National Defence Committee on May 2nd, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

You have six minutes, Ms. Mathyssen.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I'd like an update on the progress of the [Inaudible—Editor] recommendations in terms of the external comprehensive review implementation committee and the duty to report working group. Can you tell us where these organizations are with the transfer of cases to civilian courts?

[Bill Matthews]

There are three things in there, Mr. Chair.

With regard to the review of the colleges, we are currently under way in finding the people who will do that work. Stay tuned on that front.

On the cases and their transfers to provinces, we have set up a federal-provincial-territorial working group that includes justice departments, policing organizations, etc. We were reviewing the details or obstacles to transferring, because there are always complexities. There is a consultation paper that has been shared, so that work continues.

On the duty to report, I will have to turn to the chief for an update there.

[Gen Wayne D. Eyre]

Mr. Chair, we're getting very close on the duty to report. I believe I talked to you two years ago at this committee that this was something we needed to move on.

I have signed off on it. I believe it's making its way up about addressing this and making some very fundamental changes to that policy.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I heard some previous news reports about systemic harassment of civilian workers on bases. The PSAC and UNDE unions have spoken out about the issues, specifically ones in fire halls on bases. Civilian firefighters have faced a lot of barriers, and there is a lot of violence in that workplace. There have been complaints. Senior leadership has been involved, and there has been enforcement about harassment policies and so on.

Can you talk to us about the department's plan to work through the backlog of those workplace-specific investigations?

General Eyre, I asked the minister before about her meeting with the union leadership. Can you talk to me about the last time you were in touch with union leadership to discuss those specific workplace incidents?

[Bill Matthews]

I have a couple of thoughts, Mr. Chair, before I turn to the chief.

On the workplace, it is an integrated workplace. Civilians and military members are side by side. When we talk about culture, we do have to talk about both, both in terms of who might be behaving inappropriately and those who are the recipients of that behaviour. It can be civilian and/or military.

When we meet with union leadership at our regular meetings, we talk about workplace initiatives and education, and also the backlog or the slowness in responding to some of those grievances.

When I've gone to bases and held town halls, there probably isn't a great understanding amongst all of how the system works. I would flag that the first thing we have to do with all inside the department is to make sure that everyone is more aware of the responsibilities of hearing these grievances. They're often resolved at the lower levels, but I think people have a model in mind where everything rockets up the list to the chief or me. The vast majority can get resolved at the lower level.

We're not as good as we can be in communicating the status of those grievances. That's a frequent topic.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I'm sorry, it's just that a lot of the problems with the backlog is that fact that the people who are potentially creating the problems in the first place are continuing on in their workplace. So, those problems are continuing as the backlog is not being addressed. I didn't really hear an answer for addressing that backlog.

[Bill Matthews]

I would distinguish between the grievances that happen and serious enough allegations that have formal investigations. Employees can take advantage of one or both of those. They also sometimes go outside the department, because there are mechanisms for recourse there.

What I'm saying is that, when there is a complaint launched, the department needs to do better in communicating the status of the action back to the employee, whether it's a grievance or an investigation. If things are serious enough in the workplace environment, we can remove people from the workplace. Again, that is only an option you would exercise once you've seen evidence of wrongdoing.

[Gen Wayne D. Eyre]

Mr. Chair, I'll answer the specific question.

The office of the CDS does not get terribly involved in labour relations. That being said, as the commander of the army, I was very involved and had routine meetings with union representatives. It was a very cordial relationship, with an open door and a willingness to connect between those meetings if there was an issue to be addressed.

Specifically, you talked about fire halls. I'm aware of one case in particular. There's one location that is still undergoing resolution, so I can't speak to the details of that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mrs. Kramp-Neuman, you have five minutes.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Thank you.

On retention and recruitment, let's talk about the post-living differential. I understand that we've needed to find some creative ways to recruit. We certainly need some rapid political reaction.

You noted that a lot of members are quite content with the changes that have been made to the post-living differential. However, that's completely contrary to what I'm hearing in my office.

Being in the middle of not only a recruitment crisis but also a retention crisis, did your office or Treasury Board take into account the extremely negative impact the changes will have on retention?

[Gen Wayne D. Eyre]

Mr. Chair, this was a difficult decision. It is a benefit that has needed fixing for a long time. We took the difficult decision of fixing that as a first step in revamping our other compensation and benefits that are in dire need of updating. There's more to come on this.

However, as I travel around the country and talk to our members, indeed I'm also thanked for bringing it in for the tens of thousands who are now getting a benefit and who truly needed it.

Given the nature of some of these negotiations that are ongoing, we are limited in what can be communicated beforehand. They are subject to being protected.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

That's fair enough.

Do you think you could commit to re-establishing the benefits to those CAF members who are losing out on the new CFHD? Perhaps there could be some sort of grandfathering clause.

[Bill Matthews]

On this question, Mr. Chair, this isn't something that we can commit to. We don't have that authority. This is something that requires engagement with other departments, so I can't say anything more on that.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

That's fair enough.

Why does the CFHD ignore the cost of living when calculated in the benefits?

[Gen Wayne D. Eyre]

Mr. Chair, as the team looked at options to deal with this, the overall cost of goods was roughly the same across the country. There are pockets of difference, but the main differentiator is housing. That was the fundamental change of going to a housing differential. It's based on 25% of a member's salary. It's a maximum of 25%, and anything over that toward housing would be reimbursed based on a certain size of accommodation.

In those calculations, we're going back every couple of years to update the rate based on changing market conditions as well.

That is a difference between the new housing differential and the former post-living differential.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Could you elaborate on that with regard to the seven-year limit on the CFHD? It has also garnered a tremendous amount of criticism.

Why was it included, especially when it adversely effects people in certain cities, particularly our sailors at CFB Halifax and CFB Esquimalt?

[Gen Wayne D. Eyre]

Mr. Chair, this was all part of the negotiation with central agencies as to what we could get through and what we couldn't and what was landed on. Now that's not to say it's going to end at seven years. Seven years is a long time away. There will be a reassessment that goes in over the next few years to look at the impact. The sense is that, after seven years in one location, you're going to be established. You're going to be able to get into a more established lifestyle, more established accommodations, but reassessment will be required in a number of years.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Is it you, or is it the Treasury Board?

[Gen Wayne D. Eyre]

This is a negotiation between our staff and the Treasury Board.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Thank you.

Moving on.... We've routinely heard that the recruitment process needs to be restructured and simplified—including from Justice Arbour. What is the status on that?

[Gen Wayne D. Eyre]

Mr. Chair, I'm happy to report that our recruiting modernization team is making good progress. It is advancing on three lines of effort. The first is on attraction, getting more applicants in the door to sign up. The good news is that I was just informed last week that our applicant numbers are above historic norms—and that's putting the new permanent-resident policy aside. There is some light that showing. The challenge now is to convert those applications to enrolment. That's the first one.

The second line of effort is to streamline the recruiting process. This means getting a digital online portal to ease the process. It means putting our Canadian Armed Forces aptitude test, unproctored, online and addressing a number of the systemic barriers that are in there, such as the security clearance.

The third one, the third line of effort, is the medical requirements. Currently, 70% of our applicants require a second level of medical review. It speaks to the medical challenges in our society, the mental health, the medication, etc. Many times when we ask them to go back, we need notes from their family doctors or specialists. In our society, as you're well aware, there's a shortage of those types of clinicians, so we're looking at innovative ways to deal with that challenge, as well.

At the same time, our common—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Unfortunately, Ms. Kramp-Neuman's time is over, but I'm sure you'll have an opportunity to expand.

Mr. Sousa, you have five minutes.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

I appreciate the deliberations and so forth, and the difficulty at times when it comes to operating such a huge and substantive organization as you do. When I look at the estimates, I'm seeing the increases that have occurred with regard to the operational pieces and the parts with now the uniqueness of some of the programs that are being put forward. Do you have a concern as to where it stands right now?

[Bill Matthews]

The department as a whole?