June 7, 2005

REPORT OF UMCC HR SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING

Ms Siegel opened the meeting by thanking Brothers Willie Courtney (retiring), Yves Ducharme, Peter Dunnett and me (all upcoming elections) for participating at the committee and wished everyone luck in the future. Ms Siegel also thanked everyone for the ongoing consultation that is taking place with regards to PSMA and the revised policies and processes. She stated that the policies are still evolving and comments are encouraged and welcomed.

Attached is the agenda for the June 7, 2005 meeting. The agenda has been amended to reflect what was discussed and who presented. The minutes from the January 2005 meeting were accepted. (attached)

Ms Coldwell, DGCESP, gave a very in-depth presentation (Powerpoint file) on the upcoming changes with regards to PSEA. Discussion arose around Human Resources Plans (HRP) and HR planning.

Q: How will the CDS’ vision impact on HRPs?
A: No one knows.

Q: What level of Management will be required to produce an HRP?
A: Ms Siegel stated that currently L1, L2 and L3 Managers have this responsibility, lower levels of Management have not been defined at this time. However, any Manager that has been delegated staffing responsibilities should have a HRP to support any staffing actions.

Q: Presently there is no consultation on HRPs? Future needs should not be a secret.
A: Ms Siegel agreed. HRPs are not secret and staffing processes should be transparent. This is further supported on page 12 of the briefing slides.

Union representatives and members should be familiar with all HRPs that impact on their workplaces since all future staffing is suppose to be based on and supported by a HR Plan.

Specific comments on the slide package:

Page 6 – the Appointment Framework was approved in March and becomes effective December 1, 2005. However, there will be a phase in period before full implementation to allow for the completion of any ongoing competitive processes. Competitions conducted under the “old” rules will be finalized under the “old” rules. Bargaining Agents have been asked to provide input on when the full implementation date for DND should be? Brother Lachance passed on that he was advised at a previous training session, that existing eligibility lists would remain in effect for six (6) months after the changes of PSEA become effective December 1, 2005. DGLRC will confirm.

Page 7 – the Policy also states that hiring practices should be consistent with the organization’s needs, hence the requirement for an HRP. The other “considerations” are: an asset: example, a 3rd language; operational requirement: example, shift work or a requirement to travel; and needs: example Employment Equity gaps.

Page 9 – Regulations and Procedures Policies still in the developmental stages.

Page 26 – A list of the applicable separate agencies has been provided in a separate e-mail (attached in Word). Concerns were voiced by all union representatives with regards to military personnel entitlement to PS positions, transparency in unadvertised processes, limited career opportunities for the existing workforce, and level playing field. ADM HR Civ stressed that unadvertised processes should not be considered the norm but the exception.

Page 30/31 – Following a competitive process, a “pool” of qualified persons will be created (replaces eligibility lists). Non-appointed persons have the right for informal discussion (replaces disclosure) after every appointment made from the process.

A question with regards to union representation in an informal process was raised. DGLR advised that the informal process does not allow for representation, however, following discussion we were advised that “accompaniment” will not be denied. Members participating in the informal discussion process are only permitted to discuss their own qualifications and why they were not selected for a specific appointment.

Ms Coldwell reported that four or five focus groups will be conducted across the country to discuss the forecasted changes. The focus groups will be coordinated by the Service Centres and HRBMs. This is still in the planning stages so sites have not been identified as yet. I asked who would participate in the focus groups, stressing the importance of union input and understanding at all levels? Ms McCusker, DGLRC, asked how the information shared locally and regionally could be incorporated with the national input? The Bargaining Agents agreed that unions should be responsible to ensure that their respective constituents are informed of the national perspective and then have confidence in the Local and Regional representatives. Ms Siegel added that any contradicting information received would be clarified with the respective union at the national level.

Joint training with regards to the changes to the PSEA was requested and supported.

Feedback on the followoing staffing related documents is requested by close of business on June 30, 2005:

• Area of Selection Policy
• Corrective Action and Revocation Policy
• DND Deployment Policy
• DND Informal Discussion Document
• Non-Advertised Appointment Criteria
• Public Service Commission Appointment Policy

Classification Update. Ms Teckles reported on the progress of generic work descriptions (WDs). ADM IM has developed 78 generic CS WDs; Health Services has 28 WDs developed with 20 more to follow based on the standard medical clinic structure; and ADM Mat is looking at PG generic WDs.

IBM has been hired to provide feedback on the use of generic WDs across the department. More consultation forecasted for the fall.

Further to the e-mail received (attached), Ms Teckles spoke briefly on the ongoing National Studies. She explained that national studies result from grievances with a national impact; managerial request; a change in duties, which could have a broader impact; and study results could result in the development of a generic WD. DND is in consultation at varying levels with regards to the following: STS positions in Depots; GL standard (PSHRMAC because of inter-departmental impact); FR standard (PSHRMAC); SR – feasibility study on standard (PSHRMAC).

Employment Equity (EE). Ms Teckles reported that DND was found compliant in 8 of 12 requirements as of June 2004 and that by December 2004, DND had met compliance in the remaining 4. Ms Teckles advised that 50% of the participants for the Leadership Development Program will be drawn from the EE groups. Level 1s are responsible to ensure that EE is included in the HRPs and staffing considerations. Additional monies have been received for training to close the gaps. (document attached)

I identified that UNDE wholeheartedly supports Employment Equity issues. However, when it comes to staffing, there is a perceived abuse in the field. There must be better communications.

The unions agreed that “targeted” competitions are fairer than appointments without competition.

Specific questions with regards to EE should be addressed to Sister Debbie Graham.

Compensation Service Delivery – Operational Review in the National Capital Region. (presentation attached) Ms Read, DGRCHRS, pre-empted the presentation by stating that at the present time the proposed study is focused only within the NCR. But because the outcome could have a national impact on service delivery, she felt it was necessary that the unions be aware. The study is to commence in the fall of 2005 and will continue for one year. I was advised that the members impacted have been consulted with and that consultation is on-going. However, I also confirmed that the UNDE VP NCR has not been consulted with. I suggested that consultation with Brother Champoux would be in order and the coordinator stated that she will contact him.

Public Service Labour Relations Act Update. Ms Harrison, DGLRC, reported that the UNDE feedback provided on the draft DAODs has been taken into consideration and that the DAOD on Standard of Conduct has been revised.

• Use of Departmental Premises and Equipment, and Electronic Networks, for Bargaining Agent or Union Business
• Harassment Prevention and Resolution
• Workplace Accommodation
• Standards of Civilian Conduct and Discipline
• Civilian Grievances

I raised concerns that the PSMA training being offered at the worksites is not being delivered jointly to employees and Managers. I suggested that this immediately creates an air of mistrust and apprehension. I was advised that it was PSAC’s position that there would be no joint training. I was assured that the only differences between the two presentations is that the employee package identifies the upcoming changes and the employer packages identifies the what and how.

A Questions & Answers is being developed.

Guidelines are being revised based on the Treasury Board and Public Service Commissions regulations, which are now available.

Consultation on “Guidelines on Essentials Services” – with UNDE and DND continuing

Consultation on “Guidelines for Time Off for Union Business” – on-going

Brother Price identified that the Joint Scholarship Selection Committee had met and that 16 scholarships were recommended for 2005. On behalf of the unions and memberships, he thanked the ADM HR Civ for her support in going over-budget to allocate the additional scholarships that the committee recommended.

On behalf of UNDE I requested that a sub-committee be established to address the allocation of the $1.8M to the apprenticeship program. I was advised that all monies have been allocated to the commands so there is no requirement for a sub-committee at this time. Any concerns arising from the apprenticeship program can be raised at the HR Sub-Committee. However, that does not preclude the establishment of a sub-committee at a later date if the need arises. Shortage groups identified for the apprenticeship program are SR, CS, PC, ENG, and GL.

Ms Teckles distributed a handout on the Changes to the PSEA Arising from the Veterans’ Charter (attached). Feedback is requested.

Next UMCC HR Sub-Committee is scheduled for September 12, 2005.

Fraternally,

M.L. Chamberlain
UNDE VP Ontario/OPI HR