HALIFAX, TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004
STANDING COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES
9:00 A.M.
CHAIRMAN
Mr. Ronald Chisholm
MR. CHAIRMAN: We're running a little bit late. Some of us went over to the House of Assembly instead of here because that's what the notice said. Anyway, this morning, we have the Public Service Commission with us. Mr. Richard Nurse is with us, a commissioner with the Public Service Commission. You have some people with you, Mr. Nurse, so I will let you introduce those people when you get a chance. What we normally do is allow for you to make a presentation to the committee and then, with whatever time we have left, we provide questions from committee members. Maybe we will start by going around the table so that everybody can introduce themselves. We will start with Ms. Whalen.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Nurse, you can take over.
MR. RICHARD NURSE: Mr. Chairman, we really do appreciate the invitation to be here. We would like to take the first bit of time that you've given us to sort of set a context. You've asked some specific questions about the aging workforce, diversity, our efforts in recruitment and retention, and so on. My own sense is that, to speak to those issues, it's very important that we give at least two contexts. One is the focus of all of our work, which is to try to build and maintain a skilled, committed and responsive workforce, with a focus on service excellence. So, whatever we're talking about specifically, that's really our hope and our purpose.
Because I'm all of three months old at the commission, I have Gord Adams to my right, Patti Pike to my left, and some additional staff from the commission. If we need to call on them for specific questions, that's their purpose here, to sort of help me through. As you can appreciate, this is a first for me. So, again, I'm delighted to be here, and we'll try to address the subject matter that you've given to us.
1
First, let me talk a bit about the approach that we would like to take. I'm going to cover, fairly quickly, the role and responsibilities of the commission. It will give you a sense of the changes that we've been going through in recent months. Then, as you asked, I will move fairly quickly to an overview of the workforce and the focus on age, gender, diversity and related matters.
I think it's important that we give the committee, Mr. Chairman, a sense of the work that has been occurring. So we will try to give you some examples of what's happening through the commission and through the greater HR community. Then, we'll return and we'll talk about your topics again, to give you a sense of what we expect to be focusing on in 2004-05 and beyond. That's our purpose.
One other thing, in fairness to our colleagues in the HR community, I should remind the committee that while the Public Service Commission is responsible for overall and corporate HR activities, there are a number of so-called HR CSUs that serve government departments directly and those HR CSUs, as we devolve, have considerable responsibility for what we describe as the transactional side of human resources, but they also have given tremendous leadership and set the example on various key elements of human resource planning, big tickets. So I will try to offer some examples of the work that those department level CSUs have been doing and explain to the committee that one of the tasks the commission seeks to take on is being sure that the good work of department-based CSUs is translated and used corporate wide. So I will offer some examples of that as well.
The commission then, first of all, as you know, or may know, our vision is to provide leadership and excellence in human resource management. The Public Service Commission, as it's named today, was created in June 2001 through a revision of the appropriate legislation, and our duties, in general, are described in the next overheads. There are two of them and this, again, Mr. Chairman, is the broad-brush description of what the commission has responsibility for: development of overall human resource policies, programs and procedures; setting standards and also being aware of the practices that we do use within the Civil Service; consultation, advice and assistance to departments in coordination with their own human resource or personnel activities; manpower and succession planning, an area that you did ask us to speak specifically about; staff development and training as it's named in the legislation, continuous learning as we tend to describe it in today's human resource language; classification and benefits; recruitment, obviously; we play a role in advising on collective bargaining for various groups; and workplace safety and, more and more so now, wellness is a key area of our responsibility.
The Public Service Commission, although renamed in 2001, really began to take on its new role after a review of the work that it does or did and a report in 2002 which called for its restructuring and refocusing. The refocusing was about moving away from i-dotting, t-crossing transactional activity to a more strategic and leadership role in human resource
management and planning. Again, as I said, that's done in co-operation with our HR CSU partners.
Our plan in 2004 then, having gone through that restructuring, is to deliver on the promise that restructuring held out. To deliver on that promise, we have four broad goals. I think if you choose to underline key words in these four goals, they really do focus on service excellence, people, place and practices, or they focus on service excellence in the first one. They focus on developing a dynamic, sustainable and committed Public Service, the people. In the second one, promoting a supportive, safe and healthy workplace, the place, the environment; and, finally, being sure that we have practices and policies and procedures that are applied consistently and are best practice as we can learn them in the industry in other settings and across the country.
That, in as fast a form as I can do, is what the Public Service Commission has begun to evolve into and is doing. We're a small team relatively speaking. There are some 60 people that work at the Public Service Commission and add to that - we'll talk about them as well - funding for some 30 student positions that we facilitate, identifying, and then sharing across the system.
Let me now turn to the real topic at hand - the people we seek to serve and support. From an age distribution point of view, the Nova Scotia Civil Service, and I'm speaking about the group that is at the core and made up of approximately 7,200 people, if you look at this chart, it shows that as we, some of us in particular, all know the Nova Scotia workforce is getting older - and in fact is older despite a significant difference in the 60-plus age group - than the average Nova Scotia workforce. As we look at this overhead you can see three things: In the under-30 age group there are many more people in the Nova Scotia workforce, percent-wise, than there are in the Nova Scotia Civil Service; you can see that we have a very large bubble of folks in the 40-plus and I can be corrected, but I think in the Nova Scotia Civil Service workforce, the over-40 age group makes up some 73 per cent of our total population; and then, one of the other very interesting things is the significant drop-off in folks 60-plus.
[9:15 a.m.]
For me, again given that I'm three months old as I try to understand these statistics, it's important to be reminded of the sort of experience of the 1990s where there have been freezes and where there have been efforts to reduce the size of the workforce, with early retirement and other initiatives. I would submit that those are contributing factors - not the only factors - to the shape of our age profile.
From an age and gender point of view, this next - with apologies - somewhat busy chart tells us a number of things. First it tells us that from a gender point of view, women in the workforce make up 57.9 per cent, while men make up 42.1 per cent. The difference in
the Nova Scotia Civil Service compared to the general population of the workforce is that in the general workforce the ratio is closer, obviously, to the real distribution of men and women in our society. The other things of note, for me at least, would again be the significant group of women and men moving through the 40 to 49 age population in the Civil Service, 42.1 per cent in that age group compared to 20.7 per cent for the Nova Scotia workforce. It raises some questions - and perhaps we can leave those for discussion when we move to that, and these we can put up when you're ready to discuss them, Mr. Chairman.
What more do we know today about today's Civil Service workforce? This table shows you in graphic detail one of the key challenges facing us in the next four to five years. What we have here is the picture of those members of the Civil Service who are retirement-eligible, the total number as of the end of 2002 and then the folks who enter that category, retirement-eligible, annually, to the end of 2008. We know the pattern of retirement in the last couple of years has been 137 at the end of 2002 and 176 at the end of 2003-04. Our projections are that there will be some 250 to 300 retiring at the end of 2004-05, but still that number, a total eligible over that time frame of more than 2,000 people is a signal, and a very significant one. We add to that that retirement is less than 50 per cent of the reason that people leave the workforce, so if we then add in the fact that people will leave for other reasons, that number, potentially, could grow to double that. If the earlier overhead that we showed you, where the over-60 population drops off as it has from the workforce, again that signals some significant challenges.
In a presentation that I did to a public forum, I didn't answer the question, but at least I raised the question of whether we really need to step back and talk about how we encourage folks in the mid-50's category to stay in public service - perhaps in a different relationship, which is my belief - than being in the large offices and being in the line, but in mentor, corporate memory-type roles, perhaps not on a full-time basis, but there's a whole range of possibilities that I think in the next couple of years we need to consider. Of course, we need to understand that we have to attract the under-30s and the 30-somethings into the workforce aggressively in the next three to five years as well.
What do we know on the subject of diversity? Our policy objective here is to ensure that the Nova Scotia Civil Service is reflective of the community we serve. To that end, we've created policy, education programs, reduced barriers and otherwise encouraged equity and diversity in our workplace. That said, our progress has been slow and there's more to be done. As this table suggests these are the four designated groups - Aboriginals, Black Nova Scotians, racially visible, and disabled. The statistics that we have, as you know, are based on a self-identifying process, so I would caution two things as I try to interpret and understand this graph. You may have other observations.
I could look at the statistic for Black Nova Scotians and say okay, great, let's celebrate. We have, in terms of allowing the Public Service to be reflective of that population, we're at and beyond that share of the population. It's not enough. The policy
really anticipates that we'd be reflective of the population across and throughout the organization, so we need to do some additional analysis. Our experts remind us that that group, although meeting a particular objective, is perhaps, or may be, underemployed in the Civil Service. I'm not saying they are, but I'm saying we need to understand where that group is scattered through the various levels. But it's a good sign.
For the other three groups, it is my understanding that we're, in all three, approximately halfway to being reflective of our community. That has been the picture in general with some small change, up, in terms of the Aboriginal group and the racially visible. Because the data really is different, the data I looked at showed sort of the benchmark at 16 per cent in one report, 13 per cent in another report - so I'm not hedging - it is difficult to say whether we've seen an increase or a decrease, but on the face of it we may have seen a decrease in the number of disabled, self-identified employees.
So, in the right direction in one case. Arguably, there on one dimension, not there on the other across the organization dimension. Clearly, given the general distance between where we are and where we're aiming, there is work to do.
Now forgive me - I want to give you some examples, so if my head is down it's more to keep me on track and on time than anything else. Some of the data telling us some of the issues before us - let me remind the committee, again, I can present this to you probably more objectively than others simply because I take no credit. As I said, I've only been with the commission for three months, and I'm very impressed with what I see already. That's not to say we don't have work to do, but let me tell you some of the things that are happening under these major headers.
These are the key elements of any good human resource strategy. They have to interact in a fairly complex way to work, but this is our focus. From a Preferred Employer point of view, a few examples of what's happening already. At the Public Service Commission we have a Career Starts Program. The program has four components: Cooperative Employment Program, Summer Diversity Program, Female Mentorship Program and a Post Secondary Internship Program. In the first three, the Co-op Employment Program, Summer Diversity and Female Mentorship, we offer summer employment programs in each one for 10 to 12 students with an interest in public service.
In the fourth element of the Career Starts Program, Post Secondary Internship, we offer a one-year work experience. We've had, in the past five years, 68 graduates from that program, and I am pleased to say that 25 of them are still employed in the provincial government, that's 34 per cent, on a permanent, casual or term basis. That's, again, a good program; the retention is relatively good given what we know about average turnover - which I'll remind you that in the workforce in general, the turnover is every three years that people, on average, change jobs. So this is a good record of retention, but we will be making changes in that program to try to improve the retention rate even further.
Still under Preferred Employer, we have a career connect initiative, where we are training and preparing lead public servants with an interest in speaking to the public and to students about life and service in the Public Service. That will be an initiative to go next to a recruitment video that is in the early stages of production as we speak. We have also, Mr. Chairman, as a third example, added during the restructuring of the Public Service Commission, an executive recruitment capability. It's a beginning, we will be directly involved in many future senior staff searches, and in the coordination of an in-bringing of consistency and some expertise to that activity.
Finally, under the heading of Preferred Employer, we have an example in the Department of Transportation and Public Works, called Planning for Progress, where in that department the staff are building relationships with post-secondary institutions, have created bursary programs and are giving lectures to students in their fields of education. They have also produced just a superb promotional video that exposes young people to the various careers available, just in that department. When I said in the beginning that we will try to take the good work of departments and migrate that across the entire Civil Service, that's one of the best examples that I could offer you.
In the next header, under Learning, we want to be an organization - and this is a cultural thing, it's a form of management and decision making, but we want to be an organization where learning is part of everything that we do. Under that broad umbrella of creating a culture, we have a Leadership Development and Calendar Training Program. The Public Service Commission offers four different leadership development initiatives, we also offer after needs analysis and reflection programs and change management in administrative support and computer training and things that you might name.
We also offer, I would name specifically a mandatory course in diversity management. We've put some 7,500 employees through the program since 1997, and of that group 1,000 of them actually have gone through the program since 2002. Mr. Chairman, we have a Performance Management Program that seeks to link, and does link effectively the corporate goals, departmental goals and the individual efforts of folks throughout the Public Service.
At Tourism, Culture and Heritage, there is a very specific HR strategy that again, I would offer up as an example of what's happening at the department level, and there is a concerted effort to reassign funding to HR strategies and to provide dedicated funding to development of staff within that department.
Third example, and I am growing aware of your time, so if I pick up the pace you will know I've gotten the body language message. The third item is workplace wellness, I'm thrilled to say that the commission, a year or so ago, caused a review of its own efforts in the area of occupational health and safety. We've received a report, it spoke well of what was being done, but it also offered 19 recommendations. We responded to the report, agreed to
take action on those 19 recommendations which we had been doing in 2003, and will continue to do in 2004.
[9:30 a.m.]
We've introduced an Occupational Health and Safety Audit Program, to encourage departments to comply with the legislation and, in fact, as we wish to characterize it, to go beyond compliance in our approach to occupational health and safety. The commission has agreed to be one of the two departments to experience that audit first. Ours is complete. We're still waiting for the report, but that will be an activity that will raise the profile considerably, of occupational health and safety throughout the Public Service.
I'm pleased to say, that we're taking steps to move our focus from safety to that broader theme of wellness in the workplace and look forward to communicating plans to do very specific things in 2004, as well, around wellness. We have an Employee Assistance Program as well. In government, in this past year, some 850 employees took advantage of that program, and over the past five years has seen some small growth in take-up, but it's an important service that, by those numbers, we know is serving people well.
From a work-life point of view, we're in the process of completing the analysis stage of an employee survey that saw a response rate of 53 per cent and has really been received well by staff. We know that this will be a baseline that will inform our planning and inform our activities into the future. We expect to get high marks in some things, from a cultural and environmental point of view, and we expect to get low marks on other things. Frankly, when you seek to get a baseline, that's the way that it works. I remember in an earlier life as a CEO, knowing the importance of workplace surveys, but dreading the results because inevitably as a CEO I was disappointed if people didn't say everything is at the highest level. It can't be that way, so we'll get our marching orders from the 53 per cent of staff that reacted to that survey. There are other department base surveys that occur, and they also serve and guide us now.
The last couple. From a rewards and recognition point of view, the example that I'd want to name for you is effort at the Department of Community Services, which just launched a pilot project in recognition of good performance, a pilot project that we'll be watching closely. I know that they exist in other departments, but time didn't allow me to sort of identify those. We know that the rewards and recognition side of the culture, saying thank you, being sure that work life is supportive, that we get the opportunity to work in teams, that we are empowered in the work that we do, is all captured under that.
Finally, succession management. You saw the statistics and the important message that we get about the shape of our workforce, from a diversity management point of view. If we summarize that chart, we know that some 9 per cent of the workforce represents those designated groups but that we have work to do. We have a diversity management program
which includes things like the employee systems reviews, where departments look at the potential for systemic bias in our approach to staff and by those reviews, one recently done for corrections, lowering those barriers and making the workplace more welcoming and more supportive. Diversity management is part of that succession management initiative.
We have leadership continuity, numerous programs. We took 75 staff through, to the extent where they acquired their Masters in Public Administration, in recent years. We have nine employees receiving development assessments in a very structured program, and most recently, we had 30 managers, we were oversubscribed, but 30 managers sign up for a federally supported initiative, to learn competencies and to be prepared for future jobs in our Public Service.
Mr. Chairman, there are other examples, but, I think, in the interests of your time, perhaps I should stop there. The message was and is, is that we think at the commission that we understand our overall mission in developing skilled, committed public servants. We have an array of approaches to that. We have some data that tells us we have work to do. When you're ready, I would like to talk - at the very end - about where to go from here, but I will pause here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Our practice has been that we allow about 10 minutes for questions from each caucus. We will start with the NDP caucus today. If it's okay with the Liberal caucus, Mr. Taylor has to leave a little bit early, so we will allow him to go second. Ms. MacDonald.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Thank you very much for coming this morning and for the presentation. I want to start by focusing on the affirmative action issues, which essentially are probably the primary reason we asked that you come here today, to help us with those. I noticed in the binder that was prepared for members of the committee, the Human Resources Management Manual that we have, the Affirmative Action section in that indicates that, "Each department, agency, board, and commission will develop a three-year affirmative action plan, using information provided in the workforce profile . . . and in accordance with guidelines established by the Public Service Commission and will include quantitative and qualitative goals and a reasonable timetable for achieving these goals."
So my question is - this manual indicates that this policy was effective March 1, 2001 - has each agency, board, commission and department developed that three-year plan, using guidelines from the commission with quantitative and qualitative goals and a timetable for achieving those?
MR. NURSE: The short answer would be not formally. Before the creation of the policy and since, we've had the education programs that I mentioned. Our diversity champion, Heather Chandler, who is with us here, has been helping departments, like the one I just mentioned, review their approaches to diversity management to get some of those
barriers down. We have provided, since then, the additional training of 1,000 civil servants on diversity management. And we have done the self-identifying and the surveying, and posting the data that the policy envisages.
We are, as I speak, in the process of canvassing all departments to learn what they are doing in response to the policy, and have, in our work plan for 2004, the development of that aspect of the policy, that is the development of specific plans. Mr. Chairman, I think the right place to put them, although there needs to be some discussion on it, is right in the body of the business plans that departments do now. But I would have to say that that policy isn't formally one that I can say we're there on all elements.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: I want to say that that's somewhat disappointing, that we've had this policy directive for three years and still it hasn't been implemented. I think that goes to the core of some of the concerns that have been expressed here, at this committee, around the ABCs. Let me ask you, how long has the Nova Scotia Government had an affirmative action policy? This is a formalized statement, but my perception is that governments in Nova Scotia adopted affirmative action as a fundamental piece of their remit a considerable period of time ago. So, how long have we actually had . . .
MR. NURSE: I'll begin to answer that and ask Heather if she will join us to answer any other questions you might have on diversity. I know at least two things about where the policy piece is, the one you're asking about, and I also know that we have, in fact, a signed agreement between this commission and the Human Rights Commission that was a commitment, again, to our shared role in encouraging awareness and education, and the targeting of that general goal that I mentioned, is being sure that the Public Service is reflective of our community. So you're quite right that it goes back well beyond a specific policy in 2004, but maybe you could speak to it more clearly.
MS. HEATHER CHANDLER: Mr. Chairman, we have had some form of affirmative action policy in place in the province since 1975 and while we haven't implemented the policy formally, departments, as Mr. Nurse has said, have been working on initiatives on their own. I would like to think that by our current measures to monitor what's going on, we can further enhance our efforts around policy implementation.
MR. NURSE: One of the adjustments that has occurred with the restructuring of the Public Service Commission is the strengthening of our audit function, so just as I said about occupational health and safety and our role there in ensuring full compliance, I understand that the commission's role - among other things in this - is to audit and be sure that those annual focused initiatives get done and, as I mentioned, that's already in our 2004 plan; but your point is well taken.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Because I have a fairly limited amount of time, I want to ask for your input into how the Government of Nova Scotia can do a better job of promoting agencies, boards and commissions, in terms of affirmative action. I believe you've seen the numbers from Executive Council, who to the best of their ability, compiled the number of applications we have gotten from designated affirmative action groups over the past two or three years. It's fairly dismal, I think - I don't know what the Commission thinks but certainly, it is a very small number of people.
The government uses this ad which was in the newspaper quite recently, which has a very small piece at the top that says that it is committed to affirmative action in making appointments, and this goes into the major newspapers, The Chronicle-Herald and the Cape Breton Post. It's done every so often and that, I believe, is the extent to which the government recruits applicants. My question is, can you give us some advice, can you give the government some advice about what other measures might be done to elicit a better range of applications from more diverse populations? The argument is being made that people from various backgrounds, African-Nova Scotian, people with disabilities, aren't applying, and if that's the case then our method of soliciting applications needs to be really interrogated, I think, in some ways. So if you could provide some advice on what we could do better, I think that would be very helpful.
MR. NURSE: A couple of comments. I spent most of my work life reporting to boards, so I know the importance of having a board, again, that is reflective of the community it represents. As you all know, in fact, government in the recent past reviewed its approach to appointments to ABCs. Coincidentally, I looked at a report from B.C. that talked about their best-practice approach - and I took the time because I'm idle like that some nights, and to take hours on the B.C. one and tick off to see where we were the same. Mr. Chairman, I would tell you that the current model - and I'll get to your question - is, in the country, a best practice. There was nothing of substance in the B.C. article and claim of best practice that the Nova Scotia system didn't have.
We need to advertise opportunities off against the cost of advertising that way, and the need to reach out to the designated groups in more direct ways. This is a personal view, so when asked what else might we do - and I believe we have heard a commitment from other levels to the Commission, to doing more - when asked, we will be encouraging initiatives that will bring the message more directly to those diverse groups beyond the ads. I wish I could offer specific examples this morning, but I know we've done that in other board structures. There are additional things that can be done that may not have a high price tag. So it isn't just getting the applications in the file, it's reaching out to those folks and making applying easier and getting the message of the availability of those volunteer opportunities and service.
[9:45 a.m.]
MS. CHANDLER: I would just add to that by saying that one of the techniques we've used in the past is by going out to communities to do public awareness sessions. In particular, around the affirmative action inventory whereby we hold a database of designated group members who we refer to government departments. In order to publicize that, you really do have to take it out to the community by holding public information forums. The ads in the paper are not enough for isolated marginalized communities. In Nova Scotia, unlike other parts of Canada, we do have several communities where it really will take government going out and providing the face-to-face information in order that people not only know what's available but become educated on what their role is.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Taylor.
MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank Mr. Nurse and his delegation for coming in this morning. It certainly confirms some of the thoughts that some of us have had regarding the Civil Service. I'm wondering - would it be possible to put up the Designated Affirmative Action Groups chart again, which can be found on Page 4 of your presentation.
I'm wondering - generally, if the demographic makeup of the provincial Civil Service does compare to the Nova Scotia population? I was able to print off from the Government of Nova Scotia Web site, Government of Nova Scotia demographic information indicating that the Nova Scotia population of Blacks is 2.1 per cent and the number of Blacks in the Civil Service is 2.18 per cent. I know you spoke on that particular component of the affirmative action and you had some concerns that it may not be reflective of what is actually transpiring in terms of job opportunities. Would you be able to go a little further with that?
MR. NURSE: Sure, mine was a personal observation about the way we need to approach the data in a self-reporting system. Generally under-reported, number one. Number two, on that specific one, I said that we really shouldn't because we see that a particular target or objective is achieved in raw numbers that were there. The expectation is that we would be reflective within and throughout. That number might be a good signal from the point of view within. What I was saying was that we need to do additional looking to satisfy ourselves that claim could be made throughout the workforce. I said of the others, again, they were in the right direction, but we acknowledge that we have work to do. Heather, do you want to speak to the chart as well?
MS. CHANDLER: With regard to the percentage of Blacks, in particular, being close to the working age in Nova Scotia, Mr. Nurse is quite right. I think what he's saying is that we need to do a closer analysis of where those folks are within the workforce. Certainly when you travel throughout the province - which I do on a regular basis - those numbers are not representative in terms of the visual in offices. So, determining where those people are is
crucial, whether or not they're in positions where they are underemployed and trying to find ways of moving them upward through the system. There are lots of issues around, figuring out where the numbers are exactly and what we can do to make the presence of that particular group more equitable.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, when we look further at Designated Affirmative Action Groups, we see that the Nova Scotia population, we've been told, is 51 per cent of women and that nearly 58 per cent of the Civil Service workforce is women; other racial visibilities, this population is 1.6 per cent and we haven't quite reached 1 per cent in terms of that Designated Affirmative Action Group actually working. Do you have similar concerns, for example, with women in the Civil Service compared to the concern that you had with the Blacks, perhaps how they're working in all the various different positions - managerial and otherwise? Is it fairly balanced?
MR. NURSE: The short answer is yes. We, through the commission in our education initiatives continue to encourage women on career tracks into more and more senior positions. I can't tell the committee this morning that we know the distribution. I sit at one table every Monday morning of deputies and that isn't yet a table where the gender balance is where, if we get it completely right, you would expect it to be, but there are five or six women at that table and that would be considerably more than we would have seen, let's say, a short 10 years ago. I know that there is an awareness and there's a commitment and I know through the Commission there are initiatives through all of our training efforts and all of our recruitment efforts to be sure that we continue to build that balance.
MR. TAYLOR: In terms of the ABCs, agencies, boards and commissions, Mr. Nurse, we are consistently, 100 per cent of the time, being told that the current Affirmative Action Program of the government, which was updated, by the way, in 2000, as you well know, or at least there were revisions made, we are told that the appointments are in compliance with the affirmative action policy. I'm certainly convinced by way of this presentation this morning that we're on the right road, if you will, in terms of the Civil Service, but on the ABCs, as a committee we have discussed at a couple of previous meetings, in fact some members have implicated that, you know, we should be very, very concerned that we're not meeting the goals and objectives of affirmative action. Yet the Executive Council is telling us in each and every appointment that we are. So it's a bit perplexing.
MR. NURSE: I will preface it with other departments would have more detail on this than would the Public Service Commission. It's my understanding that right now the ratio, the per cent of women to boards is, and you probably know this better than me, 31 per cent or thereabouts, and I'm hesitant again to infer targets. I think that the broad policy is reflective of our community and so to the extent that that data isn't, there's additional work needed. That would be my sense. The narrow question of in this process are we consistent with policy, is the answer to that appropriate, but a much narrower question.
MR. TAYLOR: Yes, I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. Well, I would just like to conclude by saying that I really think you folks should be proud of the work that you are doing. You have certainly confirmed some of the thoughts and views that I have regarding the affirmative action here in the Province of Nova Scotia. There is more work to be done, yes, but again I just want to say that it was gratifying to have the Public Service Commission come in and impart a presentation that was helpful from this vantage point.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. MacKinnon, you have until 10:05 a.m.
MR. RUSSELL MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, my first question is, how many persons are employed in management positions in the Civil Service, and what percentage are men and what percentage are women?
MR. NURSE: Darn. I don't have that information here or in my head, so I would have to commit to getting it.
MR. MACKINNON: Can you give an undertaking to the committee . . .
MR. NURSE: Absolutely. Unless, again, one of my colleagues has that information, we could try to give it to you this morning.
MR. MACKINNON: Do you have a breakdown, department by department, of the men/women ratio?
MR. NURSE: Cheryl?
MS. CHERYL BURGESS: I don't have it with me.
MR. MACKINNON: Will you provide that to members of the committee before day's end? Both for management and for the department by department, the total number of men in each department and the total number of women in each department, by day's end.
MS. BURGESS: Yes. By day's end?
MR. MACKINNON: Yes.
MS. BURGESS: I'm not sure about day's end, but . . .
MR. NURSE: Probably not. But we will commit to get it to you. I honestly don't know how much work is involved in getting it to you.
MR. MACKINNON: Before the week is over?
MR. NURSE: We will move on getting it to you as soon as is humanly possible. I'm not being difficult, I just don't want to make a commitment that we can't keep. As soon as is humanly possible.
MR. MACKINNON: The average pay scale in the Public Service, how does that compare, in each of these age groupings, with the private sector?
MR. NURSE: I would say . . .
MR. MACKINNON: Do you have the numbers?
MR. NURSE: No, I don't, but at a glance, lower.
MR. MACKINNON: The Public Service is lower than the private sector?
MR. NURSE: Yes.
MR. MACKINNON: Will you undertake to provide that information to the committee?
MR. NURSE: Yes, we will do that.
MR. MACKINNON: I know there are a series of issues - you made reference to violence in the workforce. There's an issue before the Department of Environment and Labour presently, violence in the workplace regulations. Is violence in the workplace an issue within the Public Service? Perhaps you could elaborate on that. There's considerable concern that the violence in the workplace regulations are not being approved in a timely fashion.
MR. NURSE: I can only speak generally, and I apologize for that.
MR. MACKINNON: Is there anybody else here who can speak to it?
MS. PATTI PIKE: I think I can make one comment in regard to that. With each department, it's their responsibility to develop a program regarding violence in the workplace for their specific needs. As you can imagine, Community Services has a large program in relation to an office setting such as ours. So, an individual department has the responsibility to develop the violence in the workplace programs.
MR. MACKINNON: Each department has their own, it's not universal, it's not co-ordinated?
MS. PIKE: No. There's a policy that each department must develop a program for violence in the workplace.
MR. MACKINNON: Do you have any indication as to how effectively it's working? Do you have any measure?
MS. PIKE: I think the policy went into place - I was at Transportation and Public Works at the time - probably two years ago. I'm sure we haven't had an opportunity to evaluate that as yet.
MR. MACKINNON: I'm getting a little discouraged here. I have lots of questions, but no answers. There was a commitment in the Tory blue book to double the existing Civil Service Career Starts Program for young university graduates. Can you indicate as to whether that objective has been met since 1999?
MS. PIKE: Yes, it has.
MR. MACKINNON: Can you provide us with some statistics? I'm quite concerned that only 5 per cent of your Public Service is below the age of 30.
MS. PIKE: Yes. There's a number of contributing factors to that low number. Again, we've gone through a major restructuring, in 2000. Again, youth that we've been bringing in are usually the least senior and they're moving out of the system when we do any restructuring. Fortunately, right now, people are recognizing, departments or elected officials are recognizing that we need to enhance the youth in our organization, and we're probably bringing 40 to 50 youth into the community every year.
[10:00 a.m.]
MR. MACKINNON: Would you be kind enough to give us a numerical breakdown year by year from 1999 to 2004, of the Career Starts Program?
MS. PIKE: I don't have that information, but we've been bringing in 16 post-secondary interns every year since 1999.
MR. MACKINNON: Yes, I'm aware of that, but I'm looking for numbers to quantify whether they've achieved their objective. You say they have and . . .
MR. NURSE: Before that date, there were eight. Since that date there have been 16.
MR. MACKINNON: Percentage-wise, what percentage of those end up with long-term employment in the Public Service?
MR. NURSE: I gave that statistic earlier, that of the 68 that have gone through the program, some 34 per cent, or 25 of those graduates, are employed in one form or another, with the Public Service.
MR. MACKINNON: Another issue that seems to be before the House the last number of days and last week the minister responsible for the department indicated a new policy or guidelines with regard to civil servants stepping up to the plate if they see wrongdoing, whether it's patronage or misuse of taxpayers' dollars or whatever. There's another phenomenon - first of all, if you could comment on that - that seems to be evolving in other jurisdictions and that is the use of camera-cell phones, to siphon off confidential information. Have you had any experience on that, to date, and perhaps if you could comment on the first part?
MR. NURSE: Your first question is about disclosure of wrongdoing and protection for civil servants. You're quite right, the Minister of Human Resources has asked the commission, as she announced in the House, to develop regulations. I would submit, Mr. Chairman, they are in addition to other vehicles that are available to civil servants currently, to express concern. They are more focused around safety and inappropriate instructions, but those regulations - the request to us was that we would contribute to the production of regulations, to allow and encourage staff to bring concerns forward and to produce those for consideration in a two-week time frame, which we will do.
I'm aware of the concern in the community, but the issue of cell phones with cameras hasn't come to our attention formally.
MR. MACKINNON: Thank you. The remaining two minutes, if I could pass along to my colleague here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Glavine.
MR. LEO GLAVINE: Good morning, thank you very much for coming in today. When you gave an overview of the recruitment, retention and HR planning, certainly mentorship, leadership, workplace wellness, all of these are very positive initiatives. Sometimes on the other side, however, performance evaluation, assessment and so on, are not always in the positive domain. I was just wondering about the broad framework that you have for evaluation and assessment of public servants, or does it go out to each department to be worked out?
MS. PIKE: The performance management process that's presently in place was designed by the Public Service Commission and put in place with departments. They receive the training, they go out, and the Corporate Service Units support that in the departments. We've had, in the last two years, close to 100 per cent response in performance management in the management groups and it's significantly increasing in the bargaining unit areas for performance management. We have set specific targets for individuals; we talk about the HR, financial and occupational health and safety targets for individuals with those responsibilities. So it's improving vastly and providing us with an opportunity to reward but also deal with developmental issues.
MR. NURSE: Can I just add, again, as a newcomer, I used to look at performance review models in hospitals across the country, it was part of a surveying activity I was involved in, and I was always, always, disappointed with the degree of application and involvement. In the time I've been here, I've been very impressed with the connection between corporate goals, the large issues of leadership from the most basic of occupational health and safety to living within our means and the fact that they're enshrined in the performance review model, in mandate letters as people arrive, and the attention that's paid to them in my experience here is the best I've seen, frankly.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Joan Massey has joined us and Ms. Massey has a question.
MS. JOAN MASSEY: How much time do I have?
MR. CHAIRMAN: You have 10 minutes.
MS. MASSEY: In the graph on age profile, is there any reason maybe that we're not having as many people in the under-25 range, do you think it has anything to do with minimum wage or their access to post-secondary education? I think somebody mentioned that there are actually less dollars involved in the Civil Service jobs as compared to the private sector. I noticed in the information that we were given here today, of course, under the Labour Standards Code, some of the changes. One of the changes was that there would be a committee of employers and employees appointed by the minister to review and report on minimum wage yearly. I'm just wondering, is it too soon? Have they reported on that yet? Are we going to see a rise in the minimum wage? I'm wondering if you had any information on that. But just to the whole issue, if you can't get a certain age group in there, why?
MR. NURSE: I don't have information on the question of changes to minimum wage. It wouldn't be something that we, at this stage, would be directly involved in. I don't have a sense that the low numbers in the under-30 have to do with wage rates in the Civil Service. I do have a sense - two things, I guess - that in the literature the turnover in that population is really high, so the folks that we do manage to attract don't stay long periods of time and also that there are some key categories, some professions and some technical areas where the market is really sparse. So those are the reasons, it's the scarcity in some subgroups. I don't think that we have difficulty recruiting in those lower numbers. I don't know that we have been focused on doing that.
My own sense is that what we see as people in the mid to senior ranks leaving and we seek to hire experienced people and you can't do both all the time. So, in the future, if we're to change that equation, we have to have some additional discussion and strategies around actually going and looking for age diversity in the workforce. But there is no sense that it has to do with incomes.
MR. MACKINNON: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman. Just quickly, there is a legislative requirement to review the minimum wage annually.
MR. NURSE: Not with the Public Service Commission. (Interruption)
MS. MASSEY: This sort of relates to the same question, the retirement eligibility graph. I believe you said that you have to attract under-30s into the workforce, so you're trying to attract under-30s into the workforce. Are the under-30s just not applying for these jobs or they're not qualified for the jobs? Can you sort of give me a better feeling of why we're not getting the under 30s? If it's not the minimum wage and it's not education, why are they not applying?
MR. NURSE: I wish I could quote statistics for you on kind of the age by application. The one example I gave was that my own sense is that we're hiring experience and filling the senior and middle jobs that are becoming vacant and that we aren't attracting. So that's one key reason why we aren't attracting young people to the Public Service. What are we doing to try to improve that? The Career Starts Program that I mentioned, where we have in fact, brought people in, like the effort at Transportation and Public Works, where there is a very focused video circulating the schools, and their efforts to speak at schools, and other departments' efforts to reach out and do better, in terms of encouraging people into Public Service.
If time allowed, I would go on at some length about what I believe is the need for all of us to speak to the value of public service, and to encourage people into the Public Service as a vocation. I guess if I can presume to offer a personal opinion, some of the public perception and debate about the calibre of public servants and the Public Service, I believe, is part of what discourages young people to come into this field. I've been a public servant all my life; I'm proud to be a public servant. My best friends tease me about how hard I might or might not work. I think that's something that our political Leaders need to be prepared to speak to, it's something that I see as central to my role, and I believe I see that as a key to encouraging young people, in particular, into the Public Service.
MS. MASSEY: Just two quick questions. On the affirmative action groups, the graph you showed, and I believe you said you're halfway there. After that, I believe you might have mentioned it's 9 per cent right now, total? Are other provinces in Canada doing a better job at this? If so, what kind of numbers are they showing? Am I wrong in saying you said 9 per cent? If we are halfway there, we're shooting for 18 per cent?
MR. NURSE: I did say 9 per cent. I did say on some of the groups we are roughly halfway there. I caution that what we're talking about is being sure that the workforce is reflective. The advice I hear from all the experts is don't name a target, because a target's too simple, you get there and you say, well it's done. That's not what it's all about. Those numbers are indicative of whether we are getting there. They're one indicator. Yes, we know
that we have additional work to do, I'm going to defer, because I'm not as familiar with what the difference would be in other provinces, so perhaps Heather can speak to that part of your question. It was, how do we compare to other provinces?
MS. MASSEY: Right.
MS. CHANDLER: Well I guess it depends on what province you are looking at. Certainly if you look at provinces like Ontario, they've been a lot more aggressive in terms of hiring diverse groups. But then, their population tends to be higher as well. If you're looking at Vancouver again, proportionately the number of people in the so-called designated groups are higher, because they have a larger critical mass as well.
I guess, if you looked across the country, we shouldn't be disgraced by our figures, but then we do have, as I said earlier, some work to do in analyzing where our designated groups are, in terms of classification and making sure that opportunities are provided for upward mobility. The numbers of people, and I think this is significant, in the designated groups, in positions of leadership, are relatively low, compared with other provinces. Our numbers are not disgraceful, but we do have to do some work in terms of succession management.
MS. MASSEY: Can you table that information? Do you have the comparatives, or is that just off the top of your head or can you get it for us?
MS. CHANDLER: That's off the top of my head in talking with colleagues across the country. I will try and find some information. Actually I attended a conference last summer, and I hope that I may still have that information.
[10:15 a.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think Ms. Massey . . .
MS. MASSEY: Am I finished?
MR. CHAIRMAN: You're finished.
MS. MASSEY: I just have to say, I don't think setting a target is too simple. I have to say that. I think you need a goal and you have to shoot for it and if you don't have a goal, then we're making a mistake.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. O'Donnell, do you have a question?
MR. CECIL O'DONNELL: I just have a couple of quick ones. First, I'm just curious to know how big the Public Service workforce is today compared to a decade ago and secondly, there have been recent changes in Shelburne with regard to employee placement and displacement. What work has the Public Service Commission done to help re-deploy or rehire and place government employees when their contract has expired?
MR. NURSE: Has the Public Service changed in terms of head count in the last 10 years? The numbers that I'm familiar with would show that now the head count is in the range of 11,200 - that some 10 years ago that figure would have been 10,800 or so. About a 3 per cent change in that time frame. You can take another time frame and see slightly different numbers, but that would be the answer to what it's been from now to 10 years ago - from a head count perspective.
Your second question was about Shelburne, the closure and what the commission has been doing? The commission has had a narrow focus taking responsibility for trying to help the 29 staff members who were displaced as a consequence of that decision. That end of employment became effective in very recent days - this week or the end of last week. Of the 29, a full 14 have already been placed in new roles, 7 chose to retire or resign and that would leave 8 in the call-back status.
The only other thing I would say, we had one person who, frankly - the last e-mail I looked at was an e-mail between folks involved in that, citing the co-operation from various departments, the positive feedback from various agencies and labour on that individual, Margaret Melanson's work. So, 14 already placed and another 8 where we're still looking at some possibilities and hopeful. It remains to be seen whether all of those would be relocated. Some of those, to give you a full answer, would have been offered opportunities outside the Shelburne area very early on and did choose, for the time being, to decline those offers. Even among the 8, there were some opportunities and they just didn't meet those individuals and their family needs. We're continuing to work with them.
MR. O'DONNELL: Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Taylor, do you have any questions?
MR. TAYLOR: No.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I have Ms. Whalen next, but Mr. Corbett has been waiting there so, we're scheduled to go until 10:30 a.m. I think we have some other items on our agenda that probably won't take us as long so if we do go over a little bit, I don't think the committee will mind? Okay, Ms. Whalen.
MS. DIANA WHALEN: There are actually so many questions. I know I won't have time today to go over it all. As you know, our reason initially for wanting to speak to you was to clarify a lot of things to do with the agencies, boards and commissions that we deal with. Some of those questions have been raised earlier by my colleagues, but I think now that we've hit on so many other interesting things that you do that we have to move along to those areas.
One of the things that I was interested to know more about is the benchmark survey that you did on employee satisfaction, I guess. I wanted to know - were the results of that ever released?
MR. NURSE: Not yet, but it's a matter of timing. It's not a matter of having the results.
MS. WHALEN: When was it done? I didn't catch when you had done it.
MR. NURSE: A month and a bit ago. The deadline for getting the forms back in closed - I just forget the exact date. I will repeat, we had a tremendous response, a 53 per cent return. Right now, with an external firm, for the sake of objectivity, the data is being compiled and analyzed. The commitment when we sent the questionnaires out was that we would release all the information in the summer and we felt that it would take that long for folks to complete the data, collection and analysis. So we're on track and intend to release the information in the early, early summer.
MS. WHALEN: Very good. I was going to ask you some of the highlights, but clearly you're not able to tell us the highlights yet.
MR. NURSE: No.
MS. WHALEN: Okay, that's very good. Could you tell me the cost of the external company - to have them do this for us?
MR. NURSE: I'm sorry, I can't. I will have to get that for you. This is Katherine Cox-Brown. Katherine is the director of our audit and evaluation function and would have staff oversight for the questionnaire, among other things.
MS. KATHERINE COX-BROWN: The actual cost for the contract, just for the analysis - originally we had $12,450, but we had such a huge response rate we added another $5,000 to get all the data entry in. So that is the total. The actual design of the employees surveyed, we did that internally so that's why we were able to get a reduced cost.
MS. WHALEN: Are you able to table that? Could we have the information?
MR. NURSE: On the cost?
MS. WHALEN: Yes, just on the cost, just for the record.
MR. NURSE: Yes.
MS. WHALEN: That would be great. That would be very good, thank you. That is something I've done in my past life as a consultant as well, so I know there's an awful lot of work involved.
MS. COX-BROWN: Yes.
MS. WHALEN: I'm not belittling that in any way - as I say, I had done one two years ago for the Public Prosecution Service. I have a couple other questions, but I guess we'll have to wait on the results of that survey, and I understand that.
I'm very interested in the dollars that we spend for training and how I think that that's a key component in retaining our staff and in making it more attractive to young people to join the Civil Service because I think, in fact, a couple weeks ago I believe some of your staff were at a breakfast with Dr. Linda Duxbury who is a professor at Carleton University. She spoke about the changing workplace and generational differences and one of the key things she said was that young people care more about the culture, the environment in which they work, and the opportunities for continuous learning, than they do about their pay. So the actual dollars we offer them is not an impediment if we can offer them the kind of learning environment.
MR. NURSE: Work life and the work challenge, yes.
MS. WHALEN: And what I wanted to know was whether or not you could tell us, sir, how much we invest in our staff, across the board, in training? What kind of dollars are available to you?
MR. NURSE: I think we can give you a sense of what the commission invests and what part of the commission is involved in that, and a sense through that of what departments do that we can quantify. Cheryl, would you mind coming to speak to that?
MS. WHALEN: If you have it today, that would be good; if not, we could get it later, but can you give me maybe an overview, just quick, we don't have a lot of time so if I could get the broad-brush stroke of that.
MR. NURSE: Yes. The summary answer would be that the Civil Service and government invest considerably. If you then listen to Cheryl to quantify that, you would make
your own judgment about whether that's true or not, but it's sure my sense that there's a pretty high emphasis and importance placed on that.
MS. BURGESS: We spend about $900,000 a year on corporate training and development, that's leadership development and calendar-wide offering to all civil servants. Many departments, as was explained earlier, run their own skill-specific training and departmental-specific training. We do not roll up those figures - we could do that, but it's difficult to do because they have drastically cut the training budgets out in the line departments. So about $900,000.
MS. WHALEN: Can I ask another question, Cheryl? Are you aware, I think it's in the Province of Quebec, they actually have legislated that a certain percentage of the public service spending must be spent on training? Do you know what that amount is? I'm not sure myself.
MS. BURGESS: No, I don't.
MS. WHALEN: I know that every department must spend their training dollars, and I in fact think they may have set it at a higher rate. I think it would be well worthwhile for us to explore setting not just a target, but making it an amount that we must spend. It's beyond just being something desirable, we would be obliged to spend that. I think given the information we have on the changing workplace and the demands, would you agree that that would be something that might help to attract and retain staff?
MS. BURGESS: Well, the youth whom I work with, and recruit, and the general workers say we have excellent training and development opportunities in government, much more so than private industry. So people are generally very pleased with the amount of effort government does spend on training and development. That's the feedback I get.
B.C., as far as I'm concerned, has the best model. They actually have to report what they spend on training, to the Legislature, and it is audited by the Auditor General. I'm not familiar with Quebec's model, but I feel B.C. is the leader across Canada. But I think we should be proud of what we do as a government, in terms of our training and development.
MS. WHALEN: Well, I think that's very encouraging, to hear that your feedback on the ground is positive, and people are finding it good. On the succession planning - part of it is more of a comment - again, in that lecture that I attended, it was mentioned, and we've talked here about older workers and we've talked about the youngest workers, under 30, but it was mentioned at that lecture that the group that is 30 to 40 is a neglected group, in business, in the workplace in general and in the Civil Service, and that they've had the misfortune of following the baby boomers, who have dominated the workplace.
The question I have relates to the percentage of workers again. I had another list, similar to your chart on the age and gender breakdown. What I wondered is, you have about 7,200 people that you used in this, are they the full-time employees with full benefits? Is that right? Is there information, or could we get the information on the people who work part-time, casual, seasonally, who are not covered by that? I would say that we're apt to be seeing an awful lot of people in the 30 to 40 age group who work in that sort of less stable, less - we need them and we hire them on contracts here and there but they don't have the benefits that go with full-time, stable employment. I would like to see that, if I could. I'm sure you don't have that available just off the top of your head, but could we ask for that, Mr. Nurse?
MR. NURSE: Yes.
MS. WHALEN: I think it would be good in the sense that that's a group that are the logical ones who should be moving into succession planning, that's the age group where they should be being prepared and groomed and trained. If there is a large number of them who aren't permanent employees of the government, then they're less apt to be captured for that. It's just sort of to signal where we need to go as time unfolds. I think we're really approaching a crisis in all workplaces, in business and in government.
Government actually has more negatives in terms of joining the Civil Service as opposed to joining business. What they were saying was that young people look for a fast-paced environment where decision making happens quickly. Well, we can be pretty well sure government doesn't provide fast turnaround for your efforts in your studies and the work that you do. So they said that we would have to address that. And that's a culture of government, that's partly because of those of us who govern and so on. I would just suggest that we have more work to do in the Civil Service to make it an attractive place to work.
MR. MACKINNON: We need a change of philosophy.
MS. WHALEN: So, you will provide that for me, though, just to have a look at the people who are not permanent employees, if we could try to capture that?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Could you comment on that, Mr. Nurse, if you would?
MR. NURSE: I may, I just want to be sure I'm clear on the information we're being asked to provide, so we get it right. Can you just . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: That will be provided . . .
MR. NURSE: So we will get a letter saying . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: You will get a copy of Hansard, when this is . . .
MS. WHALEN: If I've been clear, so maybe I will just say it again. I realize that an awful lot of people work on contract or on short-term or part-time arrangements with government as well as with other organizations. I want to capture the numbers of those people, because they're not reflected in the 7,200 that are here. I would like to have the same breakdown, what is their gender breakdown and what is their age breakdown.
MR. NURSE: We can do that. Can I just speak to two things that you mentioned? Creating the right environment for young people, I firmly believe that we can do that. I understand that in government, because there are a number of approval places, that the process can appear slow, but I've seen young people - and I can only speak from the limited experience in the commission, anecdotally - move wonderfully, crisply, seek input, receive the input, not direction, and then go forward. Small example, an e-mail from one of our students saying, we're thinking about this, what do you think? I offered my opinion back. Got told, thank you for your opinion, we'll be going the other way. And it was done by the time I got that e-mail.
I think in this environment, if we have that kind of relationship and understand that if you give somebody the ball, they're going to run with it. Again, I don't mean to sort of put it back at our political leaders, but it's part of, kind of, are you going to free us to do that? Are you going to free us to have young people make mistakes or make those decisions, and keep moving? If that's the message that we get as public servants, I promise you that people will run with it. I forget the second point so it's probably just as well.
[10:30 a.m.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: We may get to a few short snappers after. Mr. Corbett has been patiently waiting (Interruptions) Waiting to get his questions in. I apologize, Mr. Corbett, for missing you the first time.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: That's quite all right, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Nurse, thanks for coming here. While I've not been a career civil servant, this is the first government paycheque I ever got, I do agree with you and say that what value we get from our civil servants - and it is an honourable job to have and I do agree with you on that. I'm just trying to make some questions really quick. The HR survey, what was the name of the company that did the survey?
MS. BURGESS: Sierra.
MR. CORBETT: Sierra, okay. Mr. Nurse, the Career Starts Program, you said in 2002-03 that 56 per cent retained work, but clearly, only 2 were permanent; only 9 of the 16 stayed. Why were there only 2 permanent positions created? The front-end number looks very good, 56 per cent, but there was only really 2 permanent jobs.
MR. NURSE: One, the availability of employment, but also one of the anomalies around that program is that it has a duration that leaves those students technically in casual roles. So if they need jobs, then they compete with members of the bargaining unit very often. By that relationship, they don't gain access to those jobs. It's one of the barriers that we struggle with and need to overcome.
MR. CORBETT: Wouldn't you also see though, with that in mind, that being unsuccessful at a bidding at this job level then one would assume that the member of the bargaining unit that assumes the position, their slot comes open and a student could therefore apply for that position? So that would make it a negative sum then, wouldn't it?
MR. NURSE: The same dilemma.
MR. CORBETT: There comes a point in the bumping process where . . .
MR. NURSE: Yes, fair enough. Then it's whether that student is interested in those jobs. The experience has been, as you describe it, for those permanent jobs, there hasn't been that level of take-up by those students.
MR. CORBETT: Can you hazard a guess, is it wages?
MR. NURSE: From the folks who are closest to it, the answer is no about wages.
MR. CORBETT: What would it be?
MS. BURGESS: Well, it's competitive out there, trying to find a job is still competitive and the bargaining unit gets first priority. There aren't any opportunities really, because of the hiring freezes. There's just a lack of opportunity, a lack of positions that the youth are qualified to go into, and high competition from the bargaining unit.
MR. NURSE: A couple of other observations. There is a sense that this is a good experience, that we have done well to attract people into the core. When we look at the question of do those people stay, if not in the core Civil Service, do they find work in the public service, broader public service, or do they find work in the Nova Scotia workforce, I regret that I didn't bring it, but the per cent grows in response to each of those. I think our mandate is to introduce people to public service. If we can draw them in by one means or another, we do. We've had some success with that to the tune, as I said, of 34 per cent. We want to do better. One of the ways of doing better is to talk to the students, as we have done. We've had the program reviewed by the students and they tell us that of the opportunities, making the program longer, making the salary - so this is a minor piece - while they're students, a bit more attractive.
I asked the question, tell me how many people are applying? Well we're oversubscribed, so that isn't a key, key question. There are some things that we believe we can do as we go down the road, to adjust the program, to adjust access in a right relationship with labour and increase those numbers. I take your point, and we're aware of the need to continue to look at better ways to keep people in our system once we've trained them. I think we keep the investment the same, for example, and increase the number of years.
MR. CORBETT: Has there been any thought by the Public Service Commission to do HR from a regional perspective, as opposed to just all-top-down from the capital here? It appears that in places like Cape Breton, where you have a large Access Nova Scotia complex and you have fairly large TPW operations, wouldn't it make sense that HR decisions could be made on the ground there, rather than pouring back here? Why isn't that happening?
MR. NURSE: Absolutely. The general and then the specific. It is happening. The commission, as I said earlier, is a relatively small entity, with a number of key areas of responsibility, corporate. In addition to that, though, there are HR CSUs that serve assigned departments. I will ask Patti to speak to how they get to apply . . .
MR. CORBETT: Any time I deal on an HR level, if it's Access Nova Scotia employees or TPW, it's back here, it's not in the region.
MS. PIKE: Transportation and Public Works is a decentralized HR unit. They do have HR consultants in Port Hawkesbury, Truro, Bridgewater, so they are distributed regionally.
MR. CORBETT: The most diversified of the bunch.
MS. PIKE: The Department of Agriculture and Fisheries has decentralized units in areas such as the Agricultural College, for instance, depending upon their needs. So many of them are decentralized, and the CSUs are looking at the advantages of that and, as well, some shared services that may benefit with that regionalization. So, if there is somebody located in Port Hawkesbury, can they service more than just the needs of Transportation and Public Works? We are evaluating that.
MR. NURSE: The only other observation I would make is that human resources, from a policy direction and programming point of view, is as described, but every manager, as I'm sure you will agree, has a human resource responsibility, application of policy, living within collective agreements. That happens on the ground, and that's in the performance review model. Again, it's a piece of the puzzle that we regularly track and require of managers.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We're going to allow for a couple of short snappers. One short snapper maybe from each caucus. No preamble, we will just get into the question, if we could, because it's just about 10:40 a.m. Mr. Taylor.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, again, I would like to congratulate our guests. I certainly don't think there's any smoking gun here this morning. I apologize for having to leave for a few moments. Under occupational health and safety, and considering that our workforce - and I say this with all respect - is aging, I'm wondering about the absenteeism rates, how they would compare historically? Perhaps our guests might even be able to bring this information back at a later date. I'm wondering if our absenteeism rates are declining, are they increasing, if they're consistent?
Also, I wonder what the rate of work-related stress incidents are? I don't know how that would compare with other benchmarks, and how the commission is actually addressing those types of concerns. I understand they're fairly significant and prevalent within the commission's workforce. I will leave it at that.
MS. PIKE: We will have to get back to you on specifics there, but from a general absenteeism rate, we're finding we've sort of levelled in probably the last four years. However, the illness is changing from muscular-skeletal being the top, to psychological moving ahead of muscular-skeletal. There are some changes in the dynamics of that. We can give you the analysis of that.
MR. NURSE: The high-end answer, in terms of workplace injury, would be reflected, I think, not only by that, but by WCB claims. In 2003, we saw 631 WCB claims. There are many other near misses or minor injuries that occurred, but that's a pretty good indicator of where we are.
MR. TAYLOR: Is that high, low, consistent? (Interruptions)
MR. CHAIRMAN: One short one for the Liberal caucus.
MR. MACKINNON: Mr. Chairman, quickly, $200,000 paid out in bonuses last year. Will you provide to the committee the names of the people who received those bonuses and how much each one received?
MR. NURSE: I don't know what bonuses you're talking about, so you need to be more specific for me.
MR. MACKINNON: Well, Howard Windsor, Deputy Minister of Finance, provided the information on $200,000, but he wouldn't give the details. It's a human resources issue.
MR. NURSE: It's not something we're privy to or at liberty to release either, as I understand it.
MR. MACKINNON: You have no knowledge of the senior civil servants who received bonuses?
MR. NURSE: No, we wouldn't have those details.
MR. CHAIRMAN: One for the NDP caucus. (Interruptions)
MS. MASSEY: The information here on the survey, Promotion, I think it says $1,200-some. How do you promote a survey to employees? What would actually have been done? I don't know exactly how to phrase that question, but you know what I mean.
MR. NURSE: Brochures described the purpose and encouraged participation. Posters, other things that we used to get people's attention to encourage participation. So if you were in government offices you would have seen posters saying the survey is out, we need your input. Those kinds of things.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: The Chairman is not paying attention, so I'm going to sneak in one really quick one. (Laughter)
In the last few weeks, I have had a number of contacts from Nova Scotians, people with disabilities and people in the affirmative action categories who have indicated that they have applied for positions, often entry-level positions in the Civil Service of Nova Scotia and they haven't been successful and they don't know why they weren't successful. So, as an elected member, when somebody comes to me with this kind of concern, how would I best be directed to secure for them the information that they require, you know, somebody in the commission to sit down and speak with them and perhaps tell them what else they might do to be able to be more competitive in terms of jobs that open up, that kind of stuff? I think there is a pattern in the contact that I've had that reflects a level of frustration from people who have gone back to school, they've retrained, they have, in some cases, university degrees . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you have a question, Ms. MacDonald?
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: . . . community college course, and what have you. So there is a frustration. How do we work with these folks so that they feel included and they have access and opportunities?
MR. NURSE: It's a general concern, not just for folks from the designated groups or disabled, as folks who were disappointed in efforts to find employment. My answer would be, first, encourage them to go back to the most informed source, which would be the office
where they were considered for employment. We would always say, try that, and if you don't get a satisfactory answer there, go to the head of that CSU, and it's not to try to avoid it, that's where we'll go for an understanding. So get them as close to where the action is as possible first, but always add, if you don't get an answer there or from the director of that HR CSU, then the commission is always there to hear those kinds of concerns.
Frankly, we deal with them on occasion and we try to be sure that the individual who's expressing frustration gets some good mentoring, gets a proper answer to how come and gets some good mentoring on how to approach it next time, if that's appropriate. But the short answer, to the source first.
MS. PIKE: Heather Chandler also meets with a number of individuals from the designated groups to explain the process and ensure that they understand the whole process.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, I guess we're going to allow Mr. Nurse just a quick wrap-up. (Interruption) We're over 15 minutes now. We were scheduled until 10:30 a.m., we're now 10:45 a.m., so we have to cut it off somewhere.
Mr. Nurse, if you would wrap up.
MR. NURSE: In the interest of time, Mr. Chairman, I'll just speak to about half a page of notes. What I wanted to do again was to say thank you and to assure you that the commission is obsessed with, preoccupied with, helping to build and deliver a skilled, dedicated and responsive - and that's the service mentality - workforce. I would encourage you, knowing you're busy, but I encourage you to look for, when your time allows, our business plan for 2004-05.
[10:45 a.m.]
Just to, really quickly, name the things that we'll be focusing on, in case you sort of - well I wonder if they're going to do more about that. At least, the following in 2004-05, the employee survey, complete the analysis and communicate openly, transparently. The Government Corporate Business Plan has a very important plank it that we love, and it says, implement corporate HR strategy. That's a huge message for us. It includes, therefore, develop and implement, and it speaks to all of the key elements of HR that we mentioned this morning. From a commission perspective, with an interest in the civil servants, government's raised interest in that is really important to us, and an energizer.
We have Project eMerge, which is a very on-the-ground information management exercise, but meant, again, to streamline the documentation of the employee life cycle in various HR offices; beyond compliance with our OH&S efforts, a stronger focus on wellness; client satisfaction, we've restructured the commission, but we've promised by restructuring
we'd refocus. So, in 2004-05, we intend to develop mechanisms for our customers, the departments and individual staff to say whether the commission is meeting their needs.
We will do, in the fullness of time, our own report card. Positive employee relations, completing the bargaining unit classification review - which we know has been out there for a very long time - additional succession planning, continuing to focus on continuous learning. Continuing, finally, Mr. Chairman, to audit and renew practices for fairness and openness, including additional work on affirmative action and diversity, and the age diversity dilemma we've spent so much time on this morning. Thank you to your committee for your interest.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Again, thank you, on behalf of the committee, to you and your staff, Mr. Nurse, for being here. We did extend our time for questions by about 15 minutes. We really appreciate that. So, again, thank you very much for appearing today. (Applause)
Okay, we can get into the rest of the business of the committee. We have a few appointments for the ABCs. Mr. Taylor if you would start.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, to the Board of Examiners in Social Workers under the Department of Community Services, I so move Colin J. Campbell as a member.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
Mr. O'Donnell.
MR. CECIL O'DONNELL: Mr. Chairman, under the Department of Health, to the Board of Dispensing Opticians, I so move Graham J. Sweett as a member.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, to District Health Authority No. 9, the Capital District, I so move Anne L. Dillman as a member.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
Mr. O'Donnell.
MR. O'DONNELL: Mr. Chairman, to the QE II Health Sciences Centre, I so move Anne L. Dillman as a member.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
Ms. Whalen.
MS. WHALEN: I'm just wondering if there's an update on having the Halifax Regional School Board come and speak.
MRS. DARLENE HENRY (Legislative Committee Clerk): The dates for those meetings are set. They're meeting on May 4th with the Halifax Regional School Board and on May 11th with the Nova Scotia School Boards Association.
MS. WHALEN: That's great, I just saw May 25th on the agenda.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's for our next ABC meeting.
MS. WHALEN: Okay, thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Taylor.
MR. TAYLOR: I'm sorry, did we agree as a committee that we're going to meet on May 4th and we're going to meet again on May 11th?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think so. The only way we can do it (Interruption) That's on for next Tuesday.
We are adjourned.
[The committee adjourned at 10:18 a.m.]
