About a month ago, a blanket order was given by the Head of the Public Service for all civil servants to return to their place of employment. Previous to this, a managerial discretionary remote-work policy had been adopted after Covid-19 began in April 2020.

I do not recall seeing an explanation provided to civil servants. Having been repeatedly betrayed in recent years, aggrieved workers have no union to advocate for them. This is yet another blow to how the higher brass regard the government workforce under a government that is supposedly pro-labour.

Unfortunately, Bermuda is a stubbornly conservative jurisdiction, even when it is sometimes to our detriment. I, like many social-media commenters, often wonder what the first P in PLP represents because this government has proven itself over and over to be anything but progressive. In this instance, there is a failure by the Government to recognise that some changes brought about by Covid-19 may present useful opportunities.

Just imagine for a minute Jason Hayward telling us how great it is that Bermuda has benefited from having hundreds of remote-working digital nomads in our jurisdiction. However, in the next instance, the pro-labour government he represents, makes no defence for its own civil servant workforce being demanded to stop working from home and ordered back into the office.

With the recent Ministry of Health warnings that Covid is still with us, our government knows full well it can be easily contracted, spread, cause severe sickness and even death. The World Health Organisation has also started warning us not to get too comfortable because another pandemic is coming soon.

Another consideration is that technology is also having a significant impact on the way business is conducted. Artificial intelligence will increase rapidly in the near future, we have been warned, so is it necessary that all roads need to lead into Hamilton? Is this an opportunity to geographically decentralise our economy?

Some may argue that retail sales may increase with more workers in Hamilton. However, could there have been a balance of how many days civil servants are required to come in to work? Could there have been a department-by-department review to determine whether there was increased efficiency and productivity with remote work by civil servants.

In my many conversations, the private sector is aware of increased productivity and has not taken the same heavy-handed approach. Even junior employees in the private sector are allowed to work remotely.

I expect someone to respond by saying that in the private sector the emphasis is on productivity, whereas public sector employees can do nothing while at home and get paid. If this is indeed a fact, this is a real opportunity to effectively address the problem.

If a civil servant has a job description that allows them to carry out their work responsibilities remotely and they decide not to do the work, then obviously their services are not needed at their place of employment. Why would management not hold those abusing this privilege accountable? Trying to cover up this exposed problem by ordering everyone back to work through forced office attendance is not showing strong leadership; it is simply trying to conceal sham employment.

I have worked in the Civil Service and I have many family members and friends that still work there. Contrary to the stereotype, the vast majority of civil servants are hard-working, disciplined, dedicated and productive employees.

If working remotely is considered a perk, this is all the more reason why it should be embraced. Public servants rarely get a raise nowadays, thanks to the dwindling economy. When they do, it is once in a while and far below the cost of living, so their income is still in the negative. So affording civil servants the opportunity to work from home can be an incentive to join the service and also encourage worker productivity.

The bottom line is this: the Civil Service is composed of highly skilled professionals that sit in front of their computers every day and blue-collar workers that have to be on site to carry out their responsibilities. Given the situation brought about by the pandemic, it makes no sense to require everyone to report to work as it was before, especially if improved productivity is occurring that benefits the taxpayer.

The leadership of the Civil Service did not even provide guidance or directives for when civil servants contract Covid. If they are asymptomatic, they are left second-guessing whether to risk the health of their colleagues or use up sick days. What should be done when children or others in the house or close contacts have Covid or symptoms? Do they have to use up holiday or sick days?

I have not even started to dig deep into this from the workers’ perspective. Many government employees had adapted favourably to remote work. It afforded the opportunity to better uphold their family responsibilities, avoid rush-hour traffic and hazardous work environments, especially among those with underlying health challenges. Some workers were able to steer clear of toxic work environments and found working from home a better option to avoid work-related stress.

Improved work-life balance has been found by many private and public sector employees over the past few years owing to remote working. Globally, remote working has been widely adopted, and is here to stay. Sadly, under our pro-labour government, the Civil Service leadership managed to yank that away from public servants in a way that surely cannot be described as progressive.

• Vic Ball was a One Bermuda Alliance senator from November 2014 to July 2017, and more recently a candidate in the 2020 General Election in Smith's West (Constituency 9)