| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | == Key Concepts & Legal Basis == | | == Key Concepts & Legal Basis == |
| − | '''Workforce Adjustment (WFA):''' Process for redesign or reduction when positions are no longer needed due to lack of work, discontinuance, relocation, or alternative delivery initiatives. WFA falls under the '''NJC Work Force Adjustment Directive''' and collective agreement provisions which outlines the roles and responsibilities of the employer and the rights of affected employees. | + | '''Workforce Adjustment (WFA):''' In the federal public service, Workforce Adjustment (WFA) represents the mechanism by which the employer manages the reduction of its workforce. When the Deputy Head determines that the services of "some but not all" employees in a specific unit are no longer required, the Selection of Employees for Retention or Lay-Off (SERLO) process is triggered. |
| | | | |
| − | '''SERLO (Selection for Retention or Lay-Off):''' SERLO is the competitive administrative process which occurs during a WFA when a Deputy Head identifies that "some, but not all" of the employees in a specific part of the organization are to be retained using a merit-based selection process governed by Section 21 of the Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER). | + | '''SERLO (Selection for Retention or Lay-Off):''' SERLO is the competitive administrative process which occurs during a WFA. It requires using a merit-based selection process governed by the Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER).For Employee Networks and equity-seeking groups, the SERLO process is an important area of concern. If "merit" criteria are defined too loosely, or if "asset criteria are implemented without an equity lens, the process can inadvertently perpetuate systemic barriers. |
| | | | |
| − | '''Regulatory and Legal Framework:''' To ensure SERLO processes do not create barriers for systemically marginalized communities, departments must adhere to the following statutes. | + | '''Regulatory and Legal Framework:''' To ensure SERLO processes do not create barriers for systemically marginalized communities, departments must adhere to the following: |
| | | | |
| − | * '''Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) s. 64:''' Grants the authority to lay off employees. It confirms that layoffs are a management right, but the selection of individuals must be merit-based. | + | * '''Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) s. 64:''' The authority to implement a WFA comes from the PSEA. Section 64 allows Deputy Heads to lay off employees due to lack of work, discontinuation of a function or transfer or work or funds. It confirms that layoffs are a management right, but the selection of individuals must be merit-based. |
| | | | |
| − | * '''Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER) s. 21''': Mandates that the selection of employees for retention be based on merit. Crucially, it requires a bias assessment of the selection method before the process begins. | + | * '''Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER) s. 21''': Once a reduction is announced, the PSER dictates how it will occur. Section 21 mandates that the selection of employees for retention be based on merit. It also requires a bias assessment of the selection method before the process begins. |
| | | | |
| | * '''Employment Equity Act (EEA) s. 5:''' Requires the employer to identify and eliminate employment barriers against the four designated groups. This duty persists during downsizing. | | * '''Employment Equity Act (EEA) s. 5:''' Requires the employer to identify and eliminate employment barriers against the four designated groups. This duty persists during downsizing. |
| | | | |
| | * '''Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) s. 7 & 15:''' Prohibits adverse effect discrimination (where a neutral rule has a disproportionately negative impact on a protected group). This governs the application of operational requirements like availability or mobility. | | * '''Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) s. 7 & 15:''' Prohibits adverse effect discrimination (where a neutral rule has a disproportionately negative impact on a protected group). This governs the application of operational requirements like availability or mobility. |
| | + | * '''National Joint Council (NJC) Workforce Adjustment Directive:''' collective agreement provisions which outlines the roles and responsibilities of the employer and the rights of affected employees. |
| | + | '''Defining Merit Criteria:''' In a SERLO, "merit" is defined by the Deputy Head through three components: |
| | | | |
| − | * Step 7: Identify qualifications, requirements, and organizational needs, including Equity, Diversity & Inclusion | + | * '''Essential Qualifications''': The baseline skills required for remaining positions |
| − | * Step 9: Identify and mitigate biases or barriers | + | |
| | + | * '''Asset Qualifications:''' Beneficial or added skills needed in an organizations. |
| | + | |
| | + | * '''Organizational Needs:''' Strategic priorities of the organization. |
| | + | |
| | + | |
| | + | '''Systemic Risk: Fettering of Discretion via Outdated Data:''' A critical legal concept in administrative law is "Fettering of Discretion." This occurs when a decision-maker rigidly applies a rule or outdated data source without considering current evidence or judgment. |
| | + | |
| | + | The Data Lag (2021 vs. 2025): Using 2016 or 2021 Census data to determine workforce availability (WAE) in 2025 creates a "built-in bias". |
| | + | |
| | + | <nowiki>*</nowiki> The Reality: The labour market for Racialized and Indigenous populations has grown significantly since 2021. |
| | + | |
| | + | <nowiki>*</nowiki> The Risk: Relying on unadjusted 2021 data understates under-representation. A manager might believe a team is "representative" based on 2021 numbers, while in 2025 terms, a significant gap exists. |
| | + | |
| | + | <nowiki>*</nowiki> Legal Implication: Refusing to adjust values despite evidence of growth fetters discretion and undermines compliance with the Employment Equity Act. |
| | + | |
| | + | 4.2 Correction Factors for 2025 |
| | + | |
| | + | To avoid discriminatory effects, the following correction factors should be applied to Attainment Rates (AR) or Workforce Availability (WFA) estimates during SERLO planning: |
| | + | |
| | + | <nowiki>*</nowiki> Racialized Groups: Divide Attainment Rate by 1.25. |
| | + | |
| | + | <nowiki>*</nowiki> Indigenous Groups: Divide Attainment Rate by 1.10. |
| | + | |
| | + | 5. Data Methodology: Attainment Rates vs. Gaps |
| | + | |
| | + | How data is visualized drives decisions. Departments often use raw "representation gaps" (number of people), which distorts the reality for smaller groups. |
| | + | |
| | + | The Theatre Analogy |
| | + | |
| | + | <nowiki>*</nowiki> Scenario A (Small Group): A theatre has 10 seats. 0 are occupied. The Gap is 10. The Attainment Rate is 0%. |
| | + | |
| | + | <nowiki>*</nowiki> Scenario B (Large Group): A theatre has 300 seats. 290 are occupied. The Gap is 10. The Attainment Rate is 97%. |
| | + | |
| | + | Impact: Both have a "gap of 10," but Scenario A represents a total exclusion. Using raw gaps hides the severity of under-representation for Indigenous and smaller racialized groups. SERLO decisions must be based on Attainment Rates (how full the theatre is), not gaps. |
| | | | |
| | '''Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER), Sec. 21''' | | '''Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER), Sec. 21''' |