EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
The human resource manual, it states what we’re suppose to do, almost like a manual for snowmobiles.
In particular, we have to deal with non-union staff, those outside of Nunavut Employees' Union, so we also have to consider that starting April 1st.
I know that as a result of Article 23, that the government of Nunavut has a priority hiring policy and I’d like to just ask the minister if that is included in this human resources manual, or if it’s a separate policy outside of that.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, it’s separate, it states that it will have to be applied.
Article 23 of Nunavut land claims, although it’s separate, we’re trying to work to make it seamless so those two don’t conflict with each other.
I think the minister’s got his work cut out for him, if his going to try and do that and I wish him the best of luck, it could take some time and I look forward to that.
Hopefully, the minister will invite the members of this Assembly to have some input into that at some stage in the game, if not all the members here, but certainly, the standing committee on that.
Would the minister commit to coming forward with any changes prior to them being approved by cabinet to the standing committee for the comments?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): yes very much, I agree with you wholeheartedly, they are different, the manual.
It states in there what you’re suppose to do when you’re going to do any hiring and also when you hire an individual there’s another guideline, so there’s two.
In regards to the members question, before we finalize it, we will get the input from the members and I will have to provide the new one to the Cabinet members.
They’re the ones that will have to approve it, but, I’m sure that we’ll get input from all the stakeholders.
Mr. Tootoo: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Does the minister have an idea, I don’t know if it was an RFP or Expression of Interest or whatever it was, I remembers seeing something put out some time ago, to review, Human Resources Manual.
I was wondering if the minister can indicate who’s doing that review and when does he expect it to be completed. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, Thank you Mr. Chairman, that contract is done by Millenium Partners, and it’s been completed.
They were the ones that did the reviewing of the manual.
And it’s being, or it’s being reviewed by the employees right now.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Tapardjuk. Mr. Tootoo.
Mr. Tootoo. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
I wish the minister luck in being able to accomplish what he said he was going to do, and it sounds it’s done already.
Is the minister confident that this review and recommendations, I would assume that are in there, do what he had hoped they indicated, what they would do is create basically a one policy, seeing this address a governments obligations under Article 23 as well as the fairness and equality for all the government employees.
Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Tootoo.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation); Like I said, that, what we’re trying to do is, we’re reviewing those manuals and guidelines.
So, we’re looking, reviewing them now, as well after the Millenium Partners did their reviewing.
I will get Ms. Okpik to answer what they have been doing.
Mr. Chairman, Thank you, Mr. Tapardjuk.
Ms. Okpik (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Chairman.
They’re not quite done yet.
Even though the contract has been completed, the human resource staff is reviewing the documents right now.
Even though Millenium Partners did the contract, we worked with them at the time.
Looking at the Article 23, we just have to change the wording from the Northwest Territories days.
There’s about 1,000 or so pages that we have to review.
We wanted the wording to be similar.
The Excluded Managers’ Handbooks and the Human Resources Manual, we wanted the wording to be sort of similar.
So, that’s what we’re reviewing right now.
Also we looked at all the differences in the manual and in the other manual.
It is one person so they don’t confuse them between the manuals and interpret them differently.
We didn’t want them to do that.
That is what the review is all about right now at the Human Resources level.
For example, we are reviewing the educational guidelines as well
Although we are not finished yet with the review we are letting the Deputy Ministers take a look at it to make sure that they know what’s being done by our department.
There are many things that we are doing.
I think that there are about 26 clauses that we have to look at before we’re done.
I understand that the minister and his deputy had indicated that they’re reviewed by Millenium Partners, is done in the Human Resources Manual.
Now that that review is done they are comparing the Human Resource Manual for all the Nunavut Employees' Union positions, that they are comparing it to the exclude members handbook.
In the review by Millenium Partners on the actual Human Resource Manual, how many recommendations other than changing Government of the Northwest Territories to Nunavut type changes that they made?
I will get my deputy to respond to that question.
There were no recommendations.
The contractors worked with the Human Resources staff at that time.
What we did is we just did the word changing.
We talked about the employee relations with the Directors of the each department to find from them which ones should be changed in the manual and then we would work together to change the wording.
How much was that contract worth?
I don’t have how much it cost for that contract but I will provide it to you.
It would be interesting to see how much that cost.
The Millenium Partners, where are they from?
They are from outside of Ottawa.
If I understood the deputy’s response earlier, that all they did was go through the report and change the name from Northwest Territories to Nunavut and there were no recommendations made for the whole manual; it was just a matter of switching over, probably renumbering, and changing to relevant territories or places.
It seems like that is something that someone here in Nunavut could have done.
I am just wondering, if that’s all that was done, why they went to an outside source to do that.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): The Human Resources Manual, if I remember correctly, there was an agreement between Nunavut Employees’ Union and the Public Service.
Inside the agreement the wording had to be clear, and we had to do some changes with some sensitive parts and the changes that we had to make were for them to conform into Nunavut.
I think we have to take a look at them again.
We are looking at them right now, we are reviewing them right now, and we had to do some changes for them to conform to the Nunavut Employees’ Union’s Manual.
We could not find anybody to do it here in Nunavut because we had to be able to have our full staff in place, and so we had to contract it out, but at the same time they had to work with the contractor because it had to be changed since 1999.
It was quite a bit of hard work.
It had to conform to the way each department is set up.
The management had to be changed, we had to look at the Priority Hiring Policy as well and how they could look at the grievances.
There were different things that we had to look at or to do in that manual.
We had to look at the Public Service Act as well.
So in 2002 when they had a meeting in Coral Harbour, they made an agreement to do some changes and it was supposed to be finished in 2005.
So this spring and next year, we will also be looking at some changes.
The member asked about how much those contractors were paid; I could say approximately less than $45,000.
Yes you are right; we did have an RFP out there.
There was about over 1,000 pages, and we didn’t want to be short staffed, but because it was such a hard work, and we wanted to get it done right away, that’s why we had to hire a contractor to work with human resources staff.
It feels like there was a lot more done there then the minister had indicated earlier, rather then changing Northwest Territories to Nunavut.
He had indicated here also that there was a meeting in Coral Harbour and they had agreed to some changes for 2005.
I’m wondering if he could be able to let us know what they are.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): I believe it was in 2000, the ministers met in Coral Harbour, and at that meeting we were given a directive to look at the Human Resources Manual and they had indicated that this manual had to be completed by 2005/06.
This directive was given in 2002, when the Cabinet had their meeting in Coral Harbour, and it’s following what the directive was.
I’m still wondering what specific directives or changes were outlined at that time.
Also the minister indicated that there was an RFP put out and I’m just wondering if they did get any proposals from within Nunavut.
Did they only advertise in Nunavut, or did they advertise outside of Nunavut simultaneously?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): I am not aware exactly if it was made available for Nunavut or outside, but we can get back to him.
I don’t see any hands raised.
Mr. Tootoo, you have a few more minutes.
Mr. Tootoo: Thank you, it all depends on the answers I get, how many RFP’s were received on that.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): We don’t have that information in front of us, but I certainly can get back to the member on how many there were and if they were from Nunavut or outside.
We probably have those and once we have that information, I can certainly pass them on to the member.
Although the minister’s looking at that, if there were proposals from within Nunavut, I wouldn’t mind finding out why they chose not to go with someone from Nunavut to do that.
The whole idea behind the process seems to be to Nunavutize the manual.
If they chose to go with someone outside of Nunavut, I wouldn’t mind getting a very good explanation as to why that happened.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): This is not confidential and we can certainly give you who put in for the RFP’s, but I would just like to say the contractors worked with our staff, and after I get that information, I certainly can give the member the information that he just requested.
Again, here the directorate is responsible for the overall direction and policy of the department, and one of the things that I know that was being worked on was a code of conduct and the conflict of interest policy for employees.
I am just wondering if that has been finalized yet or not.
At this time, it’s not completed and once it’s completed, I will have to present it to the Cabinet.
It states, in regards to code of conduct, and we tried to indicate if it would create problems or it would have a conflict of interest.
Those things still have to be looked at, and there are other things to consider like the Public Service Act and what is expected of the employees’ code of conduct, but those are not completed; they are currently being worked on.
So that’s why we can’t say that it will be like this.
Does the minister have any idea of when they expect that to be completed?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): We are aiming for this summer.
As all members of this Assembly know that we have a very good Integrity Commissioner, and I am just wondering if the department is planning on consulting with him in the development of the conflict of interest policy.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, this has been raised and we want to go through that.
We are seeking for people who can assist us.
The question that he posed, yes, very much.
I know that they are also developing a new anti-harassment and prevention of violence in the workplace policy.
Can the minister update us as to where those are at?
The policy has been drafted.
The assistant deputy ministers and deputy ministers, it’s currently being worked on and we will present that and once we consult with the deputy ministers and the assistant deputy ministers, then we will re-examine it before we proceed with that.
We have to keep in mind that we have to include Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, that it should be that we can never forget.
Maybe that’s why it’s taking a bit longer, but we are working on it diligently.
As I stated in my opening comments, one of the things that the Committee felt that should be looked at is some type of a whistle-blower legislation.
Can the minister give us an indication if and when they plan on bringing something like that forward?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): We just heard about it not too long ago.
I wonder what the terminology is in Inuktitut.
Yes, we are considering this and I can say that we are wondering how it can be best worded the Inuit way.
I wonder if we would be breaking the Inuit values and those are the things that we will have to monitor very closely.
I have told my staff to make sure that how we can improve and use Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
It’s aimed at more southern ways, but we realize that there’s a need for it.
So we have to consider this more.
I know that the minister’s new deputy is fairly new.
I know the assistant deputy and the minutes of the Standing Committee reports and other meetings with the department and the Standing Committee that has been raised in the past.
So maybe just advise the minister to go back and take a look at some of the old stuff; that this is something that is not new, it has been brought up before and to look at doing it.
As I indicate on the federal scene, they have brought forward a policy like that.
I would strongly encourage the minister to maybe get a hold of that piece of legislation and then use that as a starting point and Nunavutize it because this is a very small jurisdiction.
I know in cases in the past where I just sat down to have coffee and chat about the old times with someone that I used to work with in the Public Service since 1999 and it got back to that person that he was feeding me inside information because it’s totally absurd.
So that just gives you an example, that it is necessary for something like that to come up to protect our employees.
They don’t need to have one of those supervisors or someone that works above them to work in fear of their job, hopefully it never happens and hopefully we never need it, but in the event that something does get brought out or happens that that would cause someone to feel uncomfortable enough to bring something forward that they may feel that there may be some retribution against them.
There have been cases since 1999 that have led to dismissals of employees both within the Union and outside the Union.
You could look at it right from the senior management, the deputy minister level, and then probably cases right down to the clerks and everywhere in between.
So there is a requirement for that.
Inuit don’t like to say something when they see something wrong, but for how many years, I’ve been seating by idly and afraid to say something, when they see something happening, that they feel intimidated, they feel if they say something that there going to lose there jobs, it’ll hurt there advancement in their career within a public service.
I think we need to give those people some level of comfort, if they have the courage to come forward and speak on something that shouldn’t be happening within the public services, that there is some protection for them.
And for some members, I really strongly urge the department to work on something, some type of legislation like that for the future.
That was just a general comment, Thank you Mr. Tootoo.
Did you wish to respond minister?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): This is the opportune time to say something, even though it was just a comment, the Public Service Act.
Those are the things that we want to be sensitive to, the things that he talked about, if they say something suspicious or is aware within the work place and I’d like to state, Mr. Chairman, what were trying to do is examine if there is a problem or grievances then how can we deal with it, conflict resolutions, were examining those things.
If there’s a problem between co-workers, or between an employee and a supervisor, how can we resolve it within the work place?
We’re looking at it that way for two reasons, firstly, we want to retain our employees, and we want to keep our Inuit employees, and the other being in Article 23, and if we are to go by that, and if our Inuit employees have problems, there should be a resolution where it’s based on more on feelings.
Chairman: Thank you Minister.
Page D-5, Mr. Tootoo.
I want to go back to the priority hiring policy and the minister indicated that there was a directive from Cabinet to review that policy.
I’m just wondering if he can indicate any specific direction, were there any specific directives that Cabinet gave the department with respect to reviewing the policy and what provision of the policy are we seeing some changes in?
It was agreed to in August 2000, and the deadline would be 2001.
As a background, when it was still in Northwest Territories, there was an affirmative action policy which is geared towards that original paper.
But then again under the agreement, under Article 23, we had to make a change to the policy in 2000, and because of the involvement and the low numbers, we have agreed to 2006 as the deadline, but then again, we are reconsidering.
In regards to the priority hiring policy, we are going to keep working on it.
We are going to be using it for now as that’s the case, we are reviewing it again and we will be deciding what we are going to be doing for the upcoming year.
Mr. Tootoo, I will give you some questions to ask until Mr. Curley comes back because I had his name on the list.
I will send you a note in a minute, but thank you.
So, the minister is saying there is, other than just take a look at it and change it, there’s no specific directives issued by Cabinet in relation to this policy; is that correct?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, but we have to do a thorough review this coming year.
There’s a clause in Article 23 that states that if the Inuit are a majority, then the government would have to hire, let’s say if there are 85 percent in Nunavut, then they would have to be a representative number in the government.
So we are going to be reviewing that thoroughly this year and the main reason is are we getting a representative government and where can we make improvements.
I recognize and acknowledge our obligations under Article 23 of the Land Claim Agreement, and I guess following in on that, I know that the minister indicated they are reviewing policies, but I understand it has been a while now since the review of the existing bilingual bonus policy has been taking place.
I am just wondering why it’s taking to be reviewed and when can we expect that to be completed?
Well, we were asked to do a review and we will give recommendations.
In regards to the bilingual bonus, whether there should be an increase or whatever.
Looking at the bilingual bonus, I can say, Mr. Chairman, that we are looking at this coming August, where we’ll be able to get something to the Cabinet for the review.
The Cabinet has been discussing the issue of bilingual bonus and there has been a directive to do a review of this bilingual bonus policy, whether you’re English/Inuktitut or English/French bilingual.
Very briefly, I can respond by saying that we’ll have something to give to the Cabinet this coming August, Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Tootoo: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I understand there’s a draft new Language Incentive Policy that’s in place.
I’m just wondering if that’s one of the same as bilingual bonus system.
If it isn’t, I guess they take it to Cabinet this summer.
When will it come into effect and will it be something that’s looked at, going back retro-actively or is going to be just from approval date forward?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Tootoo.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Well, those two are different, there’s the Language Incentive Policy where you have to speak more Inuktitut in the workplace, and we have said that our government has to be more people friendly.
This is being reviewed by the Department of Finance and the higher management of the government.
It’s being reviewed and the other one is the bilingual bonus where it’s slightly different because it applies to all government employees and it’s also in the Collective Agreement.
Those are two different things, they’re not the same.
There’s one for using Inuktitut in the workplace and then there’s a bilingual bonus where it applies to all employees within the government.
And as I had made a mistake, I said 2006, it’s actually August 2005 where we’ll have done our review, Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I shall give you one more question then next member. Mr. Tootoo.
In the departments’ Business Plan, one of the stated goals for 2005/2006 is to implement casual staffing guidelines consistent with Cabinet direction.
My question is what direction has been given by Cabinet and what specific of changes are going to take place.
Chairman: (interpretation) Thank you, Tootoo.
I will have my deputy respond to your question, Ms. Okpik.
Chairman (interpretation) Ms. Okpik.
In the directive, and in regards to the casual employees, we are reviewing the delegation of authority which identifies who would be eligible to fill a position.
The Human Resources Department do a lot of reviews to make sure that they will fit into the government if the two biggest ones is the casual policy and where they can make improvements.
For example, we had a meeting with the union on the issue of casual hires and see if we could come to an agreement.
Very likely, we will set up a MOU, which will outline all casuals and their hire.
Chairman: Mr. Curley.  Mr. Curley (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, what section are we at now?
Chairman: D-5.
Directorate. Page D-5.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) We keep forgetting where we are when somebody speaks too long.
Well, I first wanted to start off on the policies.
As a Member of the Legislative Assembly, you get a lot of complaints from Government of Nunavut employees.
Some of the issues that come up are confidential and I have had more than one meeting with an employee where it was confidential.
At times it creates a ripple effect when it’s related to the harassment policy, that would be Article 41 in the Collective Agreement, which I am sure, is just for the employees, and I would believe that it’s not for the managers.
There’s harassment and prevention of violence in the workplace.
It seems to be quite hard.
I have not told this to anyone because of the sensitivity of the issue.
Where do we go with an issue like this?
You don’t want to write about, and as politicians, we don’t want to interfere with employees and the problems.
What would you do in those cases?
We have a process whereby the staff can go to Employee Relations.
We should approach that Employee Relations Officer because when we have problems occurring in our departments, it’s uncomfortable.
I will be able to explain who the Employee Relations Officer is and other matters.
In regards to the member’s question, I really don’t know how to specifically respond, but I will be able to provide you with more responses. Perhaps my deputy minister will respond to that question.
The employees, if they think that they have been harassed, there’s an avenue that they can go through.
Perhaps they can tell the supervisor.
If they think the supervisor is harassing them, they can go to the more superior people, and they can go through the Nunavut Employees’ Union.
They have that process where they can go complain to.
They could go to the workplace representatives and Nunavut is a vast territory but the employees have opportunities to make there complaints, there’s an avenue and a process there already in place.
Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Okpik.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): This procedure is pretty straight forward, but I have a asked the union representatives about that.
They don’t seem to really care and I know what the response is going to be because we don’t deal with unions.
The employee can’t really discuss this matter.
Why don’t they work closely together, because they’re Inuit, or because they’re non-natives?
Why can’t they have a close communication, it seems like they don’t even communicate with their supervisor.