Reports

Page4

EVALUATION OF THE EMPLOYMENT EQUITY COMPLIANCE PROGRAM by Consulting and Audit Canada (CAC) CAC CONCLUSIONS CHRC MANAGEMENT RESPONSE AND ACTION PLAN October 9, 2003   ISSUE 8: What impacts have the audit activities had on representation levels of employers? CAC Conclusions There have been increases in representation levels since the audits commenced although attribution of the audits is difficult. The majority of employers surveyed believed their actions, as a result of the audit, will lead to higher representation levels. The CHRC has not yet begun to monitor the implementation of EE plans by employers. Employers believed that the audits could be more effective in increasing representation if the CHRC took a more collaborative approach in the audits and provided examples of best practices. The CHRC is subject to certain disclosure requirements under the EE Act which may restrict its ability to share best practice information. CAC Recommendation 8.1: The CHRC should follow through on their plans to start the monitoring of the implementation of plans. CHRC Management Response: Agree This recommendation is a duplication of recommendation 7.2. ACTION PLAN: No action required CAC Recommendation 8.2: The CHRC should investigate whether more collaborative approaches can be applied while ensuring its compliance role is maintained. CHRC Management Response: Agree The report states that “...more employers (41%) thought that there were ways in which the audits could be more effective than those who did not think the audits could be more effective (33%); 26% did not know...” Under Issue 10, the evaluation found that the current balance between persuasion and enforcement is appropriate, and that most employers believe that enforcement actions used by the CHRC are appropriate. The Evaluation Report defines “collaboration” as follows: First, CHRC should provide advice and assistance to employers. While the Commission believes it must, and does, make every effort to ensure employers understand their obligations, the role of providing guidance and assistance lies with HRDC as clearly stated in the Act. Second, CHRC should display a collaborative attitude which encourages voluntary compliance as opposed to enforcement. This is the guiding policy enunciated in the Act and the basic principle guiding the Commission’s work. This is illustrated by the 80% compliance rate achieved thus far, and the fact that the Commission has guided all employers towards compliance without the need for a tribunal. ACTION PLAN: The Commission will continue to emphasize this collaborative mandate and focus on ways by which it can continue to be supportive towards employers. CAC Recommendation 8.3: The CHRC should share information on potential best practices, subject to the disclosure restrictions it is bound to under the EE Act, with HRDC and TBS so that they can share these best practices with employers. CHRC Management Response: Agree The Commission has been publishing basic information on best practices in its annual report. In the case of Federal Government Departments, audit reports where these best practices are documented are shared with TBS. The Parliamentary Committee made a similar recommendation in its Report. ACTION PLAN: The Commission is looking at ways on how it can enhance its capacity in this respect.   ISSUE 9: Does CHRC place an emphasis on process and numbers rather than on qualitative actions and outcomes? CAC Conclusions The legislation makes certain numerical demands on employers that the CHRC must enforce. Many employers believe there is a preoccupation with numbers. CHRC and its partners are of the view that numbers are the basis of process but not the focus. The CHRC has not yet begun to monitor the implementation of EE plans by employers. (It will not be possible for the CHRC to accurately assess the implementation of plans until 2002 or 2003 when significant numbers of employers will have implemented their plans.) 28% of employers believe that the CHRC did not recognize employment policies, practices or initiatives that their organization had put in place that will lead to higher representation levels (61% reported that the CHRC had not failed to identify such policies, practices and initiatives). CAC Recommendation 9.1: The CHRC should ensure that its numerical demands are not more detailed or restrictive than what is required under the legislation. CHRC Management Response: Agree The Report is not specific as to areas where the CHRC’s demands are more detailed or restrictive than what is required under the legislation. In the one case where the Report summarizes a concern expressed by some employers, the perception is not verified. Furthermore, the Report finds that HRDC and TBS staff believe an appropriate balance has been struck. ACTION PLAN: The Commission will continue to ensure that its numerical demands are consistent with the letter and spirit of the legislation. CAC Recommendation 9.2: HRDC and TBS should promote why numerical analyses are required and promote the idea that the assessment of outcomes is the primary focus. CHRC Management Response: Agree This recommendation is not aimed at the Commission. Nevertheless, the Commission will encourages HRDC and TBS to continue clarifying this issue for employers. ACTION PLAN: No action required ISSUE 10: Is there an appropriate balance between persuasion / voluntary compliance and directive / enforcement actions? CAC Conclusions The current persuasion/enforcement balance is appropriate for employer compliance up to the development of EE plans. Most employers believe enforcement actions used be the CHRC are appropriate. Many employers did not feel the audit process is a persuasive process. CAC Recommendation 10.1: The CHRC should investigate whether more collaborative approaches can be applied while ensuring its compliance role is maintained. CHRC Management Response: Agree This recommendation is a repetition of recommendation 8.2 under Issue 8 ACTION PLAN: No action required   Back to top   Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page