HUMA Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Monday, October 27, 2003

º

1600

The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.))

Mrs. Glynnis French (Assistant Secretary, Strategic Planning and Analysis, Human Resources Branch, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat)

º

1605

º

1610

º

1615

º

1620

The Chair

Mrs. Glynnis French

The Chair

Mrs. Glynnis French

The Chair

Mr. Larry Spencer (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, Canadian Alliance)

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Larry Spencer

Mrs. Glynnis French

º

1625

Mr. Larry Spencer

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Dave Flavell (Director, Innovations and Human Resources Planning, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat)

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Larry Spencer

Mr. Dave Flavell

º

1630

The Chair

Mr. Ovid Jackson (Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, Lib.)

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Ovid Jackson

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Dave Flavell

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Ovid Jackson

The Chair

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay (Rimouski-Neigette-et-la Mitis, BQ)

º

1635

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

º

1640

The Chair

Ms. Diane St-Jacques (Shefford, Lib.)

Mrs. Glynnis French

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Mrs. Glynnis French

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Mrs. Glynnis French

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Mrs. Glynnis French

º

1645

Mr. Dave Flavell

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

The Chair

Mr. Larry Spencer

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Dave Flavell

º

1650

The Chair

Mr. Larry McCormick (Hastings—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, Lib.)

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Larry McCormick

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Larry McCormick

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Larry McCormick

Mr. Dave Flavell

Mr. Larry McCormick

º

1655

The Chair

Mrs. Glynnis French

The Chair

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Larry McCormick

The Chair

Mrs. Glynnis French

The Chair

Mrs. Glynnis French

The Chair

Mrs. Glynnis French

The Chair

Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.)

Mr. Dave Flavell

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mr. Dave Flavell

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mr. Dave Flavell

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

»

1700

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mr. Dave Flavell

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mr. Dave Flavell

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mrs. Glynnis French

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Mrs. Glynnis French

The Chair

Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint-Boniface, Lib.)

The Chair

Mr. Raymond Simard

»

1705

Mr. Dave Flavell

Mr. Raymond Simard

Mr. Dave Flavell

Mr. Raymond Simard

The Chair

Mrs. Glynnis French

The Chair

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

The Chair

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

»

1710

The Chair

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

The Chair

The Chair

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

---

NUMBER 042

l

2nd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Monday, October 27, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

º  (1600)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.)): Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

    I have quorum to hear witnesses, but I don't have quorum to conduct any votes at the moment, so we will begin with presentations from our witnesses. We have with us today Ms. Glynnis French, the assistant secretary, strategic planning and analysis, from the human resources branch; and Dave Flavell, the director of innovations and human resources planning.

    Welcome to our committee. We are very sorry that you had to sit around and wait while we voted, but we're glad you did. We're eager and anxious to hear your presentation. I think the clerk has told you that we'd like you to keep it to no more than 15 minutes, to give us some opportunity for questions.

    Mrs. Glynnis French (Assistant Secretary, Strategic Planning and Analysis, Human Resources Branch, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat): Absolutely, Madam Chair. Thank you very much.

    I'm delighted to be here today to talk about this very important topic of work/life balance. I'm also delighted to have at my side Dave Flavell, the director of innovations and HR planning now, given the new focus in our organization. He also was the director responsible for the public service employee survey and so is well versed in the survey, both the techniques underlying its development and the survey results.

    I'll now begin my presentation. Recognizing the time, I will try to run through it relatively quickly and then leave the floor open for questions.

[Translation]

    I'd like to begin by giving you an overview of my presentation. I'll start with some of the highlights of my research into work-life balance. Then, I'll talk about the public service employee survey that was conducted, focussing on the highlights and recommendations of the Survey Follow-up Action Advisory Committee. I will then go on to discuss work-life balance policies in the public service. Lastly, I will look at steps to address work-life balance.

[English]

    As you are well aware from some of your previous witnesses, there are demographic shifts in our workforce. The workplace is changing and our values are changing. Employers in all sectors of the economy are addressing this issue of work/life balance and workplace well-being, recognizing that it plays a major role in productivity and in the health of our businesses.

    A business case has been made. We need to address the issues of workplace stress, workplace well-being, and work/life balance in order to make the public service into an employer of choice and to help us retain and attract the right people with the right values. The public service is not immune from the issue of workplace stress and work/life conflict, but much work has been done. There's more work to be done, but we've made a good start along this path.

º  (1605)  

[Translation]

    Prior to the public service employee survey being conducted, considerable research was carried out by the TBS on issues related to work-life balance. We reviewed extensive research findings to broaden our understanding of this issue. Many surveys have been carried out in Canada and abroad and these reflect considerable interest in this topic.

[English]

    For example, the Conference Board of Canada has been a leader in reviewing this material. They've talked, for example, of the interests of women, that the two top concerns of women executives in an organization are the ability to have career opportunities and a commitment by the employer to work/life balance and to support dependant care responsibilities.

    The Canadian Labour and Business Centre also conducted a review along these lines. They have indicated that over the past 10 years, both labour and management believe that the ability to balance work and family responsibilities has deteriorated, that management and labour share this view, and that certainly labour and many management representatives agree that family and work life pressures have also increased over the last few years.

    A June 2000 Conference Board study indicated that employers are beginning to realize the impact of work/life balance on business issues, and that it creates stress and affects morale in the workforce. Three-quarters of respondents to the Conference Board survey believe employee stress can be attributed in part to the difficulties in balancing work and personal responsibilities. High employee stress and low morale are key challenges facing a growing number of Canadian organizations, and indeed the public service as well.

    You'll be hearing later, I understand, from Duxbury-Higgins on the results of their study, so I won't really follow up on that.

    More recently, there's also been a study by Graham Lowe from CPRN on healthy workplaces, indicating that, again, a reduction in workplace stress plays an important role in having a health workplace.

    In the study by APEX of executives in the federal public service really focusing on

[Translation]

    the health of executives showed that one in five executives has experienced work-related stress problems and in the case of those considering retirement, the key issue is frustration with the work environment. The nature of EX work is changing to the detriment of these employees' health. The percentage of those who do not work on weekends almost doubled from 9% in 1997 to 16% in 2002, according to the most recent survey.

[English]

    The U.K. has done similar research along these lines, and they have also said that people are working longer and harder, and experiencing more stress in the workplace.

    Another major study, by Yankelovich, Gemini Consulting, looked at about 10,000 workers worldwide. The study indicated that workers really feel that the most desired conditions would be that they have the ability to balance their work and personal life. Work is enjoyable. They have security, good pay, and enjoyable co-workers. All of these factors play into the idea of whether workers feel that they do have work/life balance or they're under stress when they're at work, or at stress when they're at home.

    The U.S. Families and Work Institute has also done studies in this area. They've noted that work/life balance is a predictor of job satisfaction, retention, and commitment to employers. So we know this is a very significant issue.

    As you know, we've had two employee surveys. The 2002 employee survey sought employee opinion on a wide variety of issues related to organizational effectiveness, workplace well-being, and service delivery. A total of 95,000 employees completed the 2002 employee survey, about a 57.8% participation rate, a 3.2% increase from 1999. The increase in response suggests that employees value the opportunity to comment on their workplace and to have their managers introduce measures to improve it.

º  (1610)  

[Translation]

    Let me share with you some survey findings.

    Overall, 87% of public service employees reported being satisfied with their current working arrangements, be it a compressed work week, telework or regular work hours; just over two-thirds, or 67%, agreed that they can often or always balance personal, family and work needs in their current jobs; slightly over 25% reported that their career progress was moderately or significantly affected by conflict between work or personal obligations; 37% said that the quality of their work always or often suffered because of constantly changing priorities; 28% said that the quality of their work always or often suffered because of unreasonable deadlines; 17% said they can never or rarely complete their assigned workload during regular working hours; however, 56% reported that this was always the case; lastly, 26% said they can complete their work only sometimes during regular working hours.

[English]

    What I want to say is that, in general, the employee survey has indicated to us that, yes, there are issues in the area of work/life balance, but generally many people in the public service also do believe they can balance their work and family.

    In terms of who is working what kinds of flexible work arrangements,

[Translation]

    19% work a compressed work week; 33% work a flexible work schedule; 5% telework; 2% job share; and 3% take advantage of leave with income averaging.

[English]

    So how do we compare with other organizations? In the federal public service, 33% are using flex-time arrangements, and in other surveys, it looks like there's a range of between 12% to 24%. And 19% are using a compressed work week. Other surveys have indicated that the percentage of employees on compressed work week ranges from 3% to 13%.

    The question has been asked, and I know you're going to want to address this in more detail, about the labour standards in the public service. The federal public service is not actually bound by the Canada Labour Code, part III, meaning, when I talk about the federal public service, the part of the public service that is governed by Treasury Board Secretariat. If you think of the broad federal public service as including crown corporations, they indeed would be governed by part III of the Canadian Labour Code.

    The provisions or the authorities for management of the workforce for the federal public service arise from the Financial Administration Act, which provides for the Treasury Board to establish terms and conditions of employment. For the most part, these provisions have been negotiated within the context of collective bargaining. Where there are such provisions negotiated with unionized employees, these are usually extended to non-union employees as well, recognizing that 85% of the federal public service is unionized.

    The policies we introduced in the 1990s, quite apart from those that have been negotiated in collective agreements, include the ones that you see here in your slides. We have a pre-retirement transition leave, self-funded leave, or personal, leave with income averaging, various mechanisms to assist people in their search for child care, alternative work arrangements with various options of part-time employment, variable work weeks, the option of doing telework, or flexible hours of work.

    Let's talk for a moment about the gap between policy and practice. We have been working on these policies for over a decade. The issue is not really policies, of course; it's the application of the policies and issues of culture change that are the real challenge. What we're looking for is employee engagement--a combination of satisfaction and commitment--and retention and branding the public service as a workplace of choice. We have extremely good provisions, or labour standards, if you like, within our collective agreements. They go well beyond the provisions within the Labour Code, for the most part.

    Well-being is a joint responsibility of employees and managers, and in many instances, it is quite likely that more individuals could take advantage of existing policies.

    In terms of what we've done for follow-up of the public service surveys, specifically to focus on this issue of work/life balance, the 1999 survey.... The clerk at the time set up three committees of senior officials, one focusing on workplace well-being. We developed a discussion paper, called “Towards an Exemplary Workplace: Our Obligation to Promote and Ensure Work/Life Balance in the Federal Public Service”. And there was another publication on telework, how to do it, a learning module for employees and managers, and an annotated bibliography on workplace well-being and so on.

    We also hosted four learning events in 2000-01, and many people came out to those. One of the topics was work/life balance, but the other topics are really related to the notion of employee satisfaction as well--the respectful workplace, for example. There was also a round table established at the Canadian Centre for Management Development that ended with the publication of, “A Fine Balance: A Manager's Guide to Workplace Well-being”. I would recommend to you that very fine publication.

º  (1615)  

[Translation]

    I'd now like to talk about some of the other initiatives that have been taken.

    The Task Force on Modernizing Human Resources Management in the public service was launched. Other initiatives include promotion of a diverse and inclusive public service, the Fryer Report and the Report of the Advisory Committee on Labour Management Relations which led to a number of changes. A revised policy on the prevention and resolution of harassment in the workplace was also implemented, along with a process for the internal disclosure of information concerning wrongdoing in the workplace.

[English]

    We also announced a new code for the public service and are working on the policy on continuous learning.

    In terms of follow-up on the 2002 results, we established a survey follow-up action committee, SFAAC, in January 2003. It has been looking at the survey findings, trying to decide what are the key priorities. The SFAAC report is now available on a website. It identified five areas for public service follow-up and focus. They're listed in your deck. Work/life balance and workload are key issues, in addition to developing better tools for career development and learning, and dealing with the issues of harassment and discrimination. Finally, there is employee engagement and labour relations.

    As for the next steps, we need to continue to analyze emerging issues. Elder care, wellness, health in the workplace, stress management, and health promotion are key issues. We need to create cultural change in all areas of the organizations, including developing supportive work environments.

    We're going to work with the committee of deputies on pride and well-being to identify a workplace well-being policy framework to develop communications strategies and tools and other levers to train and develop leaders and managers who move forward on this file through their actions as well as their words.

    As well, we're establishing an accountability framework in relation to the management accountability framework that specifically relates to people management, and we will be measuring in accordance with the performance indicators that are a part of that framework.

    Finally, work/life balance remains a huge societal issue. We're quite aware of that. The solutions require all partners to address the issues. Investments will be required, but there has been a lot of research, a lot of work done to date. We know that we want to become an employer of choice and that we need to find ways to innovate and to move forward on this.

    We welcome the opportunity to speak with you on this subject.

º  (1620)  

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Just before I turn it over to committee members for questions, I wonder if you'd clarify something that's on page 10. You seem to indicate that fewer executives are working on weekends. At the bottom of the page you say, “% of those who do not work on weekends almost doubled from 9% in 1997 to 16% in 2002”.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: That's right.

    The Chair: Then fewer people--

    Mrs. Glynnis French: What's happening is that they're working their longer hours during the work week, and allowing their weekends to be free.

    The Chair: All right. I just wanted to clarify that.

    We're going to have to reduce our time significantly. My intention is that we will go through until about 5:05 or 5:10, at which point we will deal with Madam Tremblay's notice of motion.

    With that, I'm going to keep it to about six-minute rounds, starting with Mr. Spencer. And I'm going to be pretty strenuous in keeping to that.

    Mr. Larry Spencer (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Picking up from where you started there, with those who are spending more time at home on weekends and more time at the office during the week, is that at their initiative, or is that because of some of these work-family initiatives that have been taken--or is it at the demand of these executives themselves?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: That was in the APEX survey, and I'm not exactly privy to the methodology, but my understanding is that it is one of the ways in which executives, senior leaders of the public service, have decided to introduce their own form of workplace balance, which would be to work extremely long hours during the week and to protect the weekend for their own lives.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: Okay.

    We've heard a lot recently about performance bonuses for a lot of government employees somewhere. Would this be the group? Would these executives be receiving performance bonuses? Are those related to the difficulties those executives face in work/life balance situations or not?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: I think those two issues are not necessarily linked, really, in the sense that all executives in the public service are eligible for performance pay. These are also the same executives who are reporting on their hours of work. But I'm not necessarily sure that there is a relationship between those who do work long hours and those who receive performance pay.

º  (1625)  

    Mr. Larry Spencer: In other words, their job effort doesn't really impact whether or not they get a bonus. If that doesn't relate, then what does relate for their performance bonuses?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Pardon me, Mr. Spencer; what I was trying to say was that it doesn't mean they're not working long hours of work during the week. They are. I think the number of hours worked are....

    Do you have the figures there, Dave?

    Mr. Dave Flavell (Director, Innovations and Human Resources Planning, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat): I can tell you from a demographic perspective that there are four categories that are suffering the most. These are shift workers, executives, supervisors, and employees outside Canada, who presumably would be DFAIT workers. There's a correlation also with people who are in the higher salary ranges.

    So the message is that as the responsibility, supervisory, and decision-making process goes up, there's a commensurate increase in working hours. There are some categories that are also doing better, and you'll see the converse side of this--public service employees with less than three years' experience, employees with salary ranges lower than $39,000, terms, and casuals.

    We asked 112 questions, and about 112 sub-questions, of about 95,000 employees across 72 departments and regions...and gender, and we're still doing a lot of the research. But when you see issues like that, when you see clearly that shift workers, executives, supervisors, persons earning at a certain level of dollars, and employees outside Canada, where perhaps there aren't as many resources as people would like, versus the lower-end employees, you can begin to see that linkage between responsibility, work, pay, and what's defined by Linda Duxbury and Professor Higgins as “role overload”.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: I've found the information that shows that the number of executives who are working more than 40 hours a week has gone up to 94% from 81% in 1997, and that the average number of hours reportedly worked is about 53 hours a week.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: Okay.

    On your employees in general, there's mention that perhaps what's driving the desire for early retirement and the loss of employees at an earlier age is that perhaps they're having difficulties with work/life balance. How about just turnover in general? What do you perceive to be your major problems in turnover?

    Mr. Dave Flavell: When we asked the question, “Are you planning to leave within the next five years?”, 29% of the persons who responded to the survey said they would leave. We had some people at the board look at that from the standpoint of the way things worked in the past, how it relates to outside sources, the private sector, public sector, and what the turnover rates are. Actually, they're quite reasonable, because six to ten or more is not in the least bit out of the ordinary. So our turnover rate is quite manageable, and we do have a variety of programs in place to deal with that.

    Many of you will likely be familiar with things like the pre-qualified program for ADMs, AEXDP programs, CAP programs, at the higher end people moving into management. And then at the entry level we have such things as economist recruitment programs.

    With the PSC, in conjunction with Glynnis' policy people, we're trying to take a holistic approach to this. That turnover rate of 29% is over five years, so comparatively speaking, it's not an issue. It is manageable, and we're working hard at that EX entry level and the AEXDP. So we believe that's quite manageable.

º  (1630)  

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Flavell.

    Mr. Jackson.

    Mr. Ovid Jackson (Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, Lib.): Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

    Thanks to our guests for being here.

    I have just a quick question on the universal classification system. They were trying to rationalize them. I would like to maybe just get a quick update on that. And then, in light of the new work patterns that people are coming up with, how will those be addressed?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Work continues on classification. As you know, there was a decision to move from using the universal standard, but to move group by group through a process of classification reform. So this year they're looking specifically, I believe, at the CS group and fisheries officers group to sort of move forward on a step-by-step process to revise the way in which people within those categories are classified.

    So work is moving ahead on classification. There's still a lot of work to be done, but on a measured, step-by-step basis, we're moving forward.

    In terms of how people actually want to work in the public service, or how they do work, certainly many workplaces are making great efforts to ensure that teamwork and horizontality are encouraged and put in place. And certainly they're using the technology tools we have today to assist in that process. For example, you can set up virtual work groups, you can set up consultation areas on the web, so that we can easily facilitate teamwork in ways that we couldn't in the past.

    Mr. Ovid Jackson: There's no question, though, that in today's world, in order to get the best people, women in particular, because of the work/life balance and the fact that they are the nurturers, a lot of bright women are defining the way they work. How are you dealing with that?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Do you want to talk about the survey results, Dave?

    Mr. Dave Flavell: Actually, there's not a whole lot of difference between men and women in the survey results, from a demographic perspective, on their work/life balance. It's pretty close, at 65 to 69. In some cases, women are even doing better. That's one of the areas that we will certainly be looking into in our analysis. Clearly, the message is that women are not only carrying out their professional functions, but a lot of the work at home is falling on them, as well.

    If we look at our numbers, in the mid-sixties range, it's fairly equitable. So something's working.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: The other thing I'd like to mention is that the policies we have, and the provisions, really, that have arisen in the course of collective agreements, are some of the best in the country, I think, for supporting people in their work life. We're not the leading employer, but we're among the leading employers.

    For example, we top up maternity benefits while people are taking maternity leave. We have provisions for personal care. There are personal days that people can take to deal with doctors' appointments and special needs. In fact, they can take leave without pay to deal with ailing family members.

    So there are many provisions within the context of the policy regime and the collective bargaining regime that are very supportive of women and of the work/life balance more generally.

    Mr. Ovid Jackson: Thank you.

[Translation]

    The Chair: Mrs. Tremblay.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay (Rimouski-Neigette-et-la Mitis, BQ): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    I'd like to understand how it is the government has arranged for Part III of the Canada Labour Code to cover conditions of employment, but fails to see to it that its very own employees are covered by these provisions. Why is it that public service employees are not subject to the Canada Labour Code? Could this be seen as one way of creating jobs? Having a secretariat that deals only with public service employees creates many jobs. I find it rather odd that the federal public service is not bound by the Canada Labour Code provisions. Could you explain to us the rationale for this historic decision? You maintain that you have provisions in place that go well beyond what is contained in Part III of the Code. If that's true, why not include them in the Code? If you have sound provisions that apply to your employees, why not extend them to all employees covered by the Code? I don't see why public service employees should enjoy better conditions than others covered by the Code. I'd appreciate a clear explanation of this point.

º  (1635)  

    Mrs. Glynnis French: I believe a process has been launched to review the Canada Labour Code, but the standards in place are minimum standards. Many employers, even those bound by the Code, have brought in far more generous provisions.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: Who ultimately benefits from the Code's provisions? Why do we even have a Part III of the Canada Labour Code? For whom are these provisions intended? Who benefits? Why have you taken this initiative?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: I believe the Code was brought in 40 years ago. The Minister of Labour and the Minister of Human Resources Development have, I believe, acknowledged that the Code needs to be revised. Changes have occurred in the workplace, changes that should be reflected in a revised Code. This is not my bailiwick, because I'm from the public service and we have legislation in place governing public service employees.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: Do all federal employees, coast to coast, report to the TBS, without exception?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Yes, all federal employees covered by Part I of the Public Service Staff Relations Act report to Treasury Board.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: Every single federal employee?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: I'm talking about Part I. The last part concerns separate employers. The same legislation applies to them, but they negotiate collective agreements for their own employees.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: Take, for instance, Canada Post employees.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Canada Post employees are covered by the Code, I believe, because the organization is...

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: A Crown corporation?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: ...a Crown corporation. They are probably covered by the Canada Labour Code.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: In fact, they are covered by Part III of the Code.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Correct.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: However, they do not report to the TBS.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: No.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: Now then, do the same directives apply to all departments? I read somewhere in one of your documents that the TBS issues directives for federal employees.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Treasury Board does in fact issue directives that apply to all federal departments and their employees. Collective agreements apply to specific occupational groups.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: So then, not all federal public servants have the same collective agreement.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Not at all.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: What happens when a new agency is created? What happens to former employees?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: These employees have their own collective agreement, even though most belong to the same unions that negotiate with the employer. Occasionally, the same provisions may not be negotiated for them, although they usually are quite similar.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: I understand. Thank you.

º  (1640)  

    The Chair: Ms. St-Jacques.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques (Shefford, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Welcome and thank you for being here.

    On page 21 of your presentation, you note that policies in place are not a major problem, but rather that application and culture are the key challenge. You indicated to Mrs. Tremblay that the same directives apply to all departments. How do you ensure departmental compliance with these directives? What recourse is available to employees who feel their rights may have been breached in some way? Can they take action through their union? What's the procedure?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: We have a mandate to influence departmental policy. A number of our task forces are looking at specific issues such as work balance. We've heard from many people about the various measures that need to be taken to ensure better practices in the workplace. That's one step. Another is the Treasury Board directives that apply to all departments. Most work balance policies are aimed at giving employees some flexibility. For example, an employee can request flexible hours of work. Directives to that effect are included in collective agreements.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: An employee may wish to work flexible hours and his manager or service may not be able to accommodate that request. Is there some provision in place whereby that employee could request a transfer? Is there some provision that could help me if I need to work fewer hours per week because of family commitments? Can an employee change jobs?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Work requirements must be taken into consideration. Some discussion and negotiation would have to take place between the employee and the manager. I'm certain that there are cases where it's impossible to satisfy every single employee need or request. The public service tries to find solutions that satisfy both the manager and the employee.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: I have another question about active living. You talked about workplace fitness programs. In my opinion, it's important to eliminate or reduce stress. What steps do you take to achieve this objective? Perhaps we could follow them as well. I personally have a hard time fitting a fitness program into my schedule and I know that I would benefit from this type of activity. Do you encourage public servants to work out? Do you actively promote fitness programs for your employees?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Are you referring to the Continuous Learning Policy? I don't think I understood the question correctly.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: On page 20 of your document, you refer to workplace fitness programs. What exactly are you doing to encourage employees to exercise and stay fit? Are you merely promoting fitness programs, or do you in fact offer employees some incentives?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: In some workplaces, employees can participate in fitness classes. For example, we have worked with the Civil Service Recreation Association to organize several employee fitness programs. Of course, they must pay, but employees have the option of working out over their lunch hour, or at some other time during the day.

º  (1645)  

    Mr. Dave Flavell: An interdepartmental committee on workplace well-being and an HR planning committee are also discussing issues such as these. Furthermore, we are distributing documents detailing some of the promising practices throughout government. We have produced a 5th edition of Human Resources Strategies in Times of Change: An Inventory of Initiatives. There are a number of examples such as this. We are trying to encourage this type of initiative.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: Thank you, Madam Chair.

[English]

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Second round, Mr. Spencer, three minutes.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    You mentioned something in your introduction that I find interesting . You said that the public service of Canada, as an employer of choice, wanted to address situations that would help them “attract and retain the right people, with the right values”.

    In this day and age, when every value is questioned, and we seem to lower it to the lowest common denominator of no values, what are you talking about in regard to values here? How do you do that?

    I'm tying that to where, later here, you talk about the balance between family and work, that the ability to balance family and work has deteriorated. On the next page, you talk about the great stress levels that are involved.

    Do these values impact those two ideas?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: On the issue of values, really for the first time we have published the code of public service values and ethics, which is a clear enunciation of the values that it's anticipated every public servant will live by. The values really fall within four broad categories, relating to democratic values, ethical values, people values, and professional values. And for each one of those value families, there is an explanation of what kinds of behaviour are expected within that.

    We actually are quite clear about the values and the behaviour supporting those values that are anticipated in the public service. In fact, the code of the public service is now a condition of employment. When you agree to take on a position, you also sign on to the code of values and ethics for the public service. So we're actually quite precise about that.

    On the issue of work/life balance, one of the values is that people are to be treated with respect, and fairly. In part that relates to the whole issue of work/life balance, because managers who treat their employees with respect will ensure that they engage employees on what they need to do to be able to do the job in a way that permits them to carry out their family responsibilities at the same time as performing their work duties.

    Mr. Dave Flavell: I think there is that level of values, and then there is also the level of values that we want to inspire in our professional public service, such as innovation and risk-taking and support for employees and again the balance. I think the survey we have repeated for the second time can help you, as you're looking at the results of the survey.

    When we developed that survey, we took a look at all of the major quality frameworks, at what's happening in Britain in terms of what's called “Investors in People”. Every federal organization in Britain must meet that standard, which is building their people to meet the challenges of the public service. We looked at NQI, we looked at Baldridge, we looked at high-performing organizations, what the qualities were, and then we asked the questions to draw out whether or not we were doing that in our own public service.

    So we looked at the questions from the first survey and then we repeated 39 in the second survey on some of those very critical areas related to “my job world”, relating to how work units operate, to how people are using their skills, to harassment and discrimination, to how we're staffing. Are we hiring people to do the right job? Do people have confidence within the job site that the people being hired have the right skills and are doing the job right? As well, looking at their department or agency, does senior management do a good job of sharing? Will senior management try to resolve the concerns in the survey?

    The results weren't very good on that one question in 1999, but on this survey we went from a 33% response rate, on management will act, to 50% in 2002. And of the 39 questions that we repeated, which are really some core questions on what it is to build and be a healthy organization, with healthy people, we improved in 36 of those questions. Now, some of them are only modest improvements, of 1% to 2%, but others were fairly significant. So we think we're going in the right direction in there, and if we can keep improving....

    For example, on “management will continue to act to improve the survey”, we went from 33% or 35% to 50%. If we can do that again, then we're really moving up.

    So this is a good measurement tool, not only from the standpoint of what Glynnis is talking about but also how organizations are being run, and how healthy the people are.

º  (1650)  

    The Chair: Mr. McCormick.

    Mr. Larry McCormick (Hastings—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, Lib.): Thank you very much.

    On the agencies, I know you addressed that with my colleague, but I notice you mentioned that we, the public service people, top up the maternity benefits and give them time available for elder care and all that, which we should do. I'm just wondering whether we extend that, or where this fits in with the agencies and the employees of the agencies. Because we've created more agencies than ever.

    I wonder if you could speak to that.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: We really don't follow or have oversight over the provisions that are in collective agreements in the agencies, so I can't give you a clear answer on that. My expectation is that they would be moving lockstep with us, because the employees of those organizations are frequently covered, or at least represented, by the same unions that represent the public service. When they start negotiating in the federal public service, they'll probably take that same provision to the table with another employer.

    Mr. Larry McCormick: Thank you. I appreciate that, but when you said “we”--and I'm glad that we top up whatever--and yet, if “they”, the employees of the agencies, only have what's agreed on through negotiation with the unions....

    As well, I may have missed something here, but I'm wondering where it's listed who all you surveyed. And “public service” is something I'm not clear on, although I shouldn't admit it. Speaker Milliken and I, with just seven small federal institutions in the Kingston area, have public service employees at our penitentiaries. I'm just wondering if you could tell me, very briefly, where they fit in. I know we don't have too much time here.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Certainly the employees of the Correctional Service of Canada are employees of the federal government.

    Mr. Larry McCormick: Were any of them included in this survey?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Most definitely.

    Mr. Larry McCormick: Is there any breakdown available?

    Mr. Dave Flavell: Yes, there is.

    Mr. Larry McCormick: Because things are not all good, with seven penitentiaries there. I mean, the stress....

    At first when I heard about where we were going with HRDC, it sure reminded me of our job, and the members' jobs of all parties, who are here for the right reason. But for the men and women who work at those institutions--and I'm only speaking about those seven--there is so much stress there, I would like to receive at some time a bit of a breakdown or a review of what we heard from those people.

    Madam Chair, thank you.

º  (1655)  

    The Chair: If I may, I think what Mr. McCormick is asking is whether you could provide those statistics--

    Mrs. Glynnis French: By department.

    The Chair: Yes. That would be extremely helpful.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: I know we can't break it down for that region, but for the Correctional Service generally, yes, we can.

    Mr. Larry McCormick: Thank you very much.

    The Chair: Just to follow up from Mr. McCormick's question on the agencies, if you're relying solely on the collective bargaining and the fact that they're members of the same union, are you saying that there are no minimum standards in place for agency employees? They don't fall under part III of the Labour Code, they don't fall under the Treasury Board Secretariat, so they don't fall under anybody. Is that what you're saying?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: No, because their own legislation would provide the employer in this case with the opportunity to negotiate terms and conditions of employment.

    The Chair: But it's only in terms of a collective agreement. There are no minimum federally enforced labour standards.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Not an overarching law that covers all of them, and neither is there for the federal public service. We're in exactly the same situation, because we use the Public Service Staff Relations Act to provide the process for collective bargaining, and then Treasury Board imposes additional policies.

    The Chair: But there are standards, and there are guidelines--

    Mrs. Glynnis French: That they have built up over a period of time. The Treasury Board, fulfilling its role as the employer, has established certain policies that pertain to all employees within our purview.

    The Chair: Monsieur Bellemare.

[Translation]

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    I would imagine that in order to be a happy, productive public servant, one has to feel comfortable in the workplace, content in the knowledge that one can meet the demands of family life. However, advancement implies professional development.

    Are you convinced that everyone showing some potential has the opportunity to receive professional development? How do you go about deciding who has potential?

[English]

    Mr. Dave Flavell: I can respond by giving you a brief summary of some of the questions we asked from 1999. We asked employees if they get the training they need to do the job, if they're able to get on-the-job coaching, if they have the opportunity to develop and apply the skills they need to enhance their careers--

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Excuse me, but did they put their names on that questionnaire?

    Mr. Dave Flavell: No, sir.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: How would you know if X, Y, or Z “needs” and “can do”? What you're telling me is that it was a general survey, a nameless, faceless survey.

    Mr. Dave Flavell: Yes, sir, but it does--

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: If I want it to zero in on individuals, how would I do that?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Well, career development, or at least providing for both the performance management system and the career development of employees, is one of the key management functions. Every manager is expected to establish, for example, a learning plan with employees. We now do have a policy that requires that learning plans be developed for each and every employee. That can be a part of career development, but career development can be something more than simply your learning plan.

    Career progression, or career progression planning, is something that's different in different departments. For example, as we all know, with the military, they're not actually public servants, but even civilians within the military live within a culture where there is very careful career development. Foreign Affairs also has very standardized processes of career development.

    In other departments it is, I would say, less planned. Nevertheless, it is a responsibility of every manager to conduct career planning for his or her employees.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Mr. Flavell mentioned that for the executive entry level, they're working hard...and it got a little fuzzy there. What do you mean by this, that you're working hard at the executive entry level? I assume you're looking at certain individuals who had the potential for EX-1, EX-2, or whatever. Do you have them in there first as acting, so that they can get a feel for the job, and managers can have a feel for their potential?

»  (1700)  

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Actually, again, it depends. What we do have, in terms of the programs that Mr. Flavell was referring to, relates to the process to accelerate certain executives through the system so that they get the training and development and breadth and depth of experience that they need in order to be well-versed senior managers--if you like, the director general or ADM level.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: How is it done?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: There's a process of selection where executives who are interested apply to be part of a pool of people, and then they're interviewed. They're put through a process of--

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: What's the name of that program?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: The accelerated executive development program.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Could we get a copy of that policy, or that form?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Yes indeed.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Back to Mr. Spencer's ideas with regard to people working overtime, do the people who work overtime get money or do they get time off, such as longer holidays?

    Mr. Dave Flavell: They can get both.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Either one.

    Mr. Dave Flavell: They can receive overtime or they can receive compensatory time off. Oftentimes that's a negotiation between the manager and the employee.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Does that exist--for example, getting time off or money--for only a certain level, such as up to EX-1, and above that you don't get payments or whatever?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Executives are never paid for overtime. People who are covered by the provisions in the collective agreement do have provisions for overtime. If they request payment, we are required by the collective agreement to provide them with pay for their overtime. However, they also have the opportunity to request time instead of money, and we do that.

    In fact, I tried to do a quick look, because I thought you might ask a question of that kind. About 170,000 days of time in lieu were requested, I think in 2001-02. That's almost one day per employee, but you have to imagine all the employees in the federal public service.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Ms. French, you mentioned something about classification, that you were working hard at it--not your words. But I was under the impression that you had given up on classification, save for some departments, perhaps, or some sections.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Not at all.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Not at all what?

    Mrs. Glynnis French: We have not given up on classification. We absolutely understand that classification is at the fundamental underpinnings of the compensation system and that we need to get it right. What did happen, through the process of trying to put everybody within the same group, was a decision that was not appropriate given the multiplicity of work and activity in the federal public service. Instead, we needed to have still a smaller number of groups than exist today, but we needed classification reform that really fit the work that was being conducted, using the work that was done to develop a universal standard, because that standard can actually be adapted to many different groups.

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Bellemare.

    Mr. Simard.

    Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint-Boniface, Lib.): Madam Chair, I think we have about five minutes or so?

    The Chair: Yes.

    Mr. Raymond Simard: Then I will make this really quick.

    I'm not sure if I understand your survey findings correctly, but are you saying that 87% of civil servants are satisfied with their current working arrangements? That's a pretty impressive number in any industry, or any field, I would think.

    You have also identified four specific categories of public servants who are maybe less satisfied. You talked about the foreign service, supervisors, and others. I guess my question is, are we to assume that the dissatisfaction is mostly in that group of four? And if yes, does that allow you to focus or to zero in on that group in terms of trying to find solutions to these problems? Why would you spend a lot of time with the 87% who are satisfied with their work surroundings, if you will?

    Second, have they said what kinds of changes they would like to see in terms of improving their workplace situation?

»  (1705)  

    Mr. Dave Flavell: You are right. The survey results do point people in the direction of where the best practices are and where the work has to be done. The process between the central agencies and the departments is that we will share best practices. Mr. Judd goes out with the survey results and he talks to the deputy ministers. We produce documents he can share with the deputy ministers, and he talks to them about the results in the department against the public service, and how they rated against themselves in 1999. Again, I should say, the results were going up for the most part. Then departments can act, because there's not necessarily a one-size-fits-all for everything.

    You were touching on the borders of a question earlier when we were talking about different job types. The way an RCMP officer or someone on a boat or a corrections officer, for example, deals with issues of overtime, time in lieu, or stress, will be, of necessity, different from how someone who may be a policy officer in Ottawa, working more of a standardized day, deals with these issues.

    So it's a balance between working with departments, sharing best practices, and having departments take the actions in their respective communities about what's right for them to move their organizations ahead. All of this information is shared. We send information to deputies that allows them to look at where they are in relation to the public service.

    Mr. Raymond Simard: So it allows them to focus on specifics.

    Mr. Dave Flavell: That's exactly right. We try to show them a variance of where they are and then they can zero in.

    Mr. Raymond Simard: Excellent.

    Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

    The Chair: Thank you very much.

    On behalf of the members of the committee, I want to thank you very much for both coming to committee and giving us your very thorough presentation. I know that if the committee has any further questions, they won't hesitate to call and ask you to either present some written material or perhaps come back to visit the committee at some future time. Thank you very much.

    Mrs. Glynnis French: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    The Chair: Members of the committee, the next order of business is a notice of motion. This motion was filed pursuant to the 48 hours' notice. It's a notice of motion from Madam Tremblay.

    Madam, are you prepared to move your motion at this time?

[Translation]

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: Yes, Madam Chair.

[English]

    The Chair: I'll turn over the floor to you so that you can speak to your motion.

[Translation]

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: I've brought along copies, in both English and French, of the document I spoke of, Mrs. Bélisle.

    When Ms. Francine Blouin-Wilkinson appeared before the committee, I asked her a question about seasonal workers in various regions of Canada in conjunction with the committees set up by Minister Stewart. When she referred to recommendations, I felt that she hadn't understood my question or didn't understand what I was getting at. She replied that the recommendations, all of which were similar in scope, couldn't be implemented and called for a minimum wage and a guaranteed income.

    Unfortunately, I realized that the document which had been circulated to you and to which I referred only existed in French. Therefore, I took it upon myself to have certain excerpts translated, for example, the study summary. I then had the recommendations translated and appended them to the document. You also have the introduction, the table of contents, and so forth.

    You'll also note that some of the recommendations concerning departments, both federal and Quebec government departments, and others pertain to socio-economic agencies like Canada Economic Development, CFDCs and so forth. These recommendations don't just call for a minimum wage and a guaranteed income. They reflect a genuine desire to work together to find a solution to these community problems. In my opinion, these are very serious studies. However, the minister has yet to respond to them.

    My motion calls upon the minister to tell us what she plans to do with these reports. They contain many suggestions and I'd like to know if she is planning any follow-up action. In my view, she should have told the Prime Minister that she had commissioned some studies and therefore had no need for a partisan Liberal committee.

    I propose that the minister be called before the committee to tell members what action she intends to take in response to these reports on the activities of seasonal workers. She has everything she needs to make some decisions where this matter is concerned.

»  (1710)  

[English]

    The Chair: Madam St-Jacques.

[Translation]

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    First of all, in response to Mrs. Tremblay's suggestion that the minister appear before the committee, I'd have to say that this is unnecessary at this time. In my view, the senior officials who testified last week provided satisfactory answers to our questions.

    Mrs. Suzanne Tremblay: They didn't provide an answer to this particular question.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: Ms. Blouin-Wilkinson mentioned that in the committee recommendations, the question of a guaranteed annual income came up often and that this option wasn't in the cards at the present time. The Prime Minister's task force will be focussing on this issue from a more national perspective. It won't focus on any one region in particular, as the committees did. Rather, it will look at the overall picture in an effort to see what can be done for seasonal workers.

    Another issue is job insecurity. I don't know if last week, you read a Statistics Canada report on this very subject. Seasonal workers represent one type of worker. However, some new jobs may become seasonal. That is true of persons who work on contract for a given period of time. The task force will therefore be looking at these issues, but from a broader national perspective. Given the tight deadlines that we are working to, it's not necessarily the ideal solution.

[English]

    The Chair: Any further comments?

    (Motion negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

    The Chair: The meeting is adjourned.