Changes

This evergreen guide was developed using various Workforce Availability (WFA) references and Selection of Employees for Retention or Lay‑Off (SERLO) guides from across the public service. It was drafted with the support of AI to improve clarity, consistency, and plain‑language readability, and it was reviewed and validated by employee network members to check for accuracy, accessibility, and equity considerations. The result is a practical resource that reflects current policy practices while centring fairness, transparency, and representativeness throughout all 14 SERLO steps.

.This evergreen guide was developed using various Workforce Availability (WFA) references and Selection of Employees for Retention or Lay‑Off (SERLO) guides from across the public service. It was drafted with the support of AI to improve clarity, consistency, and plain‑language readability, and it was reviewed and validated by employee network members to check for accuracy, accessibility, and equity considerations. The result is a practical resource that reflects current policy practices while centering fairness, transparency, and representativeness throughout all 14 SERLO steps.

'''Workforce adjustment''' is a formal situation that occurs when a deputy head decides that the services of one or more permanent (indeterminate) employees will no longer be required beyond a specific date. This statement establishes the legal and organizational trigger for workforce adjustment and underscores that the decision relates to indeterminate employees and a defined date after which their services are no longer required. It calls for early planning, rigorous documentation, and consistent communication because employee rights, notice periods, and entitlements depend on that date.

'''Workforce adjustment''' is a formal situation that occurs when a deputy head decides that the services of one or more permanent (indeterminate) employees will no longer be required beyond a specific date. This statement establishes the legal and organizational trigger for workforce adjustment and underscores that the decision relates to indeterminate employees and a defined date after which their services are no longer required. It calls for early planning, rigorous documentation, and consistent communication because employee rights, notice periods, and entitlements depend on that date.

This usually happens because of a lack of work, the discontinuance of a specific function, or an organizational restructuring that changes how a department delivers its mandate. This sentence identifies the common operational reasons that lead to workforce adjustment and makes clear that the cause must be tied to work—either its absence, its discontinuance, or its reconfiguration—rather than to individuals. Each reason should be supported by objective evidence (for example, workload data, changed priorities, or a new delivery model) to ensure decisions are defensible.

This usually happens because of a lack of work, the discontinuance of a specific function, or an organizational restructuring that changes how a department delivers its mandate. This sentence identifies the common operational reasons that lead to workforce adjustment and makes clear that the cause must be tied to work-either its absence, its discontinuance, or its reconfiguration-rather than to individuals. Each reason should be supported by objective evidence (for example, workload data, changed priorities, or a new delivery model) to ensure decisions are defensible.

'''Selection of Employees for Retention or Lay‑Off (SERLO)''' is a structured methodology governed by the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA). It is the core decision‑making method used during workforce adjustment and that it is anchored in statute, which requires adherence to legal standards, clear criteria, and procedural fairness at each stage.

'''Selection of Employees for Retention or Lay‑Off (SERLO)''' is a structured methodology governed by the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA). It is the core decision‑making method used during workforce adjustment and that it is anchored in statute, which requires adherence to legal standards, clear criteria, and procedural fairness at each stage.

==== '''The lag between Census data and current workforce reality''' ====

==== '''The lag between Census data and current workforce reality''' ====

Official Workforce Availability (WFA) benchmarks are derived from national Census data, which is only collected every five years and published with significant delays. For rapidly changing demographic groups, such as members of visible minorities, these benchmarks often fail to capture the actual growth of qualified people in the current labor market. Expanded guidance: Availability estimates can be materially outdated relative to present labour market conditions. When planning against only historical WFA, there is a risk of concluding that representation is adequate when the external labour market has evolved. In fast‑growing groups, this gap can be substantial and may misinform decisions about where reductions occur.  If the organization relies solely on this lagging data during its initial analysis, it risks a state where the department looks representative on paper even though it is falling behind real‑world market realities. This creates a situation where reductions appear to meet Employment Equity goals but actually entrench underrepresentation relative to the current talent pool. Managers must document the Census year used and the time gap between that data and the current workforce numbers to ensure the analysis is grounded in reality.   

Official Workforce Availability (WFA) benchmarks are derived from national Census data, which is only collected every five years and published with significant delays. For rapidly changing demographic groups, such as members of visible minorities, these benchmarks often fail to capture the actual growth of qualified people in the current labor market.  

 

'''Expanded guidance:''' Availability estimates can be materially outdated relative to present labour market conditions. When planning against only historical WFA, there is a risk of concluding that representation is adequate when the external labour market has evolved. In fast‑growing groups, this gap can be substantial and may misinform decisions about where reductions occur.  If the organization relies solely on this lagging data during its initial analysis, it risks a state where the department looks representative on paper even though it is falling behind real‑world market realities. This creates a situation where reductions appear to meet Employment Equity goals but actually entrench underrepresentation relative to the current talent pool. Managers must document the Census year used and the time gap between that data and the current workforce numbers to ensure the analysis is grounded in reality.   

'''Implementation detail:''' Always record the specific Census year and publication date alongside the current date and any more recent labour market indicators consulted (for example, Labour Force Survey). Include a brief note on how data lag may affect interpretation to ensure clarity for reviewers.

'''Implementation detail:''' Always record the specific Census year and publication date alongside the current date and any more recent labour market indicators consulted (for example, Labour Force Survey). Include a brief note on how data lag may affect interpretation to ensure clarity for reviewers.

==== '''Applying growth‑adjusted benchmarks for accurate modeling.''' ====

==== '''Applying growth‑adjusted benchmarks for accurate modeling.''' ====

To address the data lag, managers should not rely exclusively on the official WFA numbers for their internal planning. Instead, they should apply a more accurate threshold using the following formula: Adjusted\ Availability = Official\ WFA + (Recent\ LFS\ proportion - Census\ proportion). This incorporates the most recent Labour Force Survey (LFS) trends to find a more realistic representation threshold. Expanded guidance: Calculating an adjusted availability aligns planning with more current labour market conditions while still acknowledging the official benchmark. The adjustment should be calculated transparently, with data sources, dates, and calculations documented and retained.  By calculating an "Attainment Ratio" (Internal\ Representation \div Adjusted\ Availability), the department can identify if a unit is at risk of creating a new representation gap. If the ratio is above 1.0 against the old Census but below 1.0 against the adjusted benchmark, the organization should document this representation risk in the Step 1 Decision Record before proceeding with any layoffs. This ensures that the department does not accidentally reduce its workforce below the actual availability of the Canadian labor market.  

To address the data lag, managers should not rely exclusively on the official WFA numbers for their internal planning. Instead, they should apply a more accurate threshold using the following formula: Adjusted\ Availability = Official\ WFA + (Recent\ LFS\ proportion - Census\ proportion). This incorporates the most recent Labour Force Survey (LFS) trends to find a more realistic representation threshold.  

 

'''Expanded guidance:''' Calculating an adjusted availability aligns planning with more current labour market conditions while still acknowledging the official benchmark. The adjustment should be calculated transparently, with data sources, dates, and calculations documented and retained.  By calculating an "Attainment Ratio" (Internal\ Representation \div Adjusted\ Availability), the department can identify if a unit is at risk of creating a new representation gap. If the ratio is above 1.0 against the old Census but below 1.0 against the adjusted benchmark, the organization should document this representation risk in the Step 1 Decision Record before proceeding with any layoffs. This ensures that the department does not accidentally reduce its workforce below the actual availability of the Canadian labor market.  

'''Implementation detail:''' Include attainment ratios both against the official WFA and against the adjusted availability. Where ratios disagree, note the variance and the potential equity impact, and consider mitigations (for example, scope choices, assessing organizational needs, or sequencing reductions).

'''Implementation detail:''' Include attainment ratios both against the official WFA and against the adjusted availability. Where ratios disagree, note the variance and the potential equity impact, and consider mitigations (for example, scope choices, assessing organizational needs, or sequencing reductions).

==== '''Requirements based on historical access to high‑profile assignments.''' ====

==== '''Requirements based on historical access to high‑profile assignments.''' ====

When defining the Future State, there is a risk of defining required work around "prestige" assignments or high‑profile experience that has not been equally accessible to all employees. If future skills are based on factors like "acting at senior levels" or "executive briefing exposure," the process will naturally favor those who were historically given those opportunities through informal networks and sponsorshi'''p.''' Expanded guidance: Requirements should be expressed in terms of what the job needs done, not the prestige of past opportunities. Screening for phrases that signal access rather than ability (for example, “central agency exposure”) helps avoid embedding historical privilege.  Employment Equity groups often face systemic barriers to these specific types of high‑visibility roles. To ensure fairness, every continuing function must be justified by its actual operational necessity rather than its historical prestige. Managers should replace these historical access requirements with clear, competency‑based descriptions of the tasks, ensuring that merit is based on the ability to do the work rather than having had a specific "seat at the table."   

When defining the Future State, there is a risk of defining required work around "prestige" assignments or high‑profile experience that has not been equally accessible to all employees. If future skills are based on factors like "acting at senior levels" or "executive briefing exposure," the process will naturally favor those who were historically given those opportunities through informal networks and sponsorship'''.'''  

 

'''Expanded guidance:''' Requirements should be expressed in terms of what the job needs done, not the prestige of past opportunities. Screening for phrases that signal access rather than ability (for example, “central agency exposure”) helps avoid embedding historical privilege.  Employment Equity groups often face systemic barriers to these specific types of high‑visibility roles. To ensure fairness, every continuing function must be justified by its actual operational necessity rather than its historical prestige. Managers should replace these historical access requirements with clear, competency‑based descriptions of the tasks, ensuring that merit is based on the ability to do the work rather than having had a specific "seat at the table."   

'''Implementation detail:''' For each essential qualification, include a plain description of the linked duty and the observable behaviour that evidences competence (for example, “prepares clear briefings for senior audiences” rather than “has briefed executives”).

'''Implementation detail:''' For each essential qualification, include a plain description of the linked duty and the observable behaviour that evidences competence (for example, “prepares clear briefings for senior audiences” rather than “has briefed executives”).

==== '''The concentration of diversity in urban work centers.''' ====

==== '''The concentration of diversity in urban work centers.''' ====

Restructuring often involves moving work from regional offices to urban centers. Diversity levels are not spread evenly across the country; for instance, representation for members of visible minorities is often significantly higher in major cities compared to rural regions. Expanded guidance: Location choices materially affect representation. Consolidating to or from urban centres should be modelled for demographic impact, so decision makers can see the representation consequences of each option.  If the Future State involves closing an urban office without modeling the demographic impact, the organization may unintentionally eliminate a large portion of its diverse workforce. A "Geographic Representation Snapshot" must be completed to ensure that consolidation does not create a "diversity desert" and that the department maintains its commitment to a workforce that reflects the Canadian population it serves.  

Restructuring often involves moving work from regional offices to urban centers. Diversity levels are not spread evenly across the country; for instance, representation for members of visible minorities is often significantly higher in major cities compared to rural regions.  

 

'''Expanded guidance:''' Location choices materially affect representation. Consolidating to or from urban centres should be modelled for demographic impact, so decision makers can see the representation consequences of each option.  If the Future State involves closing an urban office without modeling the demographic impact, the organization may unintentionally eliminate a large portion of its diverse workforce. A "Geographic Representation Snapshot" must be completed to ensure that consolidation does not create a material under‑representation risk. and that the department maintains its commitment to a workforce that reflects the Canadian population it serves.  

'''Implementation detail:''' The snapshot should show current representation by site, projected representation after proposed changes, and differences from departmental baselines and adjusted availability. Summarize findings in the Step 1 Decision Record and note mitigation steps where risks are identified.

'''Implementation detail:''' The snapshot should show current representation by site, projected representation after proposed changes, and differences from departmental baselines and adjusted availability. Summarize findings in the Step 1 Decision Record and note mitigation steps where risks are identified.

==== '''Linguistic requirements and the risk of rising language profiles.''' ====

==== '''Linguistic requirements and the risk of rising language profiles.''' ====

Official language requirements must be set objectively based on the actual functions of the position, as required by the Official Languages Act. There is a risk that language profiles are raised (for example, from Level B to Level C) as a hidden tool to reduce the number of people who can qualify for the retention pool.  Expanded guidance: Language profiles must be justified by the nature of work, such as direct service to the public, supervision, or internal service delivery in both official languages. Any proposed profile changes should reference concrete duties that require that level.  Raising language requirements without a proven operational need acts as a structural filter that pushes out high‑performing employees who may not have been given equal access to language training. The Official Languages unit must provide written confirmation that any profile changes are justified by the work, ensuring language is used for service delivery and not as a shortcut for headcount management.

Official language requirements must be set objectively based on the actual functions of the position, as required by the Official Languages Act. There is a risk that language profiles are raised (for example, from Level B to Level C) as a hidden tool to reduce the number of people who can qualify for the retention pool.   

 

'''Expanded guidance:''' Language profiles must be justified by the nature of work, such as direct service to the public, supervision, or internal service delivery in both official languages. Any proposed profile changes should reference concrete duties that require that level.  Raising language requirements without a proven operational need acts as a structural filter that pushes out high‑performing employees who may not have been given equal access to language training. The Official Languages unit must provide written confirmation that any profile changes are justified by the work, ensuring language is used for service delivery and not as a shortcut for headcount management.

'''Implementation detail:''' Attach the Official Languages written confirmation to the Step 1 file. Ensure the rationale is specific (for example, “regular, direct service to the public in both official languages at advanced complexity requires Level C reading/writing/oral”).

'''Implementation detail:''' Attach the Official Languages written confirmation to the Step 1 file. Ensure the rationale is specific (for example, “regular, direct service to the public in both official languages at advanced complexity requires Level C reading/writing/oral”).

==== '''Performing a prediction of future representation rates.''' ====

==== '''Performing a prediction of future representation rates.''' ====

Before any positions are eliminated, the department should perform a review to predict the representation rates of the retained group. The formula used is: Projected\ Representation = (Current\ EE\ employees - Proposed\ reductions) \div Future\ total\ positions. Expanded guidance: This projection should be prepared for each affected unit and for the aggregate affected part. Assumptions should be stated (for example, which positions are proposed for elimination and the demographic composition of those positions).  This projection allows the organization to see the "diversity outcome" of their business decisions before they are finalized. Where the projection falls below adjusted availability or departmental baselines, the manager must document why the reduction will not deepen existing gaps. This ensures structural awareness and prevents the unintentional erosion of progress in Employment Equity.   

Before any positions are eliminated, the department should perform a review to predict the representation rates of the retained group. The formula used is: Projected\ Representation = (Current\ EE\ employees - Proposed\ reductions) \div Future\ total\ positions.  

 

'''Expanded guidance:''' This projection should be prepared for each affected unit and for the aggregate affected part. Assumptions should be stated (for example, which positions are proposed for elimination and the demographic composition of those positions).  This projection allows the organization to see the "diversity outcome" of their business decisions before they are finalized. Where the projection falls below adjusted availability or departmental baselines, the manager must document why the reduction will not deepen existing gaps. This ensures structural awareness and prevents the unintentional erosion of progress in Employment Equity.   

'''Implementation detail:''' If projections fall below adjusted availability or internal baselines, record the specific risk, the business constraint, and any mitigations (for example, reconsider scope, revisit essential qualifications to ensure fidelity to duties, or set an organizational need in Step 7 where appropriate and lawful).

'''Implementation detail:''' If projections fall below adjusted availability or internal baselines, record the specific risk, the business constraint, and any mitigations (for example, reconsider scope, revisit essential qualifications to ensure fidelity to duties, or set an organizational need in Step 7 where appropriate and lawful).

=== STEP 2: Determine the Affected Part(s) of the Organization ===

=== STEP 2: Determine the Affected Part(s) of the Organization ===

Step 2 defines the "scope boundary"—the specific organizational unit (section, division, or directorate) and the geographic area (local, regional, or national) where the workforce adjustment will occur. This clarifies that both organizational and geographic dimensions must be set and that they determine who is considered “in scope” for the SERLO pool.

Step 2 defines the "scope boundary"-the specific organizational unit (section, division, or directorate) and the geographic area (local, regional, or national) where the workforce adjustment will occur. This clarifies that both organizational and geographic dimensions must be set and that they determine who is considered “in scope” for the SERLO pool.

These boundaries are the most important factor in determining who is placed "at risk" and who is kept "safe." This underscores the effect of scope on people. Therefore, the rationale must be explicit, consistent, and based on work, not individuals.

These boundaries are the most important factor in determining who is placed "at risk" and who is kept "safe." This underscores the effect of scope on people. Therefore, the rationale must be explicit, consistent, and based on work, not individuals.

==== '''Drawing scope boundaries too tightly around diverse teams.''' ====

==== '''Drawing scope boundaries too tightly around diverse teams.''' ====

A significant equity risk occurs when scope boundaries are drawn too tightly around a specific team that happens to be very diverse, while safe‑guarding other units that perform substantially similar work. This "unit isolation" can make a layoff look like a neutral operational decision when it is actually targeting a specific group of employees. Expanded guidance: To prevent “unit isolation,” conduct an objective comparison of duties across units that perform similar work, regardless of organizational labels or reporting lines.  To prevent this, the department must conduct a "Similar Work Test." This involves formally verifying if comparable duties are performed in other parts of the organization. If similar work exists elsewhere but is excluded from the adjustment scope, the manager must provide a written rationale in the Scope Determination Record explaining the business reason for the exclusion.  

A significant equity risk occurs when scope boundaries are drawn too tightly around a specific team that happens to be very diverse, while safe‑guarding other units that perform substantially similar work. This "unit isolation" can make a layoff look like a neutral operational decision when it is actually targeting a specific group of employees.  

 

'''Expanded guidance:''' To prevent “unit isolation,” conduct an objective comparison of duties across units that perform similar work, regardless of organizational labels or reporting lines.  To prevent this, the department must conduct a "Similar Work Test." This involves formally verifying if comparable duties are performed in other parts of the organization. If similar work exists elsewhere but is excluded from the adjustment scope, the manager must provide a written rationale in the Scope Determination Record explaining the business reason for the exclusion.  

'''Implementation detail:''' The Similar Work Test should list the core duties, the percentage of time for each duty, where those duties appear elsewhere, and a clear business reason for any exclusion (for example, work is continuing in that unit due to legislative requirement).

'''Implementation detail:''' The Similar Work Test should list the core duties, the percentage of time for each duty, where those duties appear elsewhere, and a clear business reason for any exclusion (for example, work is continuing in that unit due to legislative requirement).

==== '''The impact of geographic boundaries on regional diversity.''' ====

==== '''The impact of geographic boundaries on regional diversity.''' ====

Choosing between a local, regional, or national scope has massive consequences for fairness. For example, if a department uses a local scope for a reduction in a diverse urban center, it may result in more layoffs for racialized employees compared to using a broader national scope that includes less diverse regions. Expanded guidance: Select a geographic boundary that accurately reflects how work is delivered and that does not concentrate risk on a single location with a materially different demographic composition.  Managers must document why a specific geographic boundary was selected. If a national scope is used, the department must ensure that employees in all regions have consistent and equal access to information, union representation, and support services to ensure that distance does not become a barrier to procedural fairness.  

Choosing between a local, regional, or national scope has massive consequences for fairness. For example, if a department uses a local scope for a reduction in a diverse urban center, it may result in more layoffs for racialized employees compared to using a broader national scope that includes less diverse regions.  

 

'''Expanded guidance''': Select a geographic boundary that accurately reflects how work is delivered and that does not concentrate risk on a single location with a materially different demographic composition.  Managers must document why a specific geographic boundary was selected. If a national scope is used, the department must ensure that employees in all regions have consistent and equal access to information, union representation, and support services to ensure that distance does not become a barrier to procedural fairness.  

'''Implementation detail:''' Record the rationale for boundary selection in the Scope Determination Record and describe the measures used to provide equal access across regions (for example, simultaneous e‑mail notices, virtual town halls, bilingual Q\&A sessions).

'''Implementation detail:''' Record the rationale for boundary selection in the Scope Determination Record and describe the measures used to provide equal access across regions (for example, simultaneous e‑mail notices, virtual town halls, bilingual Q\&A sessions).

==== '''Manipulating boundaries to avoid legal program triggers.''' ====

==== '''Manipulating boundaries to avoid legal program triggers.''' ====

There is a risk that scope boundaries are drawn specifically to manipulate the "counts" of affected employees to avoid legal obligations. For instance, splitting a single team into two separate units might keep the number of affected employees below the "5 or more" threshold that triggers a mandatory Voluntary Departure Program (VDP). Expanded guidance: The design of scope must never be used to reduce or avoid employee rights. Labour Relations and HR should review scope for integrity and confirm that counts reflect the true affected part.  Labour Relations and HR must affirm that scope decisions are not being used to circumvent the rights of employees under the Workforce Adjustment Directive. The "Scope Determination Record" should include an accurate count of all affected indeterminate employees by group and level to ensure that all negotiated protections are triggered appropriately.  

There is a risk that scope boundaries are drawn specifically to manipulate the "counts" of affected employees to avoid legal obligations. For instance, splitting a single team into two separate units might keep the number of affected employees below the "5 or more" threshold that triggers a mandatory Voluntary Departure Program (VDP).  

 

'''Expanded guidance:''' The design of scope must never be used to reduce or avoid employee rights. Labour Relations and HR should review scope for integrity and confirm that counts reflect the true affected part.  Labour Relations and HR must affirm that scope decisions are not being used to circumvent the rights of employees under the Workforce Adjustment Directive. The "Scope Determination Record" should include an accurate count of all affected indeterminate employees by group and level to ensure that all negotiated protections are triggered appropriately.  

'''Implementation detail:''' Include the counts, data sources, and date of extraction. If a VDP threshold is met, record that fact and list the next steps to comply.

'''Implementation detail:''' Include the counts, data sources, and date of extraction. If a VDP threshold is met, record that fact and list the next steps to comply.

==== '''The need for a representation check before finalizing scope.''' ====

==== '''The need for a representation check before finalizing scope.''' ====

Before the scope is finalized, the HR Analytics team should produce a "Snapshot" of representation for the proposed affected area. This snapshot should be compared against the departmental baseline and the sensitivity benchmarks established in Step 1.  Expanded guidance: The Snapshot should show representation by Employment Equity (EE) category, total counts, percentages, and comparisons to both departmental baselines and adjusted availability used in Step 1, so changes in scope can be tested for fairness effects.  If the proposed scope concentrates risk in a unit with significantly higher representation than the rest of the department, this concentration must be flagged. The manager should then review the scope to ensure that the definition of the affected part is truly based on the discontinuance of a function and not on an arbitrary boundary that produces an inequitable outcome.  

Before the scope is finalized, the HR Analytics team should produce a "Snapshot" of representation for the proposed affected area. This snapshot should be compared against the departmental baseline and the sensitivity benchmarks established in Step 1.   

 

'''Expanded guidance''': The Snapshot should show representation by Employment Equity (EE) category, total counts, percentages, and comparisons to both departmental baselines and adjusted availability used in Step 1, so changes in scope can be tested for fairness effects.  If the proposed scope concentrates risk in a unit with significantly higher representation than the rest of the department, this concentration must be flagged. The manager should then review the scope to ensure that the definition of the affected part is truly based on the discontinuance of a function and not on an arbitrary boundary that produces an inequitable outcome.  

'''Implementation detail:''' Where concentration exists, document whether the scope can be expanded or adjusted to align to the function rather than the particular team, and record the decision and rationale.

'''Implementation detail:''' Where concentration exists, document whether the scope can be expanded or adjusted to align to the function rather than the particular team, and record the decision and rationale.

Step 4 is the formal notification phase. This clarifies that all parties must be advised that workforce adjustment activities are underway, prior to assessments.

Step 4 is the formal notification phase. This clarifies that all parties must be advised that workforce adjustment activities are underway, prior to assessments.

The organization must inform the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS), the unions (bargaining agents), and the affected employees that a workforce adjustment is underway. This is not a layoff notice; it is an organizational announcement intended to ensure transparency before any assessments begin. The package should clearly explain the purpose of the notice, the steps to come, the supports available, and points of contact in both official languages.

The organization must notify TBS‑OCHRO confidentially at the earliest possible date and not less than four working days before any announcement likely to involve a specified number of employees. Notify national heads of the bargaining agents before notifying employees, then notify employees. This is not a layoff notice; it is an organizational announcement intended to ensure transparency before any assessments begin. The package should clearly explain the purpose of the notice, the steps to come, the supports available, and points of contact in both official languages.

'''The requirement for simultaneous notification to all employees.'''  

'''The requirement for simultaneous notification to all employees.'''  

==== '''Ensuring communication materials are accessible by design.''' ====

==== '''Ensuring communication materials are accessible by design.''' ====

Many government announcements are sent as PDFs or emails that may not be screen‑reader compatible or available in alternate formats like large print. Under the Accessible Canada Act, the department has a legal obligation to ensure that SERLO communications are accessible to all.   

Provide letters and instructions in accessible formats and plain language. Ensure web or intranet postings meet WCAG 2.1 AA. Follow TBS ‘Guidelines on Making Communications Products and Activities Accessible. Refrain from using PDFs or emails that may not be screen‑reader compatible or available in alternate formats like large print. Under the Accessible Canada Act, the department has a legal obligation to ensure that SERLO communications are accessible to all.   

'''Expanded guidance:''' Prepare communications in accessible formats (for example, accessible Word or HTML) with plain language, clear headings, and simple navigation. Offer alternate formats upon request.  The Accessibility function should review the notification package before it is released. This includes ensuring that the instructions for requesting help or seeking union advice are clear, unambiguous, and easy to find for everyone, regardless of their physical or cognitive abilities.   

'''Expanded guidance:''' Prepare communications in accessible formats (for example, accessible Word or HTML) with plain language, clear headings, and simple navigation. Offer alternate formats upon request.  The Accessibility function should review the notification package before it is released. This includes ensuring that the instructions for requesting help or seeking union advice are clear, unambiguous, and easy to find for everyone, regardless of their physical or cognitive abilities.   

=== STEP 5: Conduct Required Classification and Staffing Activities ===

=== STEP 5: Conduct Required Classification and Staffing Activities ===

This step ensures that all job descriptions and language profiles are accurate and up‑to‑date. If the work has changed as part of the restructuring, the permanent (substantive) positions must be re‑evaluated to reflect the current duties before any assessment of employees occurs. This prevents employees from being measured against outdated or prestige‑based criteria and ensures assessments are aligned with actual work.

This step ensures that all job descriptions and language profiles are accurate and up‑to‑date. If the work has changed as part of the restructuring, the permanent (substantive) positions must be re‑evaluated to reflect the current duties before any assessment of employees occurs. This prevents employees from being measured against outdated or requirements linked to access to high‑visibility work rather than job needs and ensures assessments are aligned with actual work.

'''Removing requirements based on historical prestige.'''

'''Removing requirements based on historical prestige.'''

Inequity is often hidden in the "fine print" of job descriptions. Requirements like "experience briefing senior executives" or "central agency exposure" are often markers of past privilege rather than actual technical skills. These markers reflect who has had access to high‑profile projects in the past.   

Inequity is often hidden in the "fine print" of job descriptions. Requirements like "experience briefing senior executives" or "central agency exposure" are often markers of past privilege rather than actual technical skills. These markers reflect who has had access to high‑profile projects in the past.   

'''Expanded guidance:''' Replace prestige markers with competency‑based statements tied to duties and observable behaviours, expressed in plain language.  Employment Equity groups have historically faced more barriers to these types of high‑visibility opportunities. To ensure a fair pool, the department should screen descriptions to replace these historical access markers with competency‑based language, such as "Ability to communicate complex data to senior decision‑makers."   

'''Expanded guidance:''' Replace requirements linked to access to high‑visibility work rather than job needs with competency‑based statements tied to duties and observable behaviours, expressed in plain language.  Employment Equity groups have historically faced more barriers to these types of high‑visibility opportunities. To ensure a fair pool, the department should screen descriptions to replace these historical access markers with competency‑based language, such as "Ability to communicate complex data to senior decision‑makers."   

'''Implementation detail:''' Verify that each essential qualification maps to a specific Future State duty and the method that will assess it.

'''Implementation detail:''' Verify that each essential qualification maps to a specific Future State duty and the method that will assess it.

=== STEP 6: Establish a Voluntary Departure Program (VDP), Where Required ===

=== STEP 6: Establish a Voluntary Departure Program (VDP), Where Required ===

A VDP must be offered if five or more indeterminate employees at the same group and level in the same unit are affected and no job offer is guaranteed. It allows employees to choose to leave with a package before any involuntary layoffs are decided. Program parameters should be communicated clearly, with timelines, eligibility, benefits, and points of contact.

If five or more indeterminate employees at the same group and level in the same unit are affected and no GRJO is assured, establish a VDP before SERLO. Provide at least 30 days for volunteers to decide. It allows employees to choose to leave with a package before any involuntary layoffs are decided. Program parameters should be communicated clearly, with timelines, eligibility, benefits, and points of contact.

==== '''Ensuring the program remains truly voluntary and free of pressure.''' ====

==== '''Ensuring the program remains truly voluntary and free of pressure.''' ====

=== STEP 7: Determine the Qualifications, Requirements, and Organizational Needs ===

=== STEP 7: Determine the Qualifications, Requirements, and Organizational Needs ===

Step 7 sets the "Merit Criteria"—the list of skills, knowledge, and needs that will be used to decide who stays. These factors form the legal basis for all assessments and retention decisions under the Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER). Criteria must be directly tied to duties and expressed in clear, objective terms.

Step 7 sets the "Merit Criteria"-the list of skills, knowledge, and needs that will be used to decide who stays. These factors form the legal basis for all assessments and retention decisions under the Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER). Criteria must be directly tied to duties and expressed in clear, objective terms.

==== '''The use of clear and objective criteria to prevent bias.''' ====

==== '''The use of clear and objective criteria to prevent bias.''' ====

=== STEP 10: Inform Employees in Writing ===

=== STEP 10: Inform Employees in Writing ===

Every employee in the SERLO pool must receive a formal letter listing the qualifications being tested, the methods that will be used, and how to request help (accommodation) through the process. Letters should be accessible, bilingual, and free of jargon.

Every employee in the SERLO pool must receive a formal letter listing the qualifications being tested, the assessment methods that will be used, timelines, and how to request an accommodation through the process. Letters should be accessible, bilingual, and free of jargon.

==== '''The "no surprises" principle in notifying employees.''' ====

==== '''The "no surprises" principle in notifying employees.''' ====

==== '''Using independent scoring to prevent dominant opinions.''' ====

==== '''Using independent scoring to prevent dominant opinions.''' ====

To avoid the "Halo Effect"—where one influential assessor’s opinion sways the entire panel—each grader must write their scores down privately before they talk as a group.   

To avoid the "Halo Effect"-where one influential assessor’s opinion sways the entire panel-each grader must write their scores down privately before they talk as a group.   

'''Expanded guidance:''' Preserve original, independent scores for each assessor and each criterion, then hold a panel discussion to reconcile differences if needed.  These initial scores must be kept in the file. If a score is changed after the group discussion, the manager must write down a clear factual reason for the adjustment. This protects against a dominant personality on the panel from unfairly favoring or disadvantaging certain employees.   

'''Expanded guidance:''' Preserve original, independent scores for each assessor and each criterion, then hold a panel discussion to reconcile differences if needed.  These initial scores must be kept in the file. If a score is changed after the group discussion, the manager must write down a clear factual reason for the adjustment. This protects against a dominant personality on the panel from unfairly favoring or disadvantaging certain employees.   

==== '''Ensuring the baseline of essential qualifications is met.''' ====

==== '''Ensuring the baseline of essential qualifications is met.''' ====

Merit is the first principle of the SERLO. Employees who do not meet even one "Essential Qualification" - including official language proficiency—cannot be retained under the law.   

Merit is the first principle of the SERLO. Employees who do not meet even one "Essential Qualification" - including official language proficiency-cannot be retained under the law.   

'''Expanded guidance''': Verify essentials before any organizational need is considered. If an essential is not met, the individual cannot be retained through the SERLO outcome.  The manager must verify that every person selected for retention has successfully demonstrated all essential factors. Applying equity preferences can only happen among employees who have met this fundamental merit baseline, ensuring a competent and diverse continuing workforce.   

'''Expanded guidance''': Verify essentials before any organizational need is considered. If an essential is not met, the individual cannot be retained through the SERLO outcome.  The manager must verify that every person selected for retention has successfully demonstrated all essential factors. Applying equity preferences can only happen among employees who have met this fundamental merit baseline, ensuring a competent and diverse continuing workforce.   

=== STEP 13: Provide Written Notice of Lay‑Off or Retention ===

=== STEP 13: Provide Written Notice of Lay‑Off or Retention ===

Formal letters are issued to all participants. Lay‑off notices must legally contain five specific elements: the statement of lay‑off, the legal reason, the specific selection reason, the effective date, and the right to complain. Retention letters should confirm continuation in the position and any next steps.

Formal letters are issued to all participants. Lay‑off notices must contain Include at least: the lay‑off decision under PSEA s.64; the assessed factors under PSER s.22(2) and how they led to selection; the effective date; available WFA supports; and the right to complain to the FPSLREB under PSEA s.65, including timelines and how to file. Retention letters should confirm continuation in the position and any next steps.

==== '''Transparency through the 5‑point mandatory notice content.''' ====

==== '''Transparency through the 5‑point mandatory notice content.''' ====

'''Implementation detail:''' Use a file completeness checklist and conduct a peer review of a sample of files for consistency.

'''Implementation detail:''' Use a file completeness checklist and conduct a peer review of a sample of files for consistency.

==== Consolidated execution checklist ====

=== Equity considerations by SERLO step (exhaustive;  PSC wording) ===

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=== Quick reference ===

* Step 1: Document Future State, data vintage, adjusted availability, attainment ratios, geographic snapshot, language justifications, and projected representation; record risks and mitigations.

* '''PSC''': [https://www.canada.ca/en/public-service-commission/services/public-service-hiring-guides/selection-employees-retention-layoff-guide-managers-hr.html Selection of employees for retention or lay‑off: Guide for managers and HR specialists]

* Step 2: Define scope by discontinued/reduced work; run Similar Work Test; document geographic rationale; confirm trigger integrity with Labour Relations; complete representation snapshot; run Work‑Based Scope Test.

* '''PSER (Justice Laws)''': [https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2005-334/FullText.html Public Service Employment Regulations – s.22]

* Step 3: Form the SERLO pool from HR systems; maintain an Inclusion Log; build a Duty Similarity Matrix; complete a Position Data Audit; verify representation awareness in pools.

* '''PSEA (Justice Laws):''' [https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-33.01/ s.30 (Merit), s.64 (Lay‑off), s.65]

* Step 4: Prepare and issue accessible, bilingual notifications using a Single Release Protocol; confirm delivery to employees on leave; include clear contacts for unions, HR, accessibility, and supports.

* '''TBS''': [https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=26168 Directive on Official Languages for People Management] and [https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=32728 Guidelines on Making Communications Products and Activities Accessible]

* Step 5: Update job descriptions and Statements of Merit Criteria; remove prestige markers; confirm Official Languages profiles in writing; align essentials with duties.

* '''OCOL''': [https://www.clo-ocol.gc.ca/en/language-rights/language-rights-federal-public-service/language-requirements-positions Language requirements of positions]

* Step 6: If required, establish a VDP; issue a no‑pressure directive; monitor uptake patterns; investigate and address any disproportionate participation.

* '''PSC assessment resources:''' [https://www.canada.ca/en/public-service-commission/services/public-service-hiring-guides/selection-employees-retention-layoff-guide-managers-hr.html Selection of employees for retention or lay-off: Guide for managers and human resources specialists] [[/www.canada.ca/en/public-service-commission/services/public-service-hiring-guides/selection-employees-retention-layoff.html|SERLO assessment module]], [https://www.canada.ca/en/public-service-commission/services/public-service-hiring-guides/guide-mitigating-biases-barriers-assessment.html Guide to Mitigating Biases and Barriers in Assessment,] [https://www.canada.ca/en/public-service-commission/services/public-service-hiring-guides/tool-mitigating-biases-barriers-assessment.html Tool for Mitigating Biases and Barriers in Assessment]

* Step 7: Finalize merit criteria and any organizational needs with a Criteria Justification Table; remove subjective terms; obtain delegated approvals.

* '''FPSLREB:''' [https://www.fpslreb-crtespf.gc.ca/en/index.html Board website (staffing complaints, lay‑offs)]

* Step 8: Approve a single Master Assessment Plan; train and calibrate assessors; maintain rubrics, anchors, and inter‑rater checks.

* Step 9: Complete a Bias and Barrier Evaluation for each method; implement mitigations; publish accommodation process; confirm measures in writing.

* Step 10: Send letters that mirror approved criteria and methods; provide reasonable preparation windows; include accommodation and union contacts; retain delivery confirmations.

* Step 11: Administer assessments; capture independent scores before discussion; keep evidence‑based notes; record any score‑change rationales.

* Step 12: Build a selection matrix; confirm all essentials are met; apply organizational needs consistently among those who met essentials; record decisions.

* Step 13: Issue lay‑off and retention letters; ensure five mandatory elements in lay‑off letters; provide evidence‑linked reasons; offer explanatory meetings on request; confirm delivery.

* Step 14: Complete Individual Reasons Records; map decisions to evidence and selection logic; use file completeness checks; conduct peer reviews.

----

----