Government Operations Committee on April 19th, 2018

[Stan Lee]

We don't really have an answer to that question. It is nevertheless a good one. What other studies have suggested—and not shown, in my view—is that, redacting information from job applications makes it more difficult to assess the extent or breadth of the experience in question, qualitatively speaking.

That is all the more important in the public service, given that managers have to be sure the applicant meets the merit criteria in order for that person to be screened in to the process. That's harder to do when a significant amount of information is missing.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

That ties in with the point I was making earlier.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Kelly, you have five minutes.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

I don't know that I'm going to need five minutes; I have just a couple of thoughts. I know that perhaps our colleagues on the other side might have a bit of a busy day today, with some travel and a convention ahead of them. In the interest of time I'll keep it short.

I agree with Mr. McCauley that upon reviewing the data we have, this really would seem to be a success story in the overall achievement in employment by the various categories in this study. This is an achievement Canadians can be proud of in terms of the governments of different parties over time achieving the levels of participation of women, aboriginal peoples, disabled persons, and visible minorities in the public service. The study is perhaps a worthy undertaking to examine the question of whether or not the name creates bias, but the road to an $18-billion deficit is paved with one good idea at a time that piles up into these kinds of large expenses.

I agree that we seem to have achieved quite a bit of success as a country in this area, and we have to be conscious of never allowing that to lapse or to see reversals in this. I think this is something we can be proud of, and I'd like us as a committee to move on to other subject matter.

[Patrick Borbey]

I just want to clarify that we're dealing with both today's public service and the public service of the future. We are going through a pretty important renewal. There will be a lot of departures over the next few years. This is an opportunity for us to make sure that we will be attracting the best talents from across the country—again, in terms of the experience and skills and also the representation across the country, including geographical representation. So for us, this is an important investment into the kind of future public service that we can create.

I have shared with the committee that I am concerned that in some categories we're not attracting enough candidates. That's of concern to me, because today's successful representation may change overnight, very quickly, as we bring in a lot of new public servants over the next few years. That's why I think it's important to study these issues and make sure that our processes are bias-free, that they work, are transparent, and serve all Canadians.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Mr. Drouin, you may go ahead for five minutes.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thanks to the committee for doing this study. I think you should be doing more of that. It's the right thing to do. I mean, any criteria to measure is I think good news for us, as parliamentarians, in order to understand. Unlike my colleague Mr. McCauley, I wouldn't necessarily wait until the Edmonton Oilers were out of the playoffs before measuring their success.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

You want to be proactive.

In short, I just want to thank the committee.

I don't know whether I will use the full five minutes, but I do want to ask you something about your study.

People in my riding, especially visible minorities, often have the same complaint: they are able to get a job in the public service, but, once they are in, they aren't able to get promoted.

Did your study take into account internal promotions?

[Patrick Borbey]

No, it looked only at external staffing processes, in other words, to gain entry to the public service.

We, too, receive that kind of feedback, so I understand what you're saying. Members of certain employment equity groups feel that it's harder for them to advance their careers than it is for other people. We need to examine the measures in place to make sure people have access to training and development programs. We also have to make sure that internal staffing processes, such as those for management positions, are completely unbiased and equally accessible to everyone. That's something we need to keep an eye on.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Unfortunately, I missed part of the meeting. What comes next for this pilot project? What are you going to do in the months and years ahead?

[Patrick Borbey]

We will be doing three things.

First of all, as I mentioned, we are ready to share our methodology with departments looking to address areas where certain groups are thought to be under-represented. We are ready and willing, then, to share that methodology with them.

Second, we are going to examine the technological results. If the screening is done electronically, for instance, it would eliminate human intervention and thus all bias.

Third, and most importantly, we are going to conduct a full audit in the next year to measure the success rates of employment equity groups throughout staffing processes.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Very good.

I want to be sure I'm clear on the technological aspect. Are you saying that the applicant selection process would be entirely electronic, even the interview?

[Patrick Borbey]

No.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

It would just be to screen applicants in or out of the process, then.

[Patrick Borbey]

Yes. For instance, we talked about female versus male representation. If we had a technological tool, it would be no problem. In other words, the software would not identify the applicant's gender, since it would not detect French occurrences of “ée” indicating that the applicant was a woman. Those possibilities don't currently exist, but we are including them as we define our next recruitment platform. That's one solution that could be applied.

Exam-based solutions could also be put in place. After the screening stage, the 200 or 300 screened-in applicants could be asked to take a test that would be administered electronically, in other words, over the Internet. That would help to further screen out applicants and ensure that only qualified candidates were invited to an interview by the manager.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

That's great. Thank you very much.

I completely agree with you. We need to examine the processes currently in place in order to attract members of my generation and train them to become managers, assistant deputy ministers, directors, and so forth.

[Patrick Borbey]

We need people who can replace me as well.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Indeed. They have to start somewhere.

Thank you very much for your work.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Blaikie, you have three minutes.

You have no questions? Okay.

Mr. Jowhari, you indicated that you had a question.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Yes.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You have seven minutes.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Okay.

Thank you to the witnesses.

I'm referring to the final report that's been tabled, and I'm looking specifically at the statistical significance of the different tables or the different categories that the study dealt with. I notice that there were 27 positions and 17 departments. I managed to find the name of the departments. When it came to the positions, I was successful in finding the occupational categories, and then I found classifications under each one of these.

For example, under administrative foreign services, I found AS1 and AS2. Can you give me an idea of what type of positions these are in general? Unless I go in and do a search on AS1 and try to get an understanding of what the scope was.... That will help me, because there are some significant statistical differences that I'd like to be able to probe, but before I do that, I want to understand the nature of the positions.

[Charles Tardif, Director, Data Analytics Division, Public Service Commission]

If you want, I can go through all of the categories that are presented.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Just in general, are they entry level or management level? Are they analytical level? I'm trying to get an understanding of the level of positions and why they were specifically chosen.