REPORT OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL DIRECTOR
Presented to the 98th Annual General Meeting
The Board of Directors met on the 16th and 17th of June 2017. The following report is intended to report on issues discussed at that meeting in “open session” and at that time.
Phoenix Pay System Update
President Debi Daviau and Special Advisor to the President, Emily Watkins, attend meetings with Treasury Board. Emily Watkins attends a technical meeting where specific issues are raised concerning member pay issues. The higher level meeting where President Daviau sits is attempting to have the “Fix Phoenix” issue brought in-house by utilizing Computer System Public Service Professionals instead of outside contract workers and contract extensions. President Daviau reported that there were slight improvements in the number of cases but no large difference in the processing the number of files resolved. Compensation advisors capacity is at issue and the institute wants to enter into settlement instructions and package agreement.
The Applied Science and Patent Examination Group (SP) pay is still incorrect.
There will be a Working Group of the Cabinet Meeting the week of the 19th of June 2017 with Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) presidents. The President reported that these meetings are extremely time consuming. The issue of taking legal action against the Treasury Board has been raised by many members; however this is not a legal avenue for us to take. We must use the grievance process established for public service labour unions. More up to date Phoenix Pay System information can be found on the Institute website.
Government Relations
Research Group (RE) and SP Group are working with the Institute on implementing policies. The Institute is trying to modernize bargaining process. The new Minister of Labour has meet with the Institute President.
New C-4 Bill reverses C-377 Bill
Public Service of Science based Committees have met with regards to scientific integrity. Gartner report was released and there are many recommendations that are frightening. The committee gave some input to the report but nothing was carried forward to the Deputy Ministers. The report identifies the “Squeezing out” of Public Service workers and more use of contract services.
The continued work of the Institute to speak out against contract workers, precarious work and the “Gig” economy in conjunction with better collective agreement language for use of contract workers is needed.
In Solidarity
Glenn Maxwell
Advisory Council Director
2016 AGM Resolutions Referred to the Advisory Council
The following report is a synopsis of the Board discussions on 2016 Annual General Meeting Resolutions that were referred to Advisory Council for their consideration. The AC Director recommended that the Board consider and discuss the following resolutions referred to the AC by the 2016 AGM.
Some were of the view that the Board should not be redoing the AC’s work and should simply accept the AC’s recommendations. The Board still needs to look at each resolution to determine next steps in terms of actions required and by whom.
From a governance perspective, the AC advises the Board and caution was expressed in setting a precedent if the Board simply accepts the recommendations of the AC.
Moved, seconded and carried that the Board of Directors only considers the report recommending 2016 AGM resolutions for discussion. All other AC referred resolutions not recommended were not discussed by the Board.
AC Recommended Resolutions Discussion and Resolution Disposition:
Carried Moved and seconded that the Board adopt resolutions P-3, P-4 and P-5 as follows:
P-3 – Tax Fairness
Be it resolved that PIPSC calls on the federal government to:
- Establish a world-class tax fairness initiative with a $600 million investment to recoup $6 billion in revenue
- Investigate complex cases and prosecute offenders
- Target corporate tax cheats
P-4 - Scientific Integrity
- Therefore be it resolved that PIPSC engages the current government to support public science by investing in innovation and pure science at the federal level
- Be it further resolved that PIPSC calls on the federal government to hire additional federal scientist to reverse the impact of dangerous cuts over the previous 10 years and increase funding for conference attendance, and
- Be it further resolved that PIPSC campaign vigorously to enshrine scientific integrity into collective agreements in order to ensure no future government can muzzle federal scientists again.
P-5 - Outsourcing /Contracting Out
- Therefore be it further resolved that we call on the federal government to reduce reliance on outside IT and other professional services and reinvest a portion of the savings into training to enhance the government’s internal capacity; and
- Be it further resolved that the Institute build a multi-pronged campaign to raise member and public awareness of the harms of contracting out/outsourcing and continue to lobby the federal government to reverse the trend towards an over-reliance on private sector solutions.
These outward looking resolutions are already imbedded in the strategic objectives. The work is already ongoing and covered by internal budgets.
The motion passed, this result is as if the AGM adopted them.
P-6 – Grievance Tracking System
- Be it resolved that PIPSC adopt a grievance tracking system that can easily be used by staff and that can be searched as needed for bargaining support or to track the status of important grievances; and
- Be it further resolved that reports about grievances be provided to Groups and Regions as requested.
The Board needs more information on the gaps (if any) so the appropriate changes can be made and the appropriate resources can be allocated to do so.
Moved, seconded and carried that resolution P-6 be referred to staff for clarification on the functioning of the current tracking system and report back to the August Board meeting.
P-7 - Travel Booking Services
- Be it resolved that the Institute be directed to investigate ways to reduce time delays by moving to an on-line travel application or an alternate full service provider of Travel Booking Services, implement and report back at the 2017 AGM
Moved, seconded and carried that the Board adopt resolution P-7.
Work on establishing a new process for travel and claims is ongoing is being done in collaboration with the ITSP Committee. The goal is to implement stand alone, integrated processes that will continue to involve the current service provider but will drive down the cost to PIPSC. The new system could be implemented in the upcoming year, once the necessary testing has been done to ensure a smooth implementation and transition.
P-8 - Member Travel
- Be it resolved that the Group President be authorized to approve and issue TANs for their executive members.
Moved, seconded and carried that the Board refer resolution P-8, as amended above (amendment is underlined and bolded) to the Finance Committee for further review.
Some raised concern with the open-endedness of this resolution and felt that some controls needed to be put in place. The Chair of the Finance Committee stated that discussions had already been held with some Group Presidents and with the Working Group on Consultation regarding ways to address members’ concerns. Some were of the view that if constituent bodies have approved budgets, they are accountable to work within those budgets and this should constitute the necessary controls.
It was recommended that the larger question centralizing and putting in place an integrated approach to travel processes also be considered by the Finance Committee, based on a needs analysis and best practices. External auditors will need to be consulted in terms of giving authority to Group Presidents over TANs.
P-9 - Tracking System for Grievances
- Be it resolved that PIPSC review the capabilities of the current "tracking system for grievances", and determine further requirements through consultation with the Advisory Council, to ensure the system can easily be used by staff and that the data can easily be searched for bargaining support or to track the status of grievances; and.
- Be it further resolved that reports about grievances be provided to Groups, Regions and Consultation Teams as requested.
- Be it further resolved that this grievance tracking system be put in place before September 1, 2017. This resolution is related to P-6. There was concern raised with the deadline set, which would not be possible to meet.
Moved, seconded and carried that this resolution be referred to staff in conjunction with resolution P-6, without trying to meet the September 1, 2017 deadline, which would not be feasible.
P-11 Promoting Union Values in Hiring Processes
Discussion on resolution P-11 (Promoting Union Values in Hiring Processes) was ruled out of order by the Chair as it was not recommended by the AC, who also ruled it out of order.
There was a challenge to the Chair on his ruling. The Board sustained the Chair’s ruling.
P-12 Regional Youth Committee Leaders
- Be it resolved that each of the Regional Directors identify one or more young activists in their respective Region and encourage the creation of a Regional Youth Committee.
Moved, seconded and carried that the Board adopt resolution P-12.
P-15 Aboriginal Issues
- Be it resolved that the Institute call upon governments in Canada to implement the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in consultation with Indigenous Peoples; educate our members on the residential school system and the attempted cultural genocide of Indigenous Peoples in Canada; Support Indigenous organizations and grassroots activism in efforts to promote healing and reconciliation; and encourage the CLC and other labour bodies to do the same.
Moved, seconded and carried to refer to the Human Rights and Diversity Committee for action.
P-25 Guidelines for the Processing of Allegations
- Be it resolved that Pursuant to the Institute’s Discipline and Dispute Resolution Policy New Regulation 24.3.
- 24.3 formerly (Procedural Fairness)
- The following guidelines shall be followed in processing the allegations against individuals who may be subject to discipline, pursuant to the Institute`s Dispute Resolution and Discipline policy, in order to ensure procedural fairness:
1. Timeframes The disciplinary process shall be completed in a timely and expeditious manner. As a general rule, complaints should be dealt with in their entirety within six months from the date when the General Counsel receives the initial allegations. For any complaint that is not fully resolved after 12 weeks, or as soon as it becomes known that the complaint will not be resolved within 12 weeks, the General Counsel shall provide an update in writing to both the complainant(s) and the respondent(s) setting out the reasons for the delay. Similar advice is to be provided each subsequent 6 weeks.
2. The investigation process is comprised of five stages:
2.1 Intake of Complaint The General Counsel shall normally assess the merits of the complaint, except where he is named as a respondent or otherwise in a conflict of interest, or it involves a member of the Board of Directors, in which case a third party neutral shall be retained by the Institute. In those situations where a third party neutral is retained, the mandate and terms of reference shall be established by the Board of Directors, and shall be shared with both the complainant(s) and the respondent(s). If the complaint is determined to be frivolous, vexatious or without merit, the complaint may be summarily dismissed by General Counsel. Reasons to support summarily dismissing the complaint must be provided in writing to the complainant, who may appeal the decision to the Board, within 14 days of receipt of same.
2.2 Striking of the Panel of Peers and Assessment of Complaint If the complaint is determined to have merit, an independent Panel of Peers shall be struck by General Counsel, subject to the consideration, if any, of allegations of conflict of interest or apprehension of bias made by either the complainant or the respondent. 17 The Respondent(s) shall have an opportunity to provide a response to the allegations made against them within 10 days of receiving the complaint, (right to be heard) before the Panel of Peers makes a determination as to the most appropriate course of action. The Panel of Peers shall in all cases consider whether the allegations of misconduct can be dealt with as a remedial matter, such as additional training and development, or through alternate dispute resolution. In deciding whether to deal with an allegation by remedial action or as a disciplinary matter, the Panel of Peers shall make a preliminary assessment of the facts, including any representations made by the Respondent(s) and taking into account the seriousness and the nature of the allegations. If an investigation is determined to be warranted, the terms of reference and the mandate of the Investigator shall be shared with both the complainant(s) and the respondent(s). Preliminary objections must be responded to in writing by the Institute`s General Counsel, or designate, before the complaint matter proceeds to Investigation. The Respondent may appeal to the independent ombudsman, comprised of 3 to 5 members of the Advisory Council at any stage in the Investigation process on issues related to the procedural fairness of the Investigation process.
2.3 Investigation, including preliminary report All persons identified by the complainant or the respondent as witnesses shall be interviewed by the Investigator except that if the Investigator decides not to interview a particular person, reasons in writing shall be provided to the complainant or the respondent as soon as the determination is made. A witness to the Investigation shall in all cases, be deemed to be in a conflict of interest. Allegations shall not be considered or otherwise subject to Investigation unless the respondent has been provided with full disclosure thereto. Witnesses shall be provided with a copy of the interview notes, and shall attest to the accuracy and completeness of the information contained therein. If the witness does not certify the interview notes, the Investigator shall not rely on any of the information obtained in either his preliminary or final report. Both the complainant and the respondent shall have the opportunity to respond to the preliminary report and shall be provided with a certified copy of the witness statements, as well as any other correspondence provided to the Investigator by any source. The Investigator shall not rely on additional representations or allegations following the issuance of the preliminary report, in making findings or recommendations contained in the final report, unless the respondent is given the opportunity to respond to the new information or allegations.
2.4 Final Investigators report both the complainant and the respondent shall be provided with a copy of the final report at the same time as it is provided to the Panel of Peers. If discipline is recommended, the respondent shall be advised in writing within 7 days of the report being issued of the disciplinary action that is being contemplated. The 18 respondent shall have 14 days to provide representations in regards to the proposed disciplinary action, which will normally include an opportunity to respond verbally to the Panel of Peers. In addition to the Investigator`s report, the Panel of Peers shall consider whether there are mitigating or extenuating circumstances, whether policy and guidelines applicable to the conduct were in place, were known, or were being followed, and whether it is the first instance of misconduct or there exists a pattern of misconduct. The recommended discipline shall be relative to discipline meted out in similar circumstances, unless the discipline may reasonably be considered to be progressive.
2.5 Implementation of final decision The final decision shall only be made after considering the submission of the respondent (oral or in writing). In all cases where discipline is applied, the Respondent shall have the right to appeal pursuant to the Discipline and Dispute Resolution policy. Some felt that this resolution would put the necessary guidelines in place to ensure natural justice and procedural fairness are followed in complaint matters, resulting in less complaints going to the PSLREB and saving the Institute time and money.
Moved, seconded and carried that resolution P-25 Guidelines for the Processing of Allegations be referred to the Institute General Counsel.
It was suggested that General Counsel consult with the Member Conduct Roster in her review of this resolution. Action: General Counsel to report back to the August Board meeting.
This report concludes the Advisory Council`s work on the 2016 Annual General Meeting resolutions referred to AC.
Glenn Maxwell
Advisory Council Director