Common menu bar

Breadcrumb

Guide on the selection of employees for retention and lay-off

To assist managers and human resources (HR) advisors in dealing with Work Force Adjustment (WFA) situations, the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer (OCHRO) and the Public Service Commission (PSC) have put together a WFA information kit that consists of a series of guides on specific components of the WFA process. In addition to the current guide, the PSC also offers a Priority Administration Guide.

For general information on WFA for organizations for whom Treasury Board is the employer, including the National Joint Council Work Force Adjustment Directive (WFAD) and related collective agreements, and the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) Directive on Career Transition for Executives, consult the other guides that comprise this information kit.

For information about WFA in general for the separate agencies that are subject to the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA), but for which TBS is not the employer, consult the separate agency and its collective agreements.

For information about the PSC’s Priority Administration System and other related topics, consult the PSC’s Priority Administration Web site.

For more information on the classification process for organizations for which the Treasury Board is the employer, consult TBS’s Organization and Classification web site. For the separate agencies, contact the separate agency.

Effective Date: December 2011
Document Status: Under revision
Contact: Strategic Consultants

Definitions
Introduction
Values
Considerations
Process to select employees for retention and lay-off
Conclusion
Legal basis
References and related documents
Questions and answers

1. Definitions

Affected employee (fonctionnaire touché) – is an indeterminate employee who has been informed in writing that their services may no longer be required because of a work force adjustment situation.

Alternate delivery initiative (diversification des modes d'exécution) – is the transfer of any work, undertaking or business of the core public administration to any body or corporation that is a separate agency or that is outside the core public administration.

Core public administration (Administration publique centrale) – means that part in or under any department or organization, or other portion of the federal public administration specified in Schedules I and IV to the Financial Administration Act (FAA).

Employee (fonctionnaire) - means a person employed in that part of the public service to which the Public Service Commission has the exclusive authority to make appointments.

Lay-off (mise en disponibilité) – is the termination of an employee’s services because of the discontinuance of a function, a lack of work or the transfer of a function outside the public service.

Merit criteria (critères de mérite) – for the purpose of determining merit, the four types of merit criteria are essential qualifications, asset qualifications, organizational needs and operational requirements.

Organization (organisation) – means any portion of the federal public administration named in Schedules I, IV, or V to the FAA.

Public service (fonction publique) - means the several positions in or under:

the departments named in Schedule I to the FAA;
the organizations named in Schedule IV to the FAA; and
the separate agencies named in Schedule V of the FAA.

Separate agency (organisme distinct) - means an organization named in Schedule V of the FAA. These organizations are not subject to the Treasury Board work force adjustment directives (WFAD) and policies, but have their own WFADs and policies. Seven of these separate agencies are subject to the PSEA and to this Guide:

the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada;
Indian Oil and Gas Canada;
the National Energy Board;
the Office of the Auditor General of Canada;
the Office of the Correctional Investigator of Canada;
the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions; and
the Public Service Labour Relations Board.

Surplus employee (fonctionnaire excédentaire) – is an indeterminate employee who has been informed in writing by their deputy head that they will be laid off and has been formally declared surplus.

Work force adjustment (réaménagement des effectifs) – is a situation that occurs when a deputy head decides that the services of one or more indeterminate employees will no longer be required beyond a specified date because of a lack of work, the discontinuance of a function, a relocation in which the employee does not wish to relocate or an alternative delivery initiative.

Top of Page

2. Introduction

The public service is an institution dedicated to serving Canadians and their elected officials. To successfully play this vital role, it must be able to continuously adapt and respond to the evolving social, political and economic environment and the ensuing changes in the policies and priorities of the government of the day. This means that deputy heads must at times review and adjust their programs and services to ensure continued relevance, performance, value for money and alignment with the government’s priorities. Changes in programs and services may result in a work force adjustment (WFA) situation.

In accordance with employer policies, WFA is a situation that occurs when a deputy head has determined that the services of one or more indeterminate employees will not be required beyond a specific date because of:

a lack of work;
the discontinuance of a function;
a relocation in which the employee does not wish to relocate; or
an alternative delivery initiative.

Subsection 64(1) of the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) states that when the services of an employee are no longer required by reason of a lack of work, a discontinuance of a function or the transfer of work or a function outside the public service, a deputy head may layoff the employee. Subsection 64(2) states that where that the services of some, but not all, of the employees in any part of the organization are no longer required, the employees to be laid off are to be selected in accordance with the regulations of the Public Service Commission (PSC). Subsection 21(1) of the Public Service Employment Regulations(PSER) states that the identification of the employees to be retained is to be made in accordance with merit.

However, it is important to recognize that Subsection 64(3) states that in the case of an alternative delivery initiative, as defined in paragraph 12(1)(f) of the Financial Administration Act, subsection 64(1) does not apply. This further means that this guide does not apply to alternative delivery initiatives.

This guide outlines the process to follow when identifying which employees are to be retained and which are to be selected for lay-off. It focuses on:

identifying the affected employees who are to be assessed;
planning the process, establishing merit criteria, and choosing assessing methods;
conducting the assessments; and
selecting the employees to be retained and those who are to be laid off.

Top of Page

3. Values

The objective of the process is to select, on the basis of merit, those employees who are to be retained to carry on the continuing work of the affected part of the organization, and those who are to be selected for lay-off.

Merit is met when the PSC is satisfied that the person meets the essential qualifications required for the work to be performed, as well as the current and future asset qualifications, operational requirements and organizational needs. However, while the PSC must be satisfied that merit is met, the guiding values of fairness, transparency, access and representativeness guide managers in the process of selecting employees who are to be retained and those who are to be laid off.

Fairness means that decisions are made objectively and free from political influence or personal favouritism; policies and practices reflect the just treatment of persons. Persons have a right to be assessed in the official language(s) of their choice.

In WFA situations, merit criteria must be established objectively, based on the work to be performed, as well as the current and future operational requirements, and organizational needs. The process and methods used to identify the employees who are to be retained and those who are to be selected for lay-off must minimize the impact of the WFA situation on employees, and must reflect the just treatment of all affected employees.
Transparency means that information about decisions, policies and practices is communicated in an open and timely manner.

In WFA situations, it is critical that considerable attention be paid to keeping employees informed and to explaining the choices and decisions made at appropriate stages of the process. For example, managers should inform affected employees of how the merit criteria will be used to make selection decisions; for example, if strength in a particular merit criterion will be used to determine who will be identified for retention.
Access means that persons from across the country have a reasonable opportunity to apply, and to do so in the official language(s) of their choice, and to be considered for public service employment.

In WFA situations, affected employees must be given every reasonable opportunity to continue their careers as public service employees.
Representativeness means that appointment processes are conducted without bias and do not create systemic barriers to help achieve a public service that reflects the Canadian population it serves.

In WFA situations, when the representation of members of one or more of the employment equity (EE) designated groups has been identified as a need in the organization’s human resources (HR) or EE plan, then being a member of one of the respective EE groups may be identified as an organizational need merit criterion.

Top of Page

4. Considerations

The process of selecting employees for retention and lay-off, and its results, may be very stressful for both employees and managers, and should be conducted with respect and sensitivity, and should reflect the guiding values indicated above. Communication with affected employees should be timely and provide as much concrete information as is available, to minimize the anxiety that could result.
The PSEA and the PSER provide considerable discretion to deputy heads regarding the choice of merit criteria, the means of assessment and the selection criteria. The selection for retention decision may be made by putting greater emphasis on certain merit criteria. Therefore, it is important that considerable attention be paid to consulting with Bargaining Agents and keeping employees informed and to explaining the decisions made at appropriate stages in the process. Early discussion with the Bargaining Agents regarding the merit criteria that will be used may result in managers being made aware of potential concerns allowing for change where appropriate.
The PSER prescribe the manner of selecting employees for retention and lay-off in situations where the services of one or more employees of a part of an organization are no longer required. It requires that managers assess the merit of employees employed in similar positions or performing similar duties in the same occupational group and level in the affected part of the organization, and identify the employees who are to be retained in accordance with merit. The manager is therefore responsible for determining the merit criteria required for the continuing functions, the assessment methods, and the criteria for selection to determine who is to be retained and who is to be laid off.
When determining the merit criteria for the functions that will remain, the essential qualifications are based on the current requirements and needs of the work to be performed. Asset qualifications, as well as operational requirements and organizational needs, may be based on the current and future needs of the affected part of the organization. These needs may include those of the broader organization as long as they can be linked to the affected area.
There are situations where some positions are to be eliminated, but new positions are also created in the affected part of the organization. This may result in two processes - an appointment process to fill the new positions, and an assessment process to select employees for retention and lay-off. When conducting an appointment process to fill the new positions, managers must respect the PSEA, which prescribes the manner of making appointments within the public service.
It is important to remember that when employees are selected for lay-off, it does not mean that they have had less than fully satisfactory performance or that they are not suitable for employment elsewhere. In fact, the nature of this exercise, and the reduced number of employees who can be retained, may result in employees who are among the organization's better performers being selected for lay-off.
The process of selecting employees for retention and lay-off is not ddesigned to replace policies and procedures aimed at resolving performance issues or disciplinary problems. Unless they are at the point of having their employment terminated for cause (incompetence), poor performers who are part of the affected organization will be assessed along with all other affected employees. Should they be the ones selected for lay-off, their organization will be responsible for addressing their performance issues through a training/learning plan. It is important to keep in mind that selection for lay-off automatically triggers a priority for appointment, which imposes an obligation on all organizations, starting with the "home" organization, to reintegrate the employee.>

Top of Page

5. Process to select employees for retention and lay-off

WFA can lead to various situations where employees must be selected for retention and lay-off, depending on the particulars of the organization and the reasons for the WFA. Understanding what makes each situation unique is important because different provisions of the PSEA or the PSER may apply, and because of the impact on the organization and the affected employees. Five such situations are presented here as typical situations.

Managers and HR advisors should first identify which of the five situations relate closest to their circumstances. There are concrete steps and relevant information for each situation.

Situation 1 – Workforce reduction, with no change in duties, or to the merit criteria : The manager has determined that some, but not all, of the similar positions are to be eliminated. There are few or no changes to the duties of the positions that will remain, and there are no different or additional merit criteria required for the remaining positions. The classification decision for the remaining positions confirms they are the same existing positions from a classification perspective.

Situation 2 – Workforce reduction, with no significant change in the duties, but with changes to the merit criteria: The manager has determined that some, but not all, of the similar positions are to be eliminated. There may be some changes to the duties of the positions that will remain, and there are different or additional merit criteria required for the remaining positions. The classification decision for the remaining positions confirms they are the same existing positions from a classification perspective.

Situation 3 – Workforce reduction, with significant changes in some of the duties, and with changes to some of the merit criteria: The manager has determined that some, but not all, of the similar positions are to be eliminated. There are substantial changes to the duties that will remain. There are different or additional merit criteria required for the remaining positions. The classification decision for some but not all of the remaining positions indicate there are some new positions from a classification perspective.

Situation 4 – Workforce reduction, with all positions to be eliminated and new positions to be created, and with new merit criteria: The manager has determined that all positions are to be eliminated. There are new positions created outside of the affected part of the organization. The merit criteria are new. The classification decisions for all the positions indicate they are new from a classification perspective.

Situation 5 – Workforce reduction, with all positions to be eliminated: The manager has determined that all the similar positions are to be eliminated. As there are no employees to be retained, there is no need to assess them. They are therefore all selected for lay-off, and this guide does not apply.

Top of Page

Situation 1 – Workforce reduction, with no change in duties, or to the essential qualifications

The manager has determined that some, but not all, of the similar positions are to be eliminated. There are few or no changes to the duties of the positions that will remain, and there are no different or additional merit criteria required for the remaining positions. The classification decision for the remaining positions confirms they are the same existing positions from a classification perspective.

Step 1 – Determine the part of the organization that is affected

When faced with a WFA situation, the manager must determine the organizational and geographical boundaries within which the employees occupying similar positions are to be retained or laid off. In doing so, the manager should first consult the organization’s HR and business plans, as they are a useful source of information when conducting an environmental scan, a work force analysis and a skills gap. By understanding the current and future operational reality facing the organization, the manager can make decisions that serve the interests of the organization and that treat employees fairly. As in every step of this process, the manager should advise employees of any decisions made in as timely a manner as possible.

Some questions to consider in determining the part of the organization that is affected:

Is it a section?
Is it something larger, such as a division or a directorate?
Is it something very significant, such as an entire branch or a regional office?
Is it a program or a type of work which is inter-organizational?
Is the affected area local, regional, or national?

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

It is important to keep employees advised throughout the WFA process of major decisions affecting them. Consultation with Bargaining Agents is essential. This step is important because at this stage, managers have made critical decisions that will affect not only the life of the organization but, more importantly, will affect the lives of employees. It is essential that employees and bargaining agents have this information as soon as possible to ensure knowledgeable union representation and help them make important decisions about their own lives and careers.

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents at this step should cover the following:

the HR and business plans of the organization, as a context for understanding why WFA is being applied in the affected part of the organization;
the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information available at this early point.

Early and frequent communication does not mean that managers cannot change their minds although this should be avoided if possible. If changes are necessary, managers should be able to clearly explain the rationale for the changes as they relate to the needs of the remaining position and the organization.

Example:

There are 20 positions in a work unit in one geographic location whose duties are identical, and the positions are classified at the same group and level.

The latest HR and business plans indicate that the existing work has not changed, but only 12 positions are now required. An environmental scan confirms that no one else in the organization performs similar duties, and there are no plans for technology to change how the work is performed. Consequently, no changes to the merit criteria are foreseen.

Based on this information, the manager determines that the affected part of the organization is the work unit in this one location where the 20 positions are located.

Step 2 - Identify the similar affected positions and employees

The manager identifies the positions that constitute similar affected positions. The employees who occupy the positions are identified as affected, and are to be assessed to identify which are to be retained and which are to be selected for lay-off.

Considerations when identifying the similar affected positions

Once the affected part of the organization has been determined, the manager needs to identify which positions in the affected part of the organization are of a similar occupational nature or performing similar duties in the same occupational group and level.

Some questions to consider:

Are any of the positions unique or stand-alone?
Are there any pools of reasonably homogeneous positions, for example, those with the same or very similar duties? The similar positions might be CR-4 finance assistants, or they might be positions that are classified as CR-4 human resources assistants, including staffing and labour relations assistants.
Can a case be made for somewhat similar positions classified at the same group and level to be considered as homogeneous, for example, human resources, finance and administrative assistants classified as CR-4s?
Do the positions require the same or similar qualifications?

Considerations when identifying the employees to be assessed

When identifying the affected employees, it is important to note that some employees performing the duties of the affected positions are not included in the assessment process, while others are.

Employees to be included are:
- Incumbents of the affected positions who are performing duties elsewhere, such as:
  - employees on assignment/secondment elsewhere; and
  - employees who have been appointed on an acting basis elsewhere;
- Employees on a leave of absence, unless their position has been filled indeterminately behind them (see TBS’s Questions and Answers - Work force Adjustment Agreements Web site); and
- All other incumbents of the affected positions.
Employees not to be included are:
- Specified term employees. Note that specified term employees are subject to lay-off; however, they are not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process, nor are they entitled to a priority for appointment;
- Employees who volunteer and are accepted for lay-off;
- Employees who resign or retire before the expected lay-off date;
- Employees who are performing the duties of the affected positions, but who do not occupy them on a substantive basis, such as:
  - employees on assignment/secondment from elsewhere; and
  - employees appointed on an acting basis from elsewhere.

Organizations should ensure that employees working in an affected area and who are not included in the assessment process understand why they are not included to avoid the misperception that they occupy the affected position on a substantive basis.

It is important to note that employees who have presented performance, incapacity or discipline problems should have been dealt with prior to and outside the process for selecting employees for retention and lay-off, in accordance with the employer's policies.

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents at this step should cover the following:

the number of positions to be eliminated;
the number of employees who are affected and are subject to the assessment process to select employees for retention and lay-off;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees, as this information cannot be repeated often enough; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

Of the 20 positions that have been identified as affected, there are employees occupying each one.

Of the 20 employees, 17 are indeterminate employees who occupy the positions on a substantive basis, one is a specified term employee, one is an employee from outside the organization who has been appointed on an acting basis, and one is an employee from outside the organization who has been seconded to the position.

The term employee is not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process, as prescribed by subsection 21(6) of the PSER.
Neither the employee appointed on an acting basis nor the employee seconded from outside the organization occupies the position on a substantive basis. As employees are not subject to WFA unless it applies to their substantive position, they are not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process.

Consequently, the selection for retention and lay-off process applies only to the 17 indeterminate employees. The manager must therefore determine which 12 of these 17 employees are to be retained, and which five are to be selected for lay-off.

The manager must put plans in place to deal with the term employee, the employee appointed on an acting basis, and the seconded employee. None of them should be retained in the organization in place of an indeterminate employee who is to be laid off.

Step 3 - Determine the selection strategy

The manager has the flexibility to determine the appropriate selection strategy, so depending on the situation, different options exist. Once the strategy has been determined, it can be used to make further decisions, such as determining the merit criteria, the appropriate assessment methods and the selection criteria.

For example, while employees may volunteer for lay-off at any time, if the number of employees to be selected for lay-off is small compared to the number to be retained, a valid strategy may be to invite employees to volunteer for lay-off as early in the process as possible.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

an invitation to employees to volunteer for lay-off;
the overall selection strategy and the process to be followed, in general terms;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

There are 17 employees who are to be assessed in the selection for retention and lay-off process.

Earlier in the week, one of the employees had provided the manager with a copy of an accepted letter of offer to deploy to another organization. One other employee has volunteered for and has been accepted for lay-off. These two employees will therefore not be included in the assessment process.

Of the 15 remaining employees, 12 will be retained for the continuing functions of the organization, and three will be selected for lay-off.

Top of Page

Step 4 - Review the merit criteria and determine the selection criteria

Review the merit criteria

The merit criteria are comprised of:

essential qualifications, including official language proficiency, required for the work to be performed;
qualifications that are considered an asset for the work to be performed, or for the organization, currently or in the future;
any current or future operational requirements of the organization; and
any current or future needs of the organization.

Since there are no changes to the remaining duties warranting different or additional essential qualifications, the manager review the merit criteria to determine their relevance with respect to the work to be performed as well as the current and future operational requirements and needs of the organization.

Essential qualifications

Essential qualifications are qualifications that are required for the person to perform the work. To be selected for retention, a person must meet each essential qualification. When a manager identifies a qualification as essential, the manager is stating that if a person does not meet that qualification, the person could not function in the position. This means that if five essential qualifications have been identified, then each one must be met. If a qualification is identified that is not essential to perform the work, then that qualification may be an asset for the work to be performed and, if so, it should be identified that way.

Essential qualifications may be assessed on a “meets/does not meet” basis, and this would be appropriate when assessing some essential qualifications, for example, education. However, the level at which an employee meets an essential qualification would likely be the deciding factor in a selection for retention and lay-off process. If strength in a particular essential qualification, such as writing ability, is to be used as a criterion for the selection for retention, it will not be possible to differentiate among employees if they are assessed on a “meets/does not meet” basis for the qualification.

Official language proficiency

It is important to note that as the process for selecting employees for retention is not an appointment process, non-imperative staffing, as provided for in the Public Service Official Languages Exclusion Approval Order, does not apply.

Other merit criteria

While essential qualifications may be established for the work to be performed, the other merit criteria (current or future asset qualifications, operational requirements and organizational needs) may be established for both the current and future needs of the position and the organization. It is equally important to establish the other merit criteria to retain employees for the current and the future needs of the organization.

Other considerations

Managers should consider the degree to which they might provide an opportunity to affected employees to acquire the merit criteria required. This will vary with the nature of the merit criterion, the time required to acquire it and the operational reality of the organization. For example, if the employees do not have a driver’s licence, should they be given an opportunity to obtain it? In answering such questions, managers should consider whether operational needs can accommodate the time required to meet the merit criterion before the selection for retention and lay-off must be conducted.

Examples of other questions the manager may wish to consider in this situation are:

Is possession of a driver’s licence a bona fide occupational requirement or can this be accommodated?
What would be the next step if the employee fails to obtain a driver’s licence?
Will the manager wait until the employee can try again to obtain it?
Is there another way that the employee could get to field work locations?
Is the manager certain that there would be no work for this employee if the driver’s licence took some time to obtain or could not be obtained?

There are no easy answers to these sorts of questions. In resolving such issues, managers must try to achieve a reasonable balance between operational reality, such as the impact of a delay in conducting the selection, and fairness to the employees involved. If possible, the manager should give employees sufficient advance notice that the employees can take the necessary actions prior to the selection process for retention and lay-off.

Establishing the selection criteria

The selection for retention represents the application of the merit criteria in selecting among the employees who meet the merit criteria that have been assessed during the assessment process. It is a critical decision point, since it builds on the decisions of establishing and assessing merit criteria. The guiding values of fairness, transparency, access and representativeness must be respected when selecting employees for retention and lay-off.

Prior to the conduct of the assessment process, managers should determine the criteria they will use to select from among the employees who meet the merit criteria that will be applied to determine who will be retained. The selection criteria could be a strength in a particular qualification, a combination of qualifications, or the application of an organizational need.

While employees to be retained must meet all the essential qualifications and all the other merit criteria that are relevant to the selection decision, this does not mean that all the other criteria must be applied in every case or in any particular order. Managers have the flexibility to apply the selection criteria to select the employees who are to be retained within the context of the continuing positions. So, although employees being retained must always meet the essential qualifications, the manager may apply and select those who meet an asset qualification, an organizational need or an operational requirement before assessing the essential qualifications if it is more efficient to do so.

For example, a manager could choose to apply the same merit criteria in the same way and with the same weight to the filling of all the remaining positions where the needs of those positions are truly the same. On the other hand, the continuing functions of the affected organization, possibly including anticipated future needs, may be better served by retaining employees with a mix of merit criteria; this would be achieved by applying different combinations of the merit criteria, as long as all those retained meet all the essential qualifications. This recognizes that even though the employees are being assessed for retention in similar positions, the emphasis in some positions may not be exactly the same as in others. Thus, the manager has the flexibility to select for retention those persons who, collectively, best reflect the differences in skills, organizational goals or future directions required. As a result, a manager could choose a group of employees, all of whom meet the same essential qualifications, but who possess different asset qualifications, or who meet the operational requirements or organizational needs.

For these reasons, it is imperative that managers objectively determine the selection criteria and communicate it to the employees in advance of the assessment process. This will assist in addressing any misperception that personal favouritism may have played a part in the selection of employees for retention and for lay-off.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

the merit criteria, including the definitions of each one and, if applicable, the relative weighting of each merit criterion;
the selection criteria that will be used to determine which employees are to be retained for the remaining positions;
an invitation to employees to identify any accommodations they may need for the assessment process;
an invitation to employees to volunteer for lay-off;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

The 15 affected employees have all worked with the manager for at least two years, and are performing well in their positions.

The manager’s review of the merit criteria indicates that:

while the work remains the same, the employees will be required to work with less supervision;
the work unit will continue to produce written documents that are clear, concise and accurate.

The manager confirms the following as essential qualifications:

Education in accordance with the applicable qualification standard;
experience in the work the team is currently performing;
official language proficiency - bilingual CBC/CBC;
ability to interpret the act and regulations the team is responsible for interpreting;
written communication skills;
oral communication skills
interpersonal skills;
initiative; and
teamwork.

After the manager’s review of the existing and future work, the manager decides to use the following selection criteria:

to ensure that high-quality written documents are produced, the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in written communication will be used as a selection criterion for six positions;
;to ensure the continuing provision of quality advice to the clientele, the ability to interpret the act and regulations the team is responsible for interpreting will be used as a selection criterion for four positions; and
as there will be less supervision, the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in initiative will be used to differentiate between employees as a selection criterion.

Step 5 - Determine the assessment methods to be used, and assess the affected employees

The objective of the assessment process is to ensure that the employees selected for retention are qualified to perform the continuing functions of their positions and that they will meet the needs identified in the organization's HR or business plans. Appropriate assessment methods must be chosen or developed so that merit criteria can be thoroughly assessed to ensure the right employees are retained.

Assessment methods must produce information that is relevant to all the qualifications being assessed. The amount of information needed to assess an employee's competence with respect to a particular qualification depends on the nature and the importance of the qualification, as identified by the manager. The use of multiple, well-developed assessment tools generally provide more complete and valid information. The integration of information from more than one source ensures a more complete and accurate picture of the employee being assessed.

When determining which assessment method to use, managers may choose to use existing documents, such as descriptions of an employee's past performance, and the manager’s own knowledge of the employees’ performance, as a source of information if this will provide sufficient information to assess a particular merit criterion. However, this does not preclude the manager from choosing to use other assessment methods, such as interviews, written examinations, etc. Using different sources of information enhances the assessment process and permits an evaluation of the consistency of performance over time and across various situations.

Assessment should be seen as a process, rather than just the administration of individual assessment tools. To increase efficiency, HR advisors can help managers identify assessment tools that complement each other and those that can assess more than one qualification.

In all cases, the manager must ensure that the employees selected for retention meet the essential qualifications, including official language proficiency, and that they meet any other merit criteria that are being applied - asset qualifications, operational requirements and organizational needs.

Considerations related to the assessment of official language proficiency

When assessing official language proficiency to select employees for retention in bilingual positions, it is important to note that the results of Second Language Evaluation (SLE) tests are valid for five years, unless the employee is exempted from undertaking further second official language assessment. When this time period expires, the employee’s SLE results are deemed to be valid for an indefinite period with regard to the employee’s substantive position, as long as the linguistic profile of the position has not been raised above the employee's skill level.

Where the official language proficiency requirements of a bilingual position are not changed, the employee remains in their substantive position, and the employee’s most recent SLE test results demonstrate that they meet the official language proficiency requirements of their position, the employee’s SLE results remain valid, even if they were obtained more than five years ago.

However, if the employee’s most recent SLE results demonstrate that they do not meet the official language proficiency requirements of their position, then the employee must undertake another SLE to demonstrate that they meet those requirements.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

a reminder of the merit criteria, including the definitions of each one and, if applicable, the relative weighting of each merit criterion;
a reminder of the selection criteria that will be used to determine which employees are to be retained for the remaining positions; for example, strength in a particular qualification or combination of qualifications;
the overall process and expected timing of the assessment for retention and lay-off;
the methods of assessment;
an invitation to employees to identify any accommodations they may need for the assessment process;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees, as this information cannot be released too often; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

The manager has determined the assessment methods to be used to assess each merit criterion:

education in accordance with the applicable qualification standard – a review of the employee’s file to confirm the employee’s educational credentials;
official language proficiency - bilingual CBC/CBC – obtain a copy of the employee’s most recent SLE results from the PSC, and use the SLE for those employees who no longer meet the requirement;
experience in the work the team is currently performing – the manager’s personal knowledge;
ability to interpret the act and regulations the team is responsible for interpreting – the manager’s personal knowledge based on past performance;
written communication skills – the PSC’s standardized Written Communication Test ;
oral communication skills – the manager’s personal knowledge;
interpersonal skills – the manager’s personal knowledge;
initiative – using a standardized reference check developed by the PSC; and
teamwork – the manager’s personal knowledge.

The assessment process will proceed as follows:

Employees will be asked to identify any accommodations they may require for the written communication test;
The manager will complete a review of the employees’ files and complete a written assessment of their personal knowledge;
Employees will be asked to provide the name of two persons for a reference check, and reference check questionnaires will be sent to the two persons;
The manager will liaise with the HR advisor to obtain from the PSC each employee’s latest SLE results;

Upon completion of the assessment of the 15 employees, all are found to meet the essential qualifications.

Top of Page

Step 6 – Determine which employees are to be retained and which are to be laid off

Selection is a crucial step in the decision-making process, and the PSER requires that such decisions be recorded for the employees who are to be retained. Thus, it is important that the manager has confidence in the assessment process and the reason for the selection decision, and that they are sufficiently documented to clearly explain them to the affected employees.

Unlike an appointment process where candidates are not generally aware of who the other candidates are, affected employees who are to be assessed for retention and lay-off are usually aware of which other employees are also being assessed. This may contribute to tension between the employees in the work environment, and may lead to a loss of productivity. As well, unlike an appointment process where candidates who do not meet the selection criteria are simply not appointed, in an assessment for retention and lay-off process, employees who do not meet the selection criteria are selected for lay-off, which could directly result in the loss of employment.

It is important that a selection strategy be developed early in the process, so that at this point, the manager has established and applied the appropriate merit criteria, and thoroughly assessed them to make appropriate decisions at this step.

Additional information regarding selection decisions may be found in the PSC’s Guidance Series - Assessment, Selection and Appointment.

Example:

In accordance with the original strategy, the manager selects for retention the following 12 employees:

The six employees with the greatest strengths in written communication, as assessed by the PSC’s standardized Written Communication Test;
Of the remaining nine employees, the four employees with the greatest strengths in ability to interpret the act and regulations as assessed by the manager’s personal knowledge based on past performance;
Of the remaining five employees, the two with the greatest strengths in initiative, as assessed by the standardized reference check questionnaire.

The remaining three employees are selected for lay-off.

Step 7 - Communicate results to employees

Once the determination as to which employees are to be retained and which are to be laid off has been made, managers are encouraged to inform employees, on an individual basis, whether they have been selected for retention or for lay-off as soon as possible. To ensure transparency and fairness of the process, all employees who were assessed should be informed about the selection results at the same time.

While informal discussion as contemplated by section 47 of the PSEA does not apply to the selection for retention and lay-off process, the guiding values of fairness and transparency mean that managers should be prepared to discuss and explain the assessment results to employees. Information provided to an employee would relate only to that employee. Keep in mind that the Privacy Act protects personal information. Any information about a third party must not be disclosed.

Advise the employees to be laid off that they have been selected for lay-off, and provide recourse rights

Once the affected employees have been advised of the results of the selection, the next step is to advise those who have been selected for lay-off.

Subsection 21(5) of the PSER requires managers to inform, in writing, the employees who have been selected for lay-off and the proposed lay-off date. The manager must also inform the PSC of the names of the surplus employees and the proposed lay-off dates. Organizations provide this information to the PSC by registering the surplus employees in the PSC’s Priority Information Management System, which is designed to facilitate the appointments of persons who are entitled to a priority for appointment.

Section 65 of the PSEA provides that where some, but not all, the employees in a part of the organization are informed that they will be laid off, the employees selected for lay-off may complain to the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (PSST). This right is extended to employees when they are formally declared surplus, as this is the point at which they are informed that they will be laid off. Employees may complain on the grounds that their selection constituted an abuse of authority. As stated in subsection 2(4) of the PSEA, abuse of authority includes bad faith and personal favouritism.

No complaint may be made against the decision to lay-off employees, against the determination of the part of the organization and positions to be affected, or the number of employees to be laid off.

Where the PSST finds a complaint to be substantiated, it may set aside the decision to lay-off the complainant and order the deputy head to take any corrective action that it considers appropriate.

A full listing of the PSST's mandate and procedures (including the timing of submissions) may be found on the PSST's Web site.

Advise the remaining employees they will be retained

Employees who have been selected for retention should be advised in writing that they are to be retained, and that they will remain in their current position.

Example:

The 15 employees who were assessed are informed of the assessment results, and whether they were selected for retention or for lay-off.

The employee who volunteered and was accepted for lay-off is informed that he will be laid off.

The three employees selected for lay-off based on the selection process are invited to discuss the decision with the manager.

All four employees to be laid off are informed of their recourse rights to the PSST.

The 12 employees to be retained are also advised that they will remain in their position, and the other employees have a right to complain about the selection decision to the PSST.

Top of Page

Situation 2 – Workforce reduction, with no significant change in the duties, but with changes to the merit criteria:

The manager has determined that some, but not all, of the similar positions are to be eliminated. There may be some changes to the duties that will remain, and there are different or additional merit criteria required for the remaining positions. The classification decision for the remaining positions confirms they are the same existing positions from a classification perspective.

Step 1 – Determine the part of the organization that is affected

Some questions to consider in determining the part of the organization that is affected:

Is it a section?
Is it something larger, such as a division or a directorate?
Is it something very significant, such as an entire branch or a regional office?
Is it a program or a type of work which is inter-organizational?
Is the affected area local, regional, or national?>

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

It is important to keep employees advised throughout the WFA process of major decisions affecting them. Consultation with bargaining agents is essential. This step is important because at this stage, managers have made critical decisions that will affect not only the life of the organization but, more importantly, will affect the lives of employees. It is essential that employees and bargaining agents have this information as soon as possible to ensure knowledgeable union representation and help them make important decisions about their own lives and careers.

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents at this step should cover the following:

the HR and business plans of the organization, as a context for understanding why WFA is being applied in the affected part of the organization;
the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information available at this early point.

Example:

There are 20 positions in a work unit in one geographic location whose duties are identical, and the positions are classified at the same group and level.

Based on this information, the manager determines that the affected part of the organization is the work unit in this one location where the 20 positions are located.

Step 2 - Identify the similar affected positions and employees

Considerations when identifying the similar affected positions

Some questions to consider:

Are any of the positions unique or stand-alone?
Are there any pools of reasonably homogeneous positions, for example, those with the same or very similar duties? The similar positions might be CR-4 finance assistants, or they might be positions that are classified as CR-4 human resources assistants, including staffing and labour relations assistants.
Can a case be made for somewhat similar positions classified at the same group and level to be considered as homogeneous, for example, human resources, finance and administrative assistants classified as CR-4s?
Do the positions require the same or similar qualifications?

Considerations when identifying the employees to be assessed

When identifying the affected employees, it is important to note that some employees performing the duties of the affected positions are not included in the assessment process, while others are.

Employees to be included are:
- Incumbents of the affected positions who are performing duties elsewhere, such as:
  - employees on assignment/secondment elsewhere; and
  - employees who have been appointed on an acting basis elsewhere;
- Employees on a leave of absence, unless their position has been filled indeterminately behind them (see TBS’s Questions and Answers - Work force Adjustment Agreements Web site); and
- All other incumbents of the affected positions.
Employees not to be included are:
- Specified term employees. Note that specified term employees are subject to lay-off; however, they are not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process, nor are they entitled to a priority for appointment;
- Employees who volunteer and are accepted for lay-off;
- Employees who resign or retire before the expected lay-off date;
- Employees who are performing the duties of the affected positions, but who do not occupy them on a substantive basis, such as:
  - employees on assignment/secondment from elsewhere; and
  - employees appointed on an acting basis from elsewhere.

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents at this step should cover the following:

the number of positions to be eliminated;
the number of employees who are affected and are subject to the assessment process to select employees for retention and lay-off;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees, as this information cannot be repeated often enough; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

Of the 20 positions that have been identified as affected, there are employees occupying each one.

The term employee is not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process, as prescribed by subsection 21(6) of the PSER.
Neither the employee appointed on an acting basis nor the employee seconded from outside the organization occupies the position on a substantive basis. As employees are not subject to WFA unless it applies to their substantive position, they are not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process.

Top of Page

Step 3 - Determine the selection strategy

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

an invitation to employees to volunteer for lay-off;
the overall selection strategy and the process to be followed, in general terms;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

There are 17 employees who are to be assessed in the selection for retention and lay-off process.

Of the 15 remaining employees, 12 will be retained for the continuing functions of the organization, and three will be selected for lay-off.

Step 4 - Review the merit criteria and determine the selection criteria

Review the merit criteria

The merit criteria are comprised of:

essential qualifications, including official language proficiency, required for the work to be performed;
qualifications that are considered an asset for the work to be performed, or for the organization, currently or in the future;
any current or future operational requirements of the organization; and
any current or future needs of the organization.

Identifying the merit criteria starts with a thorough understanding of the work that is to be performed after the affected positions have been eliminated. This means not only looking at the work involved, but also examining the relationship between the work and the environment.

The manager must not only review the merit criteria to determine its relevance with respect to the continuing work to be performed, but may also establish different or new merit criteria taking into account the changes to the duties to be performed, as well as the current and future operational requirements and needs of the organization.

Managers must take into consideration the continuing functions of the affected part of the organization when reviewing the merit criteria. This could include establishing merit criteria based on the general direction of the organization as a whole, if there is a link to the affected part of the organization. For example, it could be that the organization is moving towards further automation of systems and procedures; however, managers are only responsible for the WFA in their own units. Managers could then establish merit criteria that take into account the automated systems that the organization will be using in the future.

Elements of the organization's HR and business plans, such as the environmental scan and analysis of the work force, both of which may address EE and OL issues, as well as the identification of skills gaps, play an important role in developing the merit criteria, since these factors provide the context for the work.

Essential qualifications

Official language proficiency

The Official Languages Act states that OL proficiency must be set objectively for the functions to be performed. Paragraph 30(2)(a) of the PSEA, which defines the meaning of merit, provides that OL proficiency is an essential qualification. For this reason, OL proficiency may be established only for the current requirements of the position. Managers must determine, as a result of the work force adjustment exercise, whether the official language proficiency requirements of the position are to be changed.

Other merit criteria

While all essential qualifications must be assessed, there is no obligation to establish or to apply the other merit criteria, which are current or future asset qualifications, operational requirements and organizational needs. Selection for retention could be limited only to those employees who meet the essential qualifications.

Merit criteria other than the essential qualifications need not be applied to each selection for retention and lay-off process, or to the selection decision for each position. This means that employees can be selected for retention even though they do not meet some or all of the other merit criteria. Managers should inform employees whenever some, but not all, of the other merit criteria will be applied, and whenever they will be applied to some, but not all, of the positions.

While essential qualifications may be established for the work to be performed, the other merit criteria may be established for both the current and future needs of the position and the organization. It is equally important to establish the other merit criteria to retain employees for the current and the future needs of the organization.

Examples of how the other merit criteria may be established:

A government office serves an area that includes a major ethnic community that is accustomed to having a number of officers who speak the language of the community. If operational requirements dictate that a certain number of officers, but not all, are required to possess the language skills of the community, then it would be appropriate to apply that skill as an asset qualification to the selection of some of the employees to be retained, but not to others, or to apply a higher level of skill to some but not to others.
The number of similar administrative positions is being reduced from 10 to six positions. The work descriptions are similar and have the same requirement for word processing duties. However, in the past four years, those duties were performed by only two of the employees. After the reduction, all the employees retained will be expected to perform word processing duties. In this context, it would be appropriate to establish ability to perform word processing duties as an essential qualification.

Other considerations

Examples of other questions the manager may wish to consider in this situation are:

Is possession of a driver’s licence a bona fide occupational requirement or can this be accommodated?
What would be the next step if the employee fails to obtain a driver’s licence?
Will the manager wait until the employee can try again to obtain it?
Is there another way that the employee could get to field work locations?
Is the manager certain that there would be no work for this employee if the driver’s licence took some time to obtain or could not be obtained?

Establishing the selection criteria

While employees to be retained must meet all the essential qualifications and all the other merit criteria that are applied, this does not mean that all the other criteria must be applied in every case or in any particular order. Managers have the flexibility to apply the selection criteria to select the employees who are to be retained within the context of the continuing positions. So, although employees being retained must always meet the essential qualifications, the manager may apply and select those who meet an asset qualification, an organizational need or an operational requirement before assessing the essential qualifications if it is more efficient to do so.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

the merit criteria, including the definitions of each one and, if applicable, the relative weighting of each merit criterion;
the selection criteria that will be used to determine which employees are to be retained for the remaining positions;
an invitation to employees to identify any accommodations they may need for the assessment process;
an invitation to employees to volunteer for lay-off;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

The 15 affected employees have all worked with the manager for at least two years, and are performing well in their positions.

The manager’s review of the existing and future work indicates that:

while the work remains the same, the employees will be required to work with less supervision;
the work unit will continue to produce written documents that are clear, concise and accurate; and
in addition to continue to develop information sessions, the work unit will now present information sessions.

The manager confirms the following as essential qualifications:

Education in accordance with the applicable qualification standard;
experience in the work the team is currently performing;
official language proficiency - bilingual CBC/CBC;
ability to interpret the act and regulations the team is responsible for interpreting;
written communication skills;
oral communication skills
interpersonal skills;
initiative;and
teamwork.

In addition, the managers establishes that the following essential qualifications will now be required for the work to be performed:

presentation skills; and
autonomy

The manager also establishes travel occasionally to make presentations as an operational requirement.

After the manager’s review of the existing and future work, the manager decides to use the following selection criteria:

to ensure that high-quality written documents are produced, the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in written communication will be used as a selection criterion for six positions;
to ensure a capacity to deliver presentations, the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in presentation skills will be used as a selection criterion for four positions;
to ensure the continuing provision of quality advice to the clientele, the ability to interpret the act and regulations the team is responsible for interpreting will be used as a selection criterion for two positions; and
as there will be less supervision, the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in initiative will be used to differentiate between employees as a selection criterion.

Top of Page

Step 5 - Determine the assessment methods to be used, and assess the affected employees

Assessment methods must produce information that is relevant to all the qualifications being assessed. The amount of information needed to assess an employee's competence with respect to a particular qualification depends on the nature and the importance of the qualification, as identified by the manager. The use of multiple, well-developed assessment tools generally provides more complete and valid information, and the integration of information from more than one source ensures a more complete and accurate picture of the employee being assessed.

Considerations related to the assessment of official language proficiency

When assessing official language proficiency to select employees for retention in bilingual positions, it is important to note that t he results of Second Language Evaluation (SLE) tests are valid for five years unless the employee is exempted[1] from undertaking further second official language assessment. When this time period expires, the SLE results of an employee are deemed to be valid for an indefinite period with regard to the employee’s substantive position, as long as the linguistic profile of the position has not been raised above the employee's skill level.

Regardless of whether the official language proficiency requirements of the position are changed, and the employee remains in their substantive position, if the employee’s most recent SLE results demonstrate that they meet the official language proficiency requirements, the employee’s SLE results remain valid, even if they were obtained more than five years ago.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

a reminder of the merit criteria, including the definitions of each one and, if applicable, the relative weighting of each merit criterion;
a reminder of the selection criteria that will be used to determine which employees are to be retained for the remaining positions; for example, strength in a particular qualification or combination of qualifications;
the overall process and expected timing of the assessment for retention and lay-off;
the methods of assessment;
an invitation to employees to identify any accommodations they may need for the assessment process;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

The manager has determined the assessment methods to be used to assess each merit criterion:

Education in accordance with the applicable qualification standard – a review of the employee’s file to confirm the employee’s educational credentials;
experience in the work the team is currently performing – the manager’s personal knowledge;
official language proficiency - bilingual CBC/CBC – obtain a copy of the employee’s most recent SLE results from the PSC, and use the SLE for those employees who do not meet the requirement;
ability to interpret the act and regulations the team is responsible for interpreting – the manager’s personal knowledge based on past performance;
written communication skills – the PSC’s standardized Written Communication Test ;
oral communication skills – the manager’s personal knowledge;
presentation skills – using a standardized test developed by the PSC;
interpersonal skills – the manager’s personal knowledge;
initiative – using a standardized reference check developed by the PSC;
teamwork – the manager’s personal knowledge; and
autonomy – the manager’s personal knowledge;
Travel occasionally to make presentations – employees will be asked to indicate in writing whether or not they are willing to meet this operational requirement.

The assessment process will proceed as follows:

Employees will be asked to identify any accommodations they may require for the written communication test and the test for presentation skills;
The manager will complete the review of the employees’ files and complete a written assessment of their personal knowledge;
Employees will be asked to provide the name of two persons for a reference check, and reference check questionnaires will be sent to the two persons;
The manager will liaise with the HR advisor to obtain from the PSC each employee’s latest SLE results;
For those employees who are not exempted from undertaking further SLE assessment or do not have valid SLE tests, the manager will liaise with the HR advisor to make the arrangements to administer the SLE;
Employees will be asked to indicate in writing whether or not they are willing to meet this operational requirement.

Upon completion of the assessment of the 15 employees, all are found to meet the essential qualifications. Two have indicated that they are not willing to travel.

Step 6 – Determine which employees are to be retained and which are to be laid off

Additional information regarding selection decisions may be found in the PSC’s Guidance Series - Assessment, Selection and Appointment.

Example:

In accordance with the original strategy, the manager selects for retention 12 of the 15 employees:

The six employees with the greatest strengths in written communication, as assessed by the PSC’s standardized Written Communication Test;
Of the remaining seven employees who indicted they were willing to travel occasionally to make presentations, the four employees with the greatest strengths in presentation skills, as assessed by the standardized test developed by the PSC;
Of the remaining five employees, the two with the greatest strengths in the ability to interpret the act and regulations the team is responsible for interpreting, as assessed by the manager’s personal knowledge, one of whom is not willing to travel.

The remaining three employees are selected for lay-off, one of whom did not agree to the operational requirement of travel.

Step 7 - Communicate results to employees

Advise the employees to be laid off that they have been declared surplus, and provide recourse rights

Once the affected employees have been advised of the results of the selection, the next step is to advise those who have been selected for lay-off that they have been declared surplus.

No complaint may be made against the decision to lay-off employees, against the determination of the part of the organization and positions to be affected, or the number of employees to be laid off.

Where the PSST finds a complaint to be substantiated, it may set aside the decision to lay-off the complainant and order the deputy head to take any corrective action that it considers appropriate.

A full listing of the PSST's mandate and procedures (including the timing of submissions) may be found on the PSST's Web site.

Advise the remaining employees they will be retained

Employees who have been selected for retention should be advised in writing that they are to be retained, and that they will remain in their current position.

Example:

The 15 employees who were assessed are informed of the assessment results, and whether they were selected for retention or for lay-off.

The employee who volunteered and was accepted for lay-off is informed that he will be laid off.

The three employees selected for lay-off based on the selection process are invited to discuss the decision with the manager.

All four employees to be laid off are informed of their recourse rights to the PSST.

The 12 employees to be retained are also advised that they will remain in their position, and that the other employees have a right to complain about the selection decision to the PSST.

Top of Page

Situation 3 - Workforce reduction, with significant changes in some of the duties, and with changes to some of the merit criteria:

The manager has determined that some, but not all, of the similar positions are to be eliminated. T here are substantial changes to the duties that will remain. T here are different or additional merit criteria for the remaining positions. The classification decision for some but not all of the remaining positions indicate there are some new positions from a classification perspective.

Step 1 – Determine the part of the organization that is affected

Some questions to consider in determining the part of the organization that is affected:

Is it a section?
Is it something larger, such as a division or a directorate?
Is it something very significant, such as an entire branch or a regional office?
Is it a program or a type of work which is inter-organizational?
Is the affected area local, regional, or national?

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents at this step should cover the following:

the HR and business plans of the organization, as a context for understanding why WFA is being applied in the affected part of the organization;
the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information available at this early point.

Example:

There are 25 positions in a work unit in one geographic location whose duties are identical, and the positions are classified at the same group and level.

The latest HR and business plans indicate that the existing work has changed to the extent that only 15 positions are now required. However, in addition to the 15 positions, three new positions have been created. An environmental scan confirms that no one else in the organization performs similar duties, and there are no plans for technology to change how the work is performed. Consequently, no changes to the merit criteria are foreseen for the 15 positions, but the three new positions will have different merit criteria.

Based on this information, the manager determines that the affected part of the organization is the work unit in this one location where the 25 positions are located.

Step 2 - Identify the similar affected positions and employees.

Considerations when identifying the similar affected positions

Some questions to consider are:

Are any of the positions unique or stand-alone?
Are there any pools of reasonably homogeneous positions, for example, those with the same or very similar duties? The similar positions might be CR-4 finance assistants, or they might be positions that are classified as CR-4 human resources assistants, including staffing and labour relations assistants.
Can a case be made for somewhat similar positions classified at the same group and level to be considered as homogeneous, for example, human resources, finance and administrative assistants classified as CR-4s?
Do the positions require the same or similar qualifications?

Considerations when identifying the employees to be assessed

When identifying the affected employees, it is important to note that some employees performing the duties of the affected positions are not included in the assessment process, while others are.

Employees to be included are:
- Incumbents of the affected positions who are performing duties elsewhere, such as:
  - employees on assignment/secondment elsewhere; and
  - employees who have been appointed on an acting basis elsewhere;
- Employees on a leave of absence, unless their position has been filled indeterminately behind them (see TBS’s Questions and Answers - Work force Adjustment Agreements Web site); and
- All other incumbents of the affected positions.
Employees not to be included are:
- Specified term employees. Note that specified term employees are subject to lay-off; however, they are not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process, nor are they entitled to a priority for appointment;
- Employees who volunteer and are accepted for lay-off;
- Employees who resign or retire before the expected lay-off date;
- Employees who are performing the duties of the affected positions, but who do not occupy them on a substantive basis, such as:
  - employees on assignment/secondment from elsewhere; and
  - employees appointed on an acting basis from elsewhere.

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents at this step should cover the following:

an explanation of the new organizational structure, including the number of positions that are to be eliminated, and the number that have been created;
a brief description of the new positions;
the staffing strategy for the new positions, if it exists;
the number of employees who are affected; and are subject to the assessment process to select employees for retention and lay-off;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees, as this information cannot be repeated often enough; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

Of the 25 positions that have been identified as affected, there are employees occupying each one.

Of the 25 employees, 22 are indeterminate employees who occupy the positions on a substantive basis, one is a specified term employee, one is an employee from outside the organization who has been appointed on an acting basis, and one is an employee from outside the organization who has been seconded to the position.

The term employee is not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process, as prescribed by subsection 21(6) of the PSER.
Neither the employee appointed on an acting basis nor the employee seconded from outside the organization occupies the position on a substantive basis. As employees are not subject to WFA unless it applies to their substantive position, they are not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process.

Consequently, the selection for retention and lay-off process applies only to the 22 indeterminate employees. The manager must therefore determine which 15 of these 22 employees are to be retained, and which seven are to be selected for lay-off.

Top of Page

Step 3 - Determine the selection strategy for the new and existing positions

The choice of a strategy at this point is crucial because there is a reduction in the number of existing positions at the same time as the creation of new positions. Here are three possible options.

The manager could conduct an appointment process to fill the new positions first. This would provide an opportunity for the affected employees to be placed, and would thus reduce the number of affected employees. The manager could establish and apply essential qualifications, asset qualifications, operational requirements and organizational needs. Once the affected employees have been appointed to the new positions, the manager would conduct a selection for retention and lay-off process to determine which of the remaining affected employees would be selected for lay-off.

By conducting an appointment process and then conducting a selection for retention and lay-off process, some employees will have two opportunities to complain to the PSST. The first would be as provided by section 77 of the PSEA for internal appointments to the new positions, and the other would be as provided by section 65 for selection for lay-off from the existing positions. However, the standards by which the PSST may consider these complaints may be different, as the appointment opportunities results in an employee not being appointed, whereas the selection for retention and lay-off process results in an employee being selected for lay-off and potentially losing their employment.
A variation of this option is that the manager could first deploy the affected employees to the new positions – assuming they are at the same or equivalent group and level – before conducting the selection for retention and lay-off process. While this would also result in a reduced number of affected employees who would need to be selected for lay-off, it would not provide the employees who are not deployed with recourse to the PSST. Selection for retention and lay-off should be conducted in accordance with the values of fairness, access and transparency.
The manager could first conduct a selection for retention and lay-off process among the employees to select for lay-off. Once the employees have been selected for lay-off, they could be entitled to a surplus priority status. The employees would also be entitled to complain to the PSST as provided by section 65 of the PSEA.

The manager could then conduct an appointment process to fill the new positions, and could consider the surplus employees. There would be no opportunity for the employees who are not appointed to the new positions to complain to the PSST, as priority appointments, in accordance with section 87 of the PSEA, are not subject to recourse to the PSST.

However, in accordance with section 38 of the PSEA, persons with a priority entitlement are required to meet the essential qualifications only. This means that had the manager established asset qualifications, operational requirements or organizational needs, the manager would not be able to apply them to select from among the surplus employees, which would thus reduce the manager’s flexibility to select employees for the new positions.

Each of these options would meet the guiding values to different degrees. Option one would be fair and transparent to employees, while providing them with access, as they would have an opportunity to be considered for the new positions. As well appointing affected employees, in accordance with merit, would result in the reduction of the number of employees who would need to be selected for lay-off. There would be an appropriate recourse mechanism available for employees for both the selection for appointment, and the selection for retention and lay-off.

With regard to deploying employees, even if the new positions are classified at the same group and level as that of the affected employees, it would be more in keeping with the guiding values to conduct an appointment process.

While option three would also meet the values of transparency and fairness, there would be less flexibility for managers to select employees, and less of an opportunity for employees to avail themselves of recourse to the PSST. Depending on the requirements of the new positions, the manager may prefer to consider employees selected to be retained for these positions. Option one will be explored further in this guide.

Considerations when conducting the appointment process to fill the new positions

As the selection strategy includes conducting an appointment process prior to the selection for retention and lay-off process, the manager should consider several options to limit the impact of WFA on the affected employees.

An appointment process conducted in this situation is subject to the PSEA and the PSC’s Appointment Policy, as would be any other appointment process. Employees who are to be appointed must meet all the merit criteria required for the work to be performed, including official language proficiency, unless excluded pursuant to the Public Service Official Languages Exclusion Approval Order.

If the organization’s area of selection policy permits it, the area of selection could be limited to the affected area of the organization.

Whether the area of selection is limited or not, when establishing the merit criteria for the new positions, managers should consider establishing and applying an organizational need of “placement of affected employees”, and using this merit criterion to select employees for appointment. This will ensure that affected employees may be considered first for appointment.

Manager should consider invoking section 43 of the PSEA, which provides that should the Commission consider that the appointment of a priority person will result in another person having a priority right, then the Commission may decide to not apply that provision in that case. This means that when requesting priority clearance when conducting the appointment process, the PSC may agree to not refer any other priority persons that may be available.

An appointment process conducted under these circumstances may result in an increased level of stress on the affected employees, and should be conducted as quickly as possible.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

an invitation to employees to volunteer for lay-off;
the overall selection strategy and the process to be followed for both the appointment process and the selection for retention and lay-off process, in general terms;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

There are 22 employees who are to be assessed in the selection for retention and lay-off process.

The manager determines that an appointment process will be conducted before the selection for retention and lay-off process.

Of the remaining 20 employees, 18 apply on the appointment process. Three employees are appointed to the new positions.

Seventeen affected employees remain, and will be assessed for retention for the continuing functions of the organization. Of these, two will be selected for lay-off.

Step 4 - Determine the merit criteria and the selection criteria for the remaining positions

In general, the application of merit, as described in some detail in the PSC's Guide to Implementing the Assessment Policy, applies to the selection of employees for retention and lay-off.

Employees who are to be retained must meet all the essential qualifications required for the work to be performed, including official language (OL) proficiency.
The manager may establish other merit criteria:
- qualifications that are considered an asset for the work to be performed, or for the organization, currently or in the future;
- any current or future operational requirements of the organization; and
- any current or future needs of the organization.

Because merit criteria consist of more than just qualifications, managers may take into consideration the continuing functions of the affected part of the organization when determining the merit criteria. This could include establishing merit criteria based on the general direction of the organization as a whole, if there is a link to the affected part of the organization. For example, it could be that the organization is moving towards further automation of systems and procedures; however, managers are only responsible for the WFA in their own units. Managers could then establish merit criteria that take into account the automated systems that the organization will be using in the future.

For organizations for which the Treasury Board is the employer, all identified qualifications must meet the Treasury Board’s qualification standards, as indicated in the TBS Qualification Standards. Separate agencies are responsible for establishing their own qualification standards, and all identified qualifications must meet these standards. Note that managers may establish qualifications that exceed those minimum standards.

Essential qualifications

Official language proficiency

The Official Languages Act states that OL proficiency must be set objectively for the functions to be performed. Paragraph 30(2)(a), which defines the meaning of merit, provides that OL proficiency is an essential qualification. For this reason, OL proficiency may be established only for the current requirements of the position. Managers must determine, as a result of the work force adjustment exercise, whether the official language proficiency requirements of the position are to be changed.

Other merit criteria

Examples of how the other merit criteria may be established:

A government office serves an area that includes a major ethnic community that is accustomed to having a number of officers who speak the language of the community. If operational requirements dictate that a certain number of officers, but not all, are required to possess the language skills of the community, then it would be appropriate to apply that skill as an asset qualification to the selection of some of the employees to be retained, but not to others, or to apply a higher level of skill to some but not to others.
The number of similar administrative positions is being reduced from 10 to six positions. The work descriptions are similar and have the same requirement for word processing duties. However, in the past four years, those duties were performed by only two of the employees. After the reduction, all the employees retained will be expected to perform word processing duties. In this context, it would be appropriate to establish ability to perform word processing duties as an essential qualification.

Other considerations

Examples of other questions the manager may wish to consider in this situation are:

Is possession of a driver’s licence a bona fide occupational requirement or can this be accommodated?
What would be the next step if the employee fails to obtain a driver’s licence?
Will the manager wait until the employee can try again to obtain it?
Is there another way that the employee could get to field work locations?
Is the manager certain that there would be no work for this employee if the driver’s licence took some time to obtain or could not be obtained?

Establishing the selection criteria

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

the merit criteria, including the definitions of each one and, if applicable, the relative weighting of each merit criterion;
the selection criteria that will be used to determine which employees are to be retained for the remaining positions;
an invitation to employees to identify any accommodations they may need for the assessment process;
an invitation to employees to volunteer for lay-off;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

The 17 affected employees have all worked with the manager for at least two years, and are performing well in their positions.

The manager’s review of the existing and future work indicates that:

while the work remains the same, the employees will be required to work with less supervision;
the work unit will continue to produce written documents that are clear, concise and accurate; and
the work unit will continue to develop and present information sessions.

The manager has decided to establish the following as essential qualifications:

Education in accordance with the applicable qualification standard;
experience in the work the team is currently performing;
official language proficiency - bilingual CBC/CBC;
ability to interpret the act and regulations the team is responsible for interpreting;
written communication skills;
oral communication skills
presentation skills;
interpersonal skills;
initiative;
teamwork; and
autonomy.

The manager also establishes travel occasionally to make presentations as an operational requirement.

After the manager’s review of the existing and future work, the manager decides to use the following selection criteria:

to ensure that high-quality written documents are produced, the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in written communication will be used as a selection criterion for six positions;
to ensure a capacity to deliver presentations, the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in presentation skills will be used as a selection criterion for four positions; and
as there will be less supervision, the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in initiative will be used to differentiate between employees as a selection criterion.

Top of Page

Step 5 - Determine the assessment methods to be used, and assess the affected employees for the remaining positions.

Assessment methods must produce information that is relevant to all the qualifications being assessed. The amount of information needed to assess an employee's competence with respect to a particular qualification depends on the nature and the importance of the qualification, as identified by the manager. The use of multiple, well-developed assessment tools generally provides more complete and valid information, and the integration of information from more than one source ensures a more complete and accurate picture of the employee being assessed.

Considerations related to the assessment of official language proficiency

When assessing official language proficiency to select employees for retention in bilingual positions, it is important to note that the results of Second Language Evaluation (SLE) tests are valid for five years unless the employee is exempted[2] from undertaking further second official language assessment. When this time period expires, the SLE results of an employee are deemed to be valid for an indefinite period with regard to the employee’s substantive position, as long as the linguistic profile of the position has not been raised above the employee's skill level.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

a reminder of the merit criteria, including the definitions of each one and, if applicable, the relative weighting of each merit criterion;
a reminder of the selection criteria that will be used to determine which employees are to be retained for the remaining positions; for example, strength in a particular qualification or combination of qualifications;
the overall process and expected timing of the assessment for retention and lay-off;
the methods of assessment;
an invitation to employees to identify any accommodations they may need for the assessment process;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

The manager has determined the assessment methods to be used to assess each merit criterion:

Education in accordance with the applicable qualification standard – a review of the employee’s file to confirm the employee’s educational credentials;
experience in the work the team is currently performing – the manager’s personal knowledge;
official language proficiency - bilingual CBC/CBC – obtain a copy of the employee’s most recent SLE results from the PSC, and using the SLE for those employees who do not meet the requirement;
ability to interpret the act and regulations the team is responsible for interpreting – the manager’s personal knowledge;
written communication skills – the PSC’s standardized Written Communication Test ;
oral communication skills – the manager’s personal knowledge;
presentation skills – using a standardized test developed by the PSC;
interpersonal skills – the manager’s personal knowledge;
initiative – using a standardized reference check developed by the PSC;
teamwork – the manager’s personal knowledge; and
autonomy – the manager’s personal knowledge;
Travel occasionally to make presentations – employees will be asked to indicate in writing whether or not they are willing to meet this operational requirement.

The assessment process will proceed as follows:

Employees will be asked to identify any accommodations they may require for the written communication test and the test for presentation skills;
The manager will complete the review of the employees’ files and complete a written assessment of their personal knowledge;
Employees will be asked to provide the name of two persons for a reference check, and reference check questionnaires will be sent to the two persons;
The manager will liaise with the HR advisor to obtain from the PSC each employee’s latest SLE results;
For those employees who do not meet the required Official Language Proficiency, the manager will liaise with the HR advisor to make the arrangements to administer the SLE;
Employees will be asked to indicate in writing whether or not they are willing to meet this operational requirement.

Upon completion of the assessment of the 17 employees, all are found to meet the essential qualifications. Two have indicated that they are not willing to travel.

Step 6 – Determine which employees are to be retained and which are to be laid off.

Additional information regarding selection decisions may be found in the PSC’s Guidance Series - Assessment, Selection and Appointment.

Example:

In accordance with the original strategy, the manager selects for retention the following employees:

The six employees with the greatest strengths in written communication, as assessed by the PSC’s standardized Written Communication Test;
Of the remaining 11 employees who indicted they were willing to travel occasionally to make presentations, the four employees with the greatest strengths in presentation skills, as assessed by the standardized test developed by the PSC;
Of the remaining seven employees, the five with the greatest strengths in initiative, as assessed by the standardized reference check questionnaire.

The remaining two employees are selected for lay-off.

Step 7 - Communicate results to employees

Advise the employees to be laid off that they have been selected for lay-off, and provide recourse rights.

Once the affected employees have been advised of the results of the selection, the next step is to advise those who have been selected for lay-off.

No complaint may be made against the decision to lay-off employees, against the determination of the part of the organization and positions to be affected, or the number of employees to be laid off.

Where the PSST finds a complaint to be substantiated, it may set aside the decision to lay-off the complainant and order the deputy head to take any corrective action that it considers appropriate.

A full listing of the PSST's mandate and procedures (including the timing of submissions) may be found on the PSST's Web site.

Advise the remaining employees they will be retained.

Employees who have been selected for retention should be advised in writing that they are to be retained, and that they will remain in their current position.

Example:

The 17 employees who were assessed are informed of the assessment results, and whether they were selected for retention or lay-off.

The employee who volunteered and was accepted for lay-off is informed that they will be laid off.

The two employees selected for lay-off based on the selection process are invited to discuss the decision with the manager.

All three employees to be laid off are informed of their recourse rights to the PSST.

The 15 employees to be retained are also advised that they will remain in their position, and the other employees have a right to complain about the selection decision to the PSST.

Top of Page

Situation 4 - Workforce reduction, with all positions to be eliminated and new positions to be created, and with new merit criteria:

The manager has determined that all positions are to be eliminated. There are new positions created outside of the affected part of the organization. The merit criteria are all new. The classification decisions for all the positions indicate they are new positions from a classification perspective.

Step 1 – Determine the part of the organization that is affected

Some questions to consider in determining the part of the organization that is affected:

Is it a section?
Is it something larger, such as a division or a directorate?
Is it something very significant, such as an entire branch or a regional office?
Is it a program or a type of work which is inter-organizational?
Is the affected area local, regional, or national?

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents at this step should cover the following:

the HR and business plans of the organization, as a context for understanding why WFA is being applied in the affected part of the organization;
the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information available at this early point.

Example:

There are 25 positions in a work unit in one geographic location whose duties are identical, and the positions are classified at the same group and level.

The latest HR and business plans indicate that the existing work has changed to the extent that no positions are now required. However, three new positions have been created. An environmental scan confirms that no one else in the organization performs similar duties.

Based on this information, Manager A determines that the affected part of the organization is the work unit in this one location where the 25 positions are located.

Step 2 - Identify the similar affected positions and employees.

The manager identifies the positions that constitute similar affected positions. The employees who occupy the positions are identified as affected, and are informed they will be laid-off if no suitable opportunities in other parts of the organization can be identified for them.

Considerations when identifying the similar affected positions

Some questions to consider are:

Are any of the positions unique or stand-alone?
Are there any pools of reasonably homogeneous positions, for example, those with the same or very similar duties? The similar positions might be CR-4 finance assistants, or they might be positions that are classified as CR-4 human resources assistants, including staffing and labour relations assistants.
Can a case be made for somewhat similar positions classified at the same group and level to be considered as homogeneous, for example, human resources, finance and administrative assistants classified as CR-4s?
Do the positions require the same or similar qualifications?

Considerations when identifying affected employees

When identifying the affected employees, it is important to note that some employees performing the duties of the affected positions are not included, while others are.

Employees to be included are:
- Incumbents of the affected positions who are performing duties elsewhere, such as:
  - employees on assignment/secondment elsewhere; and
  - employees who have been appointed on an acting basis elsewhere;
- Employees on a leave of absence, unless their position has been filled indeterminately behind them (see TBS’s Questions and Answers - Work force Adjustment Agreements Web site); and
- All other incumbents of the affected positions.
Employees not to be included are:
- Specified term employees. Note that specified term employees are subject to lay-off; however, they are not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process, nor are they entitled to a priority appointment;
- Employees who resign or retire before the expected lay-off date;
- Employees who are performing the duties of the affected positions, but who do not occupy them on a substantive basis, such as:
  - employees on assignment/secondment from elsewhere; and
  - employees appointed on an acting basis from elsewhere.

Organizations should ensure that employees working in an affected area and who are not included in the process understand why they are not included to avoid the misperception that they occupy the affected position on a substantive basis.

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents at this step should cover the following:

an explanation of the new organizational structure, including the number of positions that are to be eliminated, and information on positions that have been created in unaffected parts of the organization;
a brief description of the new positions;
the staffing strategy for the new positions, if it exists;
the number of employees who are affected;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees, as this information cannot be repeated often enough; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

Of the 25 positions that have been identified as affected, there are employees occupying each one.

Neither the employee appointed on an acting basis nor the employee seconded from outside the organization occupies the position on a substantive basis. As employees are not subject to WFA unless it applies to their substantive position, they are not subject to the selection for retention and lay-off process.

Consequently, the lay-off process applies only to the 22 indeterminate employees and one term employee. However, the term employee is not provided with the same provisions as the indeterminate employees as term employees are not entitled to priority entitlements unlike indeterminate employees.

Manager A must put plans in place to deal with the term employee, the employee appointed on an acting basis, and the seconded employee.

Top of Page

Step 3 - Determine the selection strategy

Managers have the flexibility to determine the appropriate staffing and lay-off strategy, so depending on the situation, different options exist. Once the strategy has been determined, it can be used to make further decisions, such as determining the merit criteria, the appropriate assessment methods and the selection criteria.

For example, while employees may volunteer for lay-off at any time, if the number of employees to be laid-off is small compared to the number to be appointed, a valid strategy may be to invite employees to volunteer for lay-off as early in the process as possible.

The choice of a strategy at this point is crucial because there is a reduction in the number of existing positions at the same time as the creation of new positions. Here are three possible options.

The manager could conduct an appointment process to fill the new positions first. This would provide an opportunity for the affected employees to be placed, and would thus reduce the number of affected employees. The manager could establish and apply essential qualifications, asset qualifications, operational requirements and organizational needs. Once the affected employees have been appointed to the new positions, the manager would lay-off the remaining employees.

By conducting an appointment process followed by a lay-off process, employees who participated in the appointment process will have an opportunity to complain to the PSST as provided by section 77 of the PSEA for internal appointments.

If the area of selection policy for the organization allows a restriction to the area of selection, it could be established for affected employees of the affected part of the organization. As well, an organizational need may also be established for the same reason and target affected employees. In addition, in obtaining priority clearance from the PSC, section 43 of the PSEA may be invoked in order to avoid creating another person with a priority status.
The manager could lay-off all the employees of the affected part of the organization. Employees may be entitled to a surplus priority status. The employees with a surplus priority status may be assessed against the new positions and if they meet all the essential qualifications of the position, they will be appointed to the new position. There would not be an opportunity for employees to make a complaint to the PSST in this strategy.

In accordance with section 38 of the PSEA, persons who are entitled to a priority entitlement are required to meet the essential qualifications only. This means that had the manager established asset qualifications, operational requirements or organizational needs, the manager would not be able to apply them. This would reduce the manager’s flexibility to select employees for the new positions.
A third option would be the manager could first deploy affected employees to the new positions – assuming they are at the same or equivalent group and level – before conducting the lay-off process. While this would also result in a reduced number of affected employees who would need to be laid-off, it would not provide the employees who are not deployed with recourse to the PSST. All processes should be conducted in accordance with the values of fairness, access and transparency.

All of these options would meet the guiding values to different degrees. Option one would be fair and transparent to employees, while providing them with access, as they would have an opportunity to be considered for the new positions. As well, appointing affected employees in accordance with merit would result in the reduction of the number of employees who would need to be laid-off. There is an appropriate recourse mechanism available for employees for the selection for appointment.

While option two would also meet the values of transparency and fairness, there would be less flexibility for managers to select employees, and less of an opportunity for employees to avail themselves of recourse to the PSST. Thus, the first option is recommended by the PSC.

Considerations when conducting the appointment process to fill the new positions

As the strategy includes conducting an appointment process prior to the lay-off process, the manager should consider several options to limit the impact of WFA on the affected employees.

If the organization’s area of selection policy permits it, the area of selection could be limited to the affected area of the organization. This would ensure that affected employees may be considered first.

An appointment process conducted under these circumstances may result in an increased level of stress on the affected employees, and should be conducted as quickly as possible.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

the overall strategy and the process to be followed for both the appointment process and the lay-off process, in general terms;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

There are 22 indeterminate employees who are affected and will be laid-off.

Earlier in the week, one of the employees had provided Manager A with a copy of an accepted letter of offer to deploy to another organization. This employee will therefore not be included in any appointment processes where only affected employees are identified in the area of selection.

Manager A is aware of another part of the organization that is unaffected and where new positions requiring similar skills have been created. After consultation with Manager B of the unaffected organization, Manager A determines that an appointment process will be conducted for the new positions before the lay-off process. However, it is Manager B who is in charge of the appointment process and will be responsible for selection decisions. Manager A will participate on the selection board but will have no control over the final decisions.

Step 4 - Determine the merit criteria and the selection criteria for the new positions

The application of merit is described in some detail in the PSC's Guide to Implementing the Assessment Policy.

Employees who are to be appointed must meet all the essential qualifications required for the work to be performed, including official language (OL) proficiency, unless excluded pursuant to the Public Service Official Languages Exclusion Approval Order.
The manager may establish other merit criteria:
- qualifications that are considered an asset for the work to be performed, or for the organization, currently or in the future;
- any current or future operational requirements of the organization; and
- any current or future needs of the organization.

Other considerations

Managers should consider the degree to which they might provide an opportunity to affected employees to acquire the merit criteria required. This will vary with the nature of the merit criterion, the time required to acquire it and the operational reality of the organization. For example, if the employees do not have a driver’s licence, should they be given an opportunity to obtain it? In answering such questions, managers should consider whether operational needs can accommodate the time required to meet the merit criterion before the appointment process and lay-off process must be conducted.

Examples of other questions the manager may wish to consider in this situation are:

Is possession of a driver’s licence a bona fide occupational requirement or can this be accommodated?
What would be the next step if the employee fails to obtain a driver’s licence?
Will the manager wait until the employee can try again to obtain it?
Is there another way that the employee could get to field work locations?
Is the manager certain that there would be no work for this employee if the driver’s licence took some time to obtain or could not be obtained?

There are no easy answers to these sorts of questions. In resolving such issues, managers must try to achieve a reasonable balance between operational reality, such as the impact of a delay in conducting the appointment process, and fairness to the employees involved. If possible, the manager should give employees sufficient advance notice that the employees can take the necessary actions prior to the appointment process.

Establishing the selection criteria

The selection for appointment represents the application of the merit criteria in selecting among the employees who meet the merit criteria that have been assessed during the assessment process.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

the merit criteria, including the definitions of each one and, if applicable, the relative weighting of each merit criterion;
the selection criteria that will be used to determine which employees are to be appointed;
an invitation to employees to identify any accommodations they may need for the assessment process;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

The 21 affected employees, who are subject to lay-off if no suitable opportunities in other parts of the organization are identified, are advised of the internal advertised process. They are also informed that the area of selection has not been restricted, as the organization’s policy did not allow for this. However, an organizational need has been established that targets affected employees of Manager A’s organization.

In Manager B’s organization, there are 10 existing positions and five new positions have recently been created. Some of the existing positions are vacant and others are currently staffed on a temporary basis. Manager B decides to staff all his positions on an indeterminate basis and indicates that the organizational need will be applied to a minimum of 8 positions. A review of the existing and future work is conducted and Manager B establishes the merit criteria.

After Manager B’s review of the existing and future work, the following selection criteria is determined:

the organizational need, placement of affected employees in Manager A’s organization, will be applied for eight of the positions;
the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in written communication will be used as a selection criterion for four positions;
to ensure a capacity to deliver presentations, the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in presentation skills will be used as a selection criterion for three positions; and
the level at which an employee demonstrates strength in initiative will be used to differentiate between employees as a selection criterion.

Top of Page

Step 5 - Determine the assessment methods to be used, and assess the employees for the new positions.

The following statements are from the PSC's Assessment Policy:

The assessment is designed and implemented without bias, political influence or personal favouritism and does not create systemic barriers;
The assessment processes and methods effectively assess the essential qualifications and other merit criteria identified and are administered fairly; and
The identification of people who meet the operational requirements and organizational needs is carried out objectively.

A further explanation of the policy statements shown above, the underlying principles and their application may be found in the PSC's Guide to Implementing the Assessment Policy.

In all cases, the manager must ensure that the employees selected for appointment meet the essential qualifications, and that they meet any other merit criteria that are being applied - asset qualifications, operational requirements and organizational needs.

Communication with employees

Communication with employees at this step should cover the following:

a reminder of the merit criteria, including the definitions of each one and, if applicable, the relative weighting of each merit criterion;
a reminder of the selection criteria that will be used to determine which employees are to be appointed; for example, strength in a particular qualification or combination of qualifications;
the overall process and expected timing of the assessment and lay-off;
the methods of assessment;
an invitation to employees to identify any accommodations they may need for the assessment process;
a reiteration of the services and information available to affected employees and the career transition plans of the organization respecting affected employees; and
any other information that is available at this point.

Example:

Manager B has determined the assessment methods to be used to assess each merit criterion. Manager A communicates with the 21 affected employees and provides information on the merit criteria, the selection criteria, the timing of the appointment process and the lay-off process.

Three of the affected employees choose not to participate in the appointment process due to a lack of interest in the position, the lack of ability to travel, and personal reasons.

Upon completion of the assessment of the 18 affected employees, all are found to meet the essential qualifications. Two have indicated that they are not willing to travel.

Step 6 – Determine which employees are to be appointed to the new positions and which are to be laid off.

As this is an appointment process, not all employees may have submitted an application to be considered. Only those employees within the area of selection who participated in the appointment process can be selected for appointment to a new position.

As in all internal advertised processes, unsuccessful candidates can make a complaint to the PSST based on section 77 of the PSEA. Affected employees who participated in an appointment process but who are not selected for appointment will have the opportunity to make a complaint to the PSST under section 77 of the PSEA. However, this does not preclude them from being laid off.

Affected employees who did not participate in the appointment process will be laid off. They will neither have the opportunity to make a complaint to the PSST under section 77 nor section 65 of the PSEA since they did not participate in an appointment process and the entire affected part of the organization is laid off.

Additional information regarding selection decisions may be found in the PSC’s Guidance Series - Assessment, Selection and Appointment.

Example:

In accordance with the original strategy, the manager selects for appointment the following employees:

The four employees with the greatest strengths in written communication, two of which are affected employees.
Of the remaining employees who indicted they were willing to travel occasionally to make presentations, the three employees with the greatest strengths in presentation skills, all of which are affected employees;
Of the remaining employees, the eight with the greatest strengths in initiative, all of which are affected employees.

Manager B appoints a total of 15 employees. Thirteen of which are affected employees from Manager A’s organization.

Step 7 - Communicate results to employees

Once the determination as to which employees are to be appointed and which are to be laid off have been made, managers are encouraged to inform employees, on an individual basis, whether they have been selected for appointment or for lay-off as soon as possible. To ensure transparency and fairness of the process, all employees who were assessed should be informed about the selection results at the same time.

Informal discussion as contemplated by section 47 of the PSEA applies to the appointment process as do the guiding values of fairness and transparency. This means that managers should be prepared to discuss and explain the assessment results to employees. Information provided to an employee would relate only to that employee. Keep in mind that the Privacy Act protects personal information. Any information about a third party must not be disclosed.

Advise the employees to be laid off that they are laid off

Once the affected employees have been advised of the results of the appointment process, the next step is to advise those who will be laid off.

Section 65 of the PSEA does not apply in this case since all employees are to be laid off. In addition, no complaint may be made against the decision to lay-off employees, against the determination of the part of the organization and positions to be affected, or the number of employees to be laid off.

Example:

Manager A had 21 affected employees in the organization. Eighteen of the employees participated in the appointment process. Thirteen affected employees were appointed and five of them were not selected for appointment.

Manager B informs the five employees who were assessed of the assessment results, and provide them with an opportunity for informal discussion as well as recourse to the PSST under section 77 of the PSEA.

Manager A informs the five employees who participated in the appointment process and the three employees who did not participate in the appointment process that they will be laid off. There will be no recourse to the PSST as all employees will be laid off.

Top of Page

Situation 5 – Workforce reduction, with all positions to be eliminated:

The manager has determined that all of the similar positions are to be eliminated. As there are no employees to be retained, there is no need to assess the employees. They are therefore all selected for lay-off, and this guide does not apply. There is no recourse to the Public Service Staffing Tribunal available when all employees are selected for lay-off.

6. Conclusion

The identification of the employees who are to be retained and those who are to be selected for lay-off must be tied to the organization’s HR and business plans. The merit criteria must be chosen carefully to meet the requirements of those plans. In accordance with section 21 of the PSER, employees occupying a similar position in the affected part of the organization must be assessed and selected for retention or lay-off on the basis of merit. This allows for the business plan to be realized. It is strongly recommended that bargaining agents be consulted (as per the WFADs and collective agreements), and that employees be advised of the organization's plans and the means and rationale for the assessment as early and as often as appropriate to the situation.

7. Legal basis

Section 64 of the PSEA provides deputy heads with the authority to lay-off employees in certain circumstances, as long as the lay-offs and the identification of employees to be laid off are in accordance with the PSER:

ss.64

1) Where the services of an employee are no longer required by reason of lack of work, the discontinuance of a function or the transfer of work or a function outside those portions of the federal public administration named in Schedule I, IV or V to the Financial Administration Act, the deputy head may, in accordance with the regulations of the Commission, lay off the employee, in which case the deputy head shall so advise the employee.
2) Where the deputy head determines under subsection (1) that some but not all of the employees in any part of the deputy head's organization will be laid off, the employees to be laid off shall be selected in accordance with the regulations of the Commission.
3) Subsection (1) does not apply where employment is terminated in the circumstances referred to in paragraph 12(1)(f) of the Financial Administration Act.

Section 22 of the PSEA provides the PSC with its general regulatory authority, including the authority to establish regulations respecting the manner in which employees are to be laid off, and the means of selecting those employees:

ss.22

1) The Commission may make any regulations that it considers necessary to give effect to the provisions of this Act relating to matters under its jurisdiction.
2) Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), the Commission may make regulations ...
- (i) respecting the manner of laying off employees and the manner of selecting employees to be laid off, for the purposes of section 64.

The PSER, in section 21, specify the manner of laying off employees where some, but not all, of the employees in the affected part of an organization must be laid off, as follows:

ss. 21

(1) If the services of one or more employees of a part of an organization are no longer required in accordance with section 64 of the Act, the deputy head shall assess the merit of the employees employed in similar positions or performing similar duties in the same occupational group and level within that part of the organization, and identify, in accordance with merit, [boldface added] the employees who are to be retained having regard to the continuing functions of that part of the organization and the remaining employees who are to be advised that their services are no longer required and are to be laid off.
(2) Deputy heads shall record the reasons for the selection of those employees to be retained.
(3) Despite subsection (1), the determination of employees to be laid off in the Ship Repair group in the Department of National Defence shall be based on a combination of merit and seniority factors and shall be made in consultation with the bargaining agents concerned.
(4) Despite subsection (1), if an employee volunteers to be laid off, the deputy head may advise the employee that their services are no longer required and may lay off the employee.
(5) The deputy head shall, in writing, inform
- a) the Commission of the names of the employees who are to be laid off in accordance with this section and the proposed date of the lay-off; and
- b) any employee who is advised that their services are no longer required, of the proposed layoff date.
(6) Subsections (1) to (5) do not apply to an employee who is appointed for a specified period.

The PSEA defines merit in section 30. The definition includes essential qualifications, current and future asset qualifications, operational requirements and organizational needs. Essential qualifications must always be met; the choice and use of the other merit criteria are at the discretion of the manager, and may be applied depending on need. Section 30 of the PSEA refers to "appointments," but the definition of merit also applies to the identification of employees to be retained, and laid off pursuant to subsection 21(1) of the PSER.

Employees not selected for retention may be declared surplus prior to being laid off. It is important to note that the authority to declare employees surplus flows from the employer's policies and WFA agreements, and not from the PSEA or PSER. There is no provision in either the PSEA or the PSER to declare employees surplus, only to provide them with an entitlement to a priority for appointment, and to lay them off if they have not been appointed before the end of their surplus period. Employees remain in surplus status for varying periods, as per the PSER, policy and collective agreements, during which time they may be considered for or marketed for other positions to avoid lay-off.

Top of Page

8. References and related documentation

Legislation

Other References

Public Service Commission
Treasury Board Secretariat
Public Service Staffing Tribunal
- Procedural Guide
National Joint Council
- Work Force Adjustment Directive

Top of Page

9. Questions and answers

1. What constitutes a "new" position?

Managers should consult their classification advisor to determine if the positions are new from a classification perspective. If the position is new from a classification perspective, then an appointment or deployment is required to place an affected employee in that position.

2. What happens if the analysis of current and future requirements results in the creation of positions that are very different from the existing positions?

Sometimes WFA or downsizing coincides with reorganization or transformation of the way work is done and results in the creation of positions that cannot reasonably be considered similar to the positions from which employees are to be laid off. If this is the case, there are different options are available. The following are examples of some of these options:

Conduct an internal appointment process (advertised or non-advertised), subject to priority clearance from the PSC. Those incumbents of the affected positions who are not appointed to the new positions are selected for lay-off.

If the organizational area of selection policy permits, the organization could choose to reduce the area of selection to the affected work unit, since the employees who are not appointed may be selected for lay-off.

The organization could also choose to limit appointments to those employees in the affected part of the organization by establishing an organizational need such as ‘Employees in the affected part of organization X’.

Manager should consider invoking section 43 of the PSEA, which provides that should the Commission consider that the appointment of a priority person will result in another person having a priority right, then the Commission may decide to not apply that provision in that case. This means that when requesting priority clearance when conducting the appointment process, the PSC may agree to not refer any other priority persons that may be available.
Select all the affected employees for lay-off and declare them surplus, and consider them as priority persons for the new positions, appointing those who meet the essential qualifications.

This latter approach may be considered less desirable because it limits the flexibility available to the manager, who may apply only the essential qualifications when appointing a person with a priority for appointment. In addition, this approach could impose additional stress on employees who might not otherwise have to be declared surplus.

3. Is it necessary to assess an employee's knowledge as part of the process of selection for retention and lay-off?

Not necessarily. The merit criteria must collectively cover the work to be performed, including knowledge, as needed. In some cases, specifying a certain merit criterion implies possession of another. For example, the ability or skill to apply knowledge may, in some circumstances, presuppose the possession of that knowledge. Another example would be a simulation that requires a certain level of knowledge in order to demonstrate abilities and personal suitability.

In other circumstances, new knowledge may be required that was not required previously, or may be required because the continuing positions, though similar, are not identical. In such cases, it may be reasonable to select on the basis of aptitude to learn and apply the new knowledge. In any event, managers must determine whether or not employees must possess the knowledge to be selected for retention and if required, whether it would be an essential qualification or an asset qualification.

In respecting the guiding values of transparency, it is advisable to communicate clearly to employees which merit criteria are to be assessed. When in doubt, and if it is certain that a knowledge factor will be assessed, it is advisable to state the knowledge factor as a merit criterion.

4. My organization is only going through reduction. We are eliminating five of our positions. There are no new positions to be created. I am a manager who has supervised the same group of employees for the past 10 years and I know my employees’ work. Why do I have to assess every single merit criteria for the employees who have been selected for retention? I have already documented the selection decision and have the assessment of two of the merit criteria.

The PSER requires that the selection for retention be in accordance with merit. In order to demonstrate merit is respected, employees have to be assessed against all merit criteria that is applied. Bear in mind that a manager has the flexibility to determine the assessment methods used. For example, section 36 of the PSEA suggests “a review of past performance and accomplishments” as an assessment method.

5. Could an employee's self-assessment be used as one of the assessment tools?

It is a management responsibility to assess employees for retention and lay-off.

Managers may use information provided by employees to support their assessment. For example, employees could be asked to provide verifiable behaviour-based descriptions of their performance from their own experience to illustrate the degree to which they possess merit criteria, such as abilities or personal suitability factors. Managers would then verify and assess the information provided against predetermined criteria. The most likely approach would be to use the information in conjunction with information obtained from other sources, such as reference checks or performance appraisals. Note that self-assessments used alone may not be reliable indicators of future performance.

6. Do I have to give employees a lot of notice prior to assessing them?

It depends on your particular situation. Consideration should be given to whether the merit criteria established consists of new merit criteria as well as the assessment methods.

7. Organizations are required to make every reasonable effort to retrain their affected employees. How do I factor this in with my process of selection for retention and lay-off?

It depends on your particular situation. Your timelines will be a big determining factor. Please refer to the Considerations section in Step 4 of Determine the merit criteria and the selection criteria for more information. Note that employees selected for retention must be assessed in all merit criteria established for the position and they must meet all requirements of the position.

8. Should employment equity considerations factor into determining who to retain and who to lay-off?

Maintaining or achieving employment equity goals may be an organizational need merit criterion, and could be critical to the selection. Managers must ensure that this is a need reflected in the organization's employment equity or HR plan.

Of course, the requirement for employees to self-identify should be made known beforehand to all employees who are to be assessed for retention and lay-off if this is to be applied.

9. How is an employee's second official language assessed in a selection process for retention and lay-off?

Official language proficiency in a bilingual position is assessed on a "meets/does-not-meet" basis using the Second Language Evaluation (SLE) test, except where the second language requirement of the position has been identified as code "P". It is important to bear in mind that SLE results are valid for five years (unless an employee is exempt from undertaking further second official language assessment). When this time period expires, the SLE results of an employee who has not obtained an exemption are deemed to be valid for an indefinite period, but solely with regard to the position held by the person, as long as the linguistic profile of the position has not been raised above the employee's skill level. Consequently, if new positions have been created, employees with expired SLE results will need new SLE results to be appointed or deployed.

10. How are employees who have been appointed on an acting basis in an affected position treated in a process for selection for retention and lay-off?

These employees are not included in a selection for retention and lay-off process that includes the position in which they are acting. When the services of the acting employees are no longer required, they will return to their substantive position.

However, "acting" employees are to be included in any selection for a retention and lay-off process that affects their substantive position.

11. How are persons on secondments or assignments handled in a process to select employees for retention and lay-off?

The principles that apply to acting appointments also apply to secondments or assignments.

12. How are seasonal employees in an affected position treated in a process for selection for retention and lay-off?

Seasonal employees are indeterminate employees and should be treated as such. Management will have to look at the operational requirements and determine if the organization requires seasonal positions in the future.

13. How are part time employees in an affected position treated in a process for selection for retention and lay-off?

Part time employees are indeterminate employees and should be treated as such. Management will have to look at the operational requirements and determine if the organization requires a full time position or a part time position in the future.

Top of Page

14. How is personal information concerning employees involved in a selection for retention and lay-off process handled?

Managers must respect the Privacy Act, which protects personal information relating to a third party.

Employees assessed in a selection for retention and lay-off process must be provided with sufficient information concerning themselves to understand the decision. The information provided would relate only to that employee. This information could include any factors that were taken into account, including the merit criteria used, how the assessment was carried out and the person's assessment results.

Before the selection for retention and lay-off process begins, managers must inform employees of the merit criteria that will be applied. For example, this would include the intent to apply employment equity as an organizational need. To promote transparency, managers should also inform employees of how the merit criteria will be used to make selection decisions. For example, if ranking will be used to determine who is retained and who will be laid off, this should be communicated to employees.

Communicating these criteria and the intent could lead to the characteristics of the employees who are retained to be deduced by other employees with some degree of accuracy. This could include conclusions about an employee belonging to a designated employment equity group, as well as their other attributes, such as knowledge or skills. Employees should be aware that when they self-identify as members of an employment equity group for the purpose of the selection for retention and lay-off process, their membership might be deduced by other employees, by virtue of the outcome of the process.

If employees file a complaint with the PSST, access to information concerning the process, about themselves and about third parties must be in accordance with the PSST regulations and policies.

Any questions respecting privacy and access to information should be discussed with the organization's privacy and access to information experts.

15. Can the Personnel Psychology Centre tests be used in a selection for retention and lay-off?

Yes, Personnel Psychology Centre (PPC) tests can be used when the criteria assessed by the PPC tests are included among the merit criteria of the position. For information about PPC tests and services, consult its Web site.

16. Can a manager use a particular merit criterion as a screening tool in a selection for retention and lay-off process? For example, declaring surplus all employees who do not meet that criterion and continuing selection with those who do meet it?

This may be an appropriate course of action, especially in a WFA situation that involves a large number of employees and few remaining positions. Any merit criterion may be used as a screening tool in this way. Employees who do not meet that criterion would not be considered further for retention and would be selected for lay-off.

17. How do you manage a selection for retention and lay-off process that involves one or more salary-protected employees occupying positions at the level at which the adjustments are to take place?

Salary-protected employees are considered only in selection for retention and lay-off processes that involve the positions in which they are employed. This means that the selection has to do with the classified level of the position occupied by the employee only, rather than the level of the salary protection.

18. There is a term employee in the affected area of the organization who has just, or will shortly achieve, three years' service. Should that employee be included in the selection for retention and lay-off process?

Section 59 (1) provides that conversion to indeterminate status is automatic if the conditions prescribed by the employer are met. If the term employee has reached the end of the cumulative period specified by the employer, the employee is converted to indeterminate status and is included in the assessment for the retention and lay-off process. If the term employee has not yet reached the end of the cumulative period, then they should be treated in accordance with the policies of the employer

19. Must the reasons for retaining and the laying off employees be documented?

Yes. Abuse of authority is grounds for complaint to the PSST [PSEA 65(1)],which implies that lay-off decisions must be documented. Paragraph 21(2) of the PSER further expands on the PSEA by requiring that deputy heads record the reason for their decisions.

20. Can the results of a selection for retention and lay-off process be used in a second subsequent selection for retention and lay-off process, for example, four months after the results were initially determined?

Yes, the results may be used more than once, but before doing so, the manager must ensure that:

in the intervening time it is unlikely that the merit of the affected employees has changed significantly;
there are no new employees in the affected area of the organization occupying similar positions of the same group and level as those who had originally been assessed; and
a further notice of the new application of the results is provided to the employees, including notification of their right to recourse.

21. Is it possible to deploy (as opposed to appoint) the affected employees to be retained to newly created positions?

It depends. If new positions are created, a deployment might not be consistent with the values of access and transparency, as they are not subject to the merit principle and there is no right of complaint. Since the process for selecting employees for retention and lay-off is rooted precisely in merit-based selection and transparency, it may be preferable for the employees to be appointed to the new positions.

22. What happens when two employees are equally good and I can only select one to retain?

This is a management decision and in some situations it may be difficult to select. Frequent communication with employees is important. There may be solutions that management had not considered that employees may offer as options.

23. Can I use random selection as a selection decision amongst employees who all meet merit?

Random selection can be used. However, it is important to communicate this decision upfront with employees who are affected. Using random selection may have advantages and disadvantages so careful consideration should be given.

24. Can I use seniority as a selection decision?

Selection is based on merit which includes the current and future needs of the organization. Experience can be used as a selection criterion. However, note that the depth and breadth of experience is not always proportionally correlated with years of experience.

PSER 21(3) has provisions for using a combination of merit and seniority factors for the Ship Repair group in the Department of National Defence only.

25. One of my employees is on long term leave of absence. Can I request that they return to the workplace for assessment?

Generally speaking, employees on leave are included in the assessment process. Depending on the reason for the leave of absence, there would be a different approach. Each situation should be looked at on a case by case basis in consultation with Labour Relations in order to determine the best course of action.

The employer has posted this Q&A:

Q15. What if an employee is on leave when a WFA situation occurs in his or her department?

If an employee is away on leave without pay, and if the employee's position has not been staffed indeterminately, then the employee is to be notified about the WFA situation at the same time as other affected employees. The decision as to whether a guarantee of a reasonable job offer or access to the Options will be accorded to the employee will only be made when the employee returns to work at the end of the leave period.

However, if an employee has been on leave without pay for more than one year, and if the employee's substantive position had subsequently been staffed on an indeterminate basis, it is then expected that the employee on leave would normally have been accorded a leave of absence priority entitlement. There would be no application of WFA in that circumstance.

Footnotes

1. Where an employee’s SLE test results warrant, the PSC may grant an exemption from further second official language testing for an indefinite period for each of the three language skills (written comprehension, written expression and oral proficiency). However, this exemption does not apply to the assessment of technical or specialized language skills (code P), which is conducted by means of instruments specially designed to assess technical or specialized language skills. [Return to note 1]

2. Where an employee’s SLE test results warrant, the PSC may grant an exemption from further second official language testing for an indefinite period for each of the three language skills (written comprehension, written expression and oral proficiency). However, this exemption does not apply to the assessment of technical or specialized language skills (code P), which is conducted by means of instruments specially designed to assess technical or specialized language skills. [Return to note 2]

Primary navigation (left column)

Appointment Framework

Proactive Disclosure

Proactive Disclosure

Footer

Date Modified:: 2011-12-16

Top of Page

Important Notices

Common menu bar

Breadcrumb

Guide on the selection of employees for retention and lay-off

Table of Contents

1. Definitions

2. Introduction

3. Values

4. Considerations

5. Process to select employees for retention and lay-off

Situation 1 – Workforce reduction, with no change in duties, or to the essential qualifications

Step 1 – Determine the part of the organization that is affected

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Step 2 - Identify the similar affected positions and employees

Considerations when identifying the similar affected positions

Considerations when identifying the employees to be assessed

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Step 3 - Determine the selection strategy

Communication with employees

Step 4 - Review the merit criteria and determine the selection criteria

Review the merit criteria

Establishing the selection criteria

Communication with employees

Step 5 - Determine the assessment methods to be used, and assess the affected employees

Considerations related to the assessment of official language proficiency

Communication with employees

Step 6 – Determine which employees are to be retained and which are to be laid off

Step 7 - Communicate results to employees

Advise the employees to be laid off that they have been selected for lay-off, and provide recourse rights

Advise the remaining employees they will be retained

Situation 2 – Workforce reduction, with no significant change in the duties, but with changes to the merit criteria:

Step 1 – Determine the part of the organization that is affected

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Step 2 - Identify the similar affected positions and employees

Considerations when identifying the similar affected positions

Considerations when identifying the employees to be assessed

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Step 3 - Determine the selection strategy

Communication with employees

Step 4 - Review the merit criteria and determine the selection criteria

Review the merit criteria

Other considerations

Establishing the selection criteria

Communication with employees

Step 5 - Determine the assessment methods to be used, and assess the affected employees

Considerations related to the assessment of official language proficiency

Communication with employees

Step 6 – Determine which employees are to be retained and which are to be laid off

Step 7 - Communicate results to employees

Advise the employees to be laid off that they have been declared surplus, and provide recourse rights

Advise the remaining employees they will be retained

Situation 3 - Workforce reduction, with significant changes in some of the duties, and with changes to some of the merit criteria:

Step 1 – Determine the part of the organization that is affected

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Step 2 - Identify the similar affected positions and employees.

Considerations when identifying the similar affected positions

Considerations when identifying the employees to be assessed

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Step 3 - Determine the selection strategy for the new and existing positions

Considerations when conducting the appointment process to fill the new positions

Communication with employees

Step 4 - Determine the merit criteria and the selection criteria for the remaining positions

Establishing the selection criteria

Communication with employees

Step 5 - Determine the assessment methods to be used, and assess the affected employees for the remaining positions.

Considerations related to the assessment of official language proficiency

Communication with employees

Step 6 – Determine which employees are to be retained and which are to be laid off.

Step 7 - Communicate results to employees

Advise the employees to be laid off that they have been selected for lay-off, and provide recourse rights.

Advise the remaining employees they will be retained.

Situation 4 - Workforce reduction, with all positions to be eliminated and new positions to be created, and with new merit criteria:

Step 1 – Determine the part of the organization that is affected

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Step 2 - Identify the similar affected positions and employees.

Considerations when identifying the similar affected positions

Considerations when identifying affected employees

Communication with employees and consultation with bargaining agents

Step 3 - Determine the selection strategy

Considerations when conducting the appointment process to fill the new positions

Communication with employees