 |
Modernization of the Public ServiceJuly 25, 2003 The Honourable Lucienne Robillard Dear Ms. Robillard: A copy of Bulletin #20 on the modernization of human resources management issued on June 30, 2003 was recently sent to me by a PSAC member. In the bulletin, you make a number of statements with which I must take issue. First, your assertion that Bill C-25 has been well received cannot possibly take into account the reaction of those who are likely to be most affected by the Bill—that is, the workers. From my discussions with members across the country, I can tell you that the more PSAC members learn about Bill C-25, the more concerned they are. In general terms, PSAC members are concerned that the legislation tips the balance of power in favour of the employer much further than is the case now. For example, the broadening of the definition of essential services and the union’s inability to challenge the level of service to be provided during a strike effectively removes the right of PSAC members to strike. Similarly, the extension of personal liability to individual union officers under the Offences and Punishment provisions is an unnecessarily extreme and punitive measure which will discourage union members from taking an active role in their union. Measures such as these seem designed to minimize the impact of unions within the workplace and, as far as we are concerned, constitute a step backwards in union/management relations. This is the message PSAC members have been delivering to MPs and Senators across the country since Bill C-25 was introduced. It is one we will continue to deliver in the hope that meaningful changes can be made to the proposed legislation. In Bulletin #20, you state that the proposed changes with respect to staffing are intended to avoid “the complex procedures that exist in today’s legislation” and will not “water down merit in the staffing system or inadvertently open the door to bureaucratic patronage”. You maintain that the bill is designed to uphold the principles of fairness, competency and non-partisanship and that strong safeguards, such as the new Public Service Staffing Tribunal, have been put in place to protect against personal favouritism and other forms of abuse in staffing. As we now know, a recent audit of the Federal Student Work Experience Program (FSWEP) found that “there were a significant number of cases where managers improperly circumvented the safeguards in place in order to hire someone they had in mind before making the request”. If it is possible to manipulate the system in this way in spite of existing safeguards, what will happen once the new Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) is in place? Once Bill C-25 is implemented, the Public Service Commission will not be required “to consider more than one person in order for an appointment to be made on the basis of merit”. Moreover, the person to be appointed will only have to meet the “essential” qualifications of the job. As if that were not enough, the Commission will be able to take into account any additional qualifications and any current or future operational requirements or needs of the organization, as determined by the deputy head! The words are clear. There can be no misinterpretation. Under these provisions, managers will have the flexibility they need to hire the one person they think is best suited to a particular job. That is why we believe that, if Bill C-25 is enacted as currently written, your government will have sanctioned the dubious staffing practices that most observers have suspected—and that the FSWEP audit has concluded—have been in place all along. While most PSAC members may agree that the current staffing system needs to be streamlined, they do not agree that the proposed changes to the PSEA will result in improvements to the system. In fact, it is these changes that are most worrisome to PSAC members. It is inconceivable to them and to me that your government would not wish to ensure that a successful candidate possesses all of the qualifications for a position and that no additional or unspecified criteria, other than those described in the statement of qualifications, would be considered. Finally, in the most recent bulletin, you note that the Government Operations and Estimates Committee focused particular attention on various issues such as “the protection of employees who disclose wrongdoing in the workplace” and that amendments were adopted to strengthen the legislation in these areas. As you well know, C-25 stipulates only that “the Treasury Board may establish policies or issue directives respecting the disclosure by persons employed in the public service of information concerning wrongdoing in the public service and the protection from reprisal of persons who disclose such information in accordance with those policies or directives”. This is a far cry from language that would expressly prohibit reprisals against so-called “whistleblowers”. Many of the witnesses who appeared before the Committee called for whistleblowing legislation “with teeth”. At least two Committee members presented comprehensive amendments designed to protect employees fully from any disciplinary action taken as a result of their reporting on wrongdoing in the workplace. The amendment that was accepted amounts to a formal recognition of what is already in place – a policy. Unfortunately, the policy is not well known and has been described by one PSAC member as “the best kept secret in the federal government”. In light of recent events in the Office of the Privacy Commission, PSAC members understand the need to protect employees from vindictive managers more than ever, and expect their employer to guarantee in concrete terms that they can expose wrongdoing without fear. A whistleblowing policy issued solely at the discretion of the Treasury Board is simply not good enough. In closing, let me say once again that I regret that you have not seen fit to consult the Public Service Alliance of Canada in any meaningful way on ways to modernize the public service. A constructive dialogue between two equal partners is, in my view, the only way to start building more constructive labour- management relations, and create a more productive and supportive working environment.
|