Structural Reform: What are the steps to achieve structural reform of classification standards?

As we implement the classification reform program, we will work according to a three-year rolling plan, with new groups added as we go. Each reform will involve three major steps: Analysis, Application, and Implementation.

Step One: Analysis
During the Analysis step, candidates for reform will be selected, and we will begin to tailor group-specific classification standards.

Step Two: Application
During the Application step, departments will review their evaluation data and assess organizational impacts while working with Treasury Board Secretariat to finalize group-specific standards.

Step Three: Implementation
The Implementation Step will take place once the classification standard for a particular group has been completed. At that point, we will negotiate pay rates with the appropriate union, and employees will be notified about their new group, level and rate of pay.

Structural Reform: How are candidates for classification reform selected?

The decisions are made, based on business needs and priorities, following consultations with departments and bargaining agents. The Treasury Board Secretariat is leading a co-ordinated effort to identify those occupational groups that are in need of classification reform. We are working with departments to analyse their classification-related business problems, develop practical solutions, and ensure ongoing alignment with the new legislative framework to modernize human resources management in the federal public service. In some cases, the best solution is structural reform of a classification standard. In other cases, different types of human resources reform may be more appropriate.

How is System Capacity for Classification being Rebuilt?

Initiatives to rebuild and revitalize the business of classification across government include:

Capacity Survey: A comprehensive survey of classification capacity in Departments and Agencies has been conducted. The research findings will identify the key challenges and issues that need to be addressed and give us a baseline against which to assess our progress in rebuilding the classification system.

New Courses: A new course curriculum is being designed for classification officers.

Performance Measurement/Active Monitoring: Measures to assess how well the classification system is responding to the government’s business needs are now being developed. This will give us a basis to begin active monitoring of classification performance throughout the system.

What is being done to maintain existing classification standards?

The Treasury Board Secretariat is working closely with Departments and Agencies, as partners, to update, maintain and use existing classification standards that meet ongoing business needs.

Initiatives to update and maintain the existing classification standards include:

Access to Current Evaluation Data: Relativity is key to ensuring the consistency and appropriateness of classification decisions. We are developing a set of database services that will give all departments access to the data they need to make informed classification decisions while at the same time ensuring consistency and relativity across the Public Service.

Mapping legacy standards to UCS work descriptions: We continue to encourage departments to write UCS-style work descriptions. The benefit of maintaining UCS-style work descriptions is that they have been designed to capture all aspects of work and to describe work characteristics in a manner that minimizes gender bias. We are now working with departments to map UCS-style work descriptions to the current classification standards, collect information that may be missing from UCS-style work descriptions and evaluate these work descriptions in a consistent manner to ensure relativity throughout the Public Service.

Classification Grievance Procedure: We have now made the Classification Grievance Procedure available on our Web site to allow easier access to employees, managers and human resources advisors.

In preparation for classification reform, departments were consulted on a new classification policy framework and a classification conversion grievance policy. What is the status of these policies?

On April 25, 2002, the Treasury Board approved a new Classification System and Delegation of Authority Policy and a new Classification Conversion Grievance Policy. However, it is important to note that these policies are not yet in effect. The Treasury Board Secretariat will notify departments of the effective date. For details, see “When will the new classification policies come into effect?”

The Classification System and Delegation of Authority Policy will replace the policy set out in Chapter 1 Classification System, Chapter 2 Classification Delegation, and Chapter 3 Classification – Training and Accreditation of the existing classification policy in the Treasury Board Manual.

The new Classification Conversion Grievance Policy will be applied only when the Treasury Board Secretariat decides that the circumstances of a classification conversion merit its use. Again, the Treasury Board Secretariat will notify departments whenever this policy will be applied.

When will the new classification policies come into effect?

At the earliest, the Classification System and Delegation of Authority Policy will be effective on the date on which the policy guidelines are issued. At the latest, this policy will be effective on the date on which the first collective agreement with a new pay structure for an occupational group undergoing a classification conversion is signed. The Treasury Board Secretariat will notify departments of the effective date and will provide departments with sufficient lead-time to prepare in advance of the effective date.

The Classification Conversion Grievance Policy will be applied only when the Treasury Board Secretariat decides that the circumstances of a classification conversion merit its use. The Secretariat will notify departments accordingly.

How will the new policies differ from the policies we are using now?

The Classification System and Delegation of Authority Policy differs from the current one by giving Deputy Heads greater flexibility in the management of classification. It also reduces the lengthy procedures and reporting requirements that Deputy Heads must follow to ensure the integrity of the classification system. The new policy provides a monitoring framework through which departments choose the monitoring practices that best meet their needs. The Treasury Board Secretariat establishes performance indicators with departments and carries out audit and evaluation studies as well as other measures to monitor and assess the effectiveness and integrity of the classification system.

The Classification Conversion Grievance Policy defines the approach that will be taken to resolve classification conversion grievances. This policy will be applied only when the Treasury Board Secretariat decides that the circumstances of a classification conversion merit its use. The significant features of the new policy are an informal review process at the departmental level and the classification conversion grievance process centrally managed by the Treasury Board Secretariat. This policy has been developed to provide a streamlined and transparent process, consistent application of the new classification standards, and increased employee confidence.

Classification grievances that do not result from classification conversions for which the Treasury Board Secretariat has specified the use of this policy will continue to be resolved using the Classification Grievances Policy (June 9, 1994).

In consultation with departments, the Treasury Board Secretariat will develop guidelines for both of these new policies.

How can departments prepare themselves to implement the new classification policies?

The new policies, unlike the current policies, do not contain detailed processes. Process issues and procedures will be covered in policy application guidelines that are now being developed.

Once the guidelines have been completed, the Treasury Board Secretariat will send departments complete packages of the policies along with the guidelines. The Secretariat will provide departments with sufficient lead-time to prepare in advance of the effective date.

What is the status of the existing classification policies?

The existing classification policies remain in effect. Departments are required to ensure the effective management of the classification system within their delegated authority. Departments must consult with the Treasury Board Secretariat prior to authorizing any classification decision that may have a significant impact on interdepartmental relativity or collective bargaining. The Treasury Board Secretariat continues to offer advice on the application of all classification standards and management of the classification system.

Management of departmental classification systems must be aligned with the Treasury Board Policy on Active Monitoring that came into effect on June 1, 2001. The Treasury Board policy on Active Monitoring provides the framework within which departments are expected to actively monitor the state of their management practices and controls. This policy gives departments responsibility for ensuring that their programs and activities are well managed, and that suitable management practices and controls are in place and working. Human resources advisors and their management teams should consult with their departmental colleagues who are responsible for implementing Modern Comptrollership in their respective departments.

What processes and tools are in place to ensure consistent application of the classification standards?

Relativity and technical expertise in the application of classification standards are the keys to ensuring the consistency and appropriateness of classification decisions.

Relativity is both internal and external. It is important to be able to compare jobs within different organizational components of one department and with similar jobs in other departments to ensure that similar jobs have similar ratings.

The Treasury Board Secretariat provides ongoing advice to departments on the application of all classification standards and the management of the classification system. In addition, the Secretariat is consulting with departments to assess their needs and identify best practices with respect to the development of additional tools to promote the consistent and appropriate application of the classification standards.

Our department initiated an informal review process for employees with potential classification grievances in anticipation of a new classification conversion grievance policy. Should we maintain these processes?

Yes. An informal review process provides an opportunity in an informal environment for an employee, the employee’s representative (if applicable), and management representatives to attempt to resolve, by mutual agreement, issues that the employee is raising related to his/her classification group and level and/or rating. Many classification-related issues can be resolved in a timely manner through this type of process. Several departments already have such processes in place and report positive results.

Departments are encouraged to adopt such practices and to share best practices with colleagues in other departments.

If the government is not proceeding with the Universal Classification Standard (UCS) project, what is it doing?

We are moving from the UCS project to a manageable, multi-year classification reform program. The Treasury Board Secretariat will proceed step-by-step, as various department and union officials have suggested, tailoring classification reform to specific occupational groups, beginning with those whose existing standards are particularly outdated or impede sound management.

Is the Public Service investment in UCS lost?

On the contrary, the Public Service will benefit from the progress we have achieved through the UCS project. The factors and elements used to develop the UCS will be the basis on which we will tailor new standards for those occupational groups selected for classification reform. In addition, the work descriptions already completed in the UCS format for all groups can continue to be used in conjunction with their current classification standards.

We appreciate the hard work, patience and professionalism of the employees, managers and union officials who have worked so hard on the UCS project. As we work together to implement the next steps of our classification reform program, we will be building on their accomplishments.

Why has the government concluded that ‘universality’ is not a workable approach to public service classification reform?

Applying a single standard and a single pay structure to the more than 150,000 positions in the federal public service would create too rigid and inflexible a management framework for the widely varied work of our employees. As a result, it could impede our ability to compete in the marketplace for the talent and skills needed to serve Canadians in the future. Furthermore, a universal approach:

would not adequately recognize the diversity of work done by our employees;
could call into question the role of multiple unions; and
might not guarantee compliance with the Canadian Human Rights Act.

What is the scope and the timetable for the new approach to classification reform and what are the next steps?

The Treasury Board Secretariat has concluded that some classification standards, such as those used to evaluate the types of work that make up the Program and Administrative Services (PA) Group, need to be completely overhauled. Others may just need a tune-up to bring them up-to-date while some others still work reasonably well and could be left alone for the time being. Setting business-based priorities, pacing change to fit our capacity to manage reform and resourcing ourselves appropriately will bring faster real returns on our investment than trying to adjust the entire system all at once. And, it will ensure that the Public Service is able to keep its priorities straight – service to Canadians must not be compromised.

Implementing classification reform in an organization as large and varied as the Public Service of Canada will require a coordinated effort. Reform will not happen overnight. Our next steps will be to consult with unions and departments to confirm the priority groups and develop a plan to help departments get ready. We will monitor our efforts and update employees on our progress and plans annually.

How does classification reform fit with the Human Resources Management Modernization initiative?

Classification reform is one of a series of initiatives that will help us to recruit and retain the skilled employees needed to serve Canadians in the years ahead.

While much of our human resources management (HRM) system is rooted in our classification structures, classification cannot fix every HRM problem. The substantial policy research and analysis conducted for the classification reform initiative highlighted the need for many improvements to other important aspects of our human resources management system. Classification is only part of the solution, and its reform must be aligned with the larger framework of HRM modernization.

This incremental approach will allow the Public Service to advance classification reform at a more measured pace and make room for other Public Service priorities such as developing recruitment strategies to counter the anticipated high turnover of our aging workforce.

What can departments do to get ready for classification reform?

Departments need to ensure that their classification reform teams have the appropriate capacity and expertise to implement classification reform.

Departments having large numbers of positions among the priority groups need to prepare their departmental management and human resources teams to work with Treasury Board Secretariat and functional communities on several fronts:

Determining the organizational impact of the proposed reforms;
Developing shared approaches to the treatment of jobs that are common across departments; and
Sharing their new learning and expertise across the public service.

The Treasury Board Secretariat has said for the past several years that one classification standard and one pay line were the best way to ensure pay equity. What has changed?

In order to compete in the marketplace for the skills needed to serve Canadians, we would need to create an increasingly complex set of ‘exceptions’ to the single compensation structure. This would effectively mean that there would be multiple pay structures anyway.

The Secretariat has concluded that a universal compensation structure would be unworkable and that it might not guarantee compliance with the Canadian Human Rights Act.

What groups have been proposed as the initial candidates for classification reform?

The Economics and Social Science Services (EC) Group, the Foreign Service (FS) Group, and the Program and Administrative Services (PA) Group are among the initial candidates for classification reform. Together, these three groups represent about 55% of the public service. We will discuss the timing and priority of groups with the departments and unions involved before making a final decision.

What should departments do in cases where the UCS-style work description does not contain all of the information needed to evaluate a particular position?

Departments can and should take opportunities to build on the good work that has been done to date.

If the current description is in the UCS-style and the manager has validated it as being an accurate representation of the work performed, then it may still be used. Before evaluating the position, departments should add a short addendum, giving clear information on any necessary missing information needed to accurately evaluate the position using the existing standard(for example: contacts, working conditions and/or supervisory responsibilities, organizational charts).

Is the Treasury Board Secretariat still encouraging the use of generic work descriptions?

Yes. Departments should continue to use generic work descriptions where appropriate. When developed as intended, they promote flexibility, transparency and equity and can greatly facilitate the classification and staffing processes.

However, departments should avoid the temptation to over use generic work descriptions. Doing so can lead to misclassification as a result of combining the work being done by a group of positions into one work description. Departments should not combine work descriptions currently allocated to two or more occupational groups unless all aspects of the work are being performed.

Should departments continue to use the UCS 2.0 classification standard for evaluating work?

No. Departments should use the existing classification standards when evaluating work, including for those groups that will be confirmed as priority candidates for classification reform. Treasury Board Secretariat will work with departments and unions to develop tailored classification standards based on the needs specific to each group.

Minor adjustments that facilitate departmental ease of use will be made to existing standards, where necessary.

If we are not using the UCS 2.0 for evaluation, what process do we use to ensure consistent application of classification standards?

Departments should continue to apply the existing classification standards in line with the processes set out in the existing classification policies in the Treasury Board Manual. Relativity among evaluations and technical expertise in the application of classification standards are key to ensuring consistency. Relativity is both internal to the department and in many cases to the overall public service. It is important that departments are able to compare jobs within different organizational components and also with similar jobs in other departments to ensure that similar jobs have similar ratings.

Are classification practitioners still required to be accredited?

Yes. Departments should continue to fulfil the requirements of the existing classification policy in the Treasury Board Manual.