Last week, I started the discussion of the great debate that is actually turning into the great resignation. Employees are talking with their feet and when a company starts demanding that they come back to the office they make the choice that it’s time to find a more humane company that understands the trials and tribulations of life. This is particularly true for the new parents who are entering family life and for the ‘sandwich generation’ that have both children and elderly relatives to care for. But it’s also for other employees who want to have time to eat right, work out and have a hobby or two. And the environmentally conscious individuals who really are working to reduce their carbon footprint and help fight the climate chaos this world is currently facing.   

I highlighted the debate and the striking observation that I made that those on the work-from-home side are much more heterogenous than those on the butts in seats side. That is, the second group tends to be more male, white and older, and they would like to return to normal, to the old way of doing business. I really do not think we will be going back to the old way of doing things.  

I can only think that the debate is raging for one of two reasons. Possibly both. Real estate professionals and governments depend on office space being used, on restaurants being visited, retailers selling goods and on people riding the mass transit. If people are home in the suburbs with their yard, kids and dogs, they’re not spending money in our cities and the value of all these commercial real estate investments will fall. The economy is impacted, property taxes are impacted, services are impacted. It’s a vicious cycle. We’ve built up our urban environments and we need to feed them to keep them healthy. If people stay home, the urban core becomes a ghost town or, in some places, filled with tent cities. We need people at their desks to keep our cities alive and vibrant. The economist and finance training in me say this makes sense, but the empathetic and experienced super mum who worked five-shifts each day raising two children and climbing the career ladder wonders if it’s right to put the needs of investors to make money on their investments and governments to make money on property taxes and fees in front of raising families, caring for the sick and elderly and living sane lives?  

The other reason the debate may be so intense is that those in power who insist we need to go back to normal may not truly understand the lives of their employees. They haven’t walked in their shoes as they may not have climbed their ladder in the same two-career household that I did. In the earlier column I talked about my five-shift work day and my working weekend. The largely male, white and older persons on the butts-in-seats side of the debate may have got to where they are because they had someone who stayed home, took care of the kids and the house while they worked at the office until midnight. I used to be jealous of my male colleagues, as most of them did have a stay-at-home partner and were  living in a Leave it to Beaver household. They were the first to come in and the last to leave, getting noticed, getting the promotions. So, in the minds of many of today’s leaders that is what it takes. It takes grit. In their minds, the only way you can be successful is to work the long hours and have the two-hour commute. Sort of the Mr Banks from Mary Poppins.  

In my mind, the leaders who are insisting we go back, claiming it is a necessity for promotion and culture and team building are living in the dark ages. Are talking like my grandparents when they used to say, “I walked five miles, up hill to school in the freezing cold”.  We have cars now, we have computers now, we have Zoom now. We can and we should support our employees and provide them with flexibility and assistance as they navigate through the various stages of life. The research shows this is clearly important for children, who need the love and attention of their parents. And it is important for those who are doing the selfless caregiving that is so essential at the end of one’s life. It’s so important to be there for your loved ones who are sick and need help. It’s good for them, it’s good for you.  

So, let’s quit the debate. Here are some ideas. Let’s work to find ways to best accommodate this new need for flexibility. Get creative and come up with ways to repurpose some of our buildings to meet the needs of different consumers. Maybe we need tax credits similar to the Historic tax credits to help in the conversion of office and hotels to much-needed affordable housing and low-income housing in our urban communities. If we bring people to our city centres to live, they can create demand for the restaurants, retail and other cultural amenities. We could then have truly walkable communities where people can live, work and play. New residents will pay the taxes to ensure that services can be provided. Placemaking and vibrant communities that are not dependent on people being in high-rise office buildings and on expense accounts could dominate our cities. Of course, we need to remember to bring in the major services essential for a community. We need to improve schools, crime, traffic and bring in the amenities you can find in a suburb. Parks, recreation, health care and grocery stores are essential for daily living. We have learned a hard lesson with Covid. That we need to be able to pivot and change how we do things. We used to say the only thing you can be certain of in life is death and taxes. I believe these last 18 months have shown us that we need to shift our mindset. We live in a dynamic environment that is constantly changing. Therefore, adaptability, flexibility and creativity are the keys to survival in this brave new world.