About us

Talk to us

President's Message

Regional Voices

Calendar

Symposia

Training and Employment Opportunities

Library

Home Library Summary of the Working Meeting between PSHRMAC, NCVM, NCFED and NCAFE April 21, 2006

Summary of the Working Meeting between PSHRMAC, NCVM, NCFED and NCAFE April 21, 2006

Facilitator: Nancy Filion (PSHRMAC)

Participants:
NCVM – Jacqueline Edwards, Feilan Xia-Baker
NCFED – Louise Normand, Carole Willans-Théberge, Duane Simpson
NCAFE – Gail Gallagher, Greg Cheverie, Cleo L Holness Big Eagle, Cecil Lafontaine
PSHRMAC – Glen Bailey, Karine Baron, Wally Boxhill, Beverly Brown, Angela Henry, Yves Séguin

Objectives of this meeting

• To review major accomplishments of the three groups (NCVM, NCFED and NCAFE) for fiscal year 2005-2006;
• To begin developing a strategy for partnering with each other and PSHRMAC during fiscal year 2006-2007.

Glen Bailey provided an update on some developments at PSHRMAC:

• Adjustments to the organizational structure of the Human Resources Planning, Accountability and Diversity Branch; creation of Diversity Directorate headed by Wally Boxhill as Acting Director General; 2 divisions – Policy and Partnerships; and Programs;
• EE Fund 2006-2007: TB Submission moving forward to secure funds for 6 projects;
• Diversity Policy – now in final review and approval stage; Policy to be approved by TB Ministers; will seek permission for future directives to be approved by PSHRMAC’s President;
• Diversity Policy – now in final review and approval stage; Policy to be approved by TB Ministers; will seek permission for future directives to be approved by PSHRMAC’s President;
  Release in Fall (Policy, Directives, Guidelines)
• Results of the Public Service Employee Survey: release in early June;
• EE Annual Report to be tabled in early May;
• MAF (Management Accountability Framework) and assessment of organizational performance: EE is an indicator on its own.
  For the FY 2004-2005, only 3 departments are in the “Acceptable” category. Most are in “ Opportunity for improvement”.
• Diversity is a critical part of the business of the Government of Canada.
• Public Service needs to tap into talent pool to respond to changing demographics of Canada
• Need for a representative workforce in an inclusive environment

Comments / Observations:

• Concerns about national statistics on persons with disabilities; feeling that they underestimate the size of this population.
• Disabilities are not always visible but "we are there".
• There should be more communication about the existence of the three EE groups whenever there are presentations given from government as it pertains to diversity, employment equity and the new Public Service Employment Act.
• EE workforce availability goals for Women might have been met but not for Visible minority women.

Reports - Accomplishments during fiscal year 2005-2006

NCAFE (deck presented)

• Inaugural Forum held December 5 and 6, 2005;
• Seven new sub-committees were created;
• Appointment of the 2006 spokesperson/chair – Ms. Gail Gallagher;
• Name changed from ANNI to NCAFE;
• Logo changed;
• PWGSC has agreed to host NCAFE’s Website;
• The Process of setting up a General Meeting for 2006 has begun. The meeting will be held in Quebec City in October 2006. Currently, the organizing body is considering a registration fee.

Comments / Observations:

• Discussion about registration fee and logistical challenges of hosting General Meeting in Quebec City.

NCFED (deck distributed)

• Change in name from NCFPSD to NCFED;
• Mandate clarified;
• Conference 2005;
• Work was done on governance;
• Holding by-elections;
• Development of Website;
• Development of communication tools (newsletter and brochure);
• PSES Survey 2005: Ensured the accessibility of survey, in collaboration with PSHRMAC.

Priorities:

• Working on PS Survey 2008;
• Managers Awareness Sessions, in collaboration with the CSPS – Target date: June 2006;
• Real Time Print Interpretation project submitted to the Official Languages Innovation Fund (pending approval);
• Meeting to be held with various partners about Disability Management Issues and Insurance Issues;
• Promoting Universal Design: efforts underway to get buy-in form other departments;
• The Infocentre;
• Career Progression for Persons with disabilities;
• Development of a tool kit for employees and managers on “Mental Health Issues”;
• Regional development;
• Liaison with bargaining agents;
• Sustainability for the coming years;
• Identifying a Banker department;
• Working more closely with Champion;
• Work on Congress 2008.

Comments / Observations:

• Great potential to share memberships. Try to work closely with the others, hence the reason for these partnerships.
• Duty to Accommodate issue: More work needed with PWGSC re. Physical accommodation of the needs of persons with disabilities

NCVM

• National Symposium – April 2005:
  • Election of members;
  • Determine 4 priorities:
    • 1. Organizational;
    • 2. Communication / strengthen awareness;
    • 3. Strengthen partnerships;
    • 4. Engage communities within Public Service.
• Secured MOU – securing funds was an uphill battle;
• Role of Canadian Heritage as host department;
• Staying in business in today’s environment (NCVM is 6 years old);
• Communications with partners (NCFED and NCAFE);
• Elaboration of Business Plan assisted by NRCan;
• Held 15 workshops and mini-conferences.

Regional Accomplishments:

• Production of newsletters;
• Establishment of working group;
• Held one Interdepartmental meeting – another coming up on May 3rd;
• Development of Website;
• Career opportunities were sent out to members on a regular basis;
• Attended EE Conferences all across Canada.

Challenges:

• Obtaining managers’ permission for Visible Minority employees to participate in events;
  All groups felt that lack of support by managers is crippling participation by their members in their organization’s activities;
• Having to focus on finding funds;
• Costs of maturity.

Comments / Observations:

• Need to strike a balance between representation and inclusion agendas
• Discussion to build awareness about the historical approach of government towards Aboriginal people.
• For the Anti-Racism Strategy – let’s not forget harassment. Add anti-harassment and anti-discrimination and not just talk about racism.

Current Governance

The presentation on “Governance and organizational Relationships” was an introduction to the discussions that were to follow. Its objective was to provide information on the governance model and relationships between PSHRMAC and the 3 groups (NCVM, NCFED and NCAFE).

Comments / Observations:

• Regional dimension of governance and how information reaches designated group members outside the NCR.
• A recommendation was made to link goals for each Council in our strategic thinking.
• Promote the message of these Councils as being the “eyes, ears and voices of their constituents”, but we must be careful with how and to whom this message is conveyed.
• It was also recommended that the final product from this meeting should go to the Clerk of the Privy Council. Wally noted that such have to go through Errol Mendes.

It was decided that PSHRMAC’s role would not be discussed since it was covered in Howard Barton’s report that was distributed to all groups. However, participants would like to get a copy of PSHRMAC’s Business Plan. Wally Boxhill indicated that the Strategic Framework for the future of diversity is an appropriate reference document.

Participants worked in 2 groups and each discussed two topics from the governance deck, as follows:

(a) Role of the Deputy minister Champion; Information flow
(b) Host department; Secretariat.

DM Champion

• Recommended that Champions meet annually
• Have a vice-champion or a point of contact at the ADM or DG level (a day-to-day contact)
• Interface between Champion and host department’s DM
• Reports back to organization quarterly (recommended that reporting goes both ways)
• EE Champion participation in all major meetings of the organization
• Relations strengthened through strategic access and a culture of support
• Champion supports the establishment of the Secretariat
• Visible to DMs,
• Champions may also exist at ADM level

Information Flow

• Get the EE coordinators’ cooperation in transmitting information within their departments (will be brought up at IDFEE)
• Communication must be dual directional;
• Regular meetings with PSHRMAC for each groups (quarterly meetings);
• Meeting of PSHRMAC with all three groups twice a year;
• PSHRMAC needs to build in time for groups to consult with their constituents. They would like to extend consultation turn-around time;
• Need to identify a point of contact in PSHRMAC;
• Get updates from EAG, IDFEE, JEEC;
• PSHRMAC must use its position at decision tables as a strategic lever in communicating information about the three groups.

Host department

• The host department is a Banker department – financial accountability and responsibility; a host department should not be the same department / agency in which the administrative office is housed.
• The host department is independent of the issues that the group is dealing with; for example, ODI should not be the host department for NCFED nor should INAC be the host department for NCAFE.
• However, the needs of the Council must be well understood by the host department (in advance):
  • All need to be on the same page;
  • Has to be a two-way discussion.
• Expectations on both parts must be well understood;

Secretariat

The Secretariats will be different to meet each group’s needs, the size of their Boards and their overall mandate.

• Different from the host department;
• Reports to the Board and takes directions from the Board;
• Reports financially to the host department;
• The establishment of the Secretariat is supported by the Champion.

*At some point, the idea of a common Secretariat will need to be discussed.

Next Steps

• The question “What could the three groups be doing together with PSHRMAC and other organizations?” was not discussed due to lack of time. Will be discussed at a subsequent meeting.
• Another ½ day meeting to be scheduled in the near future – week of May 15th
• Summary to be sent out within a week for comments
• Commitments taken during this meeting can be found in Annex A
• Parking Lot questions are also annexed and will be answered accordingly within the next few weeks (Annex B)

Closing remarks

Once an agreement is reached on these governance issues, we will go back to the Champions and to the organizations that provide support. Organizations expressed their appreciation for the meeting, how it was conducted and the results.

PSHRMAC’s commitments

• Consult all groups on WFA estimates from the 2006 Census;
• Provide data by gender (women) – Aboriginal, with Disabilities and Visible minority;
• Provide (electronically) the deck for the Strategic Framework for Employment Equity;
• Seek input on strategic sessions / meetings / files that will enhance visibility of groups;
• Help the different groups to find host department;
• Provide presentation on the reorganization of PSHRMAC/HRPAD’s structure.
  (Participants were given a paper copy of the presentation).

Parking lot (items as parked)

• Employer of choice
• Accountability
• Resources
• What types of Aboriginal consultations were utilized in development of the Public Service Survey?
• PSHRMAC & three groups: How best to deal with individuals who have personal case/problem?
• Funding of the Secretariat
• Business Plan
• What support / activities is PSHRAMC planning to strengthen the relationships? Concrete actions?
• TB Submission for EE Fund for FY 06/07- status? Timeline?
• Is PSHRMAC asking for authority instead of being an enabler role? If accountability is so important, then why departments are failing to score / attention required?
• Two members of Visible minorities at the DM level, not acceptable, what’s the problem?
• If the private sector recognizes the importance of Diversity as part of Business Operations, why is it taking the government so long to achieve this? When an immigrant comes to Canada, Government is the first contact? The Government rating is poor!
• Is allowing dept responsibility to achieve MAF the smart thing to do? (respect to EE assessment accountability)
• Are the Websites accessible?
• How do they reconcile getting involved in individual issues?
• How do they visit their constituents in the regions?
• Do you think it is beneficial to define the role of the Champion(s) in writing?
• What about the (3) EE Groups’ Champions meeting? Does anyone know?

Top of Page