|
For additional copies in print or alternative format,
please contact the Distribution Centre by phone
at (613) 995-2855, by fax at (613) 996-0518 or
by TTY at (613) 957-9090
This publication is produced by:
Planning and Creative Services
Client Services Section
Information and Technology Directorate
Corporate Services Branch
Department of Finance and Treasury Board of Canada
Publishing Planning Officer: Shawn Dunn
Graphic Designer: Jacques Drouin
Catalogue No.: BT49-4/19-2002
ISBN: 0-662-66929-0
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada,
represented by the President of the Treasury Board, 2002
Table of Contents
Message from the President
Foreword
The 1999 and 2002 Public Service Employee Surveys: How Do The Surveys Compare?
Summary
of Survey Findings
1. What do employees say about the nature of their work?
2. What are employees saying about service to clients?
3. Workload and work-life balance: are we making progress?
4. Are the right people in the right jobs, and how are we doing in the area of
retention?
5. Are we creating a learning environment?
6. How well are we doing in the area of career development?
7. Do employees believe they are treated fairly
8. Can employees expect supportive supervision?
9. How do employees perceive senior management in some key areas?
10. Do employees encounter harassment and discrimination in the workplace?
11. Do we have a problem with physical violence in the workplace?
12. Do employees feel supported in regard to official languages?
Appendix
Responding to the 2002 Public Service Employee Survey Results:
Some Tips for Managers, Supervisors and Their Teams
Measuring progress
I am pleased to present the findings of the 2002 Public Service
Employee Survey. Although the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat commissioned
the survey, the development and delivery was made possible by the dedication and
effort of people from a number of departments, agencies and bargaining agents.
It was a team effort in every respect.
The 2002 Survey sought employee opinion on a wide variety of
issues related to organizational effectiveness, workplace well-being and service
delivery. To the thousands of you who completed the questionnaire, I extend my
most sincere thanks.
An important goal was to measure our progress since the first
survey in 1999. I am very pleased to report that we have shown improvement in
several areas. Although in some cases progress is coming in small steps, I am
confident that we are moving in the right direction. The Government of Canada is
committed to improving the federal public service workplace. This will benefit
our employees and ultimately result in better service to Canadians.
Several initiatives were launched as a result of employee
feedback from the 1999 Survey. They range from a revised Policy on the
Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Workplace to departmental
measures on career development, official languages and service to clients. Other
initiatives such as Embracing Change, which promotes diversity and inclusion in
the public service, benefited directly from what employees told us
in 1999.
Now, as we turn our attention to analyzing and taking action on
the results of the 2002 Public Service Employee Survey, I look forward to
continued collaboration and partnerships between departments, agencies and
bargaining agents.
"The paper version was signed by Lucienne Robillard,
President of the Treasury Board"
Honourable Lucienne Robillard
President of Treasury Board of Canada
Many of you will remember the first Public Service Employee
Survey in 1999. Our commitment to continue the process of survey feedback by way
of the 2002 Survey reflects the importance placed on listening to what public
service employees are saying and then acting on the findings.
Approximately 95,000 employees completed the 2002 Public Service
Employee Survey. This translates to a 57.8% participation rate, a 3.2% increase
from the 54.6% of employees who responded in 1999. We view this positively
because the increase in response suggests that employees value the opportunity
to help improve the workplace.
For the 2002 Survey, we asked questions on a wide variety of
issues. As is typically the case, the results point to areas where we are doing
well, but also to areas where improvement is needed. Looking ahead, we must all
work collaboratively in an ongoing effort to address the issues raised in the
2002 Survey, thereby improving the workplace and, ultimately, service to
Canadians.
It is encouraging to note that we have shown improvement in a
number of areas since the first survey, but we must take every step possible to
keep up the momentum. Within three months, for example, I expect all employees
will have participated in a meaningful dialogue on the survey at the team level.
It is up to public service managers and supervisors to initiate this dialogue
with their teams and with other stakeholders as appropriate such as bargaining
agent representatives. Some suggestions have been prepared to help you work
through this process. (See Appendix: Responding to the 2002 Public Service
Employee Survey Results: Some Tips for Managers, Supervisors and Their Teams.)
For my part, I will meet with Deputy Ministers and Heads of
Agencies from across the public service to discuss the survey findings at both
the departmental and public service-wide level. We will address system-wide
improvement goals for the next two to three years. I will keep you informed of
the decisions flowing from these meetings through messages to your
Departmental/Agency Survey Champion.
In closing, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to the
following members of the Interdepartmental/Union Survey Working Group who worked
so diligently to develop this survey and provide support to departments and
agencies throughout the exercise:
Members of the Interdepartmental/Union Survey Working Group
Nancy Averill, Public Policy Forum
Donald
Bilodeau, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
Sandra Brown, Canadian Heritage
Tom Boudreau, Human Resources Development Canada
Jack Cole, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Claude Danik, Social Science Employees Association
Joan Feringa, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Dave Flavell, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Martin Gravel, Statistics Canada
Mark Hammer, Public Service Commission
Louise Henry, Transportation Safety Board
Graham Howell, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
James
Ladouceur, Privy Council Office
Sylvie Lance
Roussel, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Noreen
LeBlanc, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Gary Lewis, Environment Canada
Robert
Makichuk, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Jon Peirce, Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada
Eddy Ross, Statistics Canada
Randall Russell, Correctional Service of Canada
Gisèle
Samson-Verreault, Privy Council Office
Paul Trottier, Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Rhonda Tsang, Statistics Canada
Howie West, Public Service Alliance of Canada
"The paper version was signed by Jim Judd, Secretary of the
Treasury Board and Comptroller General of Canada"
Jim Judd
Secretary of the Treasury Board
and Comptroller General of Canada
In 1998, when work began in earnest on developing the first
Public Service Employee Survey, we were aware of no other federal public service
that had conducted a climate survey involving all employees. To date, as far as
we know, we remain the only federal jurisdiction that conducts a survey of all
employees. Accordingly, by inviting comments from all employees, the Public
Service of Canada is breaking new ground.
The 1999 Survey was developed following extensive research into
factors widely recognized as contributing to healthy and productive
organizations. From the outset, the goal was to ask employees questions that
would render a clear snapshot of the federal public service against
well-regarded organizational principles and practices.
In preparing the 2002 Survey, ensuring a measurement capacity
between the 1999 and the 2002 questionnaires was essential. Accordingly, key
questions from the 1999 Survey are repeated word-for-word in the 2002 Survey,
while some others are slightly modified. In place of certain questions from the
1999 Survey, a number of new questions have been added to enable the study of
new themes and to facilitate delving more deeply into issues of concern
identified in the first survey.
Readers will note in the section entitled, "Public
Service-wide Results: The Numbers," that in every instance where a question
from the 1999 Survey is repeated, a side-by-side bar graph or percentages show
the comparison between the 2002 and 1999 results.
In preparing the section that follows, 'Summary of Survey Findings', the
results for questions where employees reported that they 'mostly agree' or
'strongly agree' are combined as 'agree'. In instances where employees reported
that they 'mostly disagree' or 'strongly disagree', the results are combined as
'disagree'. In some instances, due to rounding, there is a variance of 1%
between this section of the report, 'Summary of Findings', and the section of
the report titled, 'What You Told Us...Public Service-wide Results: The Numbers'
(pg. 16).
The following is a summary of the findings of the 2002 Public
Service Employee Survey.
The purpose of this narrative section of the report is to pull
together trends and key findings, and outline areas where we are doing well and
areas where improvement is needed.
The first range of questions on employees' satisfaction with
their work is a key indicator of workplace health. This is what employees told
us.
Eighty-four per cent of employees agree that their department or
agency is a good place to work (Q88), and 95% agree that they are strongly
committed to making their organization successful (Q86).
Seventy-six per cent of employees agree that they can clearly
explain to others the direction (for example, the vision, values or mission) of
their organization (Q76), and 91% agree that they are proud of the work carried
out in their work unit (Q33).
Eighty-one per cent of employees agree that in their work unit,
people work cooperatively as a team (Q34). Eighty-nine per cent agree that they
have the necessary materials and equipment to do the job (Q1).
Eighty-four per cent of employees agree that they have good
ongoing communication with others in their organization who work on similar
projects or issues (Q77), and 85% agree that people in their work unit learn
from mistakes and do what it takes to correct them (Q35).
While 58% of employees say they are encouraged to always or
often be innovative or to take initiative in their work (Q16), 44% indicate that
they always or often have a say in decisions and actions that impact on their
work, and 19% say that they rarely or never have a say in decisions and actions
that impact on their work (Q18).
Employees also suggested that the quality of their work often or
always suffers because of:
- constantly changing priorities - 37%;
- lack of stability in the organization - 35%;
- too many approval stages - 35%;
- unreasonable deadlines - 28%; and
- having to do the same or more work, but with fewer resources - 42% (Q12).
Twenty-six per cent of employees indicate that they have had
three or more different supervisors over the past three years or less (Q31).
Sixty-seven per cent of employees agree that if they are faced
with an ethical dilemma or conflict between values in the workplace, they know
where they can go for help in resolving the situation (Q82); and 79% of
employees agree that if faced with a health and safety issue in the workplace,
they know where to go for help in resolving the situation (Q81).
Regular feedback and measurement of success in meeting
performance standards helps to ensure that we are providing results for
Canadians.
Seventy-three per cent of employees say their work unit has
clearly defined client service standards (Q72), and 69% agree that their work
unit regularly applies the client service standards (Q73). A smaller number,
58%, agree that there are mechanisms in place in their work unit for linking
client feedback or complaints to employees who can act on the information (Q74).
While 77% of employees agree that they have the flexibility to
adapt their services to meet client needs (Q75), 31% do not agree that their
work unit periodically takes time out to rethink the way it does business (Q36).
Workload and work-life balance issues are persistent challenges
in today's
working environment.
We decided to delve more deeply into this topic in the 2002
Public Service Employee Survey than we did in 1999. Accordingly, the
Interdepartmental/Union Survey Working Group developed a number of additional
questions regarding workload and work-life balance. The results are clear.
Improvement is still needed.
While 87% of employees indicate that they are satisfied with
their current work arrangements, (e.g. regular hours, telework, compressed work
week) (Q8):
- 23% say that they feel pressured by others to work more than their regular
hours (Q6);
- 17% say they can rarely or never complete their assigned workload during regular working hours; and
- 26% say they can complete their work only sometimes (Q13);
- 67% agree that they can often or always balance their
personal, family and work needs in their current jobs (Q14); and
- slightly over a quarter of employees say that their career progress has
been moderately or significantly affected by conflict between work and
family or personal obligations (Q53).
As for the use of alternate working arrangements:
- 19% say they work a compressed work week;
- 33% work a flexible work schedule, such as variable start and end times;
- 5% telework;
- 2% are job sharing; and
- 3% report they take advantage of leave with income averaging (Q9).
One of our key goals as a public service is to ensure a healthy,
supportive and challenging work environment. Accordingly, several questions
asked relate to staffing and retention.
Seventy-eight per cent of employees believe that in their work
unit, they hire people who can do the job (Q64), but a disappointingly high 45%
of employees indicate that during the past three years, staff turnover has been
a significant problem in their
work unit (Q40).
In terms of departures from the public service, 29% of employees
indicate they are planning to leave over the next five years (Q99). This is in
line with manageable rates of attrition. It is worth noting that respondents
could indicate more than one time frame and more than one reason for their
departure.
Of that 29%:
- 22% (approx. 6% of the total public service) plan to leave within the next
year;
- 41% (approx. 12% of the total public service) plan to leave within one to
three years; and
- 51% (approx. 15% of the total public service) plan to leave within the next
three to five years (Q100).
The following were selected most often by employees as being
"very important" reasons for their intented departure from the public
service:
- retirement - 57%;
- to pursue other employment opportunities - 37%; and
- health - 37% (Q101).
Enabling and sustaining a culture of continuous learning within
the Public Service of Canada is important to an efficient, effective workforce.
While 75% of employees agree that they get the training they
need to do the job (Q41) and 63% say that they are able to get on-the-job
coaching to help improve the way they do their work (Q42), only 53% say their
immediate supervisor helps them determine their learning needs (Q30).
Thirty-three per cent of employees indicate that, to a moderate
or significant extent, lack of access to learning opportunities adversely
affected their careers (Q53).
In 1999, career development was an area noted for focused
action. In 2002, we probed this area more intensively.
Seventy-eight per cent of employees agree that they are
satisfied with their careers in the public service (Q89), and 74% say they are
moderately or significantly satisfied with their career progress in the public
service (Q52). A lower percentage, 65%, agree that they have the opportunity to
develop and apply the skills they need to enhance their careers (Q43)
Slightly less than 50% of employees agree that they have
opportunities for promotion within their department or agency given their
education, skills and experience (Q46). Less than 60% agree that they have
opportunities for promotion within the public service given their education,
skills and experience (Q47). Only 56% agree that their department does a good
job of supporting employee career development (Q45)
Twenty-seven per cent of employees indicated that they had
requested a developmental assignment within the last three years (Q49). However,
32% say that they would be reluctant to ask for a developmental opportunity,
such as a secondment or new project (Q48). Of those that indicated they had
requested an assignment in the last three years, 41% indicated that they had
been denied the request (Q50), and of concern is the finding that only 22% of
those who requested an assignment and were denied an assignment say they
received a reasonable explanation or justification for the denial (Q51).
Forty per cent of employees indicate that to a moderate or
significant extent, lack of access to developmental assignments adversely
affected their careers (Q53)
The Public Service of Canada places great emphasis on equal
opportunity and diversity.
Overall, 89% of employees agree that in their work
unit, every individual, regardless of race, colour, gender or disability would
be/is accepted as an equal member of the team (Q39).
An encouraging 84% of employees agree that, overall, their
organization treats them with respect (Q87), yet, less than 60% agree that they
are satisfied with the way in which informal complaints on workplace issues are
resolved in their work unit (Q37). Thirty-five per cent do not agree that they
feel they can initiate a formal redress process (grievance, right of appeal,
health and safety, etc.) without fear of reprisal (Q83).
Fifty-one per cent of employees agree that they are classified
fairly (Q5). Twenty-one per cent of employees do not agree that when they were
candidates in competitions during the last three years, the competitions were
run in a fair manner (Q66). Nineteen per cent also do not agree that when they
were candidates in competitions during the last three years, they had the
opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities for the positions (Q67).
Sixty-five
per cent agree that in their work unit, the process of selecting a person for a
position is done fairly (Q65)
Sixty-three per cent of employees agree that they feel they can
claim overtime compensation (in money or in leave) for the overtime hours that
they work (Q7). However, 16% of employees report that they were rarely or never
compensated for overtime worked (Q15)
A key factor that contributes to employee perceptions of a
healthy workplace is supportive managers and supervisors
Seventy-eight per cent of employees say that they can count on
their immediate supervisor to keep his or her promises (Q20). Seventy-seven per
cent of employees also agree that their immediate supervisor understands and
respects the provisions of their employees' collective agreement: (Q90)
Thirty per cent of employees do not agree that they discuss with
their immediate supervisor the results they are expected to achieve (Q24), and
27% do not agree that their immediate supervisor assesses their work against
identified goals and objectives (Q26).
Seventy-one per cent of employees agree that they get adequate
recognition from their immediate supervisor when they do a good job (Q21), while
just over 50% agree that their supervisor does a good job of helping them
develop their career (Q44)
Thirty per cent of employees disagree that they receive useful
feedback from their immediate supervisor on their job performance (Q19). Twenty
per cent disagree that their supervisor distributes work fairly (Q28), and 25%
do not agree that their supervisors keep them informed about issues affecting
their work (Q22)
Seventy-eight per cent of employees agree that if they were to
suggest ways to improve how things were done, their immediate supervisor would
take them seriously (Q27), yet 20% say they do not feel they can disagree with
their immediate supervisor on work-related issues without fear of reprisal (Q25)
Only 16% of employees do not agree that their immediate
supervisor supports the use of flexible working arrangements, subject to
operational requirements (Q29)
In 1999, only 37% of employees believed senior management would
try to resolve concerns raised in the first Public Service Employee Survey. It
is encouraging to note that, in 2002, the number has risen to 50% (Q84)
Nevertheless, only 36% of employees believe that senior
management has made progress toward resolving the issues raised in the 1999
Survey (Q85). Clearly, more sustained management action is required in order to
demonstrate to employees that practical survey follow-up is a priority
Seventy-three per cent of employees agree that senior managers
respect the provisions of their employees' collective agreements (Q91). Sixty
per cent agree that senior management actively supports the use of flexible work
arrangements (Q79), and 80% agree that supervisors and senior managers are
committed to ensuring occupational health and safety (Q80)
Forty-two per cent of employees do not agree that senior
management does a good job of sharing information (Q78)
With regard to labour management relations
- 36% indicate that they do not know whether senior management in their
organization engages in meaningful consultation with their union on
workplace issues, and 17% do not agree that senior management in their
organization engages in meaningful consultation with their union on
workplace issues (Q92);
- 42% do not know whether the relationship between their union and senior
management is highly productive, and 29% agree that the
relationship between their union and senior management is highly productive
(Q93); and
- 39% do not know if the relationship between their union and Treasury Board
of Canada Secretariat is highly productive, and 31% do not agree that the
relationship between their union and the Treasury Board of Canada
Secretariat is highly productive (Q94)
According to the results of the 1999 Survey, 18% of employees
said they had experienced discrimination and 20% experienced harassment.
Regrettably, harassment and discrimination are still reported as
sources of concern.
Twenty-one per cent of employees report they have personally
been the victims of harassment on the job over the past two years (Q54), and 17%
report they have personally been the victims of discrimination on the job in the
past two years (Q58).
In response to the statement, "I am satisfied with the way
in which my work unit responds to matters related to harassment and
discrimination", 16% of employees disagree (Q61). Similarly, in response to
the statement, "I am satisfied with the way in which my department or
agency responds to matters related to harassment and discrimination", 18%
disagree (Q62)
Moreover, 17% disagree with the statement, "My department
or agency works hard to prevent harassment and discrimination" (Q63).
Twelve per cent of employees also indicate that to a moderate or significant
extent, discrimination adversely affected their careers (Q53).
Violence in the workplace is a serious issue for any
organization. In developing the 2002 Survey, the Interdepartmental/Union Survey
Working Group decided to propose a proactive approach to this issue by asking
employees whether or not they had been the victim of physical violence on the
job, and if so, from whom (e.g., co-workers, members of the public, etc.).
Two per cent of employees indicated that within the last two
years they have been the victims of physical violence on the job (Q56).
The roll-up of reaction across Canada with regard to official
languages shows remarkably strong and positive results which, in subsequent
levels of analysis, will be broken down to take into consideration differences
in bilingual and unilingual regions.
Ninety-two per cent of employees agree that the material and
tools provided for work, including software and other automated tools, are
available to employees in the official language of their choice (Q2).
During meetings in their work units, 85% of employees feel free
to use the official language of their choice (Q38). Eighty-seven per cent of
employees agree that when they prepare written materials, including electronic
mail, they feel free to use the official language of their choice (Q3), and 84%
indicate that training offered by their department is often or always available
in the official language of their choice (Q17).
Ninety per cent of employees agree that they feel free to use
the official language of their choice when they communicate with their immediate
supervisor (Q23). However, 16% do indicate that to a moderate or significant
extent, lack of access to language training in their second official language
adversely affected their careers (Q53).
Survey follow-up action takes place at various levels across the
public service. While all efforts are important, most employees will participate
in Survey follow-up activities only at the team level. Therefore, the actions of
managers and supervisors, in collaboration with their teams, are crucial to
success.
The following is intended to support Public Service of Canada
managers, supervisors and their teams in the important task of responding to the
2002 Survey findings. It is a short "roadmap" designed to help teams
work collaboratively and take measurable steps leading to an improved workplace.
Managers and supervisors can initiate immediate action by
discussing with their team the 2002 Survey results for the public service as a
whole, and by subsequently talking about department/agency specific results.
Depending on the size of the organization, survey data may also be available at
the branch and/or division level.
Teams should ensure that improvement objectives are achievable
and focused on results. Not everything needs to be done at once. If teams try to
accomplish too much at once, they are likely to achieve less than they would
like.
Managers, supervisors and teams should select a few key results
that are important to them. They should initiate action and decide how to
measure the expected results, beginning with just three or four items. When
managers, supervisors and teams have succeeded in achieving some initial change,
they should identify a few more required improvements and keep going.
As team members reflect on the 2002 Survey findings and discuss
how to improve the workplace, there are some key questions to ask:
- Where are we now as a team in reference to the survey results?
- To what extent do the survey results reflect the picture of our team?
- What areas should we focus on in our team to help improve our workplace?
- What steps do we have to take as a team to make the changes required? What
is the plan?
- What other stakeholders might we need to involve (other teams, bargaining
agent representatives, etc.)?
- Do we need any special support or expertise to help us in this process
(external consultants, internal human resources advisors and/or organization
development resources)?
- Who is responsible for leading/coordinating the various improvement
efforts (sub-teams of employees, the manager or supervisor)?
- By what date can we expect to realize the changes we need?
- How will we know if we have succeeded? How will we measure our efforts?
Don't wait. In a few months, think about administering a
mini-survey, perhaps five or six questions, related directly to the areas your
team is trying to improve.
For instance, if your team made a commitment to improve balance
between work and family life, ask if things are improving. Then post the results
for the team to see.
If the results are not going as expected, ask the following
questions:
|
Questions |
Yes |
No |
|
1. Did the team really have a frank discussion?
|
_ |
_ |
|
2. Did the team try different ways to ensure that everyone had a say?
|
_ |
_ |
|
3. Did all employees/team members understand?
|
_ |
_ |
|
4. Did the team involve union representatives or other stakeholders,
such as clients, in the discussions?
|
_ |
_ |
|
5. Did the team set specific target dates for each improvement action?
|
_ |
_ |
|
6. Were the team's goals realistic?
|
_ |
_ |
|
7. Was someone asked to take leadership for each action item identified
by the team members?
|
_ |
_ |
|
8. Was the role clearly explained to the person who agreed to take
leadership for each action item?
|
_ |
_ |
|
9. Did members of the team offer to help the person who agreed to take
leadership for each action item?
|
_ |
_ |
|
