Public health responses cannot completely ignore public opinion. In the case of Calgary’s mask bylaw, there’s also the question of how likely people would be to follow it if the provincial mandate is no longer in effect.
While Alberta’s COVID-19 situation seems to be trending in the right direction, March 1 is still a rather arbitrary date. There’s nothing to say that the masking mandate couldn’t end tomorrow, for example. Or, what’s to say we couldn’t keep it in place until the end of March?
The other factor policymakers need to consider is whether a mask mandate might need to be reintroduced at some point. Last summer, when Alberta last ditched the masking requirement, many skeptics were predicting that it would only be a matter of weeks before it was brought back. They weren’t far off.
The answer, though, can’t be perpetual restrictions and mandates. A willingness to end such measures, even if done slightly prematurely, might buy enough goodwill to convince the public that they are needed again in the future.
The city and province may disagree on what might be sufficient to warrant a return to public health measures. Municipalities should still have the ability to introduce their own masking mandate if local circumstances demand it. The province’s flip-flop on this point seems rather political and any concerns about cities’ access to data could easily be rectified by sharing said data with cities.
Regardless of how one feels about the pending end of the mask mandate and other restrictions, I think we are all united in hoping that this goes well and that we can settle into a new, durable status quo. The virus, though, has already thrown too many curveballs at us to allow us to be overly confident or complacent.
There is clearly a significant amount of public fatigue with measures and restrictions, and it’s not unreasonable that that should guide decisions on these matters.
“Afternoons with Rob Breakenridge” airs weekdays 12:30-3 p.m. on 770CHQR and 2-3 p.m. on 630CHED rob.breakenridge@corusent.com Twitter: @RobBreakenridge
The dismal environmental record of the Doug Ford government in Ontario is well-documented. Despite some recent moves on “greening” the steel sector and electric vehicle manufacturing initiatives, the province is on track to see major increases in greenhouse gas emissions, particularly from the electricity sector.
The government’s emphasis on highway expansion in the Greater Toronto Area is further evidence of this trend.
The Ford government’s record on environmental issues is an extension of its wider approach to governance. It has broken from the traditional norms of Ontario politics, which have emphasized moderation and administrative competence, as reflected through the long Progressive Conservative dynasty.
Looking back on Ford’s four years in power reveals four themes about his approach to governance — and what the next four years might have in store if public opinion polls are correct and he wins again on June 2.
Read more:
Why Doug Ford will once again win the Ontario election
The Ford government’s agenda seems driven by instinct more than ideology. It came to power with scant vision for what a provincial government should do other than cut taxes, red tape and hydro rates. It’s struggled when confronted with more complex problems that required the province to play a much more active role.
The resulting governance model has been fundamentally reactive, and grounded in relatively short-term perspectives. The government has tended to act once a situation reaches the crisis stage, rather than identifying potential problems and taking action to prevent them.
This pattern has been most evident in the government’s hesitant responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. It tended to react to waves of COVID-19 infections rather than anticipating them and taking measures to minimize their impacts, even when given clear and consistent scientific advice to do so.
Issues like the environment and climate change are destined to do poorly under such a reactive governance model. They require taking action now to avoid problems in the future.
We are constantly reminded of this by the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and federal and provincial environmental commissioners. Only responding when problems have become too obvious to ignore tends to mean it’s already too late.
The government’s run-up to the election has placed a strong emphasis on “getting it done” — it’s the Progressive Conservative party’s campaign slogan — in areas like housing and highway and transit construction, in particular.
The flip side of this emphasis has been increasingly aggressive exercises of provincial authority, particularly over local governments. One of the government’s first moves was to arbitrarily cut Toronto City Council in half. The province threatened to invoke, for the first time in the province’s history, Sec. 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, known as the notwithstanding clause, to get its way.
Read more:
Ford’s fight with Toronto shows legal vulnerability of cities
Ontario’s planning rules have also been rewritten, not only at the provincial level, but down to the level of site-specific development plans within individual municipalities, almost universally in favour of developers’ interests. Ministerial zoning orders — which circumvent local planning processes and public consultations, designating land use without the possibility of appeals — are no longer the exceptions they once were.
Instead, they seem the new norm for planning in Ontario. Broad powers have been given to provincial agencies, most notably the provincial transit agency Metrolinx, to build what are often poorly conceived and politically motivated transit projects.
The province’s most recent legislative moves have sought to further marginalize the roles of local governments in planning matters and to eliminate public consultation requirements as red tape.
The notwithstanding clause was ultimately invoked by the government as it pertained to its election financing legislation that seemed designed to silence potential critics.
Even local school boards were forbidden to adopt COVID-19 containment measures more stringent that those put in place at the provincial level.
While the Ford government has gone to great lengths to silence voices of critical constituencies, it’s been extraordinarily open to the voices that support it.
The government has demonstrated a distinct tendency to uncritically accept whatever its favoured industry lobbyists tell it to do. This has been evident in its approaches to COVID-19, housing and infrastructure, mining, aggregate extraction sites like gravel pits and quarries, energy and long-term care.
The overall decision-making model that has emerged is based on access, connections and political whim.
A final defining feature of the Ford government has been a tendency to disregard the fiscal consequences of its decisions. The focus instead has been on short-term savings for consumers.
The cancellation of the previous Liberal government’s cap-and-trade system immediately following the 2018 election cost the provincial treasury billions in forgone revenues. Hundreds of millions more were spent cancelling renewable energy projects.
Hydro rates are being artificially lowered through an annual $7 billion in subsidies from the provincial treasury, money that could otherwise be spent on schools and hospitals. The pre-election cancellation of tolls on Highways 412 and 418 will cost at least $1 billion over the next 25 years, while the cancellation of vehicle licensing fees will cost the province an estimated $1 billion each year.
A proposed cut to provincial gasoline taxes would cost nearly $650 million in annual revenues. And the projected deficit on the government’s pre-election budget was almost $20 billion, a record.
All of this is at odds with previous Progressive Conservative governments in Ontario, which were largely fiscally prudent.
It isn’t clear yet to what extent the potential political success of a governance model organized around these four themes represents a fundamental break from the traditional norms of Ontario politics. If Ford wins again, is it due to the weaknesses of the alternatives being offered to Ontario voters, or does it signal a permanent realignment in the province’s politics?
Read more:
What Doug Ford’s shift to the centre says about the longevity of populism
Either way, June 2 could be a watershed moment in the province’s history, defining a “new normal” for politics in Ontario.
(CNN)Americans across political lines are united in their generally negative feelings about the US and its politics, according to a new CNN Poll conducted by SSRS, with Democrats particularly unlikely to express political enthusiasm.
“Office politics” often gets a bad rap. It’s thought of as the domain of catty gossip, shady backroom deals or sycophantic compliments reminiscent of the movies “Office Space” or “9 to 5.”
Thankfully, in real-life, office politics is often much tamer — and also unavoidable for anyone with the ambition to advance.
Why? Because, at its core, office politics is about relationships with colleagues and decision-makers. And nurturing those relationships can go a long way toward advancing your career goals.
While politics is often derided as purely a popularity contest, there are actually two components — being popular and getting things done.
Let’s think about “real” politics for a moment. You can be very good at getting things done, but if you’re unpopular, you’re not going to be elected in the first place. On the other hand, if you get elected because you’re popular, but fail to accomplish anything, you’ll probably find yourself voted out in the next election.
In office politics, exactly as in “real” politics, you can often get small things done without the support of others. But the more impactful your goals, the more you need to get other people on board to make them happen.
To have influence, colleagues need to like you, trust you and respect you.
If you’re not liked, well, that’s pretty much curtains for influencing decisions, unless you’re already the boss. It’s worth noting that to be liked, you must first be known.
If you’re liked, but not respected, you might be involved the discussion, but your view won’t carry any weight. We could call this “Charlie Brown syndrome” after the classic Peanuts character.
If you’re respected but not trusted (think of a well-qualified politician whose agenda you dislike), you may be consulted on an issue but colleagues may have misgivings about your motives.
To influence behavior and decisions in the office requires all three. Liked + Trusted + Respected = Influence.
Everything we do at CareerPoint is based on our philosophy that career success is driven by the value you create for your employer.
We talk about value creation by referencing eight drivers of value. You could think of these as the atomic elements of employee value. It’s a framework you could use to analyze almost anything in relation to HR or career advancement. Why? Because anything that affects your value as an employee influences both the success of your career and the success of your company.
What we know as “office politics” touches on several of these value drivers, but let’s focus on just two: Relationships and positioning.
Of all the categories of relationships that drive value for a company, none are more significant than customer relationships. If customers like, respect and trust you, they are more likely to highly value your services, keep buying them and recommend them to others. They’re also likely to be patient with you when things go awry, as things inevitably do.
The value of customer relationships can be tremendous and long-lasting. In a law firm, a single relationship can be worth tens of millions of dollars. Relationships are so important that when a partner moves from one firm to another, they often take the relationships with them. In fact, it’s hard to think of an industry where good customer relationships can’t move the dial on company success.
This means good customer relationships are a source of influence for employees. If customers highly regard you, the business won’t want to lose you and ought to value your opinion. If, on the other hand, no customer would notice or care if you left, your influence on decisions and events will be more limited.
The value driver most closely aligned with office politics is the one we’ve named Positioning. It’s all about navigating office politics to position yourself for advancement. After all, you could be the hardest working and most valuable employee in the business but fail to secure advancement if you don’t understand the politics.
The best way to think about this is to imagine a meeting of your company’s management team. Your potential promotion is being discussed. What do you want everyone to say and do?
Obviously, you want everyone to say that you are the best choice for the role. But will they?
There’s nothing you can do at this moment. It’s too late to influence any further.
In some ways, the discussion is a culmination of everything you’ve said and done since you’ve joined the company. The decision will be made largely on how the participants feel about you and the idea of you in a new, more influential role.
This is no idle abstraction. This is exactly how most advancement decisions are made. If you want to advance, the advocacy of every person around the table is what you’re solving for in the game of office politics.
Here are five quick tips you can use to help build trust, respect and likeability in your workplace.
Remember, no matter how much you hate it, office politics is a part of office life we all have to contend with. Instead of avoiding it, put your best foot forward, take smart risks, make mistakes, and learn from them.
To find out how CareerPoint can help you and your team navigate office politics and create the win/win relationships you need to succeed, visit CareerPoint’s website today.
Originally from the west coast of Scotland, Steve McIntosh is a recovering accountant (ICAEW), HR professional (GPHR) and MBA (University of Oxford). After starting his career with global accounting firm KPMG in 1998, Steve founded offshore financial services recruitment firm CML in 2004, which he led as CEO for 16 years.
In 2020, he founded CareerPoint.com, the virtual coaching platform that helps companies and their people get ahead of the curve. With customers and coaches in more than 30 countries around the world, CareerPoint is well on its way to achieving its twofold mission to help a million young people advance in their careers and level the playing field for underrepresented groups.
McIntosh is a “zealous convert” to the value of HR as a driver of business value and the author of “The Employee Value Curve: the unifying theory of HR and career advancement helping companies and their people succeed together.“
If you liked this article, sign up for SmartBrief’s free email newsletters on HR and leadership. They’re among SmartBrief’s more than 250 industry-focused newsletters.
Ghosts of History Arise
Payday loans are on the rise in Canada, due to the pandemic
Trinidad and Tobago to launch the 2022 Pan African Festival
Apple Podcasts Update Enables Annual Subscriptions – PCMag
Are you as a 2SLGBTQIA+ conformist being treated the same as heterosexuals at your place of work?
Apple Podcasts gets storage cleaning tools and annual subscriptions with iOS 15.5 – PhoneArena
iOS 15.5—Apple Issues Massive iPhone Security Update For Millions Of Users – Forbes
Monarchists criticize Canada's 'lacklustre' and 'embarrassing' Platinum Jubilee plans – CBC News