Resources

Publications

Reports

Chapter 3: Review of Hiring Policies and Practices

3.1 Introduction

The review of written policies was initiated to ensure that we understood the staffing process of the public service and that the review instruments used during the study reflected the reality of the environment. The review was limited to those policies regulating recruitment and selection as described in the Staffing Manual of the Public Service Commission (PSC). These policies have a direct impact on hiring and promotions, areas identified as a concern for visible minority candidates.

In addition, we examined several application forms, the Generic Delegated Authority Agreement and samples of entry level testing. While the Collective Agreements were not reviewed, the Master Agreement was examined. This was supplemented by information on policies and practices from interviews and questionnaires from managers, and employees.

The review was not meant to be a comprehensive systems review, as this would have been beyond the scope of this project. It did not include items such as an examination of job descriptions, and staffing files. Moreover, because each department has its own staffing directives as they relate to their delegated authorities, these departmental policies were not examined. Finally, flow data was not available to us to analyze the effect of hiring practices on visible minority candidates. This review of staffing policies is hence limited.

Public service employment practices are guided by a very comprehensive framework. Making it distinctive is the fact that employment policies and practices are governed by a specific piece of legislation, the Public Service Employment Act, which is supplemented by the Public Service Employment Regulations and a significant number of polices and guidelines issued by the Public Service Commission and the Treasury Board Secretariat.

3.2 The Public Service Employment Act

The Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) requires that appointments be based on the merit principle. The goal is to ensure that the people of Canada are served by a public service that is highly competent, non-partisan, and representative of Canadian society.

The system is designed to ensure that practices are: fair, which is defined as being objective, free from patronage, and providing just treatment; equitable, which is defined as being free from barriers; and transparent which is defined as ensuring open communication.

The main components of the staffing process are described below:

Delegation of authority

The law provides the PSC the authority to delegate staffing responsibilities. The PSC delegates to Deputy Ministers and heads of agencies the authority for staffing: they in turn delegate to managers. Initial decisions by managers include:

• Selection of available processes
• Choice of number and timing of vacancies
• Decision on time and cost of filling vacancy
• Determination as to whether permanent or temporary
• Determination as to whether a manager will make an appointment or offer deployment, assignment or secondment (not considered appointments).

Preliminary responsibilities

Preliminary responsibilities conferred on managers include:

a) Establishment of a written statement of qualifications (which always includes language, may include education, occupational certification, experience, knowledge, abilities/skills, aptitudes and personal suitability);

b) Consideration of priorities whereby managers must consider all persons who have priority status first. If no priority person is appointed, the manager can proceed with another staffing action and

c) Selection of staffing options: i.e. a choice between two types of competitions:

Closed competitions

Open competitions (which can be held to fill entry-level positions, to hire people with specific skills, or for short-term - casual - work.)

Staffing process

The main steps in the staffing process are:

1. Preparation of a competition notice (or poster); includes area of selection, closing date, qualifications required and notice of period of employment;
2. Determination of the candidates who meet the screening requirements;
3. Decision of manager about requirements for further assessment: written test, simulation exercise, interview, reference checks;
4. Decision of manager about qualified candidates to be put on an eligibility list, in order of merit;
5. Communication of results to candidates;
6. Other applicable conditions, i.e. medical, reliability and security;
7. For new employees, period of probation.

Other appointments

Appointments without competition are possible when a manager judges that this would be in the "best interests" of the public service. Such appointments include:

• Acting appointments: Fill or compete for higher level positions to be occupied for a temporary period.
• Assignments and secondments: Fill positions on a temporary basis.
• Deployments: Fill a position, for example, by moving an employee to another position in order to gain experience, or to change departments. In this case, the employee must meet the requirements of the job.

The Public Service staffing process is guided by systematized and institutionalized policies and procedures as dictated by its policy manuals and directives. It tends to be somewhat cumbersome, involving a high degree of paper work on the part of personnel involved in the process, a requirement justified by the very public and "political" nature of the public service. The rules, regulations and procedures of the staffing process are controlled centrally within the Public Service Commission. However, efforts are presently being made to decentralize the staffing process and delegate responsibility to each department. Staffing of executive positions, however, remain the full responsibility of the PSC.

Comments

The fact that staffing is governed directly by law and related regulations tends to make the process somewhat rigid though there are provisions in the Act that would allow a certain degree of flexibility. If the PSC is to delegate staffing authority and confer more flexibility in its systems, it must ensure that the staffing actions collectively are not to have a negative effect on designated groups, especially on visible minorities. At the same time, to secure accountability towards the Canadian taxpayer, it would need to develop a more effective accountability and control mechanism to monitor the impact and effectiveness of staffing policies.

3.3 Recruitment

There is a perception on the part of focus group members that there is a lack of information on employment opportunities and that candidates for many positions are pre-selected. Policy dictates that managers are to determine the geographic, organizational and occupational criteria which employees must meet to be eligible to compete. Restricting the areas of selection may assist managers in limiting the number of applicants but it may, inadvertently, limit the flow of employment information to all candidates, including visible minority candidates. Since there is a problem regarding representation of visible minority employees, these policies might have a negative effect on them and thus should be reviewed for adverse impact. The minimum area of selection can be expanded when it does not provide for a sufficiently broad pool of candidates.

In light of public service downsizing, external recruitment has become more restricted. The inventory is now closed except for specific positions. This has been identified by focus group participants as having a potentially negative impact on visible minority candidates outside the public service, and policies related to methods of recruitment may need to be examined further.

Policy allows the PSC to "actively recruit members of under-represented groups to meet department needs". However, focus group participants have indicated that they believe that this is not being done, at least, not actively.

Recruitment without competition is possible "when, in the opinion of the PSC it is in the best interest of the Public Service." (Public Service Commission, 1994:5-12) The phrase "in the best interest of the Public Service" is often used as an "exception clause" for many policies and yet it is not stated what that means or how the government will monitor these "exceptions". It may be advisable to define the terminology whenever possible - for example, to specify that they can be used for the appointment of members of Employment Equity target groups - and also to monitor these appointments for adverse impact on visible minorities.

Policy encourages the display of competition notices which are "readily accessible"; however, the minimum acceptable coverage is one location ... in each building or complex. It may be appropriate to ensure a better distribution of notices since focus group participants have identified a problem in obtaining information on employment opportunities.

3.4 Selection criteria

Policy stipulates that qualifications must reflect the work to be performed. For instance, policy dictates that:

• the statement of qualifications serves as the basis for the assessment of candidates.
• assessment methods include interviews, samples of previous work, simulation exercises, written tests, assessment centre results, and the review of past accomplishments and experience.
• managers have a responsibility to ensure that designated group members take part in selection boards.

However, our interviews and focus group discussions have indicated the following:

• statements of qualifications do not always reflect the essential duties of the position;
• assessment is usually limited to interviews and written tests. (Our interviews with senior public service managers indicate that some managers talk to a few of their select colleagues for information on past accomplishment and experience of potential candidates, prior to the selection process.)
• designated group status is not taken into consideration on a regular basis.

All of these practices need to be examined and corrective action taken as appropriate.

Managers are viewed as the "best source of information" to determine the essential qualifications of a position. Since empirical data is more convincing than subjective assessment, it may be appropriate to combine the manager's assessment with an empirical counterpart such as essential qualifications for comparable positions.

Equivalencies are provided for within the policy manual (ibid:25). It states: "Alternatives to education may be used at the manager's discretion". According to focus group participants, this is not happening. The Public Service Employment Act, Section 13 (2) indicates that"... the Commission may establish different criteria for groups of persons which are disadvantaged." This is not applied by managers, according to focus group participants, but more importantly, it may be appropriate to re-think or re-word this clause. It is important that nothing in policy encourages the perception that designated group members are less qualified than others - a fear which visible minorities have underlined.

With respect to the executive category, minutes of meetings of the Consultative Committee of Chiefs of Staffing dated March 16, 1995, indicated that assessment focuses on generic executive competencies contained in the Profile of Public Service Leaders and Managers tailored to reflect competencies that are particularly valued in today's transition market such as strategic leadership and vision, human resource management skills, and the building and management of partnerships as well as internal teams. The definition of these criteria has been identified by focus group participants as problematic for visible minorities in that the definition is viewed by management in very "American terms" and is culture-based. The "vision sought" does not consider the demographic changes that are projected for the upcoming decades.

3.5 Selection

Appointing from outside the public service is difficult, particularly in these times. For instance, if the highest ranked candidate in an open competition is from outside the public service, "it must be determined if an appointment from outside the public service is in the best interests of the public service" (ibid:4-4).

"Individuals who are entitled to a priority for appointment ... shall be appointed, in priority to

all others.. .(ibid:3-3)" In a letter to Chiefs of Staffing dated September 15, 1995, under the heading of consideration of priority persons who are candidates in competitions, it is stated: "when such persons are found qualified, they shall be appointed, regardless of where they may rank in the competitive process." Focus group participants indicate that this rarely happens to the advantage of visible minority candidates.

Focus group participants have also indicated that they did not find that assessments were in fact done on an objective basis to identify the best person for the job. One of the issues has been the subjective nature of assessing "personal suitability criteria". Policy also encourages managers to take into consideration "qualifications for future needs." There is a need for rigorous methods of applying these two criteria in order to ensure objective results.

Policy statements indicate that "cut-off scores can be expressed in either a numeric or a narrative form", and that "when judged appropriate, higher cut-off scores may be specified (ibid: 20,21)". This policy is too vague and leaves too much room for subjective decisions and discretion which according to focus group participants have a negative effect on visible minority groups.

3.6 Selection boards

On pages 20- 21 of the Staffing Module on Selection, it reads: "A selection board may change the methods of assessment used... This may be done whether or not the manager of the position... has ... authority. The selection board cannot alter the qualifications. Only the Manager of the position may do so... When a candidate is found unqualified with respect to one factor (such as personal suitability), the assessment of remaining factors is not mandatory." These practices may need to be looked at closely to eliminate the potential for adverse impact on visible minorities and to make more transparent the criteria against which a person was assessed.

On the positive side, managers are told that:

• assessment criteria are to be described in behavioral... terms...
• the assessment tools should be "job related";
• in the preparation of the rating guide, the work description, the statement of qualifications and the rating guide must all "fit together".

These are standards which meet the test of employment equity and consistency should be sought for all competitions.

3.7 Testing

The review of testing is beyond the scope of this report. However, focus group participants have indicated problems in terms of cultural differences and bilingual capability issues and their adverse effect on visible minorities. When interviewed, a PSC representative indicated that tests were validated for job relatedness but not specifically for their potential adverse effect on visible minorities. The validity studies relied on the manager's identification of the "essential duties of the position" rather than on empirical methodologies. This was done as managers were deemed to be in the best position to make such an assessment. All test results should be tracked for their adverse effect on visible minorities and rendered free of cultural/racial bias, as appropriate.

3.8 Reporting and monitoring

The Report on Staffing Transaction (ROST) is used to evaluate the use of delegated staffing authority, to monitor staffing activity within the public service and to prepare reports. It would seem an ideal monitoring mechanism which could be used for purposes of employment equity, but the "PSC continues to be concerned about the quality of staffing data (Minutes of Consultative Committee of Chiefs of Staffing, 1995)."

3.9 Acting appointments and deployments

Policy dictates that "employees can be chosen for acting situations with or without a competition" and "if a competition is held, departmental area of selection guidelines need not apply. (Public Service Commission, 1994:4-7)" Acting appointments have been identified by focus group participants as a key instrument for access to promotional opportunities, providing employees with the experience often needed to qualify for promotions. Employees have also voiced the opinion that these appointments are given to a select few on a preferential basis. Since these appointments are not subject to the competitive process and bypass certain guidelines, it would be important to track these appointments to ensure that in fact these practices are not having a negative impact on visible minorities.

Two other methods of appointing employees without competition include the appointment of term employees to indeterminate positions and deployments, which are often used to give employees additional experience or job enrichment.

If a manager is of the opinion that it would not be in the best interest of the public service to hold a competition and is satisfied that the appointee is the best qualified, the manager may appoint a term employee indeterminately (ibid:4-8).

According to the policy statement, "deployments are not appointments made by or under the authority of the PSC and are not subject to the same procedural requirements.

Both these policies have potential for adverse effect on visible minorities and should be examined accordingly.

3.10 Staffing of EX positions

In the minutes of meetings of the Consultative Committee of Chiefs of Staffing dated March 16, 1995, under the heading, "Changes in Staffing EX positions", it is indicated: "Staffing for entry to the EX Group will always be done following a notice, and these competitions will normally be open to all employees under PSC jurisdiction...." Since the number of visible minority executives is so small, there is no critical mass and less likelihood of them getting into the more senior EX levels. For such levels, postering will continue to be encouraged and competitions will normally be open to all EX's regardless of level. However, the new area of selection policy is flexible enough to allow tailoring based on job requirements and candidate availability.

Here, several issues are of concern. Focus group participants have indicated that information regarding these employment opportunities is not being made available to visible minorities. Also, while the general policy encourages a broad base of recruitment, it has loopholes that enable managers to do virtually what they want.

3.11 Downsizing and designation of surplus employees

Policies relating to downsizing indicate that the "merit principle is the basis for deciding which of the affected employees is to be declared surplus (ibid:3-10)". Related guidelines state that reverse order of merit decisions are used to declare employees surplus"(Salmond and Warrent, 1995: ii). Findings from questionnaires and interviews have indicated that some managers are using the reverse order of merit while others are not. Some managers feel that the process only creates further chaos in their departments, leading to a hostile environment. They feel that there are better ways to deal with downsizing such as voluntary termination and attrition. While most visible minority employees at focus groups were confident that the use of reverse order of merit would not affect them adversely, it might be appropriate to examine the methods for downsizing to assess the ones which are having the least negative effect on the under-represented groups such as visible minorities.

3.12 Employment Equity

Reference to employment equity is made in all staffing documents. For instance, in Chapter 5 of the Staffing Manual, it is stated that "External recruitment may be justified... to promote employment equity." Again in the same Chapter, it is stated: "The PSC actively recruits members of under-represented groups". Despite this, senior managers interviewed and focus group participants stress that such clauses are not used to the advantage of visible minorities.

3.13 Harassment policy and accommodation

Employees have indicated that these policies have had a positive impact on the environment. However, they have also indicated that they are not implemented in a consistent manner and visible minorities fear using the complaint process for fear of retaliation. Managers are not trained consistently in those areas nor are they made accountable for the results. Some participants felt that the "zero tolerance" harassment policy is not being implemented.

3.14 Areas for action

Any written policy can be criticized and improved upon and, therefore, the staffing policies of the PSC are no exception. However, the main concern in this context must remain at the implementation level. Participants in the study have suggested that a central issue is a lack of management will to enact change which would ensure that visible minority employees are fairly represented in the public service at all levels. Real commitment produces real change. In the absence of commitment, no tangible, consistent results can be expected.

What appears to be needed is the right combination of flexibility and accountability. Policies related to recruitment, staffing and promotion must be flexible enough to allow managers to give qualified visible minority candidates access to positions; while at the same time ensuring that the system remains accountable and transparent. While this is no easy task, it would be worthwhile to review policies with this in mind.

We list below some areas that warrant action:

There may be a need to clarify and tighten up some policies that are currently too vague: for example, where it is indicated that some exemption may be "in the best interest of the public service".

There is a need to ensure that mechanisms are in place to enlarge the recruitment base and make acting assignments and developmental opportunities accessible to visible minorities.

Establishing a tracking system with regard to all areas of recruitment, selection and promotion would be highly desirable at this time. It would ensure that the public service can identify with more precision areas of concern for visible minorities and keep on top of the situation as it changes. In particular, discretionary powers should be monitored to ensure that any adverse effect is captured quickly at all levels of the staffing process.

Employment equity as well as policies relating to racial harassment need to be acted upon, monitored for results and attached to an accountability mechanism. Training of personnel, particularly managers responsible for staffing, is required to ensure that they are aware of how to use employment equity provisions effectively and fairly.

Finally, the government needs to make clear to all employees that it will take the steps required to assure a representative work force for visible minorities at all levels of the organization. The will for this initiative must exist at the highest levels, and managers should know that they will be held accountable for the effective implementation of employment equity policies.

Summary: Chapter 3:

Hiring Policies and Practices

The purpose of this chapter is to review public service employment systems and their potential impact on hiring and promotion of visible minorities.

• Public service employment systems are complex, often rigid, and insufficiently transparent to demonstrate equitable treatment.
• More flexibility for managers could improve opportunity for members of visible minorities, but they must also be clear, fair and as objective as possible. Areas of selection and eligibility requirements should be broad enough to encourage a range of applicants.
• Information on employment opportunities should be widely disseminated so that all interested candidates can apply.
• Managers should use creative ways to reach out to members of visible minorities, and track results.
• All efforts should reinforce the merit principle so there is no impression that unqualified candidates are being hired. 

Previous Page Table of Contents Next page