Staffing Manual - Frequently Asked Questions

CHAPTER 4 - AREA OF SELECTION

The policy framework provides broad parameters on area of selection that reflect the current values-based delegation and accountability agreement. These are sufficiently flexible so that Deputy Heads can exercise their authority in a manner that will help them efficiently and effectively achieve their corporate and business objectives, as well as consider the needs and career aspirations of employees. The following questions and answers have been prepared in order to provide further guidance in the application of the policy framework on area of selection.

Q. 4.1 Why do we need a policy framework on area of selection?

R: A broad policy framework on area of selection is a key tool in achieving corporate objectives in the overall management of human resources in the federal Public Service. It will serve as a basis for Deputy Heads to exercise the authority delegated to them by the Commission and for the development of supporting tools.

Q. 4.2 How does the policy framework on area of selection fit into the values-based approach that the PSC has been promoting?

R: Through its values-based approach to staffing, the Commission has been eliminating rules and offering increased flexibility and accountability to Deputy Heads, so that they can better achieve their corporate and business objectives meet their needs, as well as consider the needs and career aspirations of employees. The policy framework on area of selection fits very well into this approach, by providing broad direction that is based on the staffing values and principles; in addition, it reflects the Commission's support for achieving enhanced representativeness and mobility, since these are key issues to the renewal of the Public Service.

Q. 4.3 How will Deputy Heads be held accountable for decisions on area of selection?

R: Through their Staffing Delegation and Accountability Agreement, Deputy Ministers agree to:

• consider and balance departmental business needs, corporate HR goals and interests of the Public Service as well as the career aspirations of employees;
• ensure that staffing decisions adhere to the merit values which underlie the various Acts, policies and the PSC's Standards for Selection and Assessment;
• seek the participation of employee representatives in the development and revision of their staffing practices;
• accept responsibility, accountability and reporting obligations as required by the PSC.

In order to be able to account to Parliament for the overall health of the staffing system, the PSC obtains and uses departmental information, through sources such as the departmental performance reports provided by Deputy Heads, special surveys, systemic reviews, investigations and audits.

Q. 4.4 In what circumstances does the policy framework on area of selection apply?

R: The policy framework applies to all competitive as well as non-competitive processes conducted within and outside the Public Service. It also applies to all occupational groups and levels, including the Executive group.

Q. 4.5 What legal authority allows the Public Service Commission to set areas of selection?

R: The Commission's authority to determine areas of selection is established in section 13 of the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA), which makes the following provisions:

13. (1) The Commission may establish, for competitions and other processes of personnel selection, geographic, organizational and occupational criteria that prospective candidates must meet in order to be eligible for appointment.

13. (2) In establishing criteria under subsection (1), the Commission may establish different criteria for groups of persons that are disadvantaged, including women, Aboriginal Peoples, persons with disabilities and persons who are, because of their race or colour, in a visible minority in Canada.

Q. 4.6 What is meant by "geographic, organizational and occupational criteria"?

R: The geographic criterion refers to where candidates must reside, or reside or be employed, in order to be eligible for appointment. The organizational criterion refers to the organization in which candidates must be employed, or in the case of students, the educational institution which they are attending. The occupational criterion refers to an occupational stream that may span several occupations (such as health care services, social sciences, etc.) or may be more specific and refer to a particular occupation (such as registered nurse, aeronautical engineer, lawyer, etc.).

Q. 4.7 What other legal authorities / agreements are related to area of selection?

R: Section 19 of the PSEA stipulates that the Commission shall give preference in appointment to qualified candidates in open competitions who reside in the area served by the local office, when it is in the best interests of the Public Service to do so. However, it should be noted that the local preference, if it is used, applies at the time of appointment, not at the time of advertising.

Section 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter) provides that citizens and permanent residents have the right to move to and take up residence in any province and to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province. The Charter provisions apply to all staffing actions.

The Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT) is a federal-provincial agreement, in effect since July 1, 1995, that was developed to reduce or eliminate, to the extent possible, barriers to the free movement of persons, goods, services and investments within Canada. The mobility provisions of the AIT apply to the Public Service's external recruitment practices. If an area of selection is compatible with the Charter, it will also be compatible with the AIT.

Q. 4.8 Why do we establish an area of selection?

R: The area of selection is an important tool in ensuring that appointments of qualified individuals to and within the Public Service are made in accordance with merit, in an effective and efficient manner. Within a competitive process, the establishment of an area of selection will determine who is eligible to apply. In the case of a non-competitive appointment from within the Public Service, the area of selection will determine who has the right to appeal.

Q. 4.9 How is the area of selection determined?

R: The area of selection used for any specific position will vary depending on many factors, such as the qualifications required, the level of the responsibilities and the number of candidates that may be available. The objective is always to find highly qualified candidates while upholding the public trust in the wise use of funds. Decisions on area of selection involve weighing and balancing a number of staffing values and principles or other considerations, such as:

• the need to identify a reasonable pool of candidates to ensure a meritorious selection process;
• equity: removing artificial barriers and striving to include a representative number of employment equity group members to reflect the labour market;
• fairness: objective decisions do not give an unfair advantage for appointment to any particular candidate;
• transparency: intended results are clear and decisions are communicated openly and honestly to candidates;
• efficiency: the need to fill the position within a reasonable timeframe;
• cost: accountability to the Canadian public for the judicious administration of public funds;
• mobility: balancing the right of Canadians to work anywhere in the country versus the expectations of local citizens who reasonably expect to have access to job opportunities in their community (as reflected in the legal requirement, for appointments from outside the Public Service, to give preference in appointment to qualified candidates who reside in the locality of the position whenever it is in the best interests of the Public Service to do so).

Q. 4.10 Does the implementation of the policy framework on area of selection oblige departments to revise their departmental policies on area of selection?

R: No. This policy framework is meant to reflect the current delegation of authority to departments, within a values-based system. Although this is not a requirement of the PSC policy, many departments have chosen to establish their own policies on area of selection. Departments can choose to develop or amend their current policies, as appropriate, to meet departmental needs. Once the Universal Classification Standard (UCS) has been implemented, departments using group-specific policies may wish to revisit these in order to ensure that they reflect the changed Public Service occupational group structure.

Q. 4.11 Is it possible to use the organizational and occupational criteria pursuant to PSEA 13(1) in external staffing activities?

R: Yes. There is flexibility within our current legislation that has not yet been fully explored, due to policies that were in place until April '98. The restriction on the use of the occupational and organizational elements is a good example of this. There may be situations where it would make good business sense to use the organizational component and open competitions to employees of other levels of government, not-for-profit organizations, professional associations, or private sector organizations to name a few. In other instances, it might make sense to use the occupational criterion and limit the selection to an occupational stream that spans several occupations (e.g., health care services), or to be more specific and refer to members of a particular occupation (e.g., aeronautical engineers). Departments that do not have the delegated authority to conduct external recruitment should work closely with the PSC to identify an area of selection that would target the best applicant pool to meet their needs.

Q. 4.12 a) Is it possible to use the area of selection to increase the representation of employment equity groups in the selection process?

R: Subsection 13(2) of the Act allows one or more elements (geographic, organizational and occupational) of an area of selection for a competition to be expanded for one or more of the employment equity groups. This allows designated group members to be included in greater numbers in competitions by allowing them to enter competitions that they would not otherwise be eligible for, since they would not be within the established, or regular, area of selection. Departments may use this provision at their discretion in order to further their employment equity objectives.

b) In such cases, are the employment equity group members given a preference in appointment?

R: No. This measure is a tool that permits the identification of potentially greater numbers of members from the designated groups. Once all of the eligible candidates have been identified, they are assessed and ranked in order of merit for appointment purposes.

Q. 4.13 Is it possible to limit an area of selection exclusively to the members of one or more of the employment equity groups?

R: Subsection 13(2) does not allow an area of selection to be restricted to employment equity candidates, because it must be applied when determining the general area of selection under subsection 13(1). A restriction of a competition to designated group members would only be permissible if there were an exclusion from the operation of section 13 and subsection 12(3) (which does not permit discrimination) of the PSEA. Such an exclusion exists for employment equity programs that the Commission has agreed to implement at the request of a department or the Treasury Board. Such programs exist in a number of departments, such as the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs and Health Canada. Another example is the PSC's ad hoc Employment Equity Program, through which the PSC recruits employment equity group members for referral to departments.

Q. 4.14 When do the mobility provisions or the Charter apply with respect to areas of selection?

R: They apply when the area of selection includes a geographic criterion, as permitted by subsection 13(1) of the PSEA.

Q. 4.15 Why are we concerned about Charter provisions related to mobility?

R: The Charter provisions are intended to protect the rights of Canadians to move freely and take up work anywhere in Canada and to reduce barriers between regions and provinces. On the other hand, the use of geographic limitations in areas of selection has a direct impact on the size of the pool of candidates and the ensuing number of applications, which in turn impact on the overall costs and the amount of time invested in the process. If properly implemented, use of the geographic criterion does not infringe the mobility provisions of the Charter. At the very least, areas of selection must not be determined along provincial or territorial boundaries, since areas of selection that discriminate based on an individual's province or territory of residence could infringe upon the above-mentioned mobility provisions.

Q. 4.16 How is residency applied in an open competition?

R: The geographic criterion that is often used in open competitions refers to where candidates must reside, or reside or be employed, in order to be eligible for appointment. Residency has its normal meaning: it is where the individual lives. Students or other individuals temporarily residing outside the area of selection who have a permanent residence within the area of selection would normally be eligible to apply.

Q. 4.17 A residency requirement could exclude a Canadian citizen living abroad. Would this comply with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

R: The Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides that Canadian citizens have the right to move to and take up residence in any province and to seek employment there. However, this does not mean that all positions must be open to all Canadian citizens, or that all Canadians are automatically eligible for every employment opportunity.

Q. 4.18 The policy framework refers to employee representatives. What is their involvement in the determination of areas of selection?

R: Through the Staffing Delegation and Accountability Agreement, Deputy Heads agree to seek the participation of employee representatives in the development and revision of staffing practices. Area of selection comprises one element among many other departmental staffing practices, and departments' approaches to consultation vary considerably from one organization to the other. Some departments may consult at the national level when developing national policies, while others may consult locally if the organization is very decentralized; some departments may have adopted a policy stipulating that consultation is done on a case-by-case basis.

Q. 4.19 What is meant by a "reasonable number of potential candidates" in the third policy statement?

R: It is important to remember that one size does not fit all. The policy framework is not intended to be directive, restrictive or burdensome to departments, since their needs vary greatly depending on their size, location(s), objectives and the specific circumstances surrounding particular staffing activities. The number of positions being staffed, employment equity considerations, how the eligible list will be used (e.g. national versus local, generic versus specific positions) are examples of some of the variables that may impact on the identification of the pool of candidates. In addition, an area of selection that is sufficiently broad to include a reasonable number of potential candidates may not be interpreted the same way in a large department as it would in a smaller organization.

Q. 4.20 What does "cross-jurisdictional" mobility mean?

R: This refers to movement between organizations under the PSEA and organizations not under the PSEA. This includes mobility within the broader Public Service and recruitment from outside the Public Service.

Q. 4.21 What is meant by "Public Service"?

R: Pursuant to Section 2 of the PSEA, "Public Service" has the same meaning as in the Public Service Staff Relations Act (PSSRA). It includes the positions in departments or other organizations specified in Schedule 1 (Parts I and II) of the PSSRA.

Q. 4.22 Why is mobility important?

R: Mobility is an important issue for many stakeholders and for the Public Service as a whole. The Public Service, in an effort to renew itself, is striving to increase the internal mobility of its workforce as well as to attract talented individuals from outside. Increased mobility contributes to the development of individuals and ultimately, to enhanced competency, in addition to achieving organizational goals. The Commission supports and encourages cross-jurisdictional mobility in accordance with the values and principles inherent in the PSEA. Deputy heads are encouraged to consider mobility issues when they exercise their authority with respect to area of selection, within broad principles such as cost-effectiveness and their organization's needs and business objectives, the interests of employees and the objectives and interests of the Public Service.

Q. 4.23 If mobility is important, why doesn't the PSC impose minimum areas of selection, as in the past?

R: The PSC's approach in the past required departments to provide for interdepartmental competitive opportunities in their respective area of selection policies for employees in smaller departments, small occupational groups, and widely dispersed occupational groups. This view may not meet the current needs of the Public Service, since it does not take into account the unique nature or complexity of work in many departments, or the impact that the Universal Classification Standard (UCS) will have on the basic structure of the existing occupational groups. In addition, history as well as current reality clearly demonstrate that even with prescribed broadening of areas of selection for many groups and levels, the vast majority of appointments are intra departmental.

Departments have however requested the development of a tool that would replace the current "generic frameworks" or minimum areas of selection and that would assist departments in making decisions on area of selection, but without being prescriptive. The work may involve the development of criteria, as well as "norms" when resourcing for different occupational groups and/or levels, or for some functions. Departments expressed the need for this type of mechanism in order to ensure some degree of consistency in decision-making in the Public Service, to ensure that mobility needs are considered and to provide employees with information on what they could normally expect with respect to areas of selection in the Public Service. Work on this tool could be undertaken once the implementation of UCS has been completed and would require the close collaboration of departments and employee representatives.

Q. 4.24 Departments may wish to include organizations from different parts of the Public Service in areas of selection (some may be within the appointing authority of the PSC, others may not). What about reciprocity?

R: Departments can exercise their flexibility in determining how best to approach this, in accordance with their respective needs. For example, some departments with a natural affiliation to other organizations (e.g. scientific mandate) have entered into reciprocal agreements with separate employers (e.g. Alternate Service Delivery organizations), whereby areas of selection for closed competitions that are expanded beyond the hiring organization automatically include the other(s) for certain types of positions. Such agreements may or may not involve separate employers. For example, several small departments with similar mandates have also entered into this type of agreement, to provide expanded opportunities for mobility to their employees.

Q. 4.25 How can departments give notice to prospective candidates in closed competitions where the area of selection includes Public Service organizations outside the appointing authority of the PSC?

R: Departments currently face this issue whenever they conduct closed competitions: they need to find simple, effective solutions that meet the values of equity and transparency as well as affordabiltity and efficiency. They need to consider the vehicles to which they have access (Publiservice, Reader Service, Automated Notice System) and those to which the pool of candidates they want to reach has access, prior to making a decision on the posting method they will use. This is true also when departments contemplate expanding areas of selection to other parts of the Public Service (e.g. separate employers). If they are unsure how to reach their intended population, they can establish contacts in those organizations and verify what communication vehicles are available to their employees.

Q. 4.26 Why introduce a policy framework on area of selection now, when the implementation of the Universal Classification Standard has not yet taken place?

R: Since this policy framework is generic in nature, rather than group specific, it is not anticipated that UCS implementation will impact greatly on the framework.

However, departments have indicated that they would like work undertaken to develop a tool to replace the current "generic frameworks", or minimum areas of selection and that would assist departments in making decisions on area of selection. This work could only be undertaken once UCS has been implemented, since it may be group specific.

Q. 4.27 Where do "lifeline provisions" come from and are there employees in some organizations that benefit from these?

R: Lifeline provisions were implemented to provide job opportunities to employees who agreed to relocate with their organization from the National Capital Region to another location in Canada, but who might wish to return to their original work location.

The Department of Veterans Affairs and the National Energy Board (NEB) are organizations that have lifeline provisions, whereby employees in their national headquarters offices (i.e., Charlottetown and Calgary respectively) are included in interdepartmental competitions open to the NCR. The employees of these organizations will continue to benefit from the lifeline provisions until such time as the formal agreements with the PSC are reviewed in the year 2001. It should be noted that, in the case of NEB, the lifeline provisions apply only to employees who were employed in that organization prior to July 1, 1996.

CHAPTER 6 - RECRUITMENT

Appointments Without Competition From Outside The Public Service

Criterion (a) - Shortage Group

Q. 6.6.2.a-1 What is meant by "shortage group"?

R: A shortage group refers to an occupational group (or group and level) for which there is a demonstrated scarcity of qualified candidates - a situation that may well change over time. The notion of shortage group does not refer to one-time situations within a department or the Public Service, such as a recruitment drive to replenish a particular type of competencies to compensate for planning deficiencies. It does not apply either to situations where departments are looking for fully trained individuals for specific types of jobs for which training can only be acquired within the Public Service, such as certified Human Resources Officers or Financial Officers. In these cases, criteria (f) or (g) below dealing with former employees and casuals might be appropriate.

According to section 5(2)(j) of the Public Service Employment Regulations, the appointment without competition of a person to a position that belongs to a shortage group is based on individual merit, i.e. the person must be qualified in relation to a standard of competence, rather than in relation to other persons.

Q 6.6.2.a-2 Can a shortage group be identified on a local basis or does it have to be regional or national?

R: Normally, the area of selection would have to be expanded to a regional and/or national level before it could be demonstrated that an actual shortage exists. For example, if a local manager is repeatedly unable to attract individuals for jobs requiring particular competencies (that are both bona fide and reasonable) even with an expanded area of selection, it could be concluded that a shortage group exists.

Criterion (b) - Remote Area

Q. 6.6.2.b-1 What is a geographically remote area?

R: A geographically remote area is an isolated or distant location for which it is difficult to attract qualified candidates. For example, open competitions held for jobs in these locations usually yield a small number of candidates or are often unproductive.

Criterion (c) - Specialized Skills

Q. 6.6.2.c-1 What constitutes a high-calibre candidate?

R: A high-calibre candidate is someone with an established reputation in a particular field, thereby possessing highly sought-after qualifications / competencies that could be "lost" to another sector, if an appointment is not made quickly.

Q. 6.6.2.c-2 Are highly specialized skills the same as skill shortages?

R: No. Within this context, highly specialized skills relate to the qualifications / competencies of the individual in question, rather than those of a shortage group. Although a highly specialized skill could be tied to a shortage group, this is not a pre-requisite for this criterion to apply. For instance, although biologists are not considered a shortage group within a department, a manager may wish to appoint a well-renowned, high-calibre biologist who expresses interest in working within the federal Public Service, and who might be "lost" to another employer if an appointment is not made swiftly.

Q. 6.6.2.c-3 What is a fellowship program?

R: Fellowship programs provide relevant opportunities to promising PhD researchers with leading Canadian governmental and research institutions and research groups. One such example is the Visiting Fellowships in Canadian Government Laboratories Program managed by National Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC).

Criterion (d) - Co-Funded Project/Program

Q. 6.6.2.d-1 What is meant by "jeopardized"?

R: The term "jeopardized" refers to a situation where an individual identified by the partners has competencies required for the project / program, and the timeliness of deliverables and the expected outcome could be compromised if the individual is not hired quickly. An example of this might be a partnership between Department A and Company B, which collectively hire person X for six months under a contractual framework. Additional funds are secured to extend the life of the project and Department A wants to hire the employee under the PSEA because of his/her important contribution to the success of the project.

Criterion (e) - Transfer of Responsibility

Q. 6.6.2.e-1 Does the department have to show that the original selection of the individual being transferred along with the responsibility was made on the basis of relative merit?

R: No. In most repatriation or transfer situations from another jurisdiction, individuals are transferred with the program provided they meet the requirements of the PSC's Standards for Selection and Assessment applicable to the jobs in question. Particular situations may arise, however, where departments would have to demonstrate that the best qualified individuals are being transferred, for instance when not all interested, available individuals from the other jurisdiction are being transferred.

It is important to note that this criterion normally applies to transfers involving small numbers of people, and not to large transfers of personnel.

Criterion (f) - Previous Employment under the PSEA

Q. 6.6.2.f-1 What does "previously employed under the Public Service Employment Act" mean?

R: "Previously employed under the Public Service Employment Act" refers to those situations where the person in question was employed under the PSEA, either in a term or indeterminate capacity, in a position requiring similar competencies to those required by the position being staffed. It is important to note that this criterion should not be used when the primary purpose of the departmental request is to change a person's tenure, i.e. make an indeterminate appointment of an individual who was formerly a term employee.

Q. 6.6.2.f-2 How does a department show that there are likely to be no better qualified candidates if the former employee was not actually performing the tasks of the position being filled?

R: The department must demonstrate that, even though the individual did not occupy an identical position, the competencies required to perform the duties of this "new" position are similar enough to justify that an open competition would be unlikely to identify better qualified candidates. In assessing the situation, the length of time that has elapsed between the individual leaving the Public Service and the proposed without competition appointment date would also have to be taken into consideration.

Criterion (g) - Previous Casual Employment

Q. 6.6.2.g-1 What does "selection process based on relative merit" mean?

R: For the purposes of this criterion, "selection process based on relative merit" refers to a competitive process based upon the values of fairness, transparency, equity and non-partisanship, which ultimately validated that the person selected was the best qualified in relation to other eligible persons being considered. A selection process based on relative merit would normally have the following attributes:

• the job opportunity would have been advertised to the public in such a fashion that it was accessible to more than a handful of potential applicants; and
• the process was open and free from political or bureaucratic patronage.

For example, a process would be considered to be based on relative merit if the department originally hired the casual employee from either a PSC inventory or from a departmental inventory that was demonstrably consistent with the attributes noted above. Here is another example: a department advertised an open competition on jobs.gc.ca, established an eligibility list and filled a number of positions under the PSEA; it also offered casual employment to individuals who qualified lower on the eligibility list, and the list has since expired.

Q. 6.6.2.g-2 How can a department support the claim that they are unlikely to identify better qualified candidates through an open competition process?

R: It would be possible to do so, for instance, if an individual was initially hired into a casual job as a result of a selection process based on relative merit and developed the necessary competencies for that particular job, to the point that an open competition process with reasonable qualifications would be unlikely to yield a better qualified candidate.

Criterion (h) - Employment Equity

Q. 6.6.2.h-1 Can this criterion be used outside an approved Employment Equity Program?

R: No. This criterion cannot be used outside of an approved departmental or PSC Employment Equity Program because such a program, in excluding appointments from subsection 12(3) and section 13 of the PSEA, provides the legal basis for limiting consideration to members of one or more designated groups.

According to section 5(2)(d) of the Public Service Employment Regulations, the appointment without competition of a person in accordance with an employment equity program is based on individual merit, i.e. the person must be qualified in relation to a standard of competence, rather than in relation to other persons.

Q. 6.6.2.h-2 If the department does not have its own Employment Equity Program (approved by the PSC) for the group and level and designated group in question, what factors will the PSC take into account in considering whether the appointment without competition should be approved pursuant to a PSC Employment Equity Program?

R: The PSC will consider factors such as:

• whether the department's Employment Equity Plan addresses the situation in question;
• the department does not have an employment equity plan but the representation of the designated group in question needs to be increased or consolidated in the particular occupational group and/or level;
• the proposed appointment respects staffing values - and fairness, equity and transparency in particular; for example, if the department and/or the PSC is aware of potentially qualified members of the designated group targeted by the department (e.g. through the existence of an appropriate inventory or through the results of previous selection processes), the department should conduct a competitive process to select from among the members of the designated group in question.

Q. 6.6.2.h-3 Can a department request an appointment without competition for a designated group member when it already meets its employment equity target for that designated group?

R: Yes, in as much as it is reasonably justified. An increase above the base-line may help consolidate representation, particularly in the case of small size organizations. In addition, census projections suggest that the Labour Market Availability of certain designated groups is likely to increase.

Q.6.6.2.h-4 The department has an Employment Equity Program for the group and level and designated group in question that gives it recruitment and appointment authority with and without competition from outside the Public Service (with no limitations or conditions). Does the department require PSC approval to make an appointment without competition?

R: No. The department has complete authority in this case and only has to come to the PSC where priority clearance is required (see Chapter 5.6 of the Staffing Manual). However, the department should take the factors in the answer to Q. 6.6.2.h-2 into consideration.

Q. 6.6.2.h-5 The department has an Employment Equity Program for the group and level and designated group in question but does not have the full range of recruitment and appointment authorities as reflected in Q. 6.6.2.h-4 above. Does the department require PSC approval to make an appointment without competition in the context of its Employment Equity Program?

R: Since Employment Equity Programs are tailored to the needs of departments, the answer depends on the specifics of the program approved by the PSC and contained in Annex D of the Staffing Delegation and Accountability Agreement (SDAA). Some programs include only external recruitment, some only internal staffing, and some cover both. If external recruitment authority is delegated in the context of an Employment Equity Program, this delegation is reflected in Annex C of the SDAA. For example:

1. If the authority delegated within the department's Employment Equity Program does not apply to appointments without competition from outside the Public Service, the department has to obtain PSC approval for an appointment without competition from outside the Public Service pursuant to one of the PSC's employment equity programs (see Q. 6.6.2.h-2 above).
2. If the department has an Employment Equity Program that gives it the authority to make appointments with and without competition from outside the Public Service but does not explicitly give it recruitment authority, the department does not need the PSC's approval to decide whether to use a without competition process. However, the department is required to request that the referral of the proposed person be made by the PSC, since recruitment authority is not delegated. This contact can be used by the PSC as an opportunity to provide advice on whether consideration of a competitive process would be appropriate in the case at hand. It also allows the PSC to determine whether the department's use of competitive vs. non-competitive processes within its Employment Equity Program is generally balanced, or a matter of concern in terms of staffing values that should be brought to the attention of PSC functional authorities responsible for delegation and accountability. In addition, as noted in Chapter 5.6 of the Staffing Manual, priority clearance may be required.

Criterion (i) - Emergency Situation

Q. 6.6.2.i-1 What constitutes an emergency situation?

R: An emergency situation is one in which the health, security and/or well-being of Canadians could be at risk.

Q. 6.6.2.i-2 What would justify an appointment without competition for an indeterminate, as opposed to a term period?

R: Departments have the authority to make term appointments in emergency situations under certain conditions and, therefore, they do not need the PSC's approval to make such appointments. However, if what caused the emergency situation is likely to persist for an indefinite period, the manager may choose to make an indeterminate appointment - particularly if an appointment with "tenure" makes the position more attractive for individuals of the calibre sought.

Student Bridging Mechanisms

Q. 6.10-1 What is a bridging mechanism?

R: A bridging mechanism is a way to facilitate the hiring of individuals to the Public Service who have completed their studies and who had one or more work terms in the broader Public Service. Bridging may be made by closed competition or through appointment without competition from outside the Public Service.

Q. 6.10-2 What prompted the need for bridging mechanisms?

R: In 1997, the Public Service Commission (PSC) implemented an Exclusion Approval Order (EAO) that prevented students from competing in closed competitions. Open competition was, therefore, the sole vehicle available for students to enter the Public Service.

In light of the need to rejuvenate the Public Service, departments expressed concern that there was no mechanism available to enable them to hire highly qualified students who have completed their studies and in whom they have made an investment. The Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) then revised its student policy to encourage federal organizations to develop a pool of qualified candidates for future Public Service appointments and to hire students.

Q. 6.10-3 Why has the PSC provided mechanisms to facilitate the bridging of students rather than eliminate the EAO for Students?

R: Departments and central agencies share the view that students should not be enticed away from their studies. Retaining the EAO supports this view. In fact, both mechanisms require the student to complete his or her studies prior to being eligible for appointment to the Public Service.

Q. 6.10-4 What is a Student Employment Program?

R: For the purposes of these mechanisms, Student Employment Programs include the two post-secondary programs, the Federal Student Work Experience Program (FSWEP) and the Co-operative Education and Internship Programs (Co-op). In addition, if a student employment program administered by a federal employer not governed by the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) meets the conditions for a reciprocity agreement with the PSC, former students hired under that program could be appointed to a position in the Public Service through bridging mechanism number 2, i.e., appointment without competition from outside the Public Service. Student Employment Programs do not include non-post-secondary programs such as the Secondary School Co-op Education Program the Youth Internship Program (YIP).

Q. 6.10-5 What does completion of studies mean?

R: Completion of studies means that the student has successfully completed all of the necessary courses, theses and work terms, and will graduate. Completion of studies would be substantiated by an official statement or transcript of marks received or credits earned. This is not to be confused with graduation. For example, a student may finish the required courses, theses, and work terms in December but graduation may not occur until May. In this case, the student would be eligible to compete in a closed competition provided that the completion of studies occurred within the timeframe stipulated by the manager. As well, the student could be appointed without competition from outside the Public Service up to 18 months following completion of his or her studies.

Q. 6.10-6 The choice of students for FSWEP employment opportunities is based on "random selection." How can one conclude that the merit principle and the Public Service-wide values of fairness, equity, and transparency exist?

R: FSWEP selection is accomplished primarily on the basis of skills and competencies. When initially searching the inventory, the PSC only identifies those students whose education, skills, mobility, linguistic profile, etc. match the requirements established by the hiring manager.

Given the number of FSWEP applicants, in most cases, the number of students who match the manager's required qualifications is significant and, as a result, selection based on an algorithm is used to identify the candidates to be further considered. Managers proceed with selection based on merit when further assessing and selecting the student(s) for the job(s) to be filled.

Since the PSC receives more than 90,000 applications annually for approximately 10,000 student jobs, the selection process used for FSWEP has proven to be a fair, equitable and transparent means of matching students with jobs.

Q. 6.10-7 Considering that selection for FSWEP employment is based on an algorithm, will the bridging mechanisms have a negative impact on departments' ability to achieve employment equity (EE) objectives?

R: No. The algorithm used for FSWEP ensures that the students referred to departments are representative of the inventory's employment equity applicant population. As well, departments can request that only candidates from the designated groups be referred for FSWEP positions.

Q. 6.10-8 Is a priority clearance number required before proceeding with the bridging of students by closed competition or through without competition appointment from outside the Public Service?

R: Yes. Priority clearance is required for any indeterminate appointment or for any term appointment of more than 12 months.

Q. 6.10-9 Both bridging mechanisms require students to complete their program of study before being appointed, regardless of whether the job requires the level of education. How can one justify the requirement for a university degree for students but not for all other candidates in a particular process?

R: The requirement for university education is not a qualification for the position but is a condition for the students' eligibility to compete and to be appointed. It is not intended that the requirements for specific positions be artificially raised for students. Instead, the intention is to convey the message that students must complete their studies to be eligible for bridging to Public Service jobs.

Q. 6.10-10 Do the unions support the approved mechanisms?

R: Bridging mechanisms have existed since 1998. In February, 2002, bargaining agents were consulted through the PSC Consultative Council Steering Committee on changes being proposed to the bridging mechanism based on appointment without competition from outside the Public Service. The Steering Committee agreed with those changes, and raised no concerns regarding the bridging mechanism by closed competition.

It should also be noted that the delegated appointment authority related to the bridging mechanism without competition can only be exercised when the department has determined the circumstances in which it would be appropriate to use the authority and consulted appropriately with employee representatives.

Q. 6.10-11 How will the use of these bridging mechanisms impact on current departmental employees?

R: Over the next few years, human resource management strategies will focus on the renewal and rejuvenation of the Public Service workforce. The bridging mechanisms provide means by which departments can hire highly qualified former students who have already demonstrated an interest in and a high capability for work in the Public Service. In addition, many departmental human resource management strategies are addressing the issue of developmental and advancement needs of current Public Service employees.

Q. 6.10-12 How will Deputy Heads be held accountable for their actions related to student bridging?

R: Deputy Heads are held accountable for their actions through the Staffing Delegation and Accountability Agreements thats have been signed with the Commission.

Mechanism 1 - Closed Competition

Q. 6.A-1 Mechanism 1 permits students to apply in closed competitions. What are examples of areas of selection that would include students?

R: For the purpose of this mechanism, "student" is considered to be an occupational criterion of an area of selection. An area of selection intended to include students could be written as follows:

• Open to employees of Department X, and students employed in Department X under the FSWEP or Co-op programs capable of completing their post-secondary education program by (date).
• Open to students employed in Department X under the FSWEP or Co-op programs capable of completing their post-secondary education program by (date).

These examples are for illustrative purposes only and are not all encompassing. The manager's decision on area of selection must be based on the values of fairness, equity, transparency, and take into consideration the legitimate aspirations of current departmental employees.

Q. 6.A-2 How will managers know whether students are capable of completing their studies within the stipulated time frame?

R: It will be the responsibility of students to present information confirming that they are able to complete their studies within the stipulated period. For example, they could present an official outline that states how many credits are needed for completing their program, plus a transcript that indicates the number of credits that they have completed.

Q. 6.A-3 When would it be appropriate to conduct a closed competitive process open exclusively to students?

R: Here are two examples.

• Department A has a vacancy for a junior biologist. Managers in the department are aware of the educational background of employees in their divisions. It is determined that all employees who have the required degree are already at the level of the vacant position or higher. Based on this information, it would be appropriate to use an area of selection that is only open to students. This area of selection could be departmental only or could include "sister departments" where there are similar positions.
• In March, Department B held a competition for PM-01 jobs. Five people were found qualified and appointed. Since that time, a couple of departmental employees have given notification of their impending retirement. There are currently on staff FSWEP students who worked for this department the previous summer, as well as Co-op students on their second work term. Departmental managers have observed that some of these students have demonstrated the ability to carry out duties at the PM-01 level.

The department's human resources management strategy would normally indicate that it will, in addition to providing developmental and advancement opportunities for employees, be actively recruiting highly qualified graduates to assist in the renewal and rejuvenation of its workforce. The department would normally have communicated its strategy to employees and unions.

Q. 6.A-4 In cases where a closed competition is open to students, how long should students be given to complete their studies?

R: The length of time provided to students to complete their studies is left to the manager's discretion. However, matters such as the likelihood of changes in the qualifications for the position, possible changes to the candidate pool, and the urgency to fill the position should be considered when exercising this discretion.

Q. 6.A-5 The position for which a closed competition is held requires a university degree. A student applies who will complete his or her university studies by the date stipulated on the competition poster. Is this student eligible to compete?

R: Yes, this student would be eligible to compete if the area of selection includes students, and the student is capable of completing his or her studies within the timeframe stipulated on the competition poster. However, the student's name cannot be placed on the eligibility list until he or she has completed the degree because, in this case, a university degree is required as a qualification for the position.

Q. 6.A-6 The position for which a closed competition is held requires an undergraduate degree which the student has, but he or she is now studying for a Master's degree. Can the student be appointed immediately if he or she is found qualified? Can the eligibility list be established immediately?

R: No. The student cannot be appointed immediately because one of the conditions for bridging requires that the student successfully complete his or her program of study before appointment. In this case, the student is in the process of completing a Master's degree, and therefore, he or she has not completed his or her studies.

The eligibility list can be established immediately and the notice of right to appeal can be issued. If the student is qualified with regard to the other requirements, his or her name can be placed on the eligibility list, but he or she cannot be appointed until he or she has completed the Master's degree.

Q. 6.A-7 Currently, departments can provide conditional offers to candidates who applied to the Post-Secondary Recruitment Program and were found qualified prior to the completion of their study program. Can students who will complete their studies by the period specified on the competition poster also be given a conditional offer?

R: Yes. The students could be given a conditional offer pending successful completion of their studies within the timeframe stipulated on the competition poster.

Q. 6.A-8 If the position for which a closed competition is held does not require post-secondary education, when is the eligibility list established and the notice of right to appeal issued:

1. if a student is found qualified and among those who will be offered a position?
2. if a student fails to qualify?
3. if a student is found qualified but is not among those who will be offered a position?

R: Assuming the three cases above relate to situations where both students and employees were eligible:

1. The eligibility list can be established and appeal rights can be issued immediately. The student can be provided with an offer conditional upon successful completion of his or her studies. Since the department plans to fill more than one position from the list, it may bypass the student's name and offer the position to the next candidate on the list. However, the department should keep a position open for the student upon completion of his or her studies.
2. The eligibility list can be established and the notice of right to appeal can be issued immediately. Like any unsuccessful candidate, the student has the right to appeal appointments made or about to be made as a result of a closed competition.
3. The eligibility list can be established and the notice of right to appeal can be issued immediately.

Q. 6.A-9 What happens if the student who was found qualified in a closed competition pending successful completion of his or her studies does not complete the studies within the prescribed period?

R: The student cannot be appointed and does not enjoy any further appeal rights.

Q. 6.A-10 When bridging is made by closed competition, is the appointment of the student considered to be from within the Public Service?

R: Yes. The student was working within the Public Service at the time he or she applied in the closed competition. The Student Employment Programs Regulations stipulate that this is an appointment from inside the Public Service, even though the student is not working in the Public Service at the time of the appointment.

Q. 6.A-11 Is a student appointed by closed competition subject to a probationary period?

R: Yes. Even though the appointment is made from within the Public Service, the Student Employment Programs Regulations provide that students appointed as a result of a closed competition will be on probation from the date of the appointment until the end of the relevant period set out in Schedule 2 of the PSER.

Q. 6.A-12 The student lives in Vancouver but works in Halifax during the summer months. Is this student entitled to apply on closed competitions open to students working in the Greater Halifax Area?

R: Yes. The student wousld be eligible to apply for competitions that are "open to persons employed in Student Employment Programs in the Greater Halifax Area".

Mechanism 2 - Appointment without competition from outside the Public Service

Q. 6.A-13 Has the PSC established conditions under which the authority delegated in relation to bridging through appointment without competition from outside the Public Service can be exercised?

R: Yes. This mechanism can be used when the Deputy Head has:

• determined the circumstances in which it is appropriate to make an appointment without competition, in line with business needs; and,
• consulted appropriately with employee representatives.

Q. 6.A-14 Under what circumstances is it appropriate to bridge students by means of an appointment without competition from outside the Public Service?

R: The Commission has left it to Deputy Heads to determine the circumstances in which it would be appropriate to proceed by means of appointment without competition from outside the Public Service. In determining the circumstances in which it would be appropriate to use such an approach, the department should consider the following:

• What is the impact of using this mechanism on the developmental/promotional opportunities of other employees?
• Is the mechanism being applied and seen to be applied in an impartial manner, i.e., free from political and bureaucratic patronage?
• Does the appointment assist the department in achieving a representative workforce?

Q. 6.A-15 Is a student bridged without competition subject to a probationary period?

Yes. The appointment is made from outside the Public Service and section 28(1) of the PSEA applies.

Q. 6.A-16 Student bridging without competition is subject to merit. What does this mean in practice?

R: These types of appointment are subject to relative merit. This means that the manager is able to demonstrate that the person proposed for appointment is the best qualified for the job and meets the requirements of the PSC's Standards for Selection and Assessment.

Q. 6.A-17 Is there a timeframe during which a student who has completed a work term in a department can be appointed without competition to a position in that department or another department?

R: A student can be appointed without competition within the 18-month period after the completion of his or her studies.

Q. 6.A-18 In some instances there may be more than one student who previously worked for a department. Can the without competition mechanism be used in this instance?

R: In situations where more than one student has previously worked with the department, the without competition process may be used. However, the manager must first establish which of the previous students is the best qualified for the position in question.

Q. 6.A-19 Under which circumstances can a department bridge without competition a student who had a work term in another department?

R: This may happen:

• when the manager who wishes to bridge the student comes from another department and had previously employed the student in his or her former department; or,
• when the department or departments that had previously employed the student are unable to employ him or her but feel that his or her high calibre talents should be retained in the federal Public Service, and brought the case to the attention of another department; or,
• when a federal employer not governed by the PSEA that had previously employed the student has entered into a reciprocity agreement with the PSC for student bridging purposes.

Q. 6.A-20 What role does the PSC play in cases of student bridging without competition between departments?

R: The PSC provides advice and guidance to departments and other federal employers regarding bridging without competition. However, it does not provide a marketing service for persons who might be eligible for bridging. When the department or departments that had previously employed the student are unable to employ him or her but feel that his or her high calibre talents should be retained in the federal Public Service, it is their responsibility to bring the case of this individual to the attention of another department.

In addition, the PSC will sign reciprocity agreements with certain federal employers not governed by the PSEA who are interested in entering into such agreements and whose Student Employment Program meets the criteria for reciprocity.

Q. 6.A-21 What is a reciprocity agreement?

R: A reciprocity agreement is an agreement signed between the PSC and a federal employer not governed by the PSEA. It permits bridging without competition to Public Service jobs of individuals who participated in a student employment program administered by that employer. Any non-PSEA federal employer student recruitment program which would, overall, reflect the following attributes could qualify for reciprocity:

• the student recruitment program is recognized within the organization and is designed to develop students' employability skills and improve their ability to find suitable jobs after graduation;
• awareness of the program is readily available to student populations through some sort of publicity - e.g., on-campus visits, print or electronic media, employer's website, job fairs, etc.;
• the selection of students is based on a rigorous, objective assessment of their qualifications; and,
• the student selection process is open and transparent and free from political or bureaucratic patronage.

Q. 6.A-22 What is the purpose of reciprocity agreements?

R: Reciprocity agreements are intended to ensure that the training and experience gained by students in both PSEA and non-PSEA organizational environments will not be lost when individual organizations are not in a position to employ the former student themselves. It will also allow the achievement of a number of complementary objectives:

• streamline the hiring of former students in the larger federal Public Service;
• help students diversify their work experience and make the federal Public Service more attractive to them;
• increase mobility between the various employers which comprise the larger federal Public Service; and,
• facilitate collaboration between federal organizations governed and not governed by the PSEA.

Q. 6.A-23 Which employers not governed by the PSEA are eligible for reciprocity agreements?

R: For the purposes of reciprocity, "federal employers not governed by the PSEA" include those organizations identified on List B-1, List B-2, and List B-3 of Chapter 4 of the Staffing Manual.

Q. 6.A-24 How will departments be informed of reciprocity agreements signed by the PSC and federal employers not governed by the PSEA?

R: Departments will be informed through periodic updates to chapter 6 of the Staffing Manual.

Q. 6.A-25 Can the Deputy Head sub-delegate his or her authority to bridge students without competition from outside the Public Service?

R: Yes. However, given the nature of this authority, the Deputy Head may wish to sub-delegate it to levels or positions within the organization which provide a broad-based appreciation for its impact on the values of transparency, equity, fairness and non-partisanship. It is recommended that the authority be exercised at the Assistant Deputy Minister level or equivalent when the student that a manager wishes to bridge:

• was not previously employed by the department; and,
• had not worked for the manager concerned in another department.

Q. 6.A-26 A department recently used a student bridging mechanism to appoint an individual to a ten-month term position. The department would now like to appoint the term employee to an indeterminate position. Can it use the non-competitive student bridging mechanism for this purpose?

R: No. The mechanism which allows departments to make an appointment without competition from outside the Public Service is strictly for recruiting former students to the Public Service - and the individual in question is already employed in the Public Service. It is important to remember that student bridging mechanisms are intended to build long-term capacity rather than address short-term needs. In such a situation, the department could consider making an appointment without competition from within the Public Service and issuing a notice of right to appeal.

Q. 6.A-27 A department used the non-competitive student bridging mechanism to appoint an individual to a term position which has now ended. The department wants to use the non-competitive mechanism to appoint that individual again. Is it possible to use this mechanism more than once for the same individual?

R: Yes - as long as the 18-month period since the completion of his/her program of study has not elapsed. In addition, the individual concerned must be outside the Public Service, i.e. not employed in another department or agency governed by the Public Service Employment Act.

CHAPTER 8 - ASSESSMENT, SELECTION AND APPOINTMENT

Language of Assessment

Q. 8.4-1 What is meant by "language-related qualification" or "language" as referred to in sub-section 16(2) of the Public Service Employment Act?

R: By reference to sub-section 16(3), "language" or "language-related qualification" may be defined as any qualification used to determine the candidate's knowledge and use of the English or French language or both, or of a third language. This would include any oral and/or written communication skill or ability, as well as specific or expert language-related qualifications.

Q. 8.4-2 What are "specific or expert language-related qualifications"?

R: There are two types of specific or expert language-related qualifications:

• language-related skills normally acquired through specialized training (including dictatyping, dictation using shorthand, proofreading texts, translation, interpretation, and writing, revising, and/or editing texts); and
• specialized or expert proficiency in one or both official languages (for example, as used in teaching English or French).

Specific or expert language-related qualifications, designated by code P for bilingual positions, may be required in one or both official languages, depending on the tasks to be performed, and in either reading, writing and/or oral interaction. The specific skill and proficiency itself should be identified under the Abilities and Skills qualifications on the Statement of Qualifications. In addition, the specific or expert language related qualifications must be met at the time of appointment (i.e., mandatory) and are not subject to the provisions of the Public Service Official Languages Exclusion Approval Order.

The document "Determining the Linguistic Profile for Bilingual Positions", in the Assessing for Competence series, provides further information as to the tasks requiring specific or expert language-related qualifications and how to specify such qualifications.

Q. 8.4-3 How are specific or expert language related qualifications assessed?

R: Linguistic skill(s) (reading, writing and / or oral interaction) which require(s) specific or expert language-related qualifications are evaluated by any assessment method (examination, test, interview or other method) that the selection board considers appropriate to determine whether the person meets the desired qualifications. Second language evaluation (SLE) tests are not to be used to evaluate specific or expert language-related qualifications.

Q. 8.4-4 Which qualifications are assessed in the candidate's official language of choice?

R: Any qualification which is not intended to determine the candidate's knowledge and use of the English or French language or both, or of a third language, is to be assessed in the candidate's official language of choice.

Q. 8.4-5 How do I know if a given qualification is a "language-related qualification"?

R: To ascertain whether a given qualification is a "language-related qualification", the selection board must determine whether the given qualification is intended to measure directly or indirectly the candidate's knowledge and use of the English or French language or both, or of a third language.

Q. 8.4-6 Can the Second Language Evaluation (SLE) tests be used to assess the candidate's language proficiency for an English-essential or a French-essential position?

R: No. The Second Language Evaluation (SLE) tests are intended to assess the candidate's proficiency in his or her second official language. SLE tests are to be used only for bilingual positions.

Q. 8.4-7 What happens if there is doubt as to the candidate's language proficiency in either or both official languages?

R: In accordance with the provisions of section 20 of the Act, the candidate must possess the necessary language proficiency in the language or languages required by the position to perform the functions of the position and to provide effective services to the public.

For an English-essential or a French-essential position, the candidate must demonstrate by the assessment of language-related qualifications or throughout the assessment process, that he or she possesses the necessary language proficiency in the language required by the position. Should the selection board determine that the candidate does not possess the necessary language proficiency in the language required by the position, the candidate is deemed not to be qualified for the position and cannot be appointed to the position.

For a bilingual position, the candidate must demonstrate by the assessment of language-related qualifications or throughout the assessment process, that he or she possesses the necessary language proficiency in one of the official languages, which is usually the candidate's first official language, at the level of proficiency required for the bilingual position. The candidate's proficiency in his or her second official language is assessed by means of the Second Language Evaluation (SLE) tests. Should the selection board determine that the candidate does not possess the required language proficiency in his or her first official language, the candidate is deemed not to be qualified for the position and cannot be appointed to the position.

Q.8.4-8 For a bilingual position, do we have to assess language-related qualifications in both English and French?

R: No. General language-related qualifications specified on the Statement of Qualifications are assessed in the candidate's first official language. The candidate's second official language proficiency in reading, writing and/or oral interaction is to be assessed using the Second Language Evaluation (SLE) tests.

Q. 8.4-9 What happens if there is doubt as to which language is the candidate's first official language?

R: A person's first official language is the one with which the person has a primary personal identification. This is generally the official language in which the person is most proficient.

If there is doubt as to the candidate's first official language, SLE tests may be administered in both official languages. In such circumstances, the language in which the candidate received higher test results is deemed to be the candidate's first official language and, conversely, the language in which the candidate received lower test results is deemed to be the candidate's second official language. For example, if the candidate's SLE tests results in English are CBC and in French are BBA, then the candidate's first official language would be English and his or her second official language would be deemed French.

Non-Appointment Term Extensions

Q. 8.7-1 Does this policy reflect the recommendations of the Joint TBS-PSAC Term Employment Study?

R: Recommendation 7 of the study advocated that term employees be assessed or required to compete only once for their own job, and that any extension of a term should not be a new appointment. Given the current legal requirements of the PSEA, this policy approaches this goal. The research findings presented by the study indicate that more than 2/3 of term employees have cumulative service of less than two years. Given that the maximum duration of a validity period in the policy is two years, this policy will reduce the necessity for many term employees to be repeatedly assessed for their own job.

Q. 8.7-2 Haven't we always been able to do term extensions?

R: No. While term re-appointments may be referred to colloquially as term extensions, they are in fact new appointments. As such, the qualifications of the employee must be assessed to ensure he or she is qualified, and appeal rights must be issued.

Q. 8.7-3 Under the modernized Public Service Employment Act (PSMA) (previously Bill C-25), term extensions will be possible, and will be much easier than this. Why can't we have a policy today, that mirrors the flexibility of the PSMA?

R: Once implemented, the modernized Public Service Employment Act will replace the current Act. Until such time as the modernized Act is adopted and implemented, the provisions of the current Act apply and must be respected. Section 25 of the Public Service Employment Act specifies that a term employee ceases to be an employee at the end of the term. Consequently, our policy anticipates the modernized Act while respecting the current legal requirements.

Q. 8.7-4 How does this policy allow for term extensions?

R: By making a distinction between the actual work period for which the manager is agreeing to employ the individual, and the validity period, which is the potential maximum period for which the appointment could run, managers will be able to extend the work period, up to the maximum of the validity period, without having to make a new appointment.

Q. 8.7-5 How do the validity period and the work period compare to what we have been using?

R: Until now, managers have not made a distinction between the validity period and the work period. Consequently, in a sense, for term appointments, the validity period and the work period have always been identical.

Q. 8.7-6 Can I hire a term employee and make the duration of the work period the same as the duration of the validity period?

R: Yes. However, in such a case, if the manager needs to keep the employee for a longer period, the employee cannot be extended. The employee would have to be re-appointed subject to appeal, as is the current practice.

Q. 8.7-7 What can a manager do if the need for the employee exceeds the validity period?

R: As is the current practice, at any time the manager needs to keep an employee longer than the foreseen period (the validity period), the employee may be re-appointed to a new term.

Q. 8.7-8 If an employee is re-appointed, can the manager specify a new work period and a new validity period?

R: Yes.

Q. 8.7-9 A manager has a current term employee whose term ends October 31. In the most recent letter of offer, the manager did not distinguish between the working period and the validity period. Can this term employee be extended?

R: No. In letters of offer which do not indicate a difference between the validity period and the work period, the two periods must be considered to be the same. Therefore, the employee cannot be extended.

Q. 8.7-10 What can the manager do in the above situation?

R: The manager can re-appoint the employee, and with this appointment, the manager can distinguish between the work period and the validity period. Subsequently, if the manager needs to keep the employee beyond the end of the work period, the employee may then be extended.

Q. 8.7-11 I'm afraid that telling potential employees about a validity period will raise their expectations falsely.

R: The issue you raise is a perfect example of the need to balance staffing values, in this case efficiency and transparency, when establishing the work period and the validity period. If, for example, the manager is confident the work will end at a specific date, there is no need to establish a validity period that extends beyond that date.

Q. 8.7-12 Does the new policy mean that the re-appointment mechanism has disappeared?

R: No. The implementation of a non-appointment term extension mechanism is an added flexibility. The re-appointment of a term employee continues to be a staffing option available to managers.

Q. 8.7-13 A term employee's work period is set to expire next month, at the end of the 23rd month of a two year validity period. Can the manager extend the employee for six months?

R: No. Because a period of one month remains between the end of the current work period, and the end of the validity period, the manager may extend the employee for one month only. If the manager believes the need for the employee continues for, in this example, six months, the manager may choose to re-appoint the employee, with a work period of six months, and a validity period of six months or longer, rather than extend for just one month.

Q. 8.7-14 My department wants to develop its own non-appointment term extension policy, but has not yet done so. Can I use the PSC policy?

R: Yes, the PSC policy applies in departments which do not have their own policy, either because they do not need to introduce their own policy, or because they have not yet done so.

Q. 8.7-15 My department has introduced its own non-appointment term extension policy, and it is not exactly the same as the PSC policy. Which policy should we use?

R: You should use your department's policy when extending term employees. The PSC policy applies to departments which do not have their own policy, as well as to all EX term employees, unless the department has negotiated something different with the PSC is their SES (Strategic Executive Staffing) agreement.

Q. 8.7-16 Another manager has a term employee for whom the work is ending. The employee has demonstrated the qualifications to do a job at the same group and level in my work unit. Can I extend the employee into the job in my unit?

R: No. An extension must be made in the same position covered by the most recent term appointment. In this situation, however, you could deploy the employee to the position you have available.

Q. 8.7-17 Can I deploy an employee to a new term position and create a new work period and validity period within the deployment offer?

R: No. A deployment severs an employee from the previous position. Consequently, as a result of the deployment, the employee will cease to be an employee at the end of the current work period. At that time, you may re-appoint the employee, respecting the merit and recourse provisions, and define a new work period and new validity period in the current position.

Q. 8.7-18 Does this policy apply to casuals?

R: No. Casuals are not employees.

Q. 8.7-19 Does this policy apply to students?

R: No. Students are not employees.

Q. 8.7-20 The circumstances in my department do not fit nicely into the PSC policy; the PSC policy should be changed.

R: The PSC policy is designed to offer managers an additional flexibility while continuing to respect the current legal requirements. As such, it is recognized that while this policy represents an increased flexibility, it does not represent a simplification. If a department feels its circumstances are such that its needs are not met by the policy, it may establish its own policy, within the policy framework approved by the PSC.

Q. 8.7-21 Initial letters of offer to individuals new to the Public Service are already long, awkward, and difficult to understand. Specifying two different periods in an initial letter of offer will add to the confusion of potential new employees.

R: Letters of offer need to contain the relevant information needed by the recipient to make an informed decision about whether to accept the offer or not. A distinction between the work period being offered and the potential for a longer period is such a relevant piece of information. The requirement adds transparency to the staffing system, since currently letters of offer are silent as to the possibility of a re-appointment, when in fact many term appointments are followed by a re-appointment.

Q. 8.7-22 Has the PSC developed standard wording regarding the distinction between work period and validity period for inclusion in letters of offer?

R: No. Many departments have indicated that they have vastly different circumstances, and they believed standard wording would not meet the needs of every situation. Other departments wanted the PSC to develop standardized wording, so that they were not re-inventing the wheel. The PSC developed the following suggested, not standard wording; please note that the following paragraphs are a suggested wording and that nothing precludes a department or agency to adopt its own wording to fit its particular needs.

TERM APPOINTMENT

I am pleased to offer you a specified period work term from (starting date of work term) to (end date of work term) as (Position Title) with (Name of the Department). Please note that this work term may be shorter depending upon operational requirements and subject to satisfactory job performance.

Should there be a requirement for your services in the same position for a longer period, your work term may be extended up to a maximum of three (3) times during the validity period of this appointment. The validity period runs until (end date of the validity period). An extension during the validity period does not constitute an appointment, does not require a further assessment of merit nor is it subject to appeal. However, should you be asked to work beyond the end of the validity period, you would need to be re-appointed; this new appointment would involve a new assessment of merit, and would be subject to appeal.

FIRST NON-APPOINTMENT TERM EXTENSION

Further to your letter of offer of a term appointment to the above-mentioned position, this is to inform you that your specified period work term is extended from (original end date of work term) until (new end date of work term) . I would like to remind you that the validity period of this appointment will end (end date of validity period). This offer is the first extension of the work term. Please note that this work term may be shorter depending upon operational requirements and subject to satisfactory job performance.

SUBSEQUENT NON-APPOINTMENT TERM EXTENSION

Further to our letter of (date of most recent extension offer), this is to inform you that your specified period work term is again extended from (most recent end date of work term) until (new end date of work term). I would like to remind you that the validity period of this appointment will end (end date of validity period). This offer is the (second or third) extension of the work term. Please note that this work term may be shorter depending upon operational requirements and subject to satisfactory job performance.

Q. 8.23 If I hire a term employee today, with a validity period of two years, how can the employee become indeterminate, since the threshold period of the Treasury Board policy is three years?

R: Term employees can become indeterminate in any number of ways. As employees, they are able to compete in closed competitions. In appropriate situations, you can appoint the term employee indeterminately without competition, and issue appeal rights. There is no requirement that you wait the three years to convert the employee under the Treasury Board policy. In fact, if you have on-going work, why would you make the employee wait? Also, if the employee comes directly from another term position in the same department, or has a break in service of less than 60 days from another term position in the same department, you may be able to (or have to) convert the employee under the Treasury Board policy before the end of the validity period.

Q. 8.7-24 Currently, if I need to, I can let a term go early. Can I still do so under this policy?

R: Yes. The provisions for releasing a term employee prior to the end of the work period remain the same.

Q. 8.7-25 A term employee is hired. A one-year work period and a two-year validity period are established. Part of the assessment of the individual was the SLE process, and the employee had results that were then 4 ½ years old. Can I now extend the employee, even though the SLE results are from more than 5 years ago?

R: Yes. An extension is not a new appointment, so there is no requirement for an assessment of merit when a term employee is being extended.

Q. 8.7-26 Does the ability to extend a term undermine merit in the Public Service?

R: No. Term employees are assessed for merit on initial appointment into the Public Service. If they continue in the same position for more than two years, they will have to be re-appointed, at which point they are subject to another merit test. If they continue in the same department for a sufficient period of time to qualify for conversion to indeterminate status, they are appointed indeterminately only after they are found qualified. If the term employee deploys to another position, they cannot be extended in the new position; if the manager wishes to keep them for a longer period, the employee must be re-appointed, subject to merit. These critical decision points, or merit tests, will continue to ensure the protection of merit.

Q. 8.7-27 A manager wishes to make a term appointment with a validity period of 2 years, and a work period of 9 months. Is a priority clearance number required for this appointment?

R: No. A priority clearance number is required for a term appointment when the work period of the appointment is for a duration of one year or longer.

CHAPTER 15 - PRE-QUALIFIED POOLS (PQP)

1. Establishment of Pool:

Q. 15.1.1 At what point must priorities (regulatory or statutory) be considered ? Can a department consider regulatory priorities before making an appointment from a PQP?

R: Prior to deciding on the type of selection process to use to fill vacancies, a department should consider whether those vacancies can be filled by persons having either a statutory or regulatory priority to appointment. If vacancies still exist, the department may decide to establish a PQP in accordance with its Human Resources Plan.

Appointments from a PQP will be made under s. 10(2) of the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA). The entitlement to a regulatory priority does not apply to appointments made under s. 10(2) (see s. 40 in the Public Service Employment Regulations (PSER)). Therefore, once a decision has been made to use a PQP, regulatory priorities cannot be considered. However, before making an appointment from a PQP, the department must consider any persons with statutory priority entitlement.

NOTE: Under the new PSEA, all types of priorities will have to be considered.

Q. 15.1.2 Is citizenship preference applied in PQP processes?

R: No. PSEA 17(4) indicates that preferences must be given to Canadian citizens when establishing an eligibility list in the case of an open competition. Since eligibility lists are not established with PQPs, this means that the citizenship preference does not apply in the case of PQPs.

NOTE: Under the new PSEA, the citizenship preference will be applied in the context of an advertised external appointment process.

Q. 15.1.3 What is meant by the expression "reasonable expectation of appointment"?

R: A reasonable expectation of appointment means that under normal circumstances, all those persons whose names were placed in a pre-qualified pool would be appointed. However, this does not create a right to appointment. If circumstances in the workplace change, for example, fewer people retire than anticipated, then there may not be sufficient vacancies for all persons to be appointed.

Q. 15.1.4 How does a department ensure that persons in a PQP have a reasonable expectation of appointment?

R: An essential aspect of the PQP process is good HR planning. Departments should be able to predict staffing requirements so that those persons in the pool will, in all likelihood, be appointed. In addition to effective planning, a commitment on the part of managers to use the PQP as planned, and efficient management of the assessment process to arrive at an appropriate number of persons in the pool are indispensable.

NOTE: The "reasonable expectation of appointment" feature will not be part of the new staffing regime.

Q. 15.1.5 Placement in a PQP is not based on a relative merit assessment of candidates. However, can top-down selection be used to manage the number of persons going into the PQP?

R: In order to implement the policy that candidates placed in a PQP have a reasonable expectation of being appointed, methods such as top-down selection may be used as a means to arrive at an appropriate number of persons in the PQP. Top-down selection is the practice of choosing those individuals who attain a higher level of proficiency in a particular qualification to advance to the next stage of assessment. Top-down selection should be planned for and can be used at any stage of the assessment process. Candidates must be notified at the beginning of the PQP process and/or at each step in the assessment process about how it will be used.

The department may not use the overall marks of candidates to conduct a top-down selection, as this would constitute a relative merit evaluation. Those qualifications which are most important to the duties of the positions would be most suitable to use for top-down selection.

NOTE: Under the new PSEA, the Public Service Commission (PSC) will no longer require that each candidate in a PQP have a reasonable expectation of appointment.

Q. 15.1.6 Can PQPs be established for more than one type of appointment - term, indeterminate and/or acting appointments? If so, does the name of a person appointed to a term position or on an acting basis, for example, remain in the pool for other types of appointment?

R: A PQP may be established for different types of appointments, such as term, indeterminate and/or acting. Should a person's name be removed from the PQP for the purpose of making a term appointment, as an example, this person will not be eligible to be considered for any other appointments from the PQP. This is in accordance with paragraph 5(3)(e) of the PSER that says that the "Commission shall remove from a pre-qualified pool the names of any persons who were appointed to a position for which the pool was established". Departments should ensure that participants are informed of the impact of accepting an appointment in these circumstances.

Departments may prefer establishing separate pools when various types of appointment are possible.

NOTE: Under the new PSEA, this regulatory provision will no longer exist.

Q.15.1.7 Can appointments of employment equity (EE) designated groups be made from a PQP?

R: If a department has an approved employment equity program that includes the group and level of the PQP, then that program can be used to appoint self-identified EE members of the pool to PQP positions by using EE as a selection criterion, along with any other selection criteria required by the manager. Of course, if EE is to be a selection criterion, it must be identified as such at the outset of the process. If a department does not have an EE program, it can use the PSC EE Program for appointments from outside the Public Service.

NOTE: Under the new PSEA, departments will be able to establish their respective Employment Equity programs based on their HR plan needs if under-representation exists.

Q. 15.1.8 Can the pool be established for more (or less) than two years?

R: A PQP can be established for any length of time. However, under paragraph 5(3)(f) of the PSER, the names of persons who were not appointed during the two-year period after they were added to the pool are removed from the pool.

15.2 Language Requirements and Conditions of Employment:

Q. 15.2.1 When does language proficiency have to be assessed?

R: Because language proficiency is a qualification, persons must be assessed and qualified upon entering the pool, or excluded under the Public Service Official Languages Exclusion Approval Order for non-imperative appointments.

Q. 15.2.2 If the positions have various language requirements, are several different pools established - one for each language requirement?

R: Each different language requirement should be identified from the outset, based on the requirements of the position. Two approaches are possible when there is a need to establish a PQP with various language requirements.

• One pool with various linguistic requirements.
  
  One of the challenges with this option is to ensure that the HR plan is adhered to at the time where candidates are selected from the pool, especially when non-imperative staffing was indicated as a possibility. In the case where bilingual imperative and non-imperative needs exist, all candidates, whether already bilingual or eligible for language training, are entitled to a reasonable expectation of appointment.
  
  
• Separate pools for each linguistic requirement.
  
  One of the challenges with this option is the fact that one candidate can end up in more than one pool. This has to be factored in when determining the number of candidates in each pool (to avoid double and triple counting).

Q. 15.2.3 Can official language be used as a selection criterion?

R: Yes, but only if the pool was established for positions with more than one language requirement and the language requirements requested are those objectively required by the position to be filled. The department must have an effective plan in place so that all persons in the pool will continue to have a reasonable expectation of appointment. Language proficiency at a level beyond the requirements for the position must not be a factor in selecting a candidate. This would be contrary to the guarantee under the Official Languages Act of equal opportunity to employment and advancement in the federal Public Service. This also applies to staffing on a imperative or non-imperative basis.

Q. 15.2.4 Can the names of persons be placed in a PQP if conditions of employment are not met (reliability/security, for example)?

R: Names of candidates can be placed in a PQP while it is being determined whether the candidate meets the security, reliability and/or medical conditions of employment. However, pursuant to paragraph 5(2)(i) of the PSER, candidates cannot be appointed unless they meet all the conditions of employment.

15.3 Selection Criteria:

Q. 15.3.1 How does a manager decide among several people in a PQP who all meet the selection criteria?

R: Part of the planning process for a PQP is to ensure that appropriate selection criteria are identified, so that a manager will be able to choose among persons in the pool. Selection criteria need to be identified at the beginning of the process. The manager must consider each person who meets the selection criteria. If several people meet the criteria, the manager may choose the person who is most closely aligned with job-related requirements (right fit), keeping in mind the staffing values, most particularly fairness and transparency.

Q. 15.3.2 What does random selection mean?

R: Random selection refers to the practice of selecting one or more individuals from a pool by chance, without the use of any subjective criteria. It can be as simple as pulling names out of a hat.

Q. 15.3.3 Can a manager use random selection to appoint from a pool?

R: Random selection may be applied if identified at the beginning of the PQP process. Random selection would likely be most useful for positions where there is little need or it is difficult to differentiate among candidates, such as, for example, stores persons. Should a person request a review of the manager's decision as to an appointment using random selection, the department must be able to demonstrate the reasonableness of this decision. When this method of selecting candidates from a PQP is used, all candidates in the group from which the random selection is made have access to recourse.

Q. 15.3.4 Can a manager use the highest score on one or more (not all) qualification(s) as a selection criterion? If so, which individuals may request a review of that decision, as only one person would meet the selection criterion of the highest mark?

R: There is nothing which prohibits a manager from using scores on individual qualifications as selection criteria, provided candidates were informed at the beginning of the process and there is a clear link between the importance of the particular qualification for the particular position to be filled. In order that candidates have reasonable access to recourse, the selection criteria should be defined as "evaluation on qualification X".

15.4 Management of PQP:

Q. 15.4.1 Is there an obligation to use the PQP to staff all similar positions at the same group and level?

R: The department's decision as to how and when the PQP will be used must be clearly communicated to candidates at the beginning of the PQP process. Once established, the PQP should be used to fill all positions for which the PQP was established. While there is no legal obligation to use the PQP, it should be used considering the time and commitment to the process and for reasons of transparency and fairness.

Q. 15.4.2 Can PQP participants refuse an offer?

R: Although PSER 5(3)(a) states that the Commission shall remove from a PQP the names of any persons who indicate in writing that they are unable or unwilling to accept an appointment to a position for which the pool was established, PQP candidates do not need to accept the first job they are offered. As an example, in the case where various locations are possible, a PQP candidate could decline a specific location knowing other locations could become available. However, if a person indicates in writing that he/she is not interested in any position for which the pool was established, the PSER 5(3)(a) condition is then met and the candidate's name must be removed.

Q. 15.4.3 Under what rules will PQPs be managed on the coming into force of the new PSEA?

R: In accordance with the Transitional Provisions of the new PSEA, section 70, any pending PQP process will continue to be managed as per the rules under which it was established.

15.5 Recourse:

Q. 15.5.1 When departments are sharing an internal PQP, will each department need to establish a recourse process?

R: Yes. In accordance with the PSC policy, a deputy head must establish a departmental recourse process before the department can use a PQP. A recourse process must also be established in departments which are sharing a PQP, to provide recourse at the second decision point when appointments are made from the PQP within their organization.

Q. 15.5.2 Must each person in the PQP who meets the selection criteria but is not selected for appointment be advised in writing of this and their right to recourse?

R: Yes. In accordance with the PQP Recourse Regulations, managers are required to inform, in writing, those who meet the selection criteria but are not selected, of the decision and of their right to request, within ten working days, that the deputy head review the decision.

Q. 15.5.3 What process has the PSC put in place to handle requests for review of PQP decisions?

R: A person who is not satisfied with the deputy head's review of the PQP decision may request that the PSC review the reasonableness of that decision. This is done by requesting the referral of a pre-qualified pool complaint using the Appeal, Investigation or Review form available at:
http://www.psc-fp.gc.ca/recours/appeals/DocofAppeal.PDF

The request must be accompanied by a copy of the initial complaint and the department's reply.