Revealed: A cost-benefit analysis for public servants returning to the office

Should public servants be allowed to work from home?

This week, public service minister Nicola Willis issued new work-from-home guidance for public servants. It specified that working from home is not an entitlement and must be agreed to and monitored by the employer. In a statement, Willis said the changes would improve office productivity and benefit Wellington CBD retailers.

Why did Willis think this directive was necessary? The Spinoff can exclusively reveal a detailed cost-benefit analysis provided to the finance minister by her staff.

Benefit: Could help to save some of Wellington’s worst cafes.

Cost: The inflationary stimulus from flat whites and cheese scones might make Adrian Orr blow an artery.

Benefit: Office romances will support Chris Luxon’s mission to make Kiwis have more babies.

Cost: Policy analysts will miss the high-risk eroticism of sexting on Microsoft Teams.

Benefit: Would provide vital support for Bob Jones and other struggling commercial landlords.

Cost: More road congestion during the morning and evening rush hour.

Benefit: Added justification for the long tunnel.

Cost: Some public servants might decide to leave their jobs for the private sector.

Benefit: Will make the next round of layoffs easier.

Cost: Working parents with long commutes will have less time to spend with their children.

Benefit: Maybe their children have bad vibes.

Cost: Overcrowded trains might make people demand better public transport infrastructure.

Benefit: Will encourage uptake of Wellington’s commuter cycling network.

Cost: Bike lanes make Simeon Brown cry.

Benefit: Public servants will have less time to send op-ed pitches to The Spinoff about why they shouldn’t have to go into the office.

Cost: It will look like an insulting, mean-spirited and politicised attack on public servants who have already had their pay rises frozen and just survived a harsh round of layoffs.

Benefit: That’s the point.