EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
A key objective for the 2010-11 fiscal year is to develop an evaluation framework with key performance for the Government of Nunavut. Concerted efforts will be made to complete a GN-wide Inuit Employment Plan that will concentrate on the development of GN-wide initiatives.
The Training and Development Branch provides advice, assistance, support, and training programs to other departments in the training and development of staff and has been allocated 30 percent of the department’s 2010-11 budget.
My department, in partnership with the Department of Finance, has created a training fund to provide additional training opportunities for GN employees and public agencies.
This training fund consists of two segments; one for specialized training (training specific for specialized areas) and the other for program development (develop technical, job specific competencies).
Ultimately, this training fund will result in the following outcomes: improved program/service delivery, increased technical/professional knowledge and expertise, and licence/certification achievement.
I am pleased to report that $2,092,000 has been allocated to the Sivuliqtiksat Internship program to provide professional development opportunities to Inuit and assist our departments in meeting their Article 23 requirements.
Finally, the Employee Relations Branch, which provides labour relations support and training to all GN departments and agencies, has been allocated 9 percent of the department’s 2010-11 budget.
The branch will continue to deliver and develop wellness, safety, performance management, and attendance management programs to improve the well-being of employees, address performance management and attendance issues, and ensure safe working conditions for all employees.
In the next fiscal year, the Department of Human Resources will commence negotiations for new collective agreements with the Nunavut Employees Union, which expires on September 30, 2010, and the Qulliq Energy Corporation, which expires on December 31, 2010.
The Department of Human Resources understands the dynamic and complex nature of service delivery to a growing and vital public service.
Our efforts and the successes of our program service delivery are of interest and importance to all Nunavutmiut.
We are deeply committed to all of the people we impact and we will not lose sight of the responsibility we have.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for your consideration. I would be pleased to answer your questions.
Sergeant-at-Arms, can you escort the witnesses in, please.
The witnesses are at the table now.
I would like to introduce my witnesses. To my right, I have Melinda Janes, Assistant Deputy Minister of Human Resources. On my left, I have Aluki Rojas, Deputy Minister of Human Resources.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister. I would like to welcome you and your officials.
The Chair of the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts, Mr. Arvaluk, can now make his opening comments.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): I am pleased to deliver the standing committee’s opening comments as we begin consideration of the 2010-11 Main Estimates and Business Plan of the Department of Human Resources.
The Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts has had the opportunity to meet with the minister and his officials. The minister was able to provide an update on his department’s proposed operations and maintenance expenditures for the 2010-11 fiscal year.
Members noted that the Department of Human Resources is proposing to increase its budget for 2010-11 by $463,000.
This is an increase of approximately 2 percent from the 2009-2010 fiscal year.
The main estimates indicate that this small budget increase is exclusively in the area of compensation and benefits for each of the seven branches of the department.
Mr. Chairman, the GN’s collective agreement with the Nunavut Employees Union expires in September of this year.
During the minister’s appearance before the standing committee, members were advised that the department is in the process of canvassing GN departments in order to identify issues that need to be addressed.
The minister also stated that the Nunavut Employees Union is expected to contact the Department of Human Resources in the near future as both parties move forward in the collective bargaining process.
The collective agreement between the GN and the Nunavut Teachers Association expired on June 30, 2009. (interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, the members encourage both parties in their ongoing efforts to achieve a renewed agreement with the Nunavut Teachers Association.
Mr. Chairman, according to the GN’s quarterly Inuit Employment Plan reports, the number of casual positions reached an all-time high of approximately 1,200 in December 2007.
Members recognize that the number of casual positions has subsequently decreased and has remained below 600 since December 2008.
Members believe that the use of casuals to fill positions on a long-term basis remains to be an issue that needs to be addressed.
During his appearance, the minister expressed concurrence with this position and indicated that the department is reviewing the issue.
Mr. Chairman, the Public Service Act was inherited by Nunavut upon division.
The standing committee notes that over the last several years, the department’s business plans have repeatedly referred to the need to review the Public Service Act.
A priority regarding required amendments to the Public Service Act has appeared in every year’s departmental business plan since the 2003-04 fiscal year.
In reference to the review of the Public Service Act, the department’s 2008-09 business plan stated that “Policy work and legislative drafting almost complete.”
The standing committee looks forward to substantive progress being made on this issue and expects to see the new legislation during the life of this Assembly.
For several years, the development of a Code of Conduct has also been an ongoing priority of the department.
During the minister’s appearance, he advised the standing committee that a “Code of Values and Ethics” will be tabled in the Legislative Assembly in the 2010-11 fiscal year.
The need for whistle-blower protection legislation in Nunavut was once again raised during the minister’s appearance.
Members were pleased to be advised that the department is developing a set of procedures for whistle-blower protection.
The standing committee looks forward to further detail on the whistle-blower protection process once it is fully developed.
During his appearance before the standing committee, the minister also advised members that alternative dispute resolution programs will be looked at as part of the review of the Public Service Act.
According to the GN’s 2007-08 Public Service Annual Report, 670 GN employees received a bilingual bonus as of March 31, 2008.
During the minister’s appearance, a member of the standing committee suggested the introduction of a trilingual bonus for GN employees who use all three languages on the job.
The standing committee continues to encourage the department to develop objective tests for evaluating language proficiency within the public service.
Members note that the Inuit Language Authority that has been established under the Inuit Language Protection Act may soon be ready to assist with this task.
Section 17 of the Inuit Language Protection Act provides that the Inuit Language Authority “may develop, review, recommend or administer surveys or tests that evaluate Inuit Language proficiency…”
The standing committee notes that the department’s 2006-07 business plan indicated that a draft of a new “Language Incentive Program” had been completed.
The 2010-11 business plan indicates a priority for the 2011-12 fiscal year to “Develop and implement a language incentive policy for the GN.” Given the importance of complying with the Inuit Language Protection Act, the standing committee encourages the department to make progress on this matter.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee recognizes that the department has a lead role in developing initiatives designed to increase and maintain Inuit employment in the Government of Nunavut.
According to the department’s quarterly employment reports, 888 beneficiaries were employed by the GN in January of 2000.
A total of 1,459 beneficiaries were employed by the GN in September 2009.
While members appreciate that this represents an increase of 64 percent, members also note that the total number of beneficiaries employed by the GN has been relatively stable since December 2006.
Taking into account all filled positions, members note that the overall Inuit employment rate in the GN has remained between 50 percent and 52 percent since 2007.
The 2010-13 business plan indicates that the government has set a new target for 54 percent or more of all filled positions to be filled by beneficiaries by March 31, 2011.
In order to reach this goal, at least 266 new beneficiary employees will need to be hired.
Members note with concern that the target of 54 percent is not intended to be achieved across all occupational categories. As in past years, the standing committee recognizes that more than 90 percent of the GN’s administrative support positions are filled by beneficiaries.
Members remain concerned that less than 30 percent of the GN’s currently filled senior management, middle management, and professional positions are occupied by beneficiaries.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee notes that the GN’s Priority Hiring Policy expires this month.
The policy provides that NLCA, or Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, beneficiaries who meet the qualifications of a given position have priority over other candidates.
The standing committee firmly supports this policy and members look forward to the tabling of a renewed policy.
In addition to this policy, the GN’s hiring process provides for the consideration of current GN employees as well as Nunavut residents with a minimum of one calendar year residency before applicants from other jurisdictions.
In previous years, members have urged the minister to consider increasing the minimum of one calendar year residency to five calendar years.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee continues to stress the importance of the GN’s Summer Student Employment Equity Program as it provides valuable work experience for Nunavut youth.
Approximately 1,300 students, 76 percent of whom were beneficiaries, have participated in this program since 2001.
The standing committee noted with concern that during the summer of 2009, six communities did not benefit from the program and several communities had only one or two students participate.
Members were pleased to receive a commitment from the minister to better inform all communities about the GN’s summer student program.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee notes that as of September 2009, the GN’s overall vacancy rate was 23 percent.
This remains unchanged from December 2008.
In previous years, the GN’s overall vacancy rate had consistently been approximately 20 percent.
Given the department’s central agency role in providing human resources management advice and services, members believe that the department has a role to play in addressing the ongoing vacancy issue in conjunction with the increasing number of positions across the Government of Nunavut.
Mr. Chairman, the issue of the impact of housing on GN employee retention has been an ongoing concern.
In 2008, the GN announced a rollback of staff housing rents to January 2007 levels. The standing committee encourages the department to continue to work with the Nunavut Housing Corporation on this issue, including a review of the GN’s Staff Housing Policy, which, as members understand, remains in place.
The GN’s 2010-11 business plan indicates that the government-wide retention rate was 82 percent in the 2008-09 fiscal year, which is up slightly from the 2007-08 fiscal year, when the retention rate was 80 percent.
The standing committee also encourages the department in its efforts to develop a government-wide recruitment and retention strategy as outlined in its list of priorities for the Staffing Branch in the 2010-11 fiscal year.
Lastly, the members were pleased to receive an update from the minister during his appearance on how the training and development funds were used.
In this matter, the standing committee was also pleased to receive another update earlier this month via correspondence from the minister.
In the interest of transparency and accountability, members look forward to further updates as more of the funds are used.
Individual members may have their own concerns and comments as well. (interpretation) Thank you.
You should take a break as you have finally finished making opening comments.
In the minister’s opening comments, there’s no page numbers, but I think it is page 2. He said there was $950,000 that has been allocated to the Summer Students Employment Equity Program.
In comparison to last year, is it an increase or a decrease in dollars and if so, how much either way?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Rumbolt. (interpretation ends) That would be the second page of the opening comments, first paragraph.
The dollars that are allocated are the same as last year; there’s no increase or decrease.
The deadline for the summer student program, I do believe, is some time in April and most students don’t think about jobs until June.
What is your department doing to ensure that all communities are aware of the summer student program?
The member is right, but the deadline is for the departments to submit their requests for summer students. The summer student application or the “allowability” for the student to apply is open; there is no deadline.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Shewchuk. Mr. Rumbolt.
I’m not quite sure how this works, but I’ll try and understand what you said by an example, I guess.
So if a department from the GN in a community wants a summer student, that department has to apply before April or whatever the deadline is.
Chairman: That’s what the minister said. So do you want to apply? Okay.
Are there any other questions? Mr. Rumbolt.
Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once a student applies for this program, how long is the process before the student is informed of whether he has a summer job or not?
Usually, that process happens very quickly as there is a central location in every region where a summer student must register and then the request from the departments in the communities come out and they’re matched up with the student. It usually happens very quickly.
Mr. Aupaluktuq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also thank the Hon. Minister Shewchuk for being here as well as Ms. Janes and Ms. Rojas.
I believe this committee as well as our departments all have to work together.
At the end of the day, our mandate is to provide services to our constituents, employees, and staff in the different departments.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to direct the hon. minister and his staff in regard to opening comments on page 1, third paragraph. If I may quote the last paragraph there in terms of Tamapta, it reads, “These documents provide the direction needed to lead in the development of Nunavut’s public service through excellence in human resource management.”
With that, on page 2, first paragraph, halfway, in the opening comments, “We will continue in our efforts to improve our recruitment services, staffing processes, and retention activities.”
On page 2, again on the last paragraph, halfway down, it’s noted that “In an effort to ensure that job evaluation results are fair and consistent across government...”
And then on page 3, the last paragraph, it’s noted that “On the next fiscal year, the Department of Human Resources will commence negotiations for new collective agreements with the Nunavut Employees Union, which expires on September 30, 2010, and the Qulliq Energy Corporation, which expires on December 31…”
And finally on the last page, second paragraph, it states, “We are deeply committed to all of the people we impact and we will not lose sight of the responsibility we have.”
I am glad to see that the department is open and willing to see about what can be resolved in order to enhance employment in Nunavut to provide the best services.
I think it would be a comment just to be aware that different managers and different departments are perceived by the public to be… forgive me, I’m trying to find the right word.
The public wants to ensure that there are best practices being followed and that there is protocol in place.
I want to ask the minister in regard to his opening comments how the Job Evaluation Branch will actually help Nunavummiut.
Minister Shewchuk, would you like to respond? Minister Shewchuk.
I would like to thank the member for asking that question. One of the main responsibilities for the Job Evaluation Branch is to ensure that there’s fairness and equality in all jobs and job competitions that are taking place. So it’s a matter of being open and transparent to all of these things and ensuring that all of the processes are followed.
I think people feel comfortable hearing that from the Minister of Human Resources.
I believe some of my colleagues will probably ask questions or I will by page-by-page, but I wanted to ask: have there been many people coming up with human resource or Nunavut Employees Union grievances?
I don’t know if this is the appropriate format to ask, but I just wanted to ask with regard to NEU and HR, how well you guys work together and if the people in between that you represent don’t fall between the cracks. So I am asking about Nunavummiut to see how well they’re represented by NEU and HR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank the member for that question and I do have that information here thanks to my great witnesses.
In 2009-2010, there were 39 grievances as of March 1, 2010; 30 with the NEU, 6 with the excluded employees, and 3 with the Nunavut Teachers Association.
Are there any further comments or questions?
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): Suffice it to say, Mr. Chairman, I apparently still have some comments to make.
I would like to put forward this question even though it was not mentioned during the opening comments, but many Inuit want to hear about the reasons for certain developments, such as the appointments to boards and agencies by our cabinet.
There are not very many qualified people who can serve on these boards here in Nunavut.
If we were to conduct an assessment of qualifications out of the 30,000 plus residents, then perhaps less than 500 individuals would qualify as productive board members who can be appointed by our cabinet.
However, many of these qualified people currently work for the different levels of government.
On top of that, they are appointed by the cabinet to be part of that board.
I have heard from many people who expressed concerns and that raises a question I want to ask.
With respect to the public servants who work for the government but are appointed to sit on these boards, can the appointment be overridden by their direct supervisor?
An example is that a supervisor could state that the person has too much on their plate and therefore, cannot attend to a meeting even though their appointment is directly from the cabinet or Premier.
Does anyone want to answer that question? Minister Shewchuk.
I’ll have Deputy Minister Aluki respond to that.
Thank you.  Chairman: Ms. Rojas.
I will try to respond according to your question.
If any public servant wishes to undertake further duties outside the purview of their position, they have to submit the request to their deputy minister who would then make their decision as to whether that individual can be appointed to that position.
The deputy minister has to quickly conduct a review of the request, ascertain whether the appointment would create conflict of interest for the person requesting the appointment, and make their determination based on whether a conflict of interest is created or not. In cases of conflict, the appointment would be denied.
That is generally how the letter to the applicant would be and this would all be conducted prior to the appointment of that person.
I hope that was understandable, Mr. Chairman.
I understood her response, but I’m asking about those who are appointed already. We hear that they’re denied permission to attend those meetings because of responsibilities.
Usually, these people are appointed by cabinet or the Premier.
I’ll have to use an example. Using anyone as an example is actually not a good idea.
I wanted to talk about employees who have a lot of responsibilities with government and they’re not all working in high level positions.
These individuals can be denied leave from their day jobs by their place of employment or supervisor even though they were appointed by the cabinet itself.
For example, if they’re a member of the Credit Corporation or the Power Corporation, there are quite a number of them who have been appointed.
Can they be denied leave to attend to their appointed board meeting?
What rules are in place or what type of process do they have to go through?
The individuals had been appointed already, but they were denied to take leave from their day jobs by their supervisor. That is the question.
Who would like to respond to that question?
I would like to thank the member for that question and it is a very good question. Before appointments are done to boards, this is why this has to be looked at very closely too, whether there is any conflict with the person in the position they’re dealing with the government being appointed to the board, if there may be conflict.
Also, what’s very clear here is before a person is appointed, the people appointing that person have to understand that the first and primary obligation is that employee work for the government and if there is operational needs that that person needs to be there, that should be number one.
This is part of Mr. Rumbolt’s question, but I would like more details. In the chairman’s opening comments, the minister indicated to the members that he would provide more information regarding the summer student program.
When we had a meeting with the minister, he indicated that the regional offices are also responsible in some ways to keep the information out there.
We heard that there were six communities that participated in the program in 2009. Have you made changes to the program so that all Nunavummiut can participate in the Summer Student Employment Equity Program?
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for that question. I do recall that question in the standing committee.
We are going to ensure that that happens.
As you well know, all of the MLAs have received packages. Also, it has been sent to all of your offices in your communities. We’re going to ensure that every department is aware of the summer student program and we will also make sure that our regional centres are informed that they also contact all communities.
What maybe the member needs some clarification on is that the central offices are the ones that accept applications from the students and they are placed from central offices, but we are going to make sure and ensure that all communities know about the summer student program.
Are there any questions? Mr. Ningeongan.
I’m sure that there will be information to the communities because we have been lobbying the government, but my question is: aside from just being given information, will all communities participate without any community being left out?
We will, as I committed to, do our best to make sure that all communities are aware of the summer student program and how it works. I would like to just challenge all of my colleagues and all of the MLAs in Nunavut to go back to their respective communities and make sure that information get out to the public also.
I just wanted to add onto some of Mr. Arvaluk’s comment in terms of leave and the employees, civic leave in particular.