Work Description – a document approved by the
respective manager that describes the work requirements of a
position or a job. A work description contains all the
information needed to evaluate the work using the appropriate
classification standard.
Position – the work assigned by the respective
manager that can be performed by one person.
Job – a unique position, or a number of positions
that are similar or identical and whose work is described by one
work description.
Generic Work Description – a work description
that records the work assigned to a number of similar or
identical positions at the same occupational group and level. A
generic work description can describe similar or identical work
across organizational boundaries.
The
Values and Ethics Code for the Public Service sets out the
values and ethics of the Public Service to guide and support
public servants in all their professional activities. Democratic,
professional, ethical and people values are identified.
In addition,
the Classification Monitoring Framework defines a number of
more specific values related to classification that are aligned
with these Public Service-wide values. Deputy Heads, managers and
human resources advisors are accountable for exercising their
classification authority in a way that respects all of these
values.
The Public Service classification system is position-based;
almost every employee is appointed to a specific position. The
work assigned to individual positions is described in a work
description and evaluated by applying the occupational group and
sub-group definitions and the appropriate classification
standard. The resulting group, sub-group, and level provide a
basis for the compensation of employees in the Public
Service.
In addition to their importance in determining appropriate pay
ranges, work descriptions are also essential building blocks for
most human resources management functions needed to attract,
retain and motivate skilled workers. This includes recruitment,
promotion, performance management, career management, learning,
labour relations and human resources planning.
Most collective agreements entitle employees to a complete and
current statement of duties. An accurate and up-to-date work
description serves this purpose.
Poorly described work can result in inappropriate
classification and compensation which, in turn, can cause
employee dissatisfaction, recruitment and retention difficulties,
and grievances. Furthermore, if a work description is
under-classified, it might adversely affect employees’
career advancement. If a work description is over-classified, it
will lead to inefficient use of salary dollars and could create
an inappropriate precedent for other similar jobs.
The Public Service Human Resources
Management Agency of Canada (PSHRMAC) has a continuing overall
accountability for the integrity of the classification system
including work descriptions.
The
Classification System and Delegation of Authority
Policy authorizes Deputy Heads to classify positions in their
respective departments in accordance with the policy, the
appropriate classification standard, and guidelines developed and
issued by the PSHRMAC. Departments should choose management
practices and appropriate measures to meet their needs within the
parameters of the framework prescribed in the policy and the
information provided in these guidelines.
Deputy Heads are responsible for ensuring that:
managers and human resources advisors in their department
receive adequate training in the classification system, including
the classification standards used by the department so that they
are able to effectively exercise their responsibilities and
delegated authorities; and
they understand the classification system, including the use
of classification standards and the allocation of positions to
occupational groups;
they obtain qualified advice on organizational design and on
the content of work descriptions within their organizational
context;
their organization design and the assignment of work to
positions are efficient, effective and affordable;
work descriptions accurately reflect the work assigned and
performed;
the accuracy and currency of work descriptions is maintained
as the work changes or new work is assigned; and
they establish reasonable and defensible effective date of
work descriptions;
they authorize work descriptions and encourage employees to
read and sign their work description as an indication that they
have read the information contained therein.
Human resources advisors are responsible for ensuring
that:
managers are advised on organizational design and work
description content within the organizational context;
managers are advised on appropriate format and content of
work descriptions in preparation for the classification of the
position; and
managers are aware of the criteria for establishing effective
dates.
Human resources advisors have been trained in the application
of the classification standards and are available to provide
information on occupational group allocation and the specific
information requirements of the standards.
For some jobs, where there is a mix of different types of
work, it may not be possible to determine the group allocation
until the work is completely described. Additional information
may need to be added at that time.
When it is not clear from the outset what the occupational
group and/or sub-group for a new position will be, the Key
Activities and other significant information on the work should
be described in order to facilitate an appropriate allocation.
Once the allocation is known, other information that is required
to evaluate the work with a specific classification standard can
be added to the work description. Percentage of time should
not be part of the work description and is not a reliable
indicator of the primary purpose of the work.
It is necessary to develop a sufficient understanding of the
work through the analysis of mandate, organization structure,
accountabilities of related positions and the specific work
assigned to the position. The nature and complexity of the work
assigned to a new or existing position could have financial
implications for the responsible manager. Any potential financial
impacts should be taken into consideration when designing jobs(see
Assignment of Work section in Reclassification
Guidelines).
Best Practice – Preparing to Write Work
Descriptions
Managers:
Contact your human resources advisor for advice on group
allocation and existing classification standard factors.
Review your organization chart, mandates and
accountabilities of related positions.
Review the requirements of the position with others
including colleagues and the employee performing the work, if
applicable.
Consult with the departmental heads of such corporate
functions as IT, finance, communications, etc. in order to get
their input when revising or writing a work description that
touches on these mandates.
Consider using a generic work description where
appropriate. See Annex A – Guidelines on Using Generic
Work Descriptions.
It is important that all work within an occupational group be
described in a consistent manner regardless of whether the work
is found within one department or across several departments. To
this end, departments and agencies should follow these
principles:
Starting the work description with the Client Service
Results – These results are the products or services or
a combination of the two that the position provides or delivers.
They are the results of the activities that make up the work and
not the activities themselves. Describing these results sets the
tone for the rest of the work description and helps determine the
primary purpose of the work for those reading the work
description.
Describing the work through the identification of the Key
Activities – These are the activities that the
incumbent must perform in order to deliver the Client Service
Results. These are also important for determining the primary
purpose of the work and for providing a basis for understanding
the work for occupational group and sub-group allocation and
evaluation purposes. While there is no fixed number of Key
Activities that should be covered in a work description, five to
seven Key Activities are usually sufficient to capture the
primary responsibilities of most work. Percentage of time should
not be part of the work description and is not a reliable
indicator of the primary purpose of the job.
Describing the work in relation to the four criteria
identified in the Canadian Human Rights Act –
For each of the criteria, i.e. Skill, Effort, Responsibility and
Working Conditions, there should be an explanation outlining the
demands of the work. The content of each criterion should relate
directly to the work described in the Key Activities and to the
factors in the classification standard that will be used to
evaluate the work.
Including additional information required to evaluate the
specific factors of the classification standard being used
– The Key Activities and the description of Skill,
Effort, Responsibility and Working Conditions may not include all
the information required by a specific classification standard.
Any additional information that is needed to apply the
classification standard should be added to the work description
to allow for the evaluation of each factor in the standard.
Ensuring that all significant aspects of the work
being evaluated are visible in the work description –
It is important not to overlook or under-describe any feature of
the work that is evaluated by a particular classification
standard.
Using language that describes with equal complexity the
work done by women and men – Historically, work
traditionally done by men and work at higher levels in the
hierarchy have been described with stronger language. Using
weaker language to describe work traditionally done by women or
work done at lower levels of the hierarchy can result in its
being undervalued. Therefore, it is very important to use
consistent, bias-free language when writing work descriptions for
all types of work.
Best Practice – Writing Work
Descriptions
The content of work descriptions, including the Client
Service Results, Key Activities, a description of the Skill,
Effort, Responsibility and Working Conditions as well as any
information required for evaluation with a specific
classification standard is completed in three pages. Sometimes
more information is required.
Describing work is not easy. We all bring our own experience
and perspectives to the process. Managers should be wary that
pitfalls exist and take action to avoid them. Some pitfalls
include:
Lack of information – Missing information needed
to apply the appropriate classification standard.
Inconsistent information – Job information that
is inconsistent with the organizational mandate or structure.
Too detailed information – Too much information
leading to rambling, confusing work descriptions that make it
difficult to understand the true nature of work. As a result, too
much detail makes it harder to identify work information that is
critical for allocation or evaluation purposes.
Too much jargon – Excessive terminology used on
the job that may confuse those applying the classification
standard.
Gender bias – Any factor or behaviour that, even
unintentionally, favours one sex over the other.
Work inflation – A bias to make work appear to be
more demanding or more complex.
False expectations about the nature of the work –
Assumptions about work being overly important or unimportant to
the job.
Just part of the job – A tendency to see certain
situations as conditions of employment rather than recognizing
the effort required to cope with them.
Position titles – The tendency to assume that a
position title actually tells us what is involved in the work; OR
the assignment of a title that does not reflect the nature of the
work.
Weak terminology – The tendency to pick weak
words when describing work done by workers at a lower level in
the hierarchy.
Vague terminology – Words that could be read many
ways, resulting in potential misapplication of the classification
standards.
Failure to see that work has changed – An
insensitivity toward changes in the way the Public Service does
business.
Confusing individual performance with the work itself
– The tendency to describe the work as it is performed
rather than the work that has been assigned.
The effective date establishes when the work described in the
work description has officially been assigned to a position.
In the case of reclassification, a retroactive effective date
will have financial implications for the manager, as the employee
will be entitled to retroactive pay for the period that he or she
has been doing all aspects of the newly assigned work. In order
to have a defensible effective date, managers should consider the
following questions:
When were all or parts of the work added?
Were all or parts of the work added at the same time?
Which parts of the work made the difference in group
allocation and/or level?
When the position is new, the effective date reflects the
point at which the new work has been officially classified and
when the position is ready to be staffed.
Managers are encouraged to discuss the effective date with the
human resources advisor and the employee concerned if the
position is encumbered. These discussions could add needed
information, simplify decisions and avoid disputes on effective
dates.
Best Practice – Effective Dates
The human resources advisor and the employee are consulted
prior to the establishment of an effective date in the case of
the reclassification of a position.
Managers are responsible for the accuracy of work descriptions
submitted for classification. Their dated signature on a work
description indicates their approval of the work that they have
assigned and confirms that the content of the work description is
accurate and complete.
Employees naturally have an interest in ensuring that work
descriptions accurately reflect the work they do. If there is an
employee in a position, he or she should have the opportunity to
read and comment on the work description. For a generic work
description, the manager should consult with a representative
sample of the employees whose work is included in the work
description.
Final approval of the work description is the responsibility
of the manager.
Best Practice – Approval of Work
Descriptions
All work descriptions are signed and dated by the
responsible manager prior to being submitted for
classification.
All work descriptions are signed by the employee to
indicate that he or she had the opportunity to read and comment
on the content of the work description.
Over time, the work of all positions changes through shifts in
organizational requirements and the introduction of new programs.
New technology can also result in changes to work, as can the
active assignment of new responsibilities by the manager.
It is the responsibility of managers to review the continuing
accuracy of work descriptions in light of significant changes in
the organization and the work assigned. Managers should be aware
when duties change and should be encouraged to update work
descriptions.
Departments have found it helpful to establish systems to
ensure that managers review the work descriptions in their area
of responsibility on a regular basis.
Best Practice – Cyclical Review and
Update
A departmental system is in place to review the accuracy
of work descriptions on a cyclical basis, and when the position
becomes vacant and is proposed for staffing.
A number of automated work tools to assist managers in writing
work descriptions are being developed across the Public Service.
These automated tools can ensure consistency of application
across departments and can simplify the process for managers.
Best Practice – Selecting or Developing
an
Automated Work Description Tool
An effective and efficient tool:
reflects classification policy, values and
principles;
reflects information provided in these Guidelines on
Work Description Writing in matters of work description
content;
respects the intent of the Canadian Human Rights
Act;
fosters gender-neutrality in both process and
outcome;
is usable and easy to understand by managers and human
resources advisors; and
encourages consultation with human resources advisors, to
ensure the appropriateness of the work description in the
specific organizational setting or context.
The Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada
(PSHRMAC) supports the use of generic work descriptions as an
efficient management practice. They assist managers by
streamlining the development of competency profiles, learning
plans, statement of qualifications and the development of broader
and more efficient recruitment and promotion processes.
It is up to departmental managers to determine how broad their
generic work descriptions should be within their own
organizational context. Generic work descriptions allow managers
to see commonalities and encourage consistent application of
classification standards across organizations.
In addition, generic work descriptions are:
less costly than writing individual work descriptions;
helpful in increasing the transparency of the classification
system particularly where the rationale is made public;
supportive of relativity between positions across the
organization/department; and
helpful in the transition to new classification
standards.
While there are great efficiencies, managers and human
resources advisors should also be aware that there are risks to
be considered. Action should be taken to avoid these risks:
Particular attention must be paid to organizational context.
Generic work descriptions taken out of their organizational
context may not be appropriate in other organizations. When
“borrowing” generic work descriptions from other
organizations, it is necessary to review the evaluation to ensure
that it is appropriate in the new context.
Inappropriately classified generics may quickly spread
misclassification across many positions.
While it is easier for managers to select pre-written and
pre-classified work descriptions, care must be taken to ensure
that the generics are well written and that a suitable generic
has been selected.
Best Practice – Writing and Selecting Generic Work
Descriptions
A well-developed and well-chosen generic work description
has the following characteristics:
The appropriate occupational group and level is clearly
identifiable.
The work of all positions using the same generic work
description is in the same occupational group and at the same
level.
The work described in a generic work description covers
the vast majority of the work that has been assigned; AND the
employees of positions using a specific generic work description
perform the vast majority of the work described in that work
description.
A reader can identify the work being done from the work description
alone. It is not necessary to write additional fact sheets of information
describing the duties of individual positions.
The nature of any work not explicitly described in the
selected generic work description would not be significant enough
to make a difference in occupational group or level.
The work described is appropriate to the organizational
context including mandate and supervisor/subordinate reporting
relationships, in which the generic is applied.
Managers seek the advice of their human resources advisor
when choosing a generic work description for positions within
their organization.
Departments should undertake change management processes to
increase the use of generic work descriptions in their
organization and thereby streamline the classification process.
Departments should carefully consider the implications of using
generic work descriptions in their own context and environment.
The following are examples of issues that will require
consideration:
Initial cost of development and maintenance may seem higher
than writing unique work descriptions. However, there will be
longer-term savings in both effort and turnaround time.
There will be a need for ongoing monitoring to ensure that
the generic work descriptions are not misapplied within the
department. This may result in a shift, over time, of
classification resources from performing transactional
client-service functions to performing corporate monitoring
functions.
Managers may think that they have less flexibility in
designing positions than they had when each position was treated
individually. However, their expectations could be managed
through training and increased information on the benefits of
consistency found with generics.
Employees may feel that their work is not reflected in the
generic work descriptions; this perception can be managed through
appropriate communication and training.
It is important to review generic work descriptions on a
regular basis and to take action to update them in a timely
manner. In an organization that uses generic work descriptions,
this is particularly important. Work may change for some
positions described by a generic work description and not for
others described by the same work description. Departments need
to understand how to manage changing work in such an environment
and should develop approaches to dealing with potential
issues.
Best Practice – Managing Changing Work
within Generic Work Description Environments
Individual organizations continue to evolve to meet
operational requirements while using departmental generics. The
human resources advisor assists the manager in the appropriate
use of generics through matching the work description with the
actual workassigned to employees.
The human resources advisor assists the manager in
selecting or writing a new generic work description should the
work of an employee change significantly. The change in this
employee’s work and the requirement to select or write
another work description does not necessarily impact the work or
appropriate generic for other employees using the original
generic work description.