That is fine, Madam Chair. Thank you.
Good morning, everyone.
I am here today in my capacity as Clerk of the House of Commons and head of House administration, with my colleague Kathryn Butler Malette, who is the chief human resources officer at the House of Commons and is responsible for managing all of our human resources policies and programs.
I was pleased to receive your invitation to speak on the topic of sexual harassment in the federal workplace, not least of all so that I can clarify the status of employees at the House and perhaps dispel some common misconceptions about how we are set up.
At the outset, it's important to note that there are two types of employees at the House of Commons. The first category includes staff who work for members of Parliament, either in MPs' offices here in Ottawa or in the constituencies, as well as staff who work for house officers, that is to say, the House leaders or the whips, and in the research offices of the various parties.
Secondly, there is the staff of the House of Commons Administration for which I am ultimately responsible as Clerk.
Let's look first at the staff of members and house officers.
Each MP or house officer is the employer of his or her employees. As a result, each member is responsible for monitoring and managing his or her workplace environment. Each party has its own way of operating with regard to staff of caucus members, and usually the whip of the party is responsible for general oversight of these arrangements. Neither I nor the House administration has a role in managing this staff.
Now let's look at the House administration context, that is to say, the permanent staff of the House of Commons who survive from one parliament to another regardless of what party configuration has been elected.
As the Clerk, I am entirely responsible for employees in the House Administration, some 1,800 full-time employees who work in a variety of functions to support the institution. I must make another important distinction: the House of Commons Administration is separate from the federal public service and is not subject to Treasury Board policies.
Our roles and responsibilities as an employer derive from the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act. The Board of Internal Economy, chaired by the Speaker, finds its mandate in the Parliament of Canada Act. The board is the governing body of the House, and like any board of directors, sets policies and budgets that broadly determine the terms and conditions of the work environment for the administration.
The Parliament of Canada Act provides that the Clerk is the secretary of the Board of Internal Economy and as such, reporting to the Speaker, has the overall responsibility for carrying out the directives of the board. While we are not subject to the Treasury Board, we follow best practices in public administration. Thus, while we often develop policies similar to those of the Treasury Board, we modify them as required so as to tailor them to respond to the unique needs of the parliamentary environment.
The House Administration works very hard to promote a corporate culture of dignity and respect, where harassment of any kind is not tolerated. Through mandatory information sessions held for all employees regarding workplace conflict, the House Administration educates its employees on what constitutes harassment and what avenues of resolution are available to them.
Should it be the case that there is evidence of harassment, we will intervene through formal and/or informal routes. There exist many possible resolution methods for an employee who feels that he or she was subject to harassment, sexual harassment being only one kind of difficulty that might arise.
First, there is prevention and resolution of harassment in the workplace policy for the House administration, which was approved by the Board of Internal Economy in June 2001. Our harassment policy outlines mechanisms for preventing harassment, addressing allegations, and resolving harassment complaints. If an employee chooses to file a complaint under the policy, the complaint is handled through the director of employee relations and human resources services.
Second, all collective agreements at the House administration include provisions that protect employees from harassment. The same applies to the working conditions for unrepresented employees. If a unionized employee chooses to file a grievance under the collective agreement, it follows the normal grievance process.
These two avenues are formal means of resolution, but there's also the option of an informal route that we have found to be very effective. I'm especially proud of the House administration's information conflict management program, which is called Finding Solutions Together, or FST.
In designing the program, we relied heavily on employee input, both from our unionized and unrepresented employees.
If sexual harassment is suspected, it is possible for someone to first seek advice through the Finding Solutions Together program. They can also seek resolution through FST.
Here again, employees retain the option of subsequently filing a formal complaint or grievance if they are not satisfied with the outcome from the FST process, or they can decide not to pursue the matter further, should they accept the resolution through FST.
We've noticed that most issues remotely related to harassment, which I should point out are rare, and sexual harassment rarer, first go through FST. As a result, we have had only one allegation of sexual harassment filed at the House since 2006. The case in question became a form of complaint that, following investigation by an outside expert, was deemed to be unfounded. We are nevertheless careful not to be complacent about the issue, and we are aware of our legal obligations to take action upon being informed of a complaint and to intervene in such cases. The House administration is always looking to improve its policies and processes.
That is why we are aiming to update and streamline our existing harassment policy to ensure that it is in line with current best practices in human resources management. We expect that this new policy will be in place by 2013, and it is currently being reviewed. As we are currently reviewing our policy, we will be very interested in the findings of this Committee's study on the matter.
I would like to thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. My colleague, Kathryn, and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have in due course.