ARCHIVED - 1.1.3 Non-delegated Authorities

Table of Contents

WarningThis page has been archived.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.


The Non-delegated Authorities sub-activity administers authorities that are not delegated to departments and agencies, such as the oversight of Priority Administration and Public Service Official Languages Exclusion Approval Order (PSOLEAO).

Financial resources
Resources Planned Spending Total Authorities* Actual Spending
($ thousands) 4,721 6,120 5,667

*Note: Total Authorities represent the PSC internal budget allocations.

Performance information

Expected result: Proper consideration for appointments of persons with priority rights

Performance indicator: Percentage of individuals with priority rights appointed

Met All

  • Target: Effective and timely placement of persons with priority entitlement

Performance evidence: In 2008-2009, 711 (of 2,470) or 29% priority persons were appointed indeterminately into positions in the public service, consistent with the previous three fiscal years

Expected result: Proper application of the PSOLEAO

Performance indicator: Percentage of situations in conformity with the PSOLEAO

Mostly Met

  • Target: 100%

Performance evidence: Both the overall number of cases and the number of non-compliant cases have diminished again over the past fiscal year. Organizations reporting for March 31, 2008 indicated 402 overall cases, with 156 of these being non-compliant. As of March 31, 2009 there were 311 cases, with 69 of these being non-compliant. This represents a 25% decrease in the overall number of cases and a 55% decrease in the number of non-compliant cases.

Expected result: Non-delegated Authorities administration systems and procedures are efficient and well-managed

Performance indicator: Level of efficiency and management of Non-delegated Authorities administration systems and procedures (quality and accuracy of data entered in the Priority Information Management System (PIMS))

Met All

  • Target: Satisfactory study findings on the administration of Non-delegated Authorities

Performance evidence: Changes made throughout the year to PIMS were geared toward enhancing its functionality, improving reporting capacity, and provided departments/agencies and PSC employees with greater flexibility in the system, thus reducing workload and time spent on priority clearance.

Evaluation of PIMS was deferred to 2009-2010 due to competing priorities.

Performance highlights

Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) 2008-2009 Commitment #1: Continuous improvement of priority administration to reflect changes to the legislative framework, Public Service Commission (PSC) policies and delegated authorities and to accommodate modernized staffing practices

Priority Administration confirmed 1,231 priority entitlements and cleared 47,580 requests. We also made improvements to the PIMS and updated the Web material. We provided 51 information sessions to the human resources community.

The number of priority entitlements remains relatively stable, but the number of clearance requests has significantly increased over the past several years. This increased volume in workload means the PSC will need to find ways to take advantage of its automated system in order not to affect timeliness in providing priority clearance.

RPP 2008-2009 Commitment #2: Implementation of a new, dedicated unit to support political activities

During the reporting period the PSC implemented a new, dedicated unit to support political activities.

For more information on this commitment, please refer to Sub-activity, 1.1.4 Political Activities

RPP 2008-2009 Commitment #3: Modify approach to monitoring the former and new PSOLEAO to ensure consistency

Official Languages (OL) continued monitoring of the use of the PSOLEAO with emphasis on finalizing cases that started under the former PSEA. As of March 31, 2009 there was a 25% decrease in the number of cases, down to 311 and a 55% decrease in the number of cases (69) that are considered to be non-compliant. As well, the PSC formalized its procedures which organizations need to follow in requesting a medical exemption under the PSOLEAO.

PSC responded to 817 requests for information/clarification. The OL community has experienced significant turnover. The complexity level of questions the PSC received indicates that organizational OL advisors lack understanding of the PSOLEAO.

Table of Contents