The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada
The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada
Log in

SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (SAC)

June 9th 2018 - 9:00 a.m.

PIPSC NATIONAL OFFICE

Members in attendance:

Krishna H. Gautam     SAC member, NRCan

Robert MacDonald     Board Liaison, Transport Canada

Karen Hall SAC member, Transport Canada

John Shi SAC member, AGCAN (teleconference)

Patrick Cherneski SAC member, AGCAN

 

Cathy Cheung NRC, Friend of the committee

Richard S. Winder NRCan, Friend of the committee (teleconference)

 

Staff resource: Maxime Gingras, PIPSC Research Officer

 

Staff in attendance:

Michael Urminsky, PIPSC Research Team Lead

 

  1. Call to Order & Introductions — Chair

  • Meeting called to order at 9:15 AM;

  1. Discussion on Agenda  — All

  • No further discussion was had on the agenda;

  1. Adoption of Agenda — Chair

  • Agenda was approved as is;

  1. Approval of minutes of previous meeting — All

  • Modifications were flagged, including a few typing errors;
  • Minutes were approved as amended;
  • Max will send the approved minutes for translation and web posting;

  1. Business arising from previous meeting — All

  • Most action items stemming from the last meeting were completed;

(AI) PREVIOUS ACTION ITEM: Rob to continue looking into follow-up on unanswered email from stakeholders at PIPSC regarding erosion of PC jobs to EC and EG classifications, as well as GT classifications.

  • Rob got a memo from Michael Urminsky which looked into this action item;
  • There is little evidence from the memo that indicates that PC positions are on a wide scale conversion to EC jobs;
  • SAC will be asking the SP Working Group on Consultation to keep track of flagged positions being converted to EC, GT jobs;
  • It was raised that in case law, there is an existing recourse for such matters;
  • Michael will update and circulate the memo to SAC and Karen will report to consultation team;

(AI) PREVIOUS ACTION ITEM:  Max to schedule a teleconference with SAC members on establishing suggested guidelines on the use of Monitoring reports. How to get input from Consultation Teams and updating the reports through time;

  • This did not happen as feedback on initial monitoring reports has yet to be received from some Consultation Team Presidents. New mechanism to stimulate the involvement of consultation teams could be explored by the SAC in dealing with further monitoring reports.

PIPSC President, Debi Daviau, stopped by the SAC in order to meet the members and discuss strategy regarding ongoing Public Science challenges for PIPSC.

  1. Reports on science activities: members

  • The committee had asked to get a Gender Based Analysis done for the RE and SP groups. This was completed;
  • The Science March in Vancouver had a PIPSC member and SAC member in attendance;
  • The Consultation teams will be getting the tools developed by staff regarding our two latest science reports.  Tools will need to be developed to help non-SBDAs, who are not as well versed on Public Science issues;
  • NRC is having a hard time letting go of previous revenue targets on top of new direction and a new dialogue action plan has been created between members and management;
  • AGCan is having ongoing conversations on the assessment of travel and conference attendance. There is an existing project proposal to explore how to access and manage travel and conference requests.
  • AGCan was involved a national Blueprint 2020 event. AGCan led the conversation at the Regina session;
  • Addressing visible minority challenges is also high priority being driven by ADMs, actions undertaken on this throughout SBDAs has been heterogeneous and should be flagged;
  • A number of SP group lunch and learns on Phoenix have been happening in order to inform membership on FYIs. The issue is still ongoing like everyone else;
  • A newer member noted that interacting and engaging membership on SAC activities has been a bigger challenge than expected. Lunch and learns will be used;
  • Another new member noted that Conference attendance remains an issue and it is hard to get management to acknowledge the productivity potentiality from attending conferences at AGCan;
  • NRCan seems to have initiated increased denial of conference attendance and threats of grievances seems to be the only way to solve these types of travel issues;
  • NRCan is prepping for SI policy at the Consultation level in order to get ready to go when the time comes;
  • Getting OT approval has become an issue at NRCan. Threats of moving to Office 2.0 resulting ni issues on capacity and research is ongoing;
  • RE Group members still have not received their retro pay because of Phoenix;
  • Pertaining to climate change work with SBDAs, a lot of the work being undertaken is stretching existing capacity and new money is scarce.  Members around the table also agree that the situation is similar throughout Science Based Departments & Agencies (Federal Sustainable Strategy);

  1. Updates on Strategic and Operational Plan for Public Sector Science for 2018-2019

a) Science Integrity Policy development — Maxime

  • SAC is concerned that Consultation Team Presidents may understand that they will be consulted on the process of implementation on SI and not just the policy itself. That distinction should be made clear;
  • Max provided an update on the progress made with CSA and TBS on Scientific Integrity and the        model policy;
  • A Terms of Reference document was established;
  • The internal Scientific Integrity monitoring plan and process was presented;

b) Science Membership Survey (Defrosting Public Science / Science Capacity/Gender    report) — Maxime

  • An update on was given by Michael Urminsky on Science Capacity;
  • Further updates from Michael will be given at the next meeting on Science Capacity;
  • The follow-up memo on Health Canada pertaining to departmental results on muzzling at Health Canada was very useful, only Health and PHAC asked for it;

NEW AI - Rob will approach DFO CT Presidents and NRCan CT President to see if undertaking a monitoring report of their departments would be a worthwhile effort for PIPSC.

NEW AI – Karen will bring up Science to be a standing item at WGC.

  • NRC has a Call to Action working group where a monthly meeting is held. This meeting would be a great opportunity to discuss findings

NEW AI – Max & Rob will have a talk with Research Team Lead to see if a monitoring report should be undertaken for NRC and presented to their Call to Action working group.

c) Government Science Monitoring — Maxime

  • SAC: it was suggested that the Canadian Environmental Agency should also be looked to;

d) Government & External relations on Science — Maxime

  • The Office of the Information Commissioner revealed muzzling findings were well founded and the Office of the President was informed;
  • SAC could suggest to Emily Watkins to attend next SAC in order to discuss about in making a common front on Public Science. What will be the narrative and potential?
  • A SAC member identified extramural science could be looked into.
  • E4D held their pre-budgetary webinar, we didn’t really learn anything new;

e) Conference Attendance initiative — Richard W.

  • Data is being gathered through the only tool established by the RE Group;
  • There is not much data being floated from membership;
  • The problems happen before the denial comes from management because of time limits in        booking flights and stay;
  • The RE Group is seeking greater collaboration;
  • The RE Group has an online tool to help members in case they get denied conference attendance;

f) Update on Women in Scienc — Claire

  • The committee wishes to discuss a way to re-engage the working group, inform the AGM and identify next steps;
  • Rob was tasked with putting together a memo to the PIPSC board on Women in Science. This will be endeavored with the fall Board meeting in sight;
  • A member raised that some of the Women in Science recommendations are tied to bargaining and the next SBC meeting is June 28th;
  • The Women in Science findings and recommendations were mentioned in passing at SBC, but is it the recommendation of SAC that these make their way concretely into coordinated bargaining?
  • A discussion was had to discuss the opportunity for a WiS event as part of the AGM;

NEWAI – Cathy will touch base Research Officer Claire Hurtig, SP President and potentially RE Group President in order to plan an approach which will propose Women in Science recommendations to be included in bargaining at the SBC in June.

NEW AI – Rob will follow-up with PIPSC President and SBC steering committee in getting Women in Science recommendations on the next SBC agenda.

NEW AI – Rob will contact AGM organizers to try and obtain a breakfast and a lunch for Women in Science to re-engage on the issue.

NEW AI – Claire, Cathy and Karen will endeavor to work on a program for WiS at the AGM in order to re-engage on the issue and inform membership.

NEW AI – Karen will write to President Daviau in order to get a scholarship for WiS as part of the PIPSC Legacy Fund.

 

  1. New Business

a) What is a Federal scientist? — All

  • PIPSC was brought in to Government’s demographics initiative on science personnel;
  • A suggestion was floated that Consultation Team presidents should be put in the know about the initiative from Integration Board so that members are aware;
  • Members around the table are not surprised by the content of the deck and where it comes in short;
  • Max shared previous exchanges with the Integration Board working group on the subject matter, as well as the conversation held with IB on science population in light of the data published in our Women in Science report;
  • Members agree that it is a good initiative, but can be a slippery slope for incumbent based positions which are science-based, but ultimately get burdened by other delivery services and policy priorities;
  • What is the intent of the exercise from IB? It is for political purposes or for monitoring Science progress in Public Service ranks?

NEW AI - SAC recommends that the Science Demographics deck and a brief be circulated at the next WGC in order to inform on the existence of this government initiative.

NEW AI – SAC will track the Science demographics progress and comment on its conclusions, to be brought to IB.

b) Science Capacity report presentation — Michael

  • Michael Urminsky, Research Team Lead, presented findings from the 2017 Science Survey to SAC pertaining to Science Capacity.
  • Questions reported on related to the the ability of federal scientists to carry out best practices at work, contribute to deliver to departmental mandate, personnel mandate & the use of scientific evidence in policy decisions;
  • There is definitely a story to tell and the discussion is happening at the Institute;
  • In terms of a report, the goal is to have a report drafted by end of June where a draft could be distributed to SAC;
  • The release date would be set to be happen before pre-budgetary submissions (late July to early August);
  • We want to tell a story about progress and investment in Science but with nuances and metrics;
  • Consultation will have to happen with Consultation Team Presidents on the message;
  • The suggestion going to SAC would be to comments on the draft tied to eventual PIPSC lobby in the fall;
  • Members expressed the opportunity to bring the report to WGC in November with more formal requests from Consultation Team Presidents;
  • It was floated that NRC management is interested in re-running the Science Survey;

NEW AI – Cathy Cheung to pass the name of an individual at NRC to discuss running a science survey again jointly with PIPSC and NRC.

NEW AI – SAC will be consulted and will be commenting on the first draft of the Science Capacity. That first draft will be circulated end of the 3rd week of June.

NEW AI –  Dean Corda circulated reclassifications to IT and impacts on RE Group capacity. Richard Beaulé to be involved.

NEW AI – SAC recommends that tools around Science Capacity for Consultation Teams be developed alongside a release.

NEW AI - Karen will circulate the name of a former MT member who is an expert on climate change data and can speak to the loss of data and capacity related to the scrapping of government equipment under previous cuts.

c) Conference attendance grievance template — Max

  • Members were introduced to a template tool as suggested by ERO Sarah Godwin;
  • It was raised that this type of tool be used by stewards;
  • A reference on the PIPSC website would also be a recommendation for such a tool;
  • The AC could be the best avenue to bring awareness to the eventual use of this tool (August or November);

NEW AI – Max to report back on Conference attendance grievance template to Sarah Godwin and approach Allison Tomka in introducing for LRO and EROs

NEW AI – Once Conference attendance grievance template is finalized and approved as official tool for stewards and EROs, a quick update to AC on the existence of such tool will be held (August or November)

d) Suggestions on implementation of reports into Government Relations — All

  • The idea of a flyer was floated, something portable and conducive to our members;
  • The message could be simplified on Science in changing the conversation;
  • In changing the conversation, we educate members and the public;
  • Lunch and learns are a good opportunity to present decks;
  • The SAC stresses that the validity of the message remains in the report;
  • Audience also needs to be put up front in using tools which funnel down from reports;
  • An online presence is also a way to capture science interested members, new tools are being explored through the use of Nation Builder at PIPSC;
  • A mailing list can be developed;
  • The committee could use the guidance of Emily Watkins on developing such tools and helping the SAC make recommendations on ways to implement PIPSC Science reports into Government Relations;

e) Finalization of SAC owner’s manual — All

  • A round table discussion was held on modifications flagged by members on the SAC owner’s manual;
  • A few items are lingering from Max, Rob & Jean;

NEW AI – Max will coordinate the finalization of the SAC owner’s manual alongside Richard Winder in getting the last round of feedback and finish the document by end of summer 2018.

f) Artificial intelligence — All

  • AGCan has one working group at on AI which is a rebranding of a very long-term goal for departments as part of their mandates.
  • There is very little work on big data in Government currently in comparison to industry organizations like Facebook, Google or Amazon.
  • AI is starting to get used more prevalent in terms of use at NRCan and there will be a need on expertise on that use. This also means that there will be a need for members to analyze and make sense of AI usage.
  • There is also the presence of technological change collective agreement language like in the RE Agreement which could eventually be modified to encompass the AI reality in the future.
  • A comment was made how this is related to automation but also in the Government’s tone to identify what is a scientist and what is not.
  • It appears that AI is already being discussed fairly loosely in most departments.

NEW AI – SAC would recommend to Research to start undertaking work on AI which will be used for the next three-year planning cycle.

g) Post-mortem: discussing efficiency of Defrosting Public Science & WiS reports — All

  • A series of separate meetings were held with individuals involved in the Defrosting Public Science and WiS reports in order to gauge successes and challenges;
  • As Research work is moving more towards project based approaches the learning from this will be applicable as more projects are developed and reports launched;
  • Max gave details pertaining to the content of these post-mortems to the SAC;
  • Post-mortems are available upon the request of SAC members;

7. Round Table  — All

  • There is science happening with PIPSC separate employers, inclusion at SAC of such separate employer science should be discussed at one of our future SAC meetings;
  • On Scientific Integrity, transparency will be crucial and PIPSC will have to introduce the Public in the conversation. Involving the media in a communications strategy on SI and simplify the nuances.
  • A report card on SI could be looked at in the future as a tool.

8. Date of next meeting — All

  • Tentative date August 27th or early September.
  • A doodle will be sent to gather availability for the next two meetings including November-   December.

9. List of Action Items — All

  1. NEW AI - Rob will approach DFO CT Presidents and NRCan CT President to see if undertaking a monitoring report of their departments would be a worthwhile effort for PIPSC.
  1. NEW AI – Karen will bring up Science to be a standing item at WGC.
  1. NEW AI – Max & Rob will have a talk with Research Team Lead to see if a monitoring report should be undertaken for NRC and presented to their Call to Action working group.
  1. NEWAI – Cathy will touch base Research Officer Claire Hurtig, SP President and potentially RE Group President in order to plan an approach which will propose Women in Science recommendations to be included in bargaining at the SBC in June.
  1. NEW AI – Rob will follow-up with PIPSC President and SBC steering committee in getting Women in Science recommendations on the next SBC agenda.
  1. NEW AI – Rob will contact AGM organizers to try and obtain a breakfast and a lunch for Women in Science to re-engage on the issue.
  1. NEW AI – Claire, Cathy and Karen will endeavorr to work on a program for WiS at the AGM in order to re-engage on the issue and inform membership.
  1. NEW AI – Karen will write to President Daviau in order to get a scholarship for WiS as part of the PIPSC Legacy Fund.
  1. NEW AI - SAC recommends that the Science Demographics deck and a brief be circulated at the next WGC in order to inform on the existence of this government initiative.
  1. NEW AI – SAC will track the Science demographics progress and comment on its conclusions, to be brought to IB.
  1. NEW AI – Cathy Cheung to pass the name of an individual at NRC to discuss running a science survey again jointly with PIPSC and NRC.
  1. NEW AI – SAC will be consulted and will be commenting on the first draft of the Science Capacity. That first draft will be circulated end of the 3rd week of June.
  1. NEW AI – Dean Corda circulated reclassifications to IT and impacts on RE Group capacity. Richard Beaulé to be involved.
  1. NEW AI – SAC recommends that tools around Science Capacity for Consultation Teams be developed alongside a release.
  1. NEW AI - Karen will circulate the name of a former MT member who is an expert on climate change data and can speak to the loss of data and capacity related to the scrapping of government equipment under previous cuts.
  1. NEW AI – Max to report back on Conference attendance grievance template to Sarah Godwin and approach Allison Tomka in introducing for LRO and EROs
  1. NEW AI – Once Conference attendance grievance template is finalized and approved as official tool for stewards and EROs, a quick update to AC on the existence of such tool will be held (August or November)
  1. NEW AI – Max will coordinate the finalization of the SAC owner’s manual alongside Richard Winder in getting the last round of feedback and finish the document by end of summer 2018.
  1. NEW AI – SAC would recommend to Research to start undertaking work on AI which will be used for the next three-year planning cycle.

10. Closing comments & Adjournment — Chair

  • Tentative date August 27th.
Published on 7 November 2018