Service Union Management Consultation Committee (SUMCC)

1.1 Opening remarks

Discussion

Cliff Groen and Stan Buday welcomed members to this second meeting of the SUMCC. As the co-chairs have decided to rotate chairing the meetings, Cliff Groen accepted to act as Chairperson for this meeting.

Actions

No action identified

1.2 Approval of the Record of Discussions and Decisions for the October 29^th, 2018 meeting

Discussion

The Record of Discussions and Decisions was approved as submitted.

Actions

No action identified

1.3 Update on Outstanding Action Items from the October 29^th, 2018 meeting

Discussion

Under item 2.3 of the previous meeting (Three R’s – Resources/Recruitment/Retention), Adele McLean pointed out the discrepancy in the decisions required as part of production service expectations and that some numbers are very hard coded. Mr. Buday would like to know how those numbers where achieved and were they are coming from as they are very specific. Mr. Groen confirmed that additional clarification was sought from Ms. McLean and received on Feb. 19^th. Management commits to reviewing and providing a response in the coming weeks.

Cliff Groen stated how important it is that the Outstanding Action Items document be maintained on an ongoing basis to ensure that commitments are met.

Actions

Management to review and respond to items 2.2 and 2.3 in the coming weeks.

2.1 Update on the Passport In-Person Service Improvement

(new title: Update on Citizen Services Network)

Discussion:

Evelyne Power requested that the item’s name be changed to ‘Update on Citizen Service Network’.

Ms. Power informed members that since the last SUMCC, one bilateral meeting with CEIU & UNE was held on January 15, 2019. Operational updates were provided on a number of topics including business continuity planning, passport modernization, biometrics, site consolidations and connectivity.

Ms. Power reminded members that at the time of the last briefing, the Department was waiting for the approval of a TB Submission on the Passport Modernization Initiative prior to conducting a walkthrough of the intake tools vs. processing for the new system. The TB Submission was approved on February 22nd and Ms. Power advised that activities are underway to plan system testing and deployment. Launch-related communications will begin in March 2019. Union representatives will be provided with advance copies prior to their issuance. Ms. Power informed members that a walkthrough of the intake and processing tools for the new system will be organized for an upcoming meeting.

Evelyne Power mentioned there had been an update on biometrics collection, including a demo, with specific details required as it is a technological change being introduced to the workplace. On this subject, IRCC has advised of delays in regards to the implementation date of April 1st, with no foreseen date at this time. Members will be kept informed as this item progresses. Ms. Power’s team also did an update on the upcoming site consolidations for 2019-20. In addition, Ms. Power informed members that further to the implementation of the structural model in 2017, the PM-01 Passport Officer notifications were issued on January 31st. PM-03 Team Leader notifications are anticipated to go out to employees at the end of March subject to work with UNE on this.

In closing, Ms. Power provided information on the replacement of the QMatic queuing system whose contract expired at the end of January. The new Atom system was ready for implementation but this unfortunately coincided with network performance issues that are being experienced across the Government of Canada. While Shared Services Canada is looking into this, an interim solution is being tested and working in Ottawa, and deployments are happening next week to additional offices which will see the use of tablets to access to the Atom system. There will soon be relief to the most congested offices and Ms. Power recognized the challenges met by staff but mentioned that personnel had been managing queues very well by using the business continuity measures in place. (Update as of March 1, 2019 – Shared Services Canada identified the issue created by a service provider and has rectified the situation. Full Atom operations are in place).

Actions

No action identified.

2.2 Improving Access Control

Discussion

Luc Tremblay, DSO, and Isabelle Côté, offered information on new departmental methods to ensure that the vast amount of personal information held by the Department and citizen information be protected.

Mr. Tremblay said that about 50% of internal investigations are linked to unauthorized access, and that these investigations are based on allegations from various sources.

A new method to identify unauthorized access is being introduced, and begun with the SIN program. Ten scenarios of unauthorized access were identified, starting with the Social Insurance Number program, and a pilot is being conducted using two, namely one accessing their own name and, accessing a family member’s.

Mr. Tremblay mentioned that cases will follow the existing processes, but they will not all be subject to administrative investigation. All cases will be evaluated but the approach will now be risk-based. For severe cases (ex.: transactions, high access numbers, or where fraud is suspected), administrative investigations will take place. For other cases (ex.: non complex), a warning letter will be sent to the employee and his/her director with a c.c. to the ADM, calling for this behaviour to cease and that surveillance would be taking place.

The communication plan will focus on increasing the awareness of employees.

Luc Tremblay assured Mr. Perrin that employees are always encouraged to be accompanied by their union representative.

Eddy Bourque inquired whether statistics exist and how do they compare with other years. Mr. Tremblay responded that the Department has seen an increase over the past year.

Stan Buday stated that the Department should be employing a proactive approach and educate employees accordingly. Mr. Tremblay agreed that for now, only serious cases will be investigated and also supports education in that area.

In response to Fabienne Jean-François’ inquiry about data gathering, Isabelle Côté stated that there were about thirty cases for 2017-18 and about sixty for 2018-19. The Security team has data related to regional unauthorized access cases as well and these statistics could be communicated to employee representatives whenever requested.

Danièle Besner mentioned that the Department has made some changes to the Code of Conduct which will ensure that employees understand their responsibilities.

Adele McLean inquired as to who will be privy to medical information and whether designated integrity authorities will have access to Canadians’ medical information. Cliff Groen responded that as part of strengthening departmental oversight, and to ensure that people only access information they need to see, we are looking at Integrity to ensure that they do not see information that is inappropriate. That type of function and role is within the established authorities of the Department and the Security and Integrity function is to oversee this. The expectation is that is is possible that Integrity Officers would be looking at medical information related to clients but would be very limited to the basis of the need to know, similar to some other information that is confidential as well. Mr. Groen concluded that any concerns related to the Integrity function are to be directed to Luc Tremblay.

Unions seeking information on regional data are invited to contact the DSO office.

Actions

No action identified.

3.1 Update on the Implementation of the Medical Adjudication Quality Assurance Program

Discussion

Since their last presentation in October 2018 (item 2.2 Canada Pension Plan Disability Quality Program), Trevor Kraus said that there were many developments and consultations. Louise Tremblay presented a progress update on the development of the Individual Quality Feedback (IQF) component of the Medical Adjudication Quality Assurance (MA QA) program.

Ms. Tremblay mentioned that a working group to further discuss the MA quality assurance program as well as the overall IQF started in November 2018 and is comprised of medical adjudicators (MAs), medical adjudicator consultants (MACs), representatives from all regions, and managers who contributed to developing guiding principles for the program, and defining business processes, roles and responsibilities.

Three guiding principles were elaborated:

1. That IQF is applied consistently throughout the country.
2. That feedback on IQF be constructive and positive.
3. In terms of performance management, the IQF results will be used to inform the PMA in providing information to managers to identify areas of improvement for staff and informing learning plans. The current sampling strategy does not allow current files to be used and the decision was made not to link the IQF results with the PMA this year. In the long term, it is planned that IQF will be a key indicator for PMAs.

The following activities will take place prior to the launch of the program in mid-May 2019:

• Hiring of 4 additional MAC reviewers in March 2019
• Distance training – week of April 1, 2019
• In-person training – week of April 8, 2019
• Distance training and calibration - April 15 to May 10, 2019

Frequent communications will be issued to staff, WebEx sessions will be held with managers, an intranet page is in development and will be launched soon. There will also be Q&As and program documentation being shared with staff, as well as training and calibration exercises.

Adele McLean asked whether MACs will be taking part in the actual feedback and PMA; and how the department is proceeding with individual feedback and how it will be structured.

Louise Tremblay responded that the process is still in the process of being defined in terms of roles and responsibilities. They will be happy to share results next time they come to this table. Ms. Tremblay mentioned that the MACs reviewers will not be involved in the PMAs, and that it is foreseen that the feedback would be provided to the MA, and managers would have access to it. The MAC reviewers’ role would stop at defining the feedback and providing the reviews.

Adele McLean requested clarification on what is meant by ‘understanding the nature of the medical condition’ (slide 7 of the presentation). Cassaundra Iwankow responded that this allows the reviewer to isolate key elements in the analysis that are critical to the outcome of the file and starting with the requirement for a medical condition to be present, verifying that the MA fully understands the implications, and linking to the medical condition in terms of functional limitations, or the capacity of an individual to engage in work.

Stan Buday commented on slide 5’s caption ‘advise unions and employees’ which he would like to read as ‘consult’.

Trevor Kraus responded that slide 5’s captions meant that unions and employees will be advised on the progress, but confirmed that consultation will be ongoing. Ms. Tremblay confirmed that there is representation from all Regions at the working group.

Further to Mr. Buday’s question about providing feedback, Ms. Tremblay informed that there is a generic mailbox where regional employees or their representatives are encouraged to send feedback. The address will be communicated to meeting participants.

In response to Jacques Perrin’s questions about resourcing, Louise Tremblay said that four FTE MAC reviewers will be hired for the program. Kris Johnson added that this function would not necessarily be a role that MACs would play for a very long time but rather that all reviewers would rotate in exercising that function. All will then have the opportunity to work on this and it would reinforce the conduct of other duties.

Cliff Groen mentioned that the IQF is a new program for CPP-Disability and that members will have a lot of questions. Mr. Groen offers that once decisions are made from a management perspective, they will be shared with members prior to rolling it out. In the meantime, Mr. Groen is looking forward to having discussions on the subject at future SUMCC meetings and invited members to reach out to Messrs. Kraus and Johnson. Special meetings with regional managers can also be conducted, as needed.

Adele McLean reminded members that MAs are keenly aware of their designated authority when in the performance of their duties as adjudicators, and that they know they can make independent and unfettered decisions on the files. Cliff Groen agreed that all values. ethics and legislative authorities are to be respected. Mr. Groen added that the Department must also address the fundamental issues that were raised in the Auditor General’s report related to the lack of consistency in the decision-making and program quality.

Actions

Louise Tremblay will provide the address of the generic mailbox for Regional questions.

3.2 Hosted Contact Centre Solutions (HCCS) Operational Implementation

Discussion

Trevor Milne provided an update on the implementation of this new solution that was procured by Shared Services Canada and awarded to IBM (contract ten years + two years).

The work has begun on the four ESDC call centres (i.e. National Service Desk (NSD) and the 3 Specialized Call Centres (EI, CPP/OAS and ECC)). NSD has migrated on August 17 2018 and the ECC migrated on October 28 2018. Future migration of a) Canada Pension Plan and OAS and b) EI Call centres are scheduled for May 2019 and November 2019 respectively. Both migrations are on track.

HCCS represents a move to a state of the art platform giving the Department access to advanced functionality in the future and allowing it to be an early adopter of this technology. This will be positive for Payment Service Officers (PSOs), clients and the management team.

Mr. Milne stated that this does not change the way the work is done in that this tool offers similar functionalities while being more advanced and integrated towards improved client service. Mr. Milne explained in some detail some of the functionalities described in the presentation.

Employees have responded positively. Mr. Milne stated that some may have seen an elevated number of issues escalation early on, but that was deliberate as they were all treated as Severity 1 and 2 to ensure timely oversight and rapid resolution. This demonstrated that they were able to resolve issues quickly.

In response to Jacques Perrin’s question on impact on FTEs, and any change in reporting relationships, Cliff Groen reported that hiring will go with the demand as always and that there are no changes in reporting relationships.

Mr. Milne advised Eddy Bourque that the new system will have the capabilities to support telework, however there are other factors to consider before this can move forward. Mr. Groen added that while it will enable telework, there are key elements to look at such as overall network performance issues and the business model. He does agree that it is to be examined seriously as they have a high turnover and recognized that telework might encourage employees to stay in the organization. The union will be included as part of the consultations on the subject.

In response to Stan Buday’s questions, Mr. Milne informed that the system is being looked after by Shared Services Canada and that IBM is the vendor and is responsible for service delivery. For the most part, the system is fully functional, there are still a few minor defects but those having the most impact on personnel were fixed. Marc Jubainville added that there were incidences where the quality of calls was not to the level expected (ex: static in the background) but that they are diligent in tacking and resolving issues. SCC and IBM are held to task to ensure they fix issues as they arise.

Adele McLean asked details on call-vetting and if they will automatically be sent to a specific agent by event (ex: OAS, DI). Mr. Milne responded that the system has the capability built in but the need to be able to apply it depends on the caller’s ability to distinguish themselves in the several options, and then you need a sufficient volume to make it worth activating that skill set. The current options available to clients as this time is limited to English/French. The options will continue to evolve to take the system to a more precise skill routing.

Eddy Bourque asked if the calls would be recorded. Trevor Milne responded that functionality is available in the system but that this is not being implemented at this time. It could prove beneficial as live recordings would be used to train individuals, either their own recorded calls or sample recorded calls.

Actions

No action identified.

3.3 Change Impacts and Engagement Opportunities

Discussion

Susan Ingram introduced a presentation that was shared at the National Labour Union Management Consultation Committee (NLMCC) on February 11th. The presentation details changes to be implemented within the next ten months and includes an impact assessment template detailing the projects, implementation dates and the level of impact on employees (low/medium/high). Ms. Ingram is seeking members’ feedback on the approach taken and added that, should employee representatives take this opportunity to identify projects of interest, she will gladly arrange for briefings on those topics at future meetings.

In response to Adele McLean’s inquiry regarding the CPP-SIS project, Benoît Long will verify if clients will be able to complete CPP-Disability applications online and will provide a response via the Secretariat.

Stan Buday indicated that they are having discussions on technological impact with IT Branch and they are awaiting a presentation on overall and detailed impacts in the next month.

Both union and management members stated their appreciation for the presentation and the template format.

Actions

No action identified.

Roundtable and Closing Remarks

Roundtable

Evelyne Power mentioned that a union-sponsored presentation on the safety and security of front-end employees was given at the NLMCC, and proposed the creation of a small working group to find solutions to concerns expressed at the meeting by union representatives. Eddy Bourque stated that the union will be glad to participate.

Adele McLean expressed her appreciation for the opportunity to provide feedback. She noted that requests received from NHQ are sometimes late in getting to MAs, and she would appreciate more lead time to provide fulsome analysis feedback. Cliff Groen agreed that circumstances sometimes do not allow much time, but agree that the feedback process is intended to work that way.

Stan Buday and Cliff Groen thanked participants, guests and Secretariat for their support and participation and found that this meeting was better targeted to the interests of union and management.

There being no further business, the meeting closed at 13:50 hrs.

Actions

Union members interested in participating to the Safety and Security of Front-End Employees working group are to provide names to UMCC Secretariat.

The Secretariat to ensure that telephone connection details are included in the agenda and invitation, for ease of finding.