Government Operations Committee on March 29th, 2007

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

In the next paragraph you talk about Budget 2007, and I'm glad to see that you acknowledge that this is a good plan in our budget. Unfortunately, some of the members across the way chose not to support that, which may explain why they're not here today. I'm not sure.

I'm particularly puzzled by the member from Halton. He commented last meeting that he felt that the pension plan possibly was too attractive and that people were staying on, and all of the benefits were possibly too attractive.

Here I'm finding such a diametrically opposite view today, I'm having a hard time reconciling all those differences. We were given a very optimistic report last week, and this seems to be quite troubling in many ways.

So you would not agree that the pension plans and the policies that are in place are making it so attractive that we can't move new people into these positions?

[John Gordon]

No. We don't think so.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Maybe we could report that to Mr. Turner later on. I'll share my time with Mr. Kramp now.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Thank you.

My concern still is trying to square this corner that we're on here. We have one element. We're talking about the demographics. Primarily, this whole thing is about baby boomers. A massive retirement is going to take place, and will the public service have the capacity to be able to function effectively when that takes place? Will they have enough people? Will they have enough capacity both in numbers and in quality? I think that is where we might have, possibly, some serious room for consideration from a number of arguments you've put forward, if I might offer some thought there.

Madam Barrados and others have reported that every time there's a job offer or a job opening, there are hundreds of applications. So it's not a question of numbers of people available, obviously, but when we have a serious, serious segment of very capable, mature senior administrative or leadership people retiring in a very short period of time, that could put some very serious strains on the effective operation. In other words, we have too many new people coming in, then, without enough capacity to be able to see that it's administered in an effective way.

Would you concur, or do you think that's the wrong assessment?

[David Orfald]

I guess there are a couple of things to respond to there.

I think the problem is much bigger than senior leadership, and it's bigger than what is traditionally called “knowledge workers”. I think the problem extends to a whole series of other segments of the federal public service workforce.

There are other kinds of skills—skilled trades we've already talked about a little bit—where the current strategies and programs, I think we're convinced, won't solve the problem and more needs to be done. We've suggested an apprenticeship program in the area of the skilled trades as one solution for that particular group.

There's also an area of administrative knowledge. A lot of administrative work gets done in the federal public service. If you go through too rapid a change, the corporate knowledge disappears. We think the solution of temporary help agencies, as a quick-fix solution to shortages, is a problematic one.

There are a lot of people who would like to work for the federal public service. If we're getting 200 applicants per job, that's a good thing. If more attention was paid to fulfilling the long-term staffing needs as opposed to just temporary solutions, we'd have more jobs open than are currently open and the number of applicants per job might go down. We might not have 200 people per job. We might have a smaller number because we're actually filling the jobs permanently more quickly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

I think your time is almost up.

I'd like to give Mr. Nadeau just a short time to ask a question of this group, and then we'll go on to our next group after that.

Monsieur Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon.

Do I have five minutes?

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Yes. You have only five minutes because we will be hearing from another group of witnesses.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you.

This is a vast and complex situation. We are talking about a very large number of employees and of responsibilities that vary depending on the job description. According to what Ms. Barrados recently told us, the situation is pretty well under control as regards the most specialized jobs. But you are saying that is not quite the case and that there are problems.

I am from the region. I looked at things from a different perspective when I put you, Ms. Barrados, Mr. Gordon and yourself on the other side. I taught at Gisèle-Lalonde, Louis-Riel and Nicolas-Gatineau schools, as well as in Blackburn Hamlet. That is an area where you recruit a lot of people. That may not specifically apply to you, but the fact is that some of your union members come from that area.

I would like to give you a statistic that relates to Ontario, since I taught mainly on the Ontario side. In the region, 20 per cent of men who teach high school are no longer there five years later. Where do they go? Well, they enter the federal public service. They are attracted by the working conditions. I am not saying that the working conditions in the educational field are poor, but in terms of actual tasks and stress, it is very different. Even teachers who had more seniority than I had advised me at the time to leave the field and enter the public service. They told me that I would have easier work, a better job, and so on.

As I understand it, that recruitment doesn't solve the problem in situations—and the Parliamentary Secretary, Mr. Poilievre, pointed this out previously—where a crisis is in the making. You have talked about possible solutions by referring to more flexibility.

Could you provide additional details with respect to a possible partnership between the Public Service Commission and the Public Service Alliance of Canada? I'm talking about a situation where better communication on broader issues would make it possible to attract people and thus fill the void that we will soon be facing. I am really talking about a partnership between your union, which is a very important player in this, and the people who are in charge of recruitment.

[David Orfald]

Maybe the easiest way to respond is with a couple of examples. I'll mention two things.

First is, again, the apprenticeship idea. Traditionally an apprenticeship program requires a partnership between the employer and the union, between existing employees and new employees coming in. The solution we proposed was an expansion of an apprenticeship program among the skilled trades in the federal public service, whereby our existing members would have the opportunity to systematically pass on their skills and knowledge to a new group of workers coming in; the employer and the union at national, regional, and local levels would have the opportunity to work together in designing that program and delivering it.

Similarly, with respect to the group of compensation and benefits advisors, one of the chief interests of our existing group is to see the development of a certification program that they would have the opportunity to deliver within the federal public service. It would recognize on-the-job training in an explicit way. It would be similar to a certificate that you'd get from a community college, for example. I know our members in that particular category would like nothing more than the opportunity to participate actively in its development, as long as they wouldn't have to do it on evenings and weekends.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you very much. We'll excuse you for now and invite the next group to come forward.

I'd take a break but I'm afraid I'd lose my members. It's Thursday and everybody's in a rush to leave. But thank you very much for coming forward. I hope you can help us in our quest for better conditions for paying employees.

Welcome, Mr. Corbett and Denise Doherty-Delorme.

Good afternoon. You know the process in this Committee. We invite you to make your presentation. In fact, we have already received your brief.

Mr. Corbett, you have about 10 minutes.

[Gary Corbett, Vice-President, Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the committee. My name is Gary Corbett. I am a vice-president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada. Before that, I held a position as a mining engineer with the Department of Natural Resources Canada.

We are pleased to be here today to offer you our views on the demographic challenges of the federal public sector. Joining me is Ms. Denise Doherty-Delorme. She is the institute's head of research.

Knowledge and innovation play a critical role in determining the economic and the social prosperity of Canada. Investment, jobs, incomes, and our society are directly impacted by the strength and vitality of the knowledge-based sectors and institutions. Canada is not alone in facing revolutionary changes. Every nation, province or state, and city is considering or implementing strategies to respond to the challenges and opportunities presented by the knowledge-based economy.

According to the President of the Public Service Commission's testimony, which we heard on March 22, there has been a shift to more knowledge-based workers in the public service. This shift has resulted in an increase in requirements that has pushed the average age of entry to 35. Moreover, the public service is, on average, older than the general labour force, it will be affected by the baby boom retirement wave sooner than the general labour force, in 2003-04 it had an average age of retirement of almost 58, and it will see the rate of retirement peak in 2012-13.

In 2006, knowledge-based workers, such as scientific and professional workers, and those in the computer systems area represented 58% of federal workers in the core public administration. During the mid-1990s they represented only 41%.

Will the Government of Canada be able to keep up with its staffing if the current age of entry is 35 and the age of retirement is 58? Will all the departments and agencies be able to fulfill their mandates? Today I present the current situation in the public sector and suggest ways to respond to its recruitment and retention challenges.

On the supply side, unemployment is at an all-time low and there is an acute shortage of talent. Employment has been on an upward trend, with average monthly gains of 42,000 new jobs. The competition for employees continues to be tight. According to a report by Deloitte, a shortage of workers exists in science educators to teach the next generation of chemists, health care professionals of all stripes, and design engineers with in-depth technical and interpersonal skills.

Furthermore, exacerbating the problem is the length of time it takes the public service to hire new employees. We have anecdotal evidence that the recruitment process can take up to 18 months. In addition, too many positions are staffed with term and sunset positions, as my colleague from the other union pointed out. Given the opportunity, these new hires may leave for permanent positions elsewhere. Critical talent is scarce and about to become much more so because of two looming trends: the retirement of the baby boomers and the growing skills gap.

On the baby boomers issue, in just a few years an emerging trend will force organizations to pay attention to their critical talent--the retirement of baby boomers, the first crop of which, according to Deloitte, will retire in 2008. The impact will soon be felt. In the public sector, countries such as Canada, Australia, and the United States could lose more than a third of their government employees by 2010. Retirees are also draining much of the working blood out of the health care system, with shortages of nurses and pharmacists being particularly acute.

According to Statistics Canada--as shown on the graph on page 4 of your brief--in the workforce as a whole, the median age among employed women rose from 37 in 1995 to 40 in 2006. Among men it went from 38 to 40. The workforce in the core public administration is much older than in the general workforce. This should be worrisome to Canadians. Among women, the median age rose from 40 in 1995 to 44 in 2006. Among their male counterparts, it went from 44 to 46. In addition, within the core public administration, individuals aged 45 and over accounted for just over half, or 52%, of the total in 2006, compared with just under 39% in the workforce as a whole.

According to the policy research initiative, one in three permanent employees in the federal public service, Canada's largest employer, is 50 years of age or older. Retirement of managers has already started and may peak as early as 2009. For other groups in the federal public service, retirements are expected to peak between 2012 and 2014.

The study also looked at the behavioural differences across employment categories in the federal public service when making the decision to retire. While the average retirement age for all federal employees is between 57 and 59, employees in management, administration, technical and science, and professional categories are more likely than other groups to work beyond the minimum requirements to retire without penalty.

As you can see by figure 2 on page 6 of your brief, the hiring age in the federal public service has been getting higher over the last ten years. For instance, the percentage of new indeterminate appointments under the age of 30 decreased by 33% from 1992 to 2003. Meanwhile, the same percentage of employees appointed at the age of 40 and higher increased by 54% in the same period. There's a shortage of talent.

Many colleges and universities are having trouble meeting the demand for qualified candidates. According to Deloitte again, institutions struggle with limited capacity, obsolete educational models, declining education standards, and the general shift amongst students away from hard-skilled disciplines such as science and engineering.

In fact, the U.S. Department of Education estimates that 60% of all new jobs in the 21st century will require skills that are possessed by only 22% of young people now entering the job market.

Four industries in particular will suffer a mass exodus of employees, among them the public sector. The shortage of workers is not just one of retiring baby boomers. A massive skills gap makes it worse. According to NASA projections, for example, in the U.S., colleges will graduate 198,000 science and engineering students to fill the shoes of over two million U.S. baby boomers scheduled to retire before 2008.

In other areas of specialized education, such as information technology, universities simply can't keep up with demand.

According to a survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers, there is a skills shortage across the country. On a positive note, the Pulse survey of 277 private company CEOs also found that private companies are taking steps to retain their skilled, trained workers. Eight-five percent of companies polled will increase their focus on retention in the coming year. But how will that play out for the public sector?

According to Deloitte, the shortage of workers is not just one of retiring baby boomers but a massive skills gap that makes it worse. Perhaps the most disturbing factor of all, though, is declining educational standards. Many high schools are not keeping pace with increased complexity and rapid technological change facing organizations today. Others are simply not graduating enough students. In some provinces, only 70% of students graduate from high school.

The federal science and technology community secretariat in 2006 surveyed 205 science managers in the ten science-based departments and agencies. The findings revealed that two-thirds of the respondents believe that the financial resources provided will not be sufficient to meet anticipated HR needs in their departments. They also anticipate difficulty in recruiting staff in research, applied science, and technical services.

A summary of the survey suggests that researchers will be the most difficult to recruit and retain over the next three years, and the major factor to recruitment is budget constraints.

Almost 70% feel that the financial resources they will receive over the next three years will not be sufficient to meet their HR requirements. They also mention the shortage of qualified candidates as the second largest concern. There is a significant difference in the compensation offered to more experienced or mid- to senior-level scientists in comparison with the private sector and academia.

Uncompetitive remuneration and availability of facilities and/or equipment cause many scientists to leave the public sector early or midway through their careers. It is difficult to replace them.

What is the federal government's response? When the President of the Public Service Commission was asked by this committee last week to address the issue of recruitment and retention, she spoke of the PSC's mission and mandate, which is staffing. Yet she stated that the PSC can only speak to its experience to date on the supply side of the numbers: 19.5 million visits on the website jobs.gc.ca, a screening tool that processed 920,000 applications between April 2006 and January 2007. The institute would like to point out that the number of hits on a website alone is not an indicator of how well the federal government is dealing with this recruitment and retention issue.

In order for each and every department and agency to meet the expectations of the Canadian public, they must continue to attract and retain professionals. A critical mass of talented, highly educated people is needed in each domain to produce the synergy required to achieve results. Yet many departments and agencies are already understaffed. Professionals in the public service are already overstretched as a result of cutbacks in personnel since the early 1990s.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Could we just move to your recommendations now?

[Gary Corbett]

I'm almost done, Madame.

The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada has gathered input from its 50,000 members and from its work with the departments and agencies on the issues of recruitment and retention. Institute members are vital. The institute offers the following advice regarding the need to attract qualified candidates, not only directly after graduation but at mid-career as well.

To attract the best and the brightest, the federal government needs to address salaries, infrastructure, and resources.

Entry-level salaries for professionals are too low. Several classifications have posted entry-level salaries in the range of $24,000. Recent graduates, especially those with high debt loads after university, may be unwilling to take a job because it doesn't pay the bills.

Crumbling federal infrastructure is not attractive to someone who has a choice of where to work. Therefore, there is a need for better infrastructure for scientists, researchers, and regulators. That says volumes to the resources that are put into these places.

Finally, because of the pace of technological innovation, there's a need to allow time and financial resources for professionals to attend conferences and symposia. Working collaboratively with other professionals is of utmost importance to our members to keep abreast of developments across the world and is a proven mechanism for encouraging innovation.

To retain qualified and experienced professionals, the federal government needs to address pension issues and knowledge transfer opportunities. With respect to the federal pension plan, many professionals cannot fully benefit from it because of mid-career entry and late starting age into the public service.

Finally, there is an urgent need for more incentives to retain older workers. This entails improving the flexibility of hours of work conditions in a way that will not hinder the pensions. Mentoring and knowledge transfer must not only be valued but encouraged and facilitated.

Madam Chair, members of the committee, I thank you for the opportunity to present this today and I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

Monsieur Simard.

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Saint Boniface, MB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thanks to the witnesses for being here today.

I guess my first reaction, once again, is that we're hearing a different story than we did last week. It's just unbelievable. Your comment was that the competition for employees continues to be tight, and we're hearing that every time there's a job application there are tons of people applying. Where's the truth? Is it somewhere in between there?

[Gary Corbett]

Well, I think if you look across the public sector—with all due respect, the public sector doesn't only include those in the national capital region—when you talk about professional jobs and those in laboratories in regions, I would question whether those numbers actually apply.

Are there quality candidates applying for those highly technical jobs? That is the question. While you may have 300,000 or 100,000 job applications, there still is the problem in the regions with respect to hiring highly qualified talent. It goes back not so much to whether you can recruit them, but whether they'll stay if they're recruited.

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Saint Boniface, MB]

Are you saying that in a place like Winnipeg, for instance, when there's a job posted, they have less opportunity of hiring somebody competent or skilled for that job?

[Gary Corbett]

No, I think they could hire somebody, but it's whether that person, once in the federal system, will stay. If they have done any hiring over the last number of years, whether they stay is part of the problem, because they'll get in, and there's crumbling infrastructure, or it's just not the type of place they want to work.

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Saint Boniface, MB]

You've talked about 35 being the average age of entry. Is that the age when people normally would start with the federal public service?

[Gary Corbett]

Well, in representing professionals, we're talking about people with advanced degrees. By the time they get out of school—

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Saint Boniface, MB]

So is that what it is? By the time they're finished their degrees, before they start, they're 35 years old?

[Gary Corbett]

Yes, it is.

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Saint Boniface, MB]

That's incredible. And they retire at fifty...?

[Gary Corbett]

No, they don't retire at fifty, or not usually.