Staffing Risk Assessment Framework

This staffing risk assessment framework takes effect on April 1, 2016.

The Preamble to the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) emphasizes the importance of both delegation and accountability in successfully implementing a flexible staffing environment.

Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) is committed to have a merit-based staffing system that is nimble and that upholds ethical hiring practices. Sub-delegated managers are accountable to the Deputy Minister to ensure that staffing activities conducted within their authorities respect the PSEA, Public Service Employment Regulations(PSER), and other applicable central agency and departmental staffing policies and guidance documents. Sub-delegated managers are also accountable to the Deputy Minister (DM) for making values-based staffing decisions that respect the ESDC Code of Conduct, the principles outlined in the preamble to the PSEAand the values of the Public Sector.

The objective of the framework is to provide managers and Human Resources (HR) Consultants with parameters to maximize flexibilities and efficiency in staffing processes while considering and weighing potential impacts and staffing risks.

The framework also defines HR’s role as a strategic business partner to work closely with clients to enable desired business outcomes, ensure that Staffing related authorities are adhered to, and that strategies are identified to mitigate identified staffing risks where possible

In the context of this framework, two types of staffing risks have been identified:

Compliance and values-based risks may be mitigated by the continued strategic advice and guidance exercised by HR Consultants who support managers in understanding their accountabilities in exercising sub-delegated authorities.

Annex A may be used as a reference for identifying the level of risk associated with each staffing action. In order for a staffing action to have a low, medium or high-risk level assigned, not all elements found in the definition need to be present.

Staffing actions that contravene existing legislative, regulatory or policy requirements fall outside of this framework. Non-compliance is not a risk, but rather an issue that must be addressed immediately.

Innovation and reasonable risk-taking, while adhering to legislative and policy requirements, are encouraged when conducting staffing activities within their authorities in order to produce positive business outcomes and take maximum advantage of available flexibilities.

One of the responsibilities of the HR Consultant is to identify specific staffing actions for which a broader management consultation on staffing risks is required.

Each situation is to be assessed on a case-by-case basis to determine the risk level of the staffing action and whether a broader management dialogue is warranted. In situations where it is determined that consultation at a higher level is required based on the risk level of the staffing action, HR Consultants will first discuss the staffing action with the sub-delegated manager. HR Consultants will also document advice and guidance and related decisions in the staffing file (Annex B).

Sub-delegated managers and senior managers to whom matters may be escalated for medium or high-risk staffing actions in accordance with this risk framework must decide whether the business risk (e.g. inability to deliver on important priority deliverables) outweighs the overall compliance or values-based risk of a given staffing action.

In the spirit of maintaining an effective two-way dialogue on staffing risks, sub-delegated managers may also identify specific actions for which a broader HR consultation is warranted.

Deliberate contravention of the legislative, regulatory and policy requirements or abuse of authority in an appointment process will be treated as a serious matter. Corrective measures may be undertaken should an error, omission or improper conduct have occurred.

All staffing actions identified as high-risk, at the final assessment, where no or little mitigating strategies have been undertaken, will be reported to the Corporate Workforce Strategies by the HR Consultant for monitoring purposes (i.e. trend analysis). The Deputy Minister will be informed of monitoring results at the departmental level as part of ongoing reporting mechanisms.

Annex A - Staffing Risk Levels (Accessible)

Risk Levels definitions

Notes

HRC’s have the ability to raise or reduce the risk level based on situation specific factors that apply.

Staffing actions that contravene existing legislative and policy must be addressed immediately. (I.e. Merit is not met, Political Influence, Discrimination or systemic barriers; Priorities persons were not given due consideration and improper conduct / Fraud, Appointment based on personal favoritism)

Non-compliance is not a risk, but rather an issue that must be addressed immediately.

Aggravating and mitigating factors table:

The table provides examples of considerations when determining the risk level for a staffing action- it is not exhaustive. It is a sample of aggravating and mitigation factors that could be discussed. Managers and HRC’s are also supported by several frameworks to make staffing decisions that best enable the achievement of desired business and workforce outcomes

Expected results

• A non-partisan and representative workforce of individuals drawn from across the country, benefitting from the diversity, linguistic duality and range of backgrounds and skills of Canadians;
• Appointment processes designed so as not to discriminate or create systemic barriers;
• Appointment processes conducted in a fair and transparent manner and in good faith;
• Appointments of highly competent persons who meet the needs of the organization; and
• Timely correction of errors and omissions.

Consultation

Low risk actions only require sub-delegated management involvement; medium/ high risk actions require a broader management consultation. Prior to escalating a given staffing action, the HR Consultant (HRC) must first discuss concerns with the sub-delegated manager responsible for the appointment process, and propose mitigation strategies. Refer to Annex B for details on the escalation process.

Oversight

HR Consultants will document advice and guidance and related decisions appropriately, this information will be used for monitoring and reporting purposes.

High-Risk Staffing actions that required escalation to the final management level will be closely monitored and results will be reported to the Deputy Minister as part of ongoing reporting mechanisms.

Annex B - Risk Framework Escalation Mechanism (Accessible)

*Change of Level: When mitigation strategies are adopted the level of risk may be lowered which could have an impact on the escalation process.

Escalation Mechanism for Low-Risk Actions:

1. HRC will document the review and associated decision (if applicable) and will process the staffing action.

Notes:

• Escalation: Actions only require sub-delegated management involvement; the escalation process does not apply.
• Mitigation Strategies: Even though escalation does not apply, mitigation strategies may be recommended for some low risk staffing action. Actions will be process whether the Sub-delegated managers adopts the mitigation strategies or not.

Escalation Mechanism for Medium-Risk Actions*:

1. Mitigation strategies are not adopted by the SDM.
2. HRC will escalate to HR Manager/ Director who will escalate to the next management level
3. HRC will document the escalation review and associated decision and will process the staffing action.

Notes:

• Escalation: All actions will be escalated up to the next management level and to the HR manager/Director.
• Mitigation Strategies: Mitigation Strategies always apply to Medium-Risk actions. Actions will be processed whether the next level of management adopts the mitigation strategies or not.
• Accountabilities: Upon escalation, the next management level will be held accountable to determine whether the business risk of not proceeding with the staffing action outweighs the identified staffing risks and whether to adopt the mitigation strategies proposed by the HR Consultant prior to proceeding with the staffing action.

Escalation Mechanism for High-Risk Actions*:

1. Mitigation strategies are not adopted by the SDM
2. HRC will escalate to HR Manager/Director who will escalate to the next management level
3. Mitigation Strategies are not adopted.
4. HR Manager/Director will escalate to ADM (non-ex) or DM (EX) and HR Manager/Director.
5. HRC will document the escalation review and associated decision and will process the staffing action.

Notes:

• Escalation: All actions will be escalated up to the next management level and to the HR Manager/Director. When Mitigation Strategies are not adopted, the action will be escalated up to the final escalation level, the ADM (non-ex) or DM (ex).
• Mitigation Strategies: Mitigation strategies always apply to High-Risk actions and must be adopted to stop the escalation process to ADM or DM level. Actions will be processed whether the final level of management adopts the mitigation strategies or not.
• Accountabilities: Upon escalation, the responsible level of management will be held accountable to determine whether the business risk of not proceeding with the staffing action outweighs the identified staffing risks and whether to adopt the mitigation strategies proposed by the HR Consultant prior to proceeding with the staffing action.
• Oversight: High-risk staffing actions that required escalation to the final management level will be closely monitored and results will be reported to the Deputy Minister as part of ongoing reporting mechanisms.