Ottawa is trashing a pay equity strategy it has been working on for five years, calling it “unworkable,” after spending millions of dollars on project start-up costs.
“Our system for evaluating and compensating work has not kept pace with the modern world,” said Lucienne Robillard, president of the Treasury Board.
However, she added, the government remains committed to the principles of pay equity.
“The conclusion we’ve come to is the methodology needs to be looked at,” said Alison Jamieson, the Treasury Boards’ senior director of the classification division.
Finding faults in the current classification system that dates back to the late 1960s, the federal government set out to overhaul the entire pay scheme for all unionized civil servants about 10 years ago. In 1997, a Universal Classification Standard (UCS) was proposed — judging public service jobs by a single, universal yardstick. In essence, having one standard and pay structure apply to all jobs rather than the 70-plus classifications in use today.
The Treasury Board maintains this universal approach is now unrealistic.
“(But) the notion of classification reform is still workable,” Jamieson said. “We’re still reforming...we’ve made tremendous investment and headway and we don’t have any interest in throwing the idea out,” she said.
Instead, the government will implement a multi-year classification reform program. The latest approach will tailor standards according to specific occupations, on a step-by-step basis, while catering to the government’s business objectives.
Nycole Turmel, president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, believes the plan will only create more chaos.
“When you talk about universal classification, it has to be implemented the same way, and at the same time for everybody. (As) you start to play with the groups, then it’s another problem. The market value doesn’t follow the guidelines or the principles of classification and pay equity. You can’t rely on the market value,” Turmel said.
Turmel concedes the current system needs to change, her concern is that pay equity will get watered down in the process and, if it does, she’s willing to fight the government every step of the way. “There will be a war if that happens,” she said.
“You just have to say pay equity to the woman inside the public sector and there is mobilization right away and they are just ready to join and keep on with the fight,” she said. “Women’s groups are so organized right now, it would be quite difficult for them to water it down. I hope it won’t happen.”
The government should be focused on implementing proactive legislation, said Turmel.
The government noted several UCS drawbacks deterred the board from moving forward with the project, such as the realization UCS could impair the effectiveness of other parts of the human resources system. Furthermore, it would limit the government’s ability to compete in an ever-changing labour market. Considering more than one-half of its workforce will be retiring in the next decade, attracting and retaining younger workers is crucial to the survival of public service.
“We have to make sure we are competitive,” said Jamieson. “A single qualification system would certainly indicate a single pay line, when you do that it creates a system that is too rigid.”
Setting business-based priorities, pacing change to fit the capacity to manage reform, and resourcing appropriately will bring faster real returns on our investment than trying to adjust the entire system all at once, a government release states.
A preliminary review pointed out three groups in greatest need of classification reform. These include: economists, forecasters and researchers; foreign services; and program and administrative services. Together, the groups make up roughly 55 per cent of the public service.
Some critics say moving with the market is inevitable for any employer, particularly the public service since many Canadians don’t think highly of working in the sector. A survey, conducted by EKOS Research Associates, last year, confirmed there is indeed a negative public perception. About 45 per cent of Canadian adults would look favourably on their children working for the public service. A drop from the 52 per cent reported in 2000.
The study also noted interest in working for the public sector was lowest among younger Canadians.
“The issue of keeping skilled people, especially younger people in the public sector workforce is an important one. You’re just not going to hire without an eye on what the going rate is for similar skills, things are going to adjust slowly,” said Finn Poschmann, senior policy analyst at CD Howe Institute, an economic and social policy think-tank.
What the pay equity viewpoint leaves out entirely is that two things determine pay: labour supply and market demand. It’s just a matter of logic, said Poschmann, there’s no way of getting around it.
In addition to the classification reform, the government appointed a pay equity task force to review current legislation and guidelines and make recommendations.
The task force is in the process of conducting public hearings across the country. In the fall, it will hold off-the-record consultation meetings with several employers falling under federal pay equity legislation, unions and women’s groups.
“(In these meetings) we’ll hear a lot about the kind of institutional interests of those organizations and their views on pay equity and possible options,” said Beth Bilson, chair of the task force.
Though it may seem like pay equity has been put on hold, given that the Treasury Board dumped the UCS project, Bilson said it doesn’t affect the task force’s mandate and they will continue to proceed with public hearings and consultations.
“The Treasury Board and the (justice and labour) ministers who have established this task force have said scrapping the UCS is not meant to exclude whatever recommendations we might make,” Bilson said. “We’re not proceeding as though nothing happened, but as though we still have the responsibility of assessing what a good pay equity system would be.”
The board did verify its support of the task force and the influence the group will have on changes made to legislation. The task force will report its findings by March 2003.
“Our system for evaluating and compensating work has not kept pace with the modern world,” said Lucienne Robillard, president of the Treasury Board.
However, she added, the government remains committed to the principles of pay equity.
“The conclusion we’ve come to is the methodology needs to be looked at,” said Alison Jamieson, the Treasury Boards’ senior director of the classification division.
Finding faults in the current classification system that dates back to the late 1960s, the federal government set out to overhaul the entire pay scheme for all unionized civil servants about 10 years ago. In 1997, a Universal Classification Standard (UCS) was proposed — judging public service jobs by a single, universal yardstick. In essence, having one standard and pay structure apply to all jobs rather than the 70-plus classifications in use today.
The Treasury Board maintains this universal approach is now unrealistic.
“(But) the notion of classification reform is still workable,” Jamieson said. “We’re still reforming...we’ve made tremendous investment and headway and we don’t have any interest in throwing the idea out,” she said.
Instead, the government will implement a multi-year classification reform program. The latest approach will tailor standards according to specific occupations, on a step-by-step basis, while catering to the government’s business objectives.
Nycole Turmel, president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, believes the plan will only create more chaos.
“When you talk about universal classification, it has to be implemented the same way, and at the same time for everybody. (As) you start to play with the groups, then it’s another problem. The market value doesn’t follow the guidelines or the principles of classification and pay equity. You can’t rely on the market value,” Turmel said.
Turmel concedes the current system needs to change, her concern is that pay equity will get watered down in the process and, if it does, she’s willing to fight the government every step of the way. “There will be a war if that happens,” she said.
“You just have to say pay equity to the woman inside the public sector and there is mobilization right away and they are just ready to join and keep on with the fight,” she said. “Women’s groups are so organized right now, it would be quite difficult for them to water it down. I hope it won’t happen.”
The government should be focused on implementing proactive legislation, said Turmel.
The government noted several UCS drawbacks deterred the board from moving forward with the project, such as the realization UCS could impair the effectiveness of other parts of the human resources system. Furthermore, it would limit the government’s ability to compete in an ever-changing labour market. Considering more than one-half of its workforce will be retiring in the next decade, attracting and retaining younger workers is crucial to the survival of public service.
“We have to make sure we are competitive,” said Jamieson. “A single qualification system would certainly indicate a single pay line, when you do that it creates a system that is too rigid.”
Setting business-based priorities, pacing change to fit the capacity to manage reform, and resourcing appropriately will bring faster real returns on our investment than trying to adjust the entire system all at once, a government release states.
A preliminary review pointed out three groups in greatest need of classification reform. These include: economists, forecasters and researchers; foreign services; and program and administrative services. Together, the groups make up roughly 55 per cent of the public service.
Some critics say moving with the market is inevitable for any employer, particularly the public service since many Canadians don’t think highly of working in the sector. A survey, conducted by EKOS Research Associates, last year, confirmed there is indeed a negative public perception. About 45 per cent of Canadian adults would look favourably on their children working for the public service. A drop from the 52 per cent reported in 2000.
The study also noted interest in working for the public sector was lowest among younger Canadians.
“The issue of keeping skilled people, especially younger people in the public sector workforce is an important one. You’re just not going to hire without an eye on what the going rate is for similar skills, things are going to adjust slowly,” said Finn Poschmann, senior policy analyst at CD Howe Institute, an economic and social policy think-tank.
What the pay equity viewpoint leaves out entirely is that two things determine pay: labour supply and market demand. It’s just a matter of logic, said Poschmann, there’s no way of getting around it.
In addition to the classification reform, the government appointed a pay equity task force to review current legislation and guidelines and make recommendations.
The task force is in the process of conducting public hearings across the country. In the fall, it will hold off-the-record consultation meetings with several employers falling under federal pay equity legislation, unions and women’s groups.
“(In these meetings) we’ll hear a lot about the kind of institutional interests of those organizations and their views on pay equity and possible options,” said Beth Bilson, chair of the task force.
Though it may seem like pay equity has been put on hold, given that the Treasury Board dumped the UCS project, Bilson said it doesn’t affect the task force’s mandate and they will continue to proceed with public hearings and consultations.
“The Treasury Board and the (justice and labour) ministers who have established this task force have said scrapping the UCS is not meant to exclude whatever recommendations we might make,” Bilson said. “We’re not proceeding as though nothing happened, but as though we still have the responsibility of assessing what a good pay equity system would be.”
The board did verify its support of the task force and the influence the group will have on changes made to legislation. The task force will report its findings by March 2003.
