Official Languages Survey
Language of Work
January 1999

Report

1. Introduction
2. Objectives
3. Survey Scope
4. Methodology
5. Survey Findings
6. Conclusion and Recommendations
Annex A: Additional Tables of Survey Findings
Annex B: Summary of Comments Received From Employees

The Audit and Evaluation Branch hired the firm Samson & associés to conduct an employee survey within the department in order to measure the language of work component of the Official Languages Program.

Carried out as a follow-up of the Official Languages Program Audit conducted by the department in 1996, this survey has two purposes: to evaluate the degree of satisfaction among employees with respect to the use of both official languages in their workplace and, consequently, to verify if the remedial measures, suggested in response to the recommendations of the 1996 Audit Report, have helped employees to work in the language of their choice. This survey was intended exclusively to employees of the designated bilingual regions.

The objectives of this survey stem from Chapters 2-1 and 2-3 of the Treasury Board Manual on Official Languages. Those two chapters deal respectively with the language of work in designated bilingual regions and with the communications between the Headquarters and the regions. The intended objectives of the survey are as follows:

• To determine whether meetings bringing together employees of both language groups are being held in both official languages, in order to allow employees to intervene in the official language of their choice;



• To determine whether internal services (personal and central services) are provided to employees in the official language of their choice;



• To determine whether communications between the NCR offices and those of the designated bilingual regions are held in both official languages or in the preferred official language of the employees working in those regions;



• To determine whether the work instruments, of common and generalized use, developed by IC are available in both official languages simultaneously (including computer systems and software);



• To determine whether the supervisors are able to communicate in the official language of the employee's choice;



• To determine whether the performance appraisals are available in the official language of the employee's choice.

The survey was conducted last December, among employees working in the designated bilingual regions, which are the following:

• National Capital Region (Ottawa and Hull offices);
• Northern Ontario (Sudbury and Sault Sainte-Marie offices);
• Quebec (Montreal and Sherbrooke offices);
• New Brunswick (Saint John and Moncton offices).

In order to obtain a statistical representativeness of the total population, a sample of 599 employees, spread through the four bilingual regions, was chosen from a total population of 4,031 employees. The statistical sampling, retrieved from the People Soft system, was performed in such a way to ensure the representativeness of the aforementioned regions. The questionnaires were sent by e-mail to the selected employees, who had to return them by internal mail in order to assure the confidentiality of the respondents.

In total, 289 responses/questionnaires were received, which represents a global response rate of 48%. This level of response secures us a good representation and a reliability of the opinions. The following table indicates the completion rates by region:

The survey analysis was conducted based on eight (8) respondent categories according to the region and the mother tongue. The following table indicates the number of responses received in each category:

Of the 289 respondents, 223 held a position classified as "Bilingual", 55 held a position classified as "English-Essential", 7 held a position classified as "French-Essential" and 4 held a unilingual position classified as "Either English or French". Finally, the reasons evoked to justify bilingual positions were the service to the public (52%), the internal services (34%) and the supervisory functions (14%).

Other than the objectives mentioned in Section 2, the questionnaire allowed us to evaluate the knowledge level of respondents with respect to the Program, as well as the overall degree of satisfaction concerning the use of both official languages at work.

Program Knowledge

In general, 74% of the respondents indicated that they had been informed of their rights and obligations concerning the use of either official language at work. However, it was observed that 11% of the NCR respondents and 14% of the Ontario respondents indicated that the department had not informed them on this matter. Detailed findings are indicated in Table 1 of Annex A.

Use of the Official Languages at Work

The respondents were asked to evaluate their satisfaction concerning the opportunity to use the language of their choice at work. The following table indicates the findings:

Overall, 85% of respondents claimed that they were satisfied concerning the opportunity to use the language of their choice at work. However, 14% of respondents indicated that they would prefer to use French more often.

Francophone respondents were less satisfied than Anglophone respondents: 19% of Francophones would prefer to use French more often, whereas only 3% of Anglophones would prefer to use English more often.

Use of the Official Languages at Internal Meetings

The respondents were asked to give their level of satisfaction concerning the use of English and French at internal meetings. The following table indicates the key findings:

The survey demonstrated that 68% of the Francophone respondents were satisfied. However 32% would prefer to have meetings in French more often. The need of having more meetings in French is mostly felt in the NCR: 31% of the respondents from that region share that opinion.

Concerning the reminders done to employees, during meetings, to allow them to speak in the language of their choice, 67% of all the respondents replied that they are seldom (36%) or never (31%) reminded about that (see Table 2 of Annex A). It must however be noted that those reminders are not necessary, although preferable, if the meeting rooms display notices inviting participants to use the language of their choice.

Internal Services

The following table indicates the findings concerning the satisfaction of respondents with respect to the provision of internal services in either official language:

Overall, 89% of respondents claimed that they were satisfied concerning the provision of internal services in either official language. This proportion is higher in Ontario (96%) and in Quebec (94%). Among the Francophones surveyed, 12% would like to receive more services in French.

Moreover, the respondents were asked to indicate whether the internal services that they used were provided in the language of their choice (see Tables 3 and 4 in Annex A for detailed findings). To that effect, 96% of Anglophone respondents mentioned that services were always (74%) or often (22%) provided in English. For services in French, 13% of Francophone respondents mentioned that the internal services used by them were seldom (12%) or never (1%) provided in French. This is also the opinion of 11% of Anglophone respondents.

Communications between the Headquarters and the Regions

The following table indicates the results concerning the satisfaction of respondents with respect to the communications between the NCR and the regions:

The Francophone respondents demonstrated some dissatisfaction: 31% of them mentioned that communications with the Headquarters should be provided in French more often. Quebec has the highest level of dissatisfaction: 60% of the respondents from that region share the later opinion.

Work Instruments

The following table indicates the relative satisfaction of respondents concerning the work instruments provided in either official language.

Overall, 80% of respondents claimed that they were satisfied concerning the availability of work instruments in either official language; however 18% of respondents think these instruments should be available in French more often. Anglophone respondents were more satisfied than Francophones, since 96% of the former claimed that they were satisfied. Among Francophones, just over 1 respondent on 4 (26%) answered that the work instruments should be available in French more often. The situation is less positive in Quebec, where 35% of Francophone respondents think that the work instruments should be available in French more often.

At the same time, all the Anglophone respondents mentioned that they had always or often access to work instruments in English (see Table 5 of Annex A). Among Francophones, 20% claimed that they had seldom or never access to work instruments in French, especially in the NCR and in Quebec (see Table 6 of Annex A).

With regard to the simultaneous availability of work instruments in both official languages (see Table 7 of Annex A ), 78% of respondents mentioned that the work instruments were always (24%) or often (54%) available simultaneously in both official languages. Ontario and New Brunswick had the highest rate of respondents (92% and 91% respectively) who indicated the simultaneous availability of work instruments in both versions. In Quebec, 32% of respondents answered that the work instruments were seldom (29%) or never (3%) available simultaneously in both languages, whereas 17% of the NCR respondents share that opinion.

Professional Training Courses

The following table indicates the levels of satisfaction of respondents with respect to the provision of professional training courses in either official language:

The majority of Anglophone respondents (98%) were satisfied with the provision of professional training courses in either official language. For Francophone respondents, 18% of them would prefer to have training courses in French more often. This opinion is more widely spread in the NCR: among the Francophone respondents from that region, 22% would prefer to have training courses in French more often.

Supervision

The following table indicates the respondents' degree of satisfaction concerning the communications with their supervisor in either official language:

The Anglophone respondents were more satisfied (96%) than the Francophone respondents (88%) as to the communications with their supervisors in either official language. In contrast, 12% of Francophone respondents and only 3% of Anglophone respondents would prefer that these communications be done in French more often.

At the same time, all the Anglophone respondents (100%) mentioned that their immediate supervisor was able to discuss work assignments with them in English (see Table 8 of Annex A). For the Francophone respondents, 20% of them answered that their immediate supervisor can seldom (10%) or never (10%) discuss work assignments with them in French (see Table 9 of Annex A).

With regard to the performance appraisals, only 1% of Anglophone respondents mentioned that these appraisals were seldom or never available in the language of their choice, whereas 10% of Francophones respondents answered that, in general, the performance appraisals were seldom (5%) or never (5%) available in the language of their choice (see Table 10 of Annex A).

Comments by Respondents

Respondents were invited to make comments on any issue dealing with the official languages (see Annex B: Summary of Comments Received From Employees).

Among Anglophone respondents, the comments revealed an understanding of the problem related to the predominance of English at meetings and in verbal communications, but most of them did not have any solutions. Some respondents indicated that they would appreciate having more opportunities to use French in order to improve their knowledge of that language, but that Francophones prefer often to talk in English.

Among Francophone respondents from the NCR, there exists some dissatisfaction with respect to the holding of meetings in English and, less widely, the supervision in English and the provision of training courses that are in favour of Anglophones.

Finally, Francophone respondents of the Quebec Region deplore mostly the fact that English is the language used at internal meetings (elsewhere in Quebec) and during teleconferences, as well as in the routine communications with the NCR. Another problem raised by several respondents concerns the transmission of only English working documents to the region for comment; although the French version is promised to be ready later on, the work is still performed in English.

The results of the survey show that, overall, the employees of the department were somewhat satisfied concerning the use of both official languages in their workplace. We can notice an improvement compared to the results of the audit conducted by the department in 1996. Although the questionnaire used was slightly similar to that of 1996, this year's analysis was more detailed in order to ensure a better data correlation. Moreover, the New Brunswick Region was part of the 1999 sampling. Some elements of the Official Languages Program are comparable, among which the most important are the following. First, the rate of respondents who claimed to be satisfied regarding the use of either official language has increased from 92% to 93% among Anglophones and from 76% to 80% among Francophones. Concurrently, the rate of Francophone respondents who claimed to be satisfied as to the opportunity of using the language of their choice in the communicatins with the supervisor has increased from 85% in 1996 to 88% in 1999.

However, some level of dissatisfaction was noted among Francophone respondents with respect to the limited use of French in some aspects of the language of work. More specifically, a high level of dissatisfaction was observed in Quebec regarding the communications with the NCR. There has been little improvement in the situation since 1996: in fact, the dissatisfaction rate to this effect has increased from 33% to 60%. On the other hand, a not insignificant proportion of Francophone respondents in this region and in the NCR have indicated some problems related to the very seldom use of French at meetings implicating employees from the NCR. There seems to be also a dissatisfaction concerning the provision of training courses in French and the availability of work instruments in French.

Finally, in a less considerable way, some level of dissatisfaction has been observed among Francophones with respect to internal services and supervision.

Recommendations:

1. Communications between the NCR and Quebec



• The Official Languages Directorate should remind NCR employees about the importance of ensuring that the language of choice of employees from Quebec should be respected while communicating with the latter region.



• The Official Languages Directorate should eventually ensure a follow-up with the Quebec Region (Montreal and Sherbrooke offices) in order to verify if the situation has improved.


2. The Official Languages Directorate should remind the designated bilingual regions about the obligation of providing employees with the opportunity to use their preferred language at internal meetings.



3. Work instruments



• The Official Languages Directorate should ensure that the department's Policy on Official Languages includes the obligation to ensure the availability of work instruments in both official languages simultaneously.



• The Official Languages Directorate should remind the concerned services about the obligation to ensure that work instruments are available to employees in both official languages.

Knowledge of employees concerning the Official Languages Program

Table 1: My department has informed me of my rights and obligations concerning the use of either official language at work:

Use of the preferred language of the employee at internal meetings

Table 2: At internal meetings, I am reminded that I may speak in my first official language:

Provision of internal services in both official languages

Table 3: The internal services that I use are provided in English:

Table 4: The internal services that I use are provided in French:

Use of work instruments in both official languages

Table 5: The work instruments that I use are available in English:

Table 6: The work instruments that I use are available in French:

Table 7: The work instruments that I use are available in both official languages simultaneously:

Supervision and performance appraisal in the preferred language of the employee

Table 8: My immediate supervisor is able to discuss work assignments with me in English:

Table 9: My immediate supervisor is able to discuss work assignments with me in French:

Table 10: My performance appraisals are available in the official language of my choice.

National Capital Region (NCR)

Concerning meetings, some Anglophones respondents mentioned that it was normal that English is more widely used in meetings because the majority of participants are Anglophones. Two (2) respondents indicated that they find it unfair or difficult for Francophones to speak in English at meetings even though if they form the majority. Finally, a respondent mentioned that he or she would prefer to have more meetings in French in order to have the opportunity to practice French.

With regard to meetings, about ten Francophone respondents underlined the predominance of English at meetings. It was pointed out when Francophones form the majority at meetings, and even though there is only one unilingual Anglophone participant, all of the meeting is held in English. It was also noted that often the chairman of the meeting is a unilingual Anglophone and that, moreover, in some cases where the Anglophone minority is bilingual, the meeting is held in English anyway. Finally, a respondent suggested that the director or director general should use both languages at meetings, while another respondent recommended that meeting reports should be done when Francophones form the majority.

Concerning supervision, some respondents pointed out the incapacity of some supervisors to communicate in French. Some respondents believe that this is due to a lack of effort, while others think it is due to the supervisor's incapacity. It was also observed that some supervisors are officially bilingual, but in reality, the quality of their French is poor.

In the case of written communications, a respondent commented on the poor quality of French and another one mentioned the fact that e-mails are mostly done in English. Concerning software, three (3) respondents underlined the fact that software are in English only, that the French versions arrive late and that the only French software is WordPerfect. With regard to internal services, two (2) respondents mentioned that services in French do exist, but the standby is longer than for the equivalent services in English. Some respondents noted the lack of availability of training courses in French; the French training courses are cancelled due to lack of participants, their frequency is inadequate compared to the equivalent in English or the hired teacher is a unilingual Anglophone.

Ontario

Very few comments were received from participants of this region.

Quebec

In the case of meetings and teleconferences, nine (9) respondents deplored the fact that at national meetings, or at meetings implicating the NCR or the other regions, all of the meeting is held only in English. It was mentioned that although this situation is essential to allow a good communication and to ensure that ideas are taken into account, it is also deplorable. Moreover, two (2) respondents indicated that when a guest from Ottawa, whether an announcer or someone of another function, participates at a meeting in Montreal, all the meeting is held in English, if that person is a unilingual Anglophone. Finally, five (5) respondents pointed out that teleconferences were held exclusively in English.

Regarding communications with the NCR, eleven (11) respondents mentioned that most of the time, all the communications are held in English and they gave the same reasons as the ones given by Francophone employees of the NCR. In the case of translation, some respondents noted the poor quality of the translations; for written documents, eight (8) respondents evoked the fact that sometimes they had to make comments on the English versions, due to the unavailability or the delay of French versions. Concerning internal services and work instruments, six (6) respondents showed dissatisfaction with respect to the reception of job descriptions only in English. Other respondents indicated that sometimes technical documents were received only in English (e.g.: pamphlets on mediation). Finally, with regard to training, some respondents claimed that it was difficult for the employees of the region to obtain language training in English, compared to what is provided to Anglophone employees.

New Brunswick

In New Brunswick, most of the comments were made by Francophones. Some of them mentioned that the Human Resources Branch of the region operates exclusively in English. A similar comment was made on the corporate services of the region. Finally, some comments were made on the inadequate level of bilingualism of managers, and on the holding of meetings only in English.

Management Action Taken

The Department took steps specifically to encourage:

• more communications between the National Capital Region (NCR) and the Quebec Region in French



• holding internal meetings in French more often



• providing work instruments in both official languages



• more training in French.

Printer-friendly Version

Date Modified: 2005-12-13 Important Notices