EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Prior to October 13, there really wasn’t a process in place, and it quickly became evident that issues were arising. From then, we’ve sent out a directive that states the process for cancellation of a competition.
So I would like to assure the member that we take this very seriously. We’ll do our best to ensure that we put processes in place to ensure that there is fairness and consistency.
With respect to references and unsolicited references, the Department of Human Resources holds confidentiality to its utmost. We respect the confidentiality of individuals. We do not accept unsolicited references.
If there is a specific instance, then I would like to be informed of that specific instance so that we could deal with it.
Our staffing people are held to the highest confidentiality, and if there is any breach, then I would like to know.
I’d like to state that the Department of Human Resources doesn’t accept any unsolicited references.
I’m glad to hear that. I’d like to thank the deputy for reaffirming the government’s position on that.
Like I said, a lot of people over the last six years, and it seems like more so in the last couple of years, have been very frustrated.
I’ve received lots of phone calls from people that say, “What’s the use of even having a Priority Hiring Policy if we are going to get screened out anyway before we even get there.”
Hopefully, we’ll see some controls in place and we won’t have rogue departments doing their own thing in contravention of the government’s Hiring Policy.
On the issue of unsolicited references; maybe ask the minister if he could double check with his assistant deputy minister as I’m aware of at least one case where he knows that that happened. Again, what happened with that? I’ve been approached by someone that indicated they are aware that this happened and they are aware that up to, at least up to the deputy minister level, were aware of it.
What’s done in a case like that? What should be done in a case like that?
Is there a policy, or procedures, or any kind of disciplinary action that’s required if that breach of confidentiality is found out about? Is that something that should be passed right on up to the ministerial level? Or should that be something that’s held and dealt with at the lower levels?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): We could look into this if there were any instances of that and what type of action has taken place. We have to adhere to the policies when we’re hiring any personnel because of course we have to be fair to all. I could look into the issue and I probably have to have a one-on-one meeting with you to find out more details into those types of incidences.
And exactly what kinds of problems there are and to rectify the matter.
I have no problems doing it, but like I said, you don’t need to talk to me. You just need to ask your assistant deputy minister, as I know, and I’ve been made aware that he is aware of something. He actually has a copy of something on paper that shows that.
Regardless of that particular case, or anything, what is the disciplinary process that is followed in breach of confidentiality like that, or if a member, an employee, is or has done something like that?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): If we were to be informed of such a situation, we would have an investigation, or we could direct personnel to do an investigation.
If we were told of any problems about any one of the employees, we would do an investigation on the matter and the investigator, should there be such a problem, would then look into the matter and rectify it.
I’m just wondering if the minister could indicate what he means by “rectify it.”
Does he mean create a policy so that it doesn’t happen again, like they did with cancelling competitions?
Or is there any disciplinary procedure in place for individuals that do breach confidentiality or send unsolicited...because it could be anyone that just doesn’t like someone that sends an e-mail, or a letter, or a phone call to someone in the department that says, “Don’t hire this individual.” for whatever reason.
It could be completely groundless. That’s why when you hire someone, you ask for their references, and you check with their references, and not other individuals. So in cases like this, what does happen, or what would happen if this were to have happened?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have a policy where if an employee did something wrong, we would have an investigation, and if the investigator should come to us and report to us either way, whether this individual breached or not, we look at the facts from the investigator.
We have a policy that would be followed to deal with the individual, for example, if disciplinary action would be taken, or some other form, depending on the size of the problem or the breach, we would be given some steps that would we could take from the investigator.
We’re on page D-6.
My next question to the minister or his officials: would a breach of confidentiality be something that would be considered a serious offence?
In the Department of Human Resources, you’re dealing with individuals’ lives. Like you said, it’s highly confidential information. So would a breach of that sort be considered significant, or something that would just warrant a slap on the wrist?
Breach of confidentiality is very serious for us as a department, but I would like to outline employee discipline.
Before any disciplinary action is taken, there are a number of steps that we have to take to evaluate the situation.
First of all, I guess there would need to be number one, a complaint. Number two, we would need to determine the need for an investigation.
We would need to advise the individuals involved with the investigation.
So if it’s an employee, we need to inform them, and then we need to appoint an investigator to review, analyze, and report on the situation.
So the investigative process consists of a terms of reference; identifying of what all documents are required, whether it be collective agreements, policies, guidelines; timelines of the review; and the completion of a final review, including the findings, whether it be founded, unfounded, or malicious.
And then you have to look at actually interviewing individuals who have something relevant to bring to the process, and then a report would be submitted.
In this case, if it was against one of my employees, it would be to me, as the deputy minister, and then we consult with our Employee Relations Division because you have to look at every investigation on a case-by-case basis, and to review case law, and to go from there.
In this case, because I’m not aware of what the situation is, I wouldn’t be able to comment on to what extent the discipline would be imposed because every investigation is taken on a case-by-case basis.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Ms. Okpik. Mr. Tootoo.
I can appreciate the deputy’s response and without being aware of the facts of any situation, it is very difficult to comment on.
Maybe if the minister or the deputy could, as the head officials for the Department of Human Resources, are they aware of any of these investigations going on right now?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Tootoo. Minister Tapardjuk.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): I don’t know of any at this point.
I guess if the assistant deputy minister told these individuals that there was an investigation being done into it. One would assume then that the minister would be aware of it. Is that correct?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, if we were requested to hold an investigation, then we would bring that over.
It’s a three-step process and the highest one would be at the direction of the minister asking to have an investigation done, and then the investigator would make a report. But to date, we have not been informed of any investigation that is going on.
I guess my question, I don’t know if it’s going on right now, but let’s say in the last seven months, was the minister aware of any investigations dealing with this particular issue that have gone on?
Chairman (interpretation): Deputy Minister Okpik.
In the last seven months, we have received no formal complaint.
If there are no formal complaints received, then I can’t respond or my department can’t respond by doing an investigation on something that has not come through the formal process.
If there was an issue, then I would advise that a formal complaint be sought so that we may address it.
Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Tootoo
Now that the individuals have gone and actually met with the assistant deputy minister, and the assistant deputy minister told him that they will be doing an investigation, so I find it hard to believe there hasn’t been any. And the individuals that have come to me have been told that there was an investigation being done or going to be done.
You can understand the apathy out there for people wanting to come forward to raise concerns.
I’ve asked questions in the past to this on workplace harassment and things like that that people have come forward with their concerns and they get pushed under the carpet.
They get told one thing and they never hear anything again.
One member of the public service was told in the workshop, that if they were aware of someone that had been threatened in the workplace by a supervisor for whatever reason, to keep their mouth quiet about something, that it was up to them to inform the supervisor if they became aware of it.
Otherwise, they become tied to it and become liable. That individual brought that concern forward that they heard.
I asked questions on it in the last year or two ago on that and nothing ever happened.
On it again, that it was at least brought to the director level. And in this case, I know that the individuals met with the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Department of Human Resources. They told them that there was an investigation being done, and then here, nothing’s happened.
Why is it that they didn’t want to raise issues if they’re going to fall on deaf ears?
I don’t think that’s right.
People see things that go on out there, and as ministers and deputy ministers, you guys are the ones responsible for those actions and that’s where the buck stops for you guys.
And also regarding if they do have legitimate concerns, that there is a process that they are looked at and followed through on because if not, why would anyone come forward with a concern if it’s not going to go anywhere?
Investigations should be done and the deputy indicated that you know if it’s dismissed after the investigation. Well, then the individual that brought the complaint forward should be disciplined for bringing something forward that wasn’t accurate.
On at least two occasions, I know of they were legitimate complaints that nothing’s ever been done on.
I have concerns about that because we want our workforce to work and to enjoy their work. They like working for the government not because they’re scared of saying anything to try and improve things.
I mean this is a serious issue that needs to be looked at under the department specifically on that. And again, I’ve risen in the past the whistleblower legislation. And now, maybe we need to move quicker on relating on something like this.
Now, for these two examples that I just talked about, individuals that took a chance to come forward and raise a concern, and have nothing happen to him about it. It disappears into dark recesses of who knows where, that nothing happens.
You can improve the workforce and make our employees feel more confident and comfortable working for the government. We have to know that if they do have genuine concerns, that there is a process, not just on paper, that is being followed through on.
With that, I’d like to hear the minister’s comments to those remarks and I’ll leave it at that.
Your concerns are taken.
I don’t know who did the investigation. Personally, as the minister for this department, I have initiated a few investigations that are required for enquiries that we were supposed to do.
We have policies and guidelines that we are to follow. If we are informed about a complaint or a problem, then we need to do an investigation.
We did some investigations, but I don’t have the figures here with me. We had done quite a few investigations to date. We had investigations and after that, they may have been reprimanded.
In regard to your questions, I have no information and my assistant deputy minister was not informed about this issue.
Perhaps it would be much better if Mr. Tootoo can talk to me personally and inform me so I could look at it and have it investigated.
I think that I have to check with the individual that talked to me because they may not wish to because they are scared. These people are scared; it’s a shame that they should be, in following up on an issue like this. I’ll be in touch with the minister or his deputy on this particular issue once I’ve talked to the individuals from both.
If they choose to pursue it, then I’ll be there.
If not, then I have to respect their decision. They have to work within the government and it’s a crying shame that they have to worry about that; that anyone does.
I’ll leave that for now.
The other thing that I have an issue that I’d like to ask on in relation to the staffing is actual reference checking when the department offers a position to someone in any capacity. I know that references are asked for. Are the only references that are checked the references the individuals provided?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): If an applicant had their own reference, whoever’s doing the hiring checks the references; the references that are identified by the applicant; the references are also included in the application.
I want to thank the minister for that response. When you are interviewing someone for any particular position, is there a mechanism, or is there a question that the department or the interview team uses to find out if there are any legal, whether it be in the judicial, through the criminal courts, or civil courts, or human rights complaints, like that against any individuals applying for positions that may affect their position that they’re applying for?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): The employment opportunities vary from one another.
Some of the positions have to be identified to make sure the applicant does not have a criminal record. It varies from position to position; some positions don’t require a criminal records check while others do.
If I understood your question, there are positions that require a criminal records check, but each position varies with in each department; some of them require a criminal records check while others don’t.
I’ll just take an example off the top of my head, and there are no grounds for it. I think it could show a useful process that they could look at.
Say for example, I know we have a Workplace Wellness, and Health and Safety individual, or position that teaches workplace harassment to the other departments. Not how to harass people, but what to do in cases of workplace harassment, and stuff like that.
Now, let’s say for example that this individual was on a human rights complaint against them for sexual harassment or workplace harassment, would that be something that would be looked at by the department when they’re looking to see whether this individual would be an appropriate person to hire to deliver those courses on behalf of the government to the other government employees?
When a person is applying for a position, and it’s a position of trust, then a criminal records check is required.
If there is a human rights complaint or any type of thing against an individual; that is not taken into consideration; it’s the outcome of the criminal records check that would determine whether the employment is offered or not.
I have an additional question.
Although I spoke to the issue under the directorate page, our constituents inform us usually and we can’t really do anything about the complaints that we receive on staffing.
It states here that there are priority hiring policies, and they have recruitment and staffing policies. Before we go to a longer process, before the process gets into a difficult situation, perhaps inform the Members of the Legislative Assembly.
In my community, I have been told that some of the staff is racist and I didn’t really know what to do.
It’s impossible to have those discussions with the departments. As members of the legislature, what are we doing when we hear complaints such as this?
Perhaps, if you had more frequent orientation workshops, there would be less problems arising. I think there is a lack of respect within the departments between Inuit and non-natives, and some of the individuals have to work in an environment like that.
Before the formal complaints really start, or before the conflicts start, perhaps you can try and deal with resolutions. We, as members of the legislature, don’t just want to make complaints to you.
Perhaps the minister could tell us the procedure. Once we hear of these kinds of complaints, what are we to do?
I was thinking perhaps prior to it contravening an Act, have those individuals meet with the elders and be counselled, especially the individuals or the staff that are not being too nice.
How could we provide more support to our constituents because we hear from our constituents about these complaints?
I even have an individual come into my office, and he has a number of complaints, but I don’t really want to give it to the department because this individual was going through a lot of difficulty.
He’s a very dedicated person and he was told not to make any complaints. Last year, I spoke to this issue.
So perhaps, minister, if you are willing to give us support of how to deal with these kinds of issues.
Yes, we have heard about these kinds of problems occurring, but I can respond in two or three ways.
We are always interested in hearing those kinds of complaints as the Department of Human Resources, perhaps EIA, Finance, or Education, even though those are the departments, but we are the Department of Human Resources, we are interested in hearing if there are any complaints because each department had agreed to abide by our policy on hiring Inuit.
At this time, we are reviewing the process of how the complainant and the complainer can resolve the issue so that the employees can go to work, but we are now looking at the policy, it’s within the Public Service Act; we are looking at ways of how to resolve those problems.
At this time, the policy is in its final draft, the Harassment Policy or Discriminatory Policy, whether it is an Inuk or a Qallunaaq person.
So at this time, we are reviewing the anti-harassment policy. The Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Committee is now reviewing that policy to make sure that they apply to both Inuit and non-Inuit, and after I get the recommendations from the reviewing group, then I will give it to the Cabinet.
This year, this coming spring, we would like to finalize this review.
Even before the policy review is finished, we are interested in hearing from all of the departments about those complaints and we can work with the deputy ministers, or if it’s a minister, I would be able to work with the minister.
So those are the reviews that we are doing right now.
It makes me a bit more comfortable that I’ll be able to relay that information that you provided to me to my constituents to try and resolve the situation prior to getting deeper into the process.
Firstly, after getting a response, I will ask another question on page D-6. There’s $319,000 under Purchases for Services line item. If you can elaborate to me what kind of services these are.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): You have to excuse us. We are looking for that line item.
Those are different services. For example, if there’s work to be done, especially in advertisement, for those kinds of services, the $319,000 is for that.
This is mainly for the services like communication or advertising.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Is the $319,000 for the whole government?
For all the departments...that Crown corporations are not included in there? What do they advertise?
The Housing Corporation would be included in there.
The Crown corporations, not just Housing; there’s also Nunavut Power Corporation, Nunavut Development Corporation, and others.
There are quite a number of Crown corporations. They are not included in there.
They have their own separate line item there?
Your policy or regulations; how is that used? It seems like it’s only for newspapers.
Do you have a policy that you have to advertise in the newspaper because a lot of times, they are not announced on the radio.
Can you tell me if this $319,000 is mainly for the newspaper advertisement?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): What we do is we contract Ayaya Communications, and we have a contract with them where they draw up the advertisements and we place them in Nunatsiaq News, Kivalliq News, Nunavut News, and other newspapers in southern cities if we have to, or by television through the Co-op Cable.
We also pay for those.
I don’t think we pay when we broadcast on the radio, but for the others, we usually have to pay to advertise.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): It’s very beneficial to the people who read the ads, especially people who are looking for work.
If we’re going to inform the communities, the local radio stations are the most effective way of communicating to the people.
I think if you’re a non-profit organization, like, for example, if we were looking at the Department of Education, who uses a non-profit organization, they have the contract because non-profit organizations can do the work as long as you’re not making a profit.
That’s how I understand it.
As long as they don’t make a profit, you can bill them at cost as long as you don’t make a profit margin.
The bodies or organizations can do that also.
I’m just trying to encourage you to use those kinds of bodies or organizations.
That was not a question. Mr. Minister, do you wish to respond?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes. At this time, we are trying to determine if we can advertise through the radio and the Department of Justice is presently reviewing how we can make appropriate payments to the local radios.
We are in the planning stages of determining how we can get that information to the communities.
We are on D-6 of Human Resources. Branch Summary.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $5, 084,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Turn to page D-7.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $2, 775,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Page D-8.
Job Evaluations and Organizational Design.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $807,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Page D-9.
Branch Summary. Inuit Employment Plan.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $723,000.
I have a question in this area on the Inuit Employment Plan.
I was told where people would be hired on a casual basis and after being in that position for a while, where the term was going to be short-term, it seems that they extend the length of casual employment from nine months to a year. Some people have asked why they are still in a casual position.
The policy that we used that if that person has been in a casual position for six months that it would indicate that that employee would become a permanent employee. Where is this at right now?
The length of the casual employment is four months, but our maximum would be a year. If it’s going to be extended, then my deputy minister would have to approve it. Even if the department wishes to extend the casual employment after four months up to a year, they have to get an approval from the deputy minister.
Those people who are employed on a casual basis, it gets uncomfortable sometimes because they are told that they will get a permanent job.
Maybe those are not true, is that why we hear about it? Maybe that’s why there are people who are under casual employment that haven’t been there for a long time.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): I will get my deputy minister to respond to that.
The people who are hired on a casual basis are identified by the department because they know how much funding they have for that position. What we try and monitor is how long they’ll be employed.