| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | == Key Concepts & Legal Basis == | | == Key Concepts & Legal Basis == |
| − | '''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.
| + | The following concepts and legal provisions form the foundation of Workforce Adjustment (WFA) and the Selection of Employees for Retention or Lay-Off (SERLO) process. Understanding these principles can help ensure compliance requirements and equity considerations are met. |
| | | | |
| − | '''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. | + | '''Workforce Adjustment (WFA):''' WFA is the mechanism by which the federal public service manages workforce reductions. When the Deputy Head determines that the services of "some but not all" employees in a specific unit are no longer required, the SERLO Process is initiated. WFA decisions affect employee rights and organizational integrity. Clear rules prevent arbitrary or inequitable decisions. |
| | + | |
| | + | '''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: | | '''Regulatory and Legal Framework:''' To ensure SERLO processes do not create barriers for systemically marginalized communities, departments must adhere to the following: |
| Line 14: |
Line 16: |
| | * '''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. | | * '''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: | + | '''Defining Merit Criteria:''' In a SERLO, merit is defined by the Deputy Head through three components: |
| | | | |
| | * '''Essential Qualifications''': The baseline skills, knowledge, and abilities required to perform the duties of the remaining positions. These are non-negotiable and must be met by all employees being considered for retention. Example: Required certification, language proficiency, or technical ability directly tied to the job. | | * '''Essential Qualifications''': The baseline skills, knowledge, and abilities required to perform the duties of the remaining positions. These are non-negotiable and must be met by all employees being considered for retention. Example: Required certification, language proficiency, or technical ability directly tied to the job. |
| Line 21: |
Line 23: |
| | | | |
| | * '''Organizational Needs:''' Strategic priorities identified by the organization that can legitimately influence retention decisions. These may include employment equity objectives, official language requirements, or commitments under land claims agreements. Organizational needs must be documented and applied consistently, based on current workforce data and legal obligations, not personal preference. ''Example:'' Retaining employees from designated employment equity groups to meet representation goals. | | * '''Organizational Needs:''' Strategic priorities identified by the organization that can legitimately influence retention decisions. These may include employment equity objectives, official language requirements, or commitments under land claims agreements. Organizational needs must be documented and applied consistently, based on current workforce data and legal obligations, not personal preference. ''Example:'' Retaining employees from designated employment equity groups to meet representation goals. |
| − | | + | '''Bias Controls Across the SERLO/WFA Lifecycle:''' Once these principles are understood. it becomes essential to identify how they are applied across the SERLO/WFA lifecycle. The following chart illustrates where bias can enter and what corrective actions are required at each stage. |
| − | === Bias Controls Across the SERLO/WFA Lifecycle ===
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| | {| class="wikitable" | | {| class="wikitable" |
| − | |Stage | + | |'''Stage''' |
| − | |Official Activity (PSC/TBS) | + | |'''Official Activity''' |
| − | |Where Bias Can Enter (Official Framing) | + | |'''Where Bias Can Enter''' |
| − | |Corrective Actions (Official Requirements) | + | |'''Corrective Actions''' |
| | |- | | |- |
| − | |Planing | + | |'''Planing''' |
| | |Determine the desired current and future state of the organization; determine the affected part(s); identify positions and affected employees; notify OCHRO/TBS, bargaining agents, and employees. | | |Determine the desired current and future state of the organization; determine the affected part(s); identify positions and affected employees; notify OCHRO/TBS, bargaining agents, and employees. |
| | |Defining the affected part(s) at a level that is not functionally justified can isolate specific employees. | | |Defining the affected part(s) at a level that is not functionally justified can isolate specific employees. |
| | |Document the functional rationale for the affected part(s) and link to business/HR plans; issue required written notifications to OCHRO/TBS, bargaining agents, and employees per SERLO steps. | | |Document the functional rationale for the affected part(s) and link to business/HR plans; issue required written notifications to OCHRO/TBS, bargaining agents, and employees per SERLO steps. |
| | |- | | |- |
| − | |Establishing the Merit Criteria | + | |'''Establishing the Merit Criteria''' |
| | |Establish the Statement of Merit Criteria: essential qualifications, asset qualifications, operational requirements, organizational needs. | | |Establish the Statement of Merit Criteria: essential qualifications, asset qualifications, operational requirements, organizational needs. |
| | |Over‑tailored asset qualifications or experience statements that function as proxies for tenure can distort merit and exclude already‑qualified employees. | | |Over‑tailored asset qualifications or experience statements that function as proxies for tenure can distort merit and exclude already‑qualified employees. |
| | |Write qualifications in plain, neutral, assessable language; distinguish essential vs asset; justify operational requirements; define organizational needs aligned to current and future state. | | |Write qualifications in plain, neutral, assessable language; distinguish essential vs asset; justify operational requirements; define organizational needs aligned to current and future state. |
| | |- | | |- |
| − | |Conducting the Assessment | + | |'''Conducting the Assessment''' |
| | |Determine assessment methods; complete Step 9: Identification of biases and barriers; conduct assessments with qualified assessors and respect duty to accommodate. | | |Determine assessment methods; complete Step 9: Identification of biases and barriers; conduct assessments with qualified assessors and respect duty to accommodate. |
| | |Use of subjective factors (e.g., undefined “fit” or “visibility”) introduces affinity bias and undermines fair assessment. | | |Use of subjective factors (e.g., undefined “fit” or “visibility”) introduces affinity bias and undermines fair assessment. |
| | |Apply structured tools (structured interviews, structured reference checks, standardized scoring) and accommodation guidance; ensure assessor competency and official language capacity; document the bias/barrier review before assessment. | | |Apply structured tools (structured interviews, structured reference checks, standardized scoring) and accommodation guidance; ensure assessor competency and official language capacity; document the bias/barrier review before assessment. |
| | |- | | |- |
| − | |Alteration | + | |'''Administering Alteration''' |
| | |Administer alternation for opting or surplus employees within the core public administration at the same group/level or equivalent, subject to meeting essential qualifications and language requirements; options chosen within 120 days when no GRJO is provided. | | |Administer alternation for opting or surplus employees within the core public administration at the same group/level or equivalent, subject to meeting essential qualifications and language requirements; options chosen within 120 days when no GRJO is provided. |
| | |Opaque “taps on the shoulder” and informal matching can exclude eligible employees; inconsistent application of equivalency rules creates unfair access. | | |Opaque “taps on the shoulder” and informal matching can exclude eligible employees; inconsistent application of equivalency rules creates unfair access. |
| | |Centralize and publicize alternation opportunities; apply equivalency criteria consistently; verify the employee meets the position’s essential qualifications and language profile before approving the alternation. | | |Centralize and publicize alternation opportunities; apply equivalency criteria consistently; verify the employee meets the position’s essential qualifications and language profile before approving the alternation. |
| | |- | | |- |
| − | |Selection, Notice and Reasons | + | |'''Conducting SERLO''' |
| | |Conduct selection for retention or lay‑off (SERLO); provide written notice; record reasons for selection; then administer Priority Administration for surplus/lay‑off entitlements in the proper order of precedence. | | |Conduct selection for retention or lay‑off (SERLO); provide written notice; record reasons for selection; then administer Priority Administration for surplus/lay‑off entitlements in the proper order of precedence. |
| | |Relying on outdated workforce data to justify that representation meets organizational needs can misalign decisions with current Employment Equity Act obligations. | | |Relying on outdated workforce data to justify that representation meets organizational needs can misalign decisions with current Employment Equity Act obligations. |
| Line 107: |
Line 106: |
| | | | |
| | ---- | | ---- |
| − | {| class="wikitable"
| |
| − | !Stage
| |
| − | !Official activity (PSC/TBS)
| |
| − | !Where bias can enter (official framing)
| |
| − | !Corrective actions (official requirements)
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |1. Planning
| |
| − | |Determine the desired current and future state of the organization; determine the affected part(s); identify positions and affected employees; notify OCHRO/TBS, bargaining agents, and employees.
| |
| − | |Defining the affected part(s) at a level that is not functionally justified can isolate specific employees
| |
| − | |Document the '''functional rationale''' for the affected part(s) and link to business/HR plans; issue required '''written notifications''' to OCHRO/TBS, bargaining agents, and employees per SERLO steps
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |2. Merit criteria
| |
| − | |Establish the '''Statement of Merit Criteria''': '''essential qualifications''', '''asset qualifications''', '''operational requirements''', '''organizational needs'''
| |
| − | |Over‑tailored '''asset qualifications''' or experience statements that function as '''proxies for tenure''' can distort merit and exclude already‑qualified employees
| |
| − | |Write qualifications in '''plain, neutral, assessable language'''; distinguish '''essential''' vs '''asset'''; justify '''operational requirements'''; define '''organizational needs''' aligned to current and future state
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |3. Assessment
| |
| − | |Determine '''assessment methods'''; complete '''Step 9: Identification of biases and barriers'''; conduct assessments with qualified assessors and respect duty to accommodate
| |
| − | |Use of subjective factors (e.g., undefined “fit” or “visibility”) introduces '''affinity bias''' and undermines fair assessment
| |
| − | |Apply '''structured''' tools (structured interviews, structured reference checks, standardized scoring) and accommodation guidance; ensure assessor competency and official language capacity; document the bias/barrier review before assessment
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |4. Alternation
| |
| − | |Administer '''alternation''' for '''opting''' or '''surplus''' employees within the '''core public administration''' at the '''same group/level or equivalent''', subject to meeting '''essential qualifications''' and language requirements; options chosen within '''120 days''' when no '''GRJO''' is provided
| |
| − | |Opaque “taps on the shoulder” and informal matching can exclude eligible employees; inconsistent application of equivalency rules creates unfair access
| |
| − | |'''Centralize and publicize''' alternation opportunities; apply equivalency criteria consistently; verify the employee meets the position’s '''essential qualifications''' and language profile before approving the alternation
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |5. Selection, notice, reasons
| |
| − | |Conduct selection for '''retention or lay‑off (SERLO)'''; provide '''written notice'''; '''record reasons for selection'''; then administer '''Priority Administration''' for surplus/lay‑off entitlements in the proper order of precedence
| |
| − | |Relying on '''outdated workforce data''' to justify that representation meets '''organizational needs''' can misalign decisions with current '''Employment Equity Act''' obligations
| |
| − | |Use '''current employment equity workforce availability and representation''' data to inform '''organizational needs'''; ensure compliance with Appointment Policy obligations (employment equity, official languages, duty to accommodate); respect PSC '''priority entitlements''' and order of precedence
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − |
| |
| | === Intersectionality and GBA Plus Considerations in SERLO/WFA === | | === Intersectionality and GBA Plus Considerations in SERLO/WFA === |
| | {| class="wikitable" | | {| class="wikitable" |