Non, elles n’en sont pas aux termes de la Loi sur la pension de la fonction publique et des règlements afférents.

Vous trouverez des renseignements plus détaillés sur la Directive sur le réaménagement des effectifs dans les documents de référence suivants :

• Politique de représentation de l’AJJ
• Convention collective du groupe : Praticien du droit
• Directive du Régime de soins de santé de la fonction publique du Conseil national mixte
• Directive sur le réaménagement des effectifs du Conseil national mixte
• Organigramme des principaux éléments de la Directive sur le réaménagement des effectifs du Conseil national mixte

Références législatives

• Loi sur l’emploi dans la fonction publique
• Loi sur la pension de la fonction publique

The 5-day "cap" on managerial authority to grant management leave has now been removed.  There is now no limit on the ability of managers to grant management leave and Deputy Head approval is no longer required. As well, the parties have agreed to jointly develop guidelines for managers on the issuance of management leave as well as the use of flexible workweeks, two key issues for the AJC.  

Call-Back Duty, which was previously part of a MOA, is now protected and incorporated in the Collective Agreement. The amount of compensation has not changed.

Changes have been made to allow for an extended parental leave.  A separate FAQ on maternity and parental leave is being prepared.

Members are entitled for up to 10 days of paid domestic violence leave.

Modest improvements have been made to eligibility for bereavement leave and for several types of family-related leave.

The most significant elements of this agreement are:

• Across-the-board increases in rates of pay amounting to 8.26% over 4 years;
• Undertaking a joint pay study comparing LP salaries with internal and external comparators which may result in further additional pay increases made retroactive to May 2018;
• Call-back pay incorporated into the collective agreement at current rates and the 5-day cap on the ability of local managers to approve management leave has been removed;
• Other modifications negotiated by other bargaining agents who ratified collective agreements this round; including but not limited to
• An exceptionally long implementation period necessitated by the Phoenix pay system offset by a $400 signing bonus

The Employer and the Association have agreed to have a contractor to undertake a joint pay study.  

The joint pay study will compare compensation of the LP Group with several other federal government workers (internal comparability) selected jointly by the Employer and the Association.  The AJC agreed to have the contractor undertake an internal comparability exercise because the FPSLRA requires an arbitrator to consider internal comparability in coming to a decision.

The joint pay study will also compare compensation of the LP Group with external lawyers doing similar work (external comparability).  Both parties agree that provincial government lawyers are the most appropriate comparators.

All work done by the contractor, including job matching and job evaluations, will be conducted under the supervision of both parties as equal parties in instructing the contractor.  Any disputes that arise during the process that cannot be resolved on consensus will be referred to a third-party who will make a final and binding decision.

Once the results of the study are available, we may agree on further market adjustments. If we do not agree on further market adjustments, we may proceed to arbitration on the sole issue of whether a further market adjustment is warranted.

The study is to be completed in within fifteen (15) months from the time the project plan is submitted to the working group by the contractors.

The employer has agreed to the following changes to rates of pay for all LP levels:

Effective May 10, 2018 - increase to rates of pay: 2% plus a 0.8% wage adjustment (compounded)
Effective May 10, 2019 - increase to rates of pay: 2% plus a 0.2% wage adjustment (compounded)
Effective May 10, 2020 - increase to rates of pay: 1.5%
Effective May 10, 2021 - increase to rates of pay: 1.5%

This amounts to a cumulative pensionable increase of 8.26% (compounded). We are currently developing a pay calculator to help you calculate the amount you will be receiving. This will be shared with all members once completed.

In addition to these agreed-upon wage adjustments, further wage adjustments may be retroactively awarded, depending on the outcome of the joint pay study (see further section on Joint Pay Study below).

These are across-the-board increases. There are no changes to the number of steps nor to the distinction between Toronto and Non-Toronto rates of pay.

As in the past, the adjustments are to base pay and also affect the amount of your performance pay, acting pay, and other forms of supplemental pay.  However, TBS is changing the way in which it makes these calculations (see appendix).

The results of the study will determine whether additional market adjustments are appropriate and for what segments of the LP population.  For example, the study may result in the parties agreeing to, or an arbitrator awarding, the LP1s a 0% market adjustment, LP2s a 5% market adjustment, and LP3 to LP5s a 2% market adjustment.  Since Toronto rates of pay are being evaluated separately from Non-Toronto rates, it is also possible that the study supports market adjustments for Toronto but not the rest of the country, or vice versa.  In this example, the 0%, 5% and 2% adjustments respectively would be made to rates of pay within 180 days of the agreement or award.

In addition to prospective rates of pay, there may be retroactive payments, to May, 2018.  However, because of limitations created by Phoenix, retroactive payments cannot be tailored by level.  Rather, the parties (or the arbitrator) will have to establish a single identical percentage in lieu of retro pay that will have to be afforded to all LPs equally regardless of level.     For example, on the same hypothetical as above, where the LP1s are entitled to a 0% market adjustment and LP2s are entitled to a 5% market adjustment, and LP3s to LPs are entitled to a 2% market adjustment, all 5 levels must nevertheless get the same % of retro pay.  One option the parties (or the arbitrator) could consider would be a weighted average.  Other options may be available. While this may create some perceived unfairness, the alternative is no retroactive adjustments at all.  

The AJC has agreed to withdraw its judicial review application in association with the conciliation decision made by Serge Brault.

The entitlement of LP3s and above to 50% parking reimbursement has been grandfathered.

The May 10th deadline for Performance Pay has changed. The Employer will now have 120 days from the end of the fiscal year.

We have agreed to a simplified process for calculation of retroactive pay adjustments that may result in a nominal difference (see appendix) from how it was previously calculated.

We have agreed to an extended implementation period for changes to pay, including 180 days for most members and the exceptionally long timeframe of 560 days for certain individuals whose pay files require manual intervention.  In exchange, every member receives a $400 signing bonus and those members whose retroactive pay transactions take longer than 180 days receive $50 for every additional 90 days of delay.  These amounts are taxable and not pensionable.  

We have agreed to meet with Departmental officials to discuss a possible future transition from a 4-tier performance pay regime to a 6-tier performance pay regime.  While this is not a concession for the current round, the employer is expected to seek changes to LP 1,2 and 3 performance pay in the future.

Following a survey conducted by the AJC between December 2013 and January 2014, members told us their top priorities in terms of bargaining with TB were:  compensation, job security and sick leave came.

We did however notice that there were some misconceptions as to what is subject to collective bargaining and what is not.  To this end, please refer to the following FAQs to find out what can and cannot be bargained.

Indeterminate Status

Did you know that...

...the conversion from term to indeterminate employee cannot be bargained?  Indeed, pursuant to section 59(1) of the  Public Service Employment Act, the conversion from term to indeterminate employee will take place “at the end of the cumulative period of employment specified by the employer in circumstances prescribed by the employer”,  which are outlined in section 7.2 of the Term Employment Policy.  

For more information on the matter, please refer to the AJC FAQs for Term Employees.   If after consulting our FAQs, you still have questions, do not hesitate to send your inquiry to admin@ajc-ajj.ca .

Pension

Did you know that...

...the Public Service Pension Superannuation Act governs all aspects of the public service pension plan?  Indeed, everything including eligibility, contribution rates and even death benefits are legislated and thus are not subject to collective bargaining.  The sole power to amend or modify your pension plan rests with the government.  All bargaining agents can really do is to lobby on your behalf.

Recently, a Quebec Superior Court ruling  has opened the door to expanding the scope of collective bargaining.  Section 113(b) of the FPSLRA was declared invalid as it relates specifically to preventing bargaining on matters that fall under the Public Service Superannuation Act (“PSSA”) and the Public Service Employment Act (“PSEA”).  While the decision has just opened the door to expanding the scope of collective bargaining, the declaration of invalidity has been suspended for one year.  We anticipate this means that new legislation may be in the works and so it is too early to tell whether the employer is contemplating bargaining agent consultations on this issue.   Stay tuned for potentially positive developments, however for the moment it is status quo.  We also note that even if the parties could negotiate matters that fall under the statutory purview of the PSSA and the PSEA, any agreed to changes would require legislative amendments, a matter that may not fall squarely within the AJC´s control.

Flexible work hours

Did you know that...

...the collective agreement recognizes the importance of a flexible working schedule allowing lawyers to balance personal and professional obligations? However, this flexibility must be reconciled with the employer´s legislated right to manage hours of work.  As a result, such flexibility is subject to operational requirements and managerial approval.   Lawyers may enter into alternate work or flexible work hour arrangements with the approval of their manager, who is expected to exercise their discretion in a non-arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith manner.  That said, lawyers in question must work an average of 37.5 hours per week over a 4 week period.  What a lawyer can´t do,  is to take it upon himself or herself to set his or her own schedule without management approval

Secondments and Assignments/Mobility

Did you know that...

...secondments/assignments offer the opportunity of a temporary lateral movement within the core public administration.  This kind of mobility can provide a public service employee with training and career development opportunities in addition to promoting knowledge transfer between organizations.  Although generally encouraged by the employer, such resourcing options remain at the employer´s discretion as set out in sections 7 and 11 of the Financial Administration Act .  

Area of Selection

Did you know that...

...the power to determine the area of selection for an internal non-advertised appointment rests with the department under a delegated authority or where no such delegated authority has been granted, with the Public Service Commission (PSC) pursuant to section 34 of the Public Service Employment Act?

Generally it is the Departments, through delegated authority from the PSC, who establish the area of selection by geographic, organizational,  occupational criteria or by designated groups within the meaning of section 3 of the Employment Equity Act.  

Promotion

Did you know that ...
 
Promotions are not subject to collective bargaining.  The Public Service Employment Act and the Financial Administration Act regulate the Employer´s right to manage its human resources through delegated authority.  Although the AJC actively advocates on behalf of its members and supports all career development programs that may be put in place by different Departments, it simply cannot direct the employer to offer or increase promotional opportunities through the bargaining process.      

Classification

Did you know that...

Classification levels are not the subject of collective bargaining.

Are you regularly doing work above your current classification level and feel you should be reclassified to a higher level?

Since classification levels are not the subject of collective bargaining, there is very little the AJC can do to help you unless you submit an individual request to the AJC to support the filing of an individual job content grievance on your behalf.    For more information on job content, acting pay and job classification grievances, including the process to follow to request support, please refer to our online FAQ relating to job descriptions and classifications.

Health Care Benefits

Did you know that...

Health care benefits are negotiated at the National Joint Council level?  There is a cyclical review conducted every three to five years that allows bargaining agents to send their proposed changes to the health care plan.  The Public Service Health Care Plan Directive is currently under review.  

For more information on the co-development process, please consult the NJC website.

There are no changes to the current sick leave provisions or to sick leave banks. The AJC has agreed to join a discussion table led by the Public Service Alliance of Canada with respect to considering an Employee Wellness Support Plan. The table is to complete its mandate by December 31, 2021. If consensus is reached, the expectation is that changes to sick leave may be made on consent in future rounds of bargaining.

(Please note that for any pay-related issue, you must follow the process outlined below except as otherwise indicated)

You should start with an enquiry to the HR Trusted Source & Liaison Unit (HR TS&LU) to see if your documentation was sent to the Pay Centre to process the payment or change. Any item which requires management approval comes through the HR TS&LU. Everything that is a personal option must be sent by you to the Pay Centre, we cannot do this for you. The procedure in the HR TS&LU is to notify you with an e-mail that an item has been sent to the Pay Centre.

(If the HR TS&LU does not have confirmation, then you must get management to verify that the Pay Centre was notified of your issue).

It is left up to you to make enquiries through the Pay Centre on when the increase will be processed. The HR TS&LU is not mandated to make enquiries on your behalf when you can´t get through.

The HR TS&LU would only get involved if the Pay Centre's escalation process has been exhausted and there remains a dispute on salary or allowance issues. The HR TS&LU would then get involved and, where required, bring in other stakeholders such as Labour Relations.

With regard to the options for self-service in the Compensation Web Application (CWA), the HR TS&LU has no mandate to get involved, for example, with personal options by employees, such as paying additional tax or changing insurance coverage.

If you are being underpaid you can:

• Request Priority Pay: At the request of a manager and financial authority, departments can provide 60% of your gross pay within 24-48 hours. (These payments are deducted from your future pay.) For more information on Priority Pay, please click here.
• Request Emergency Salary Advance: Emergency salary advances may be available to members, please consult the answer to the next question for full details.

The trusted source is the person responsible for ensuring that managers with a financial delegation of authority under Section 34 of the Financial Administration Act are authenticated for all requests affecting financial results, the manager´s budget or both before being sent to the Pay Centre.

Please contact your manager for more information on who your Trusted Source is in the event this information is not available on your departmental intranet.

Recent pay processes and system issues have impacted group insurance benefit plan administration. These issues are affecting the ability of new employees to access their benefits and existing employees to change their levels of coverage.

In collaboration with Public Services and Procurement Canada and the Plan administrators, the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat has developed temporary measures to address some of the issues with your benefits.

Public Service Health Care Plan (PSHCP)

Plan registration for new employees

If you are a new employee of the public service, you may not be aware that the PSHCP is a voluntary plan and requires an application within 60 days of being employed to have coverage start the first of the following month, otherwise, a three month waiting period applies. For example, if you started as a new employee of the public service on February 1, 2016, and immediately completed an application form, your coverage would have been effective March 1, 2016.

If you have not yet applied for coverage, please note that the waiting periods associated with late submission of an application have been temporarily waived.

This means that if you are eligible for PHSCP you are to:

1. Complete and submit an electronic application form using the Public Service Health Care Plan online application through the Phoenix self-service tool.
2. If unsuccessful, email a completed and scanned copy of the paper Employee application form to TPSGC.RSSFP-PSHCP.PWGSC@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca
3. Complete Positive Enrolment with Sun Life once your application is approved and you are in receipt of your certificate number.

Changes in PSHCP coverage for current members

If you are currently a member of the PSHCP and want to make changes to your coverage levels (single/family or hospital levels), the waiting period associated with late submission of an application has been temporarily waived.

To make changes to your coverage levels, you are to:

1. Use the Public Service Health Care Plan online application through the Phoenix self-service tool.
2. If unsuccessful, email a completed and scanned copy of the paper Employee application form to TPSGC.RSSFP-PSHCP.PWGSC@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca

Retroactivity

All changes to PSHCP coverage will start the first of the month following the Pay Centre's receipt of a request, unless a retroactive date is requested. Requests for retroactive coverage must be made in writing to the Pay Centre, but will only be effective the first of the month following the date you were originally eligible for the coverage change. For example, a member who married on March 28, 2016, but who had a waiting period applied to change coverage from single to family can request a retroactive coverage effective date of April 1, 2016. A retroactive request must be for the first of the month following the date you became eligible for the change and cannot be for a date earlier than September 1, 2015. You may wish to choose this option if you incurred a claim that is not eligible because your coverage was not established on time.

If you have gone on Leave without Pay (LWOP) and did not elect to make a change in coverage prior to your departure but would like to now, you may do so without returning to work. You can make the change by contacting the Pay Centre and supplying them with the necessary Employee application form. Any required contributions that result from the change in coverage will be collected or refunded upon your return to work.
NOTE: Changes in coverage are regularly transmitted to Sun Life. If you are requesting retroactive coverage, it may take a few weeks following the Pay Centre's processing of your application before the Sun Life systems are updated.

Public Service Dental Care Plan (PSDCP)

Plan registration for new employees

If you are a new employee of the public service and eligible for the dental care plan, you will automatically be placed into the Plan after a three month waiting period. If you are unsure of your coverage start date or require your certificate number, contact the Pay Centre.

Changes in PSDCP coverage for current members

If you are on Leave without Pay (LWOP) and are required to remit contributions in order to retain coverage but have lost coverage on or after September 1, 2015, because contributions were not remitted you may contact the Pay Centre and request reinstatement without returning to work. You will be required to remit all missed contributions in a lump sum as well as your normal quarterly installments along with your request.

Public Service Management Insurance Plan (PSMIP)

Plan registration for new employees

If you are a new LP since September 1, 2015, and are eligible for life insurance coverage under the PSMIP, you may wish to complete a PSMIP application form and send it to the Pay Centre. New employees who have not already applied and been denied life insurance coverage may request Basic and Dependant coverage without completing a Declaration of Health Form. For information on how to apply, please contact the Pay Centre.

For additional information please visit New to the Public Service.

It is the AJC's understanding that incidents of AJC members not receiving regular pay are far fewer than those experienced by members of other bargaining agents.

However, there are still numerous issues affecting our members that include:

• New hires are reporting that they have yet to receive pay or be enrolled in requisite benefit plans.
• Members recently deployed on interdepartmental assignment or appointments are either not getting paid or are reporting getting paid by both departments.
• Members on leave without pay (LWOP) status are reporting that the processing of LWOP is very slow. Employees who have gone on long-term LWOP are continuing to be paid, and employees who submitted short-term LWOP forms are waiting for them to be processed.
• Members receiving acting pay also seem to be experiencing issues, such as receiving too much or too little acting pay. The tax implications of being overpaid are more serious than you might think.
• Some members in the LP1 and LP2 categories, who are not at the top of the pay scale have not received their in-range lock step increases.
• Some LP1 and LP2 at the top of scale, who are entitled to the performance pay, have yet to receive the lump-sum performance award payments or have experienced serious delays.
• Members are also experiencing delays in the processing of claims for reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses like law society fees and parking.

Please click here for more information on the Government´s Pay Service.

Requests for emergency salary advances where delays in payment are causing personal hardship can be made in accordance with TB's Directive on Terms and Conditions of Employment.

You can request an emergency salary advance (ESA) when you are not paid. You must ask the Public Service Pay Centre to send your department a requisition (Form GC 80) requesting an emergency salary advances payment of estimated net salary.

The GC 80 Form will go to the delegated manager for their signature (delegated manager must have a section 34 delegation under the Financial Administration Act and is a level 4 HR sub-delegation (usually DG level)). Once signed it is provided to Finance to issue the payment.

The GC 80 Form is then provided to the Trusted Source and Liaison Unit at the Public Service Pay Centre to record that the advance was issued and so they may recover the payment from the first available funds.

The applicable excerpts of the TB's Directive on Terms and Conditions of Employment are reproduced below:

16. Standard of timeliness

"16.1 Persons with the delegated authority are to adhere to the following pay timeliness standards:

a. On initial appointment, or on return to work following leave without pay or any other salary interruption, the salary payment covering the entitlement for the first pay period, should be available by the end of the following pay period and thereafter on the regular payday.

b. Upon termination of employment, the last salary payment should be available within 20 working days of the struck-off strength effective date.

c. All changes in pay should be reflected in the second pay period following the one in which the authorized document is received by Compensation.

17. Emergency salary advance

17.1 When a regular salary payment is not issued to a person as per subsection 16.1 paragraph a. above, persons with the delegated authority are to ensure that an emergency salary advance is requisitioned by the employing organization immediately. An emergency salary advance is to be issued only for time worked in a pay period and not paid through the normal processing of that pay.

17.2 A person does not have to request an emergency salary advance. If the person indicates that he or she does not want the advance when it is offered, the department is not required to issue one.

17.3 Emergency salary advances are not to be issued under the following circumstances:

a. for allowances or retroactive or extra-duty entitlements;

b.to replace missing or delayed direct deposit payments-these are to be handled in accordance with section 7 of the Electronic Payments Regulations; or

c.to replace lost, stolen or destroyed cheques after they have been delivered to the person-these are to be handled in accordance with section 5 of the Cheque Issue Regulations, 1997.

17.4 The amount of the emergency salary advance is to be calculated to the approximate net pay entitlement for the pay period covered and in no case is to exceed two thirds of the person's gross pay entitlement for the period.

17.5 Emergency salary advances are to be recovered from the first salary payments following the issuance of the emergency salary advance. When the emergency salary advance could not be recovered from the first salary payments, the person in receipt of the advance is required to refund the advance by means of a money order or personal cheque. Under no circumstances can the emergency salary advances be recovered over an extended period.

17.6 Emergency salary advances constitute accountable advances within the meaning of the Financial Administration Act and, when necessary, may be recovered from any monies payable to the person concerned or that person's estate."

Click here to find information on paystubs.

(Updated on January 13, 2017)

The Treasury Board announced that a claims office was open to reimbursing out-of-pocket expenses public servants have incurred due to problems with the Phoenix pay system. Currently, Treasury Board is not willing to compensate employees for interest. It will however consider out-of-pocket expenses incurred on account of the Pay Centre crisis.

For example, if you needed to take out a loan with a bank or had an outstanding balance on a credit card, the interest paid could be reimbursed. Please visit the TBS Claims process webpage for more information.

The claims office is designed to reimburse people as quickly as possible and departments will have the authority to pay any claims under $500 without TB approval. Larger and more complex claims will go to the Treasury Board for decision.

• Please visit the TBS Claims process webpage.
• For frequently asked questions about the claims process, please click here.
• Click here for the Departmental Claims Officer.

As of April 27th 2017: Recognizing the unfair financial burdens these pay issues have placed on employees, the Government of Canada will reimburse those who seek or have already obtained tax advice to address tax implications caused by problems with the Phoenix system. Employees who encountered Phoenix pay issues may seek up to $200 in reimbursement for tax advisory services in relation to their 2016 or 2017 income taxes.
If you have consulted a tax expert, you are invited to submit a claim.

• Please consult the frequently asked questions on tax advisory services reimbursement page here.
• You will find the claims form for the TBS tax advisory services reimbursement here.

(Updated on July 31st 2017)

Overall Status

You can consult the latest statistics from the PSPC here: https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/remuneration-compensation/services-paye-pay-services/centre-presse-media-centre/mise-a-jour-update-eng.html

Priority 1: Employees not receiving pay

These employees include students, new hires and those returning from leave without pay.

Timeline

These employees' cases are supposed to be addressed within three working days upon notification of the issue.

Priority 2: Employees with pay at risk of disruption

These employees include those going on maternity leave or long-term disability and those leaving the public service.

Timeline

These employees' cases are supposed to be addressed within four to six weeks upon notification of the issue.

Priority 3: Employees not being paid properly

These employees are receiving regular pay, but missing supplementary pay.

For more up to date news, please click here.

Please visit the PSPC website.

You must first contact Service Canada's Employment Insurance Program Section to explain the situation in detail. Service Canada should be in a position to provide instructions on advancing your maternity/paternity claim forward.

Generally, the common rule is to ask questions and explain the predicament to Service Canada beforehand, concerning any difficulties you may be experiencing with the employer. If Service Canada knows a problems exist in advance, it usually will not apply any penalties. A maternity/paternity claim must be filed within 4 weeks from your last day worked.

Simply log in the Public Services and Procurement Canada website. Under Pay services click the Compensation Web Applications (CWA). Rather than going in “Pay System” under Phoenix, go in “Pay stubs and Archived Tax Slips” which is a bit below. In that section, you will find all your pay stubs (archived and current) in the good old format containing much more information.

(Updated on May 5 2017 )

The AJC does not provide tax advice however we can share the information we have been able to obtain from PSPC and CRA.

With the upcoming tax season approaching, PSPC has prepared helpful tools that current and former employees can use to prepare for their tax returns.

If there is an issue with earnings listed on your paystubs or tax slip, consult online questions and answers, which provide information on a range of tax scenarios.

If you still have questions about your earnings or taxes, contact the Call Centre at 1-855-686-4729. Employees not serviced by the Pay Centre should call their departments first, but if they do contact our Call Centre, our agents will transfer them directly to their department´s compensation units, which can answer their questions.

Overpayments and underpayments

Overpayments and underpayments are the two biggest tax-related issues employees may encounter.

Overpayments usually occur when certain pay transactions are not submitted or processed promptly. As a result, an overpayment may happen when:

• an employee's acting pay continues after an acting assignment has ended
• an employee continues to receive their regular salary after going on leave without pay
• leave without pay for less than five days isn't entered into the system on time

Please note that repayment of overpayment amounts will not begin until all of your outstanding pay transactions have been processed, you have started receiving your correct regular pay and you have indicated your preferred repayment option.

Under legislation before January 15th 2019, any employee who received an overpayment in a previous year was required to pay back the gross amount of the overpayment to their employer, which includes income taxes, Canada Pension Plan contributions and Employment Insurance premiums.

To alleviate this burden and help affected employees, the Department of Finance Canada has released a legislative proposals that would, under certain conditions, permit an affected employee to repay to their employer only the net amount of the overpayment received in a previous year, rather than the gross amount.

For additional information on overpayments and tax implications, consult the Overpayments and Options to Repay

Overpayments Within the Past Three Years

Under certain conditions, an employee can now repay only the net amount of an overpayment received in a previous year to their employer, rather than the gross amount, if the overpayment was recorded in Phoenix within the 3 calendar years preceding the year in which the overpayment was received.

Once your overpayment is recorded in Phoenix, your tax slip will be amended to remove the overpayment and reflect the adjusted earnings. Original source tax deductions associated with the overpayment will be adjusted and the amended deduction amounts will be reported on the amended slip to be considered when your annual income tax return is reassessed. Your employer will submit the amended slip to CRA (and Revenu Québec), which will automatically reassess your tax situation and issue a refund of tax withholdings if applicable.

Overpayments Outside the Past 3 Years

If an overpayment amount is recorded in Phoenix outside the 3 year threshold, the new tax legislation does not apply and the employer is required to deduct, and remit to the Receiver General, the appropriate tax withholdings on any salary and wages paid to you, regardless of whether the amount was paid in error.

We recommend that affected employees set money aside for repayment if possible. Interest payments may be claimed through the process outlined here.

We understand that pay and pay issues can be complicated, so if you need help, please contact the PSPC Client Contact Centre at 1-855-686-4729.

1. Examine your pay statement every payday to ensure it is correct.
2. If there is a problem, flag it to your immediate supervisor/manager.
3. Contact your Trusted Source and Liaison Unit to ensure that it received all the payroll information and instructions from your supervisor/manager and that such information has been inputted and submitted to the Pay Centre.
4. If the information has been received and inputted by your Trusted Source and Liaison Unit, contact the Public Service Pay Center by emailing paycentre.centredepaye@pwgsc-tpsgc.gc.ca

Please visit the PSPC Public Service Pay Centre for more details.

In addition to requesting priority pay and an emergency salary advance, here are a few new things you can do once you have exhausted the process :

If you are not receiving pay at all or have been seriously shorted funds, contact the AJC at admin@ajc-ajj.com and provide your PRI number. In the case of employees not receiving pay, the pay center has a system in place to enable corrections to be made quickly. For significant shortfalls, such as payments of thousands of dollars of law society fees, the AJC will ask to have these considered as a priority. Currently, priority is being given, public-service wide, to those who are not receiving any salary payments.

Also, expense claims must be sent by your manager to the Trusted Source for approval. The Trusted Source is then responsible for forwarding the proper paperwork to the pay centre to be processed. If you have not received confirmation of this from the Trusted Source, you have to contact them first.

As mentioned in previously communications, the AJC has used virtually every available mechanism to put pressure on the Government in close collaboration with the other bargaining agents.

Employment issues for federal servants fall under the PSLRA. This legislative framework is different from the common law and differs from many of the employment law or tort concepts that you may be familiar with.

We have used the tools provided to us aggressively:

• we have filed policy grievances,
• we have brought a mandamus application in federal court,
• we have earned not just a seat on the UMCC for Phoenix Damages, but the lead vantage seat of co-chair of the committee, which is working on compensation for every federal government employee affected by Phoenix,
• we have worked with the media to raise awareness and create pressure, we have demonstrated in front of the Office of the Prime Minister and of course,
• we have been assisting individual members with the most serious Phoenix problems.

We will continue to use every available mechanism until every member's Phoenix-related issues relating to this crisis have been resolved.

To date, the community of bargaining agents, including the AJC, has convinced Treasury Board to establish a process that allows for the filing of a claim for certain expenses incurred because of the problems related to the Phoenix Pay system. A working group of bargaining agent heads and PSPC officials meet on a regular basis to get the latest updates, review priorities, and try to improve the process.

In turn, the AJC continues to provide email updates to its registered members regarding the Phoenix Pay system and continues to escalate priority cases to PSPC officials.

If for some reason, you are not receiving email updates, please contact us at admin@ajc-ajj.ca to update your personal contact information.

PSPC regularly updates public servants on the PSPC webpage. Please check frequently as they update this page regularly.

For the Public Services and Procurement Canada's Technical Briefing on Phoenix, please click here.

July 2017 Update: The Working Group of Ministers made a commitment to be open and transparent about progress in addressing problems with the Phoenix pay system. The goal is to provide federal employees and the public with clearer, more useful information. To that end, a new version of the public service pay dashboard is being introduced. It has been redesigned to better track the progress being made in ensuring that public servants are paid accurately and on time.

The new dashboard is now available, and updates will continue to be provided on a monthly basis going forward.

(Updated April 2nd 2019)

Under the AJC´s Constitution, once the Rand formula is implemented, i.e., automatic and mandatory deduction of union dues from pay of bargaining unit employees, the dues will be 1.25% of annual salary. These dues will be used to fund the operating costs of the AJC and provide services to members of the bargaining unit.

Only members can participate in the internal affairs of the AJC, such as voting in elections and holding office. Payment of dues does not equate to membership. To become a member of the AJC, you must complete an application for Membership form. Once your eligibility has been confirmed, you will receive an information package.

Yes. Although the AJC was initially created as an organization of Justice Canada lawyers, the AJC took the position at the certification hearing that the employer's request for a single national unit of all legal officers should be granted, with the AJC as the bargaining agent. The Board has now concluded that the AJC is an appropriate bargaining agent for all federal legal officers, both inside and outside of the Department of Justice.

In anticipation of the Board's decision, the AJC amended its Constitution to enable it to represent counsel employed in Justice or in any agency or corporation of the Government of Canada. Along with amendments to certain definitions and the membership provisions, amendments were made to increase the size of the Executive of the Association in order to provide more effective representation.

Please contact the AJC, and a representative will be happy to answer your questions and/or talk confidentially with you about your workplace concerns. If you prefer, you may contact one of your Governing Council Members directly.

Under the PSLRA, some terms and conditions of employment are not negotiable. A collective agreement may not, directly or indirectly, alter or eliminate any existing term or condition of employment or establish any new term or condition of employment if

(a) doing so would require the enactment or amendment of any legislation by Parliament, except for the purpose of appropriating money required for the implementation of the term or condition; or

(b) the term or condition is one that has been or may be established under the Public Service Employment Act, the Public Service Superannuation Act or the Government Employees Compensation Act.

This means that, for example, a collective agreement may not cover pension issues, benefits payable on injury or death, the assignment of duties, and the classification of positions.

The AJC can and will be seeking to negotiate increases to the rates of pay, as well as improvements to working conditions and provisions for leaves of absence.

The AJC is a democratically run Association, with all of its officers elected by the membership, pursuant to the Association's By-Laws.

The ACJ is the sole bargaining agent for all lawyers and notaries in the Law Group. It has sole authority to negotiate with the employer to establish the terms and conditions of employment, including salaries and many workplace issues.

The AJC will also be able to provide you with help for your workplace issues, providing support and advice with respect to individual grievances and by carrying forward group and policy grievances. You will no longer be alone when dealing with your manager or problems in your workplace. Where required, the AJC will provide the legal assistance you need.

The AJC is the certified bargaining agent for "all lawyers in the LP group for which the Treasury Board is the employer who are not excluded from collective bargaining by law or determination of the Board."

Some employees are excluded from collective bargaining, under subsection 2(1) of the Federal Public Service Labour Relations Act (FPSLRA), including persons employed on a casual basis, persons employed on a term basis for a period of less than three months, persons employed in a program designated as a student employment program, and persons who occupy managerial or confidential positions.

No.  Currently, a lawyer who is on leave without pay for any of the following reasons, is required to contribute to the public service pension plan at a single rate for the first 52 weeks of their absence:
 

• because of the birth of a child of the contributor,
• in order to carry out parental responsibilities in respect of the acceptance of custody of a child for adoption, or
• to provide a child of the contributor with care and custody.

For any portion of leave that extends beyond 52 weeks, a lawyer is required to contribute at double rate, equivalent to twice the amount required had they not been absent. This applies to all contributors to the public service pension plan, including lawyers, regardless of their province of residence.

When a lawyer is on a leave without pay approved by the employer, they can choose to declare any period of their leave without pay in excess of the first three months as non-pensionable. This non-contributory service will not be credited to the lawyer either for eligibility or pension calculation purposes. You can find more information on public service pensionable service here.

While there are no changes to pension contribution rates for lawyers on parental leave in the new Collective Agreement, an initiative is currently underway to align the Public Service Superannuation Regulations with the recent Canada Labour Code amendments, as announced in the TBS Forward Regulatory Plan: 2019 to 2021. These amendments will extend the single rate for an additional 6 months for this type of leave, benefiting those lawyers who choose an extended parental leave.  

Several changes have been made to the parental allowance provisions in the new Collective Agreement following amendments to the Employment Insurance Act which allow for extended EI parental benefits. These changes were intended to provide greater flexibility and certainty to lawyers without significantly increasing the overall cost of parental allowance top-ups for the employer. You can find more information about changes to the Employment Insurance Act, and the impact of these changes on maternity and parental benefits here.

Under the new Collective Agreement, lawyers not residing in Québec would have a choice between:

Standard Parental Benefits:
 

• a lawyer who has chosen standard parental leave and who has chosen to receive standard EI parental benefits will be eligible to receive 93% of their weekly rate of pay for the waiting period, less any other monies earned,
• for each week that a lawyer receives EI parental benefits, they will be eligible for a top-up of the difference between 93% of their weekly rate of pay and their EI benefits, less any other monies earned, AND
• where a lawyer has received either the full 35 weeks of standard EI parental benefits or has divided the full 40 weeks of standard EI parental benefits and either employee remains on parental leave without pay, the lawyer is eligible to receive a further parental allowance of 93% of their weekly rate of pay and their EI benefits, less any other monies earned, for a period of one week.

The maximum combined shared maternity and standard parental allowance payable under the New Collective Agreement will be increased from 52 weeks in the previous Collective Agreement to 57 weeks. This will address the additional 5 weeks of EI parental benefits now available for non-birthing parents.

Extended Parental Benefits:
 

• a lawyer who has chosen extended parental leave and who has chosen to receive extended EI parental benefits will be eligible to receive 55.8% of their weekly rate of pay for the waiting period, less any other monies earned,
• for each week that a lawyer receives EI parental benefits, they will be eligible for a top-up of the difference between 55.8% of their weekly rate of pay and their EI benefits, less any other monies earned, AND
• where a lawyer has received either the full 61 weeks of standard EI parental benefits or has divided the full 69 weeks of standard EI parental benefits and either employee remains on parental leave without pay, the lawyer is eligible to receive a further parental allowance of 55.8% of their weekly rate of pay and their EI benefits, less any other monies earned, for a period of one week.

The maximum combined shared maternity and standard parental allowance payable would be 86 weeks. This will address the additional 8 weeks of EI parental benefits now available for non-birthing parents.

In order to be eligible for parental benefits under either the previous or the new Collective Agreement, a lawyer must:
 

• have completed 6 months of continuous employment prior to the commencement of parental leave,
• provide proof that they have applied for and are in receipt of parental, paternity or adoption benefits under the Employment Insurance (EI) Plan or the Québec Parental Insurance Plan (QPIP), AND
• sign an agreement with the employer.

The new Collective Agreement clarifies that a lawyer must agree to return to work within the federal public administration, as specified in Schedule I, Schedule IV, or Schedule V of the Financial Administration Act (FAA).

A lawyer must also agree that following their return to work, that they will work for period equal to the period that they were in receipt of maternity and parental allowance. In addition to the time period that a lawyer is in receipt of the standard parental allowance, the new Collective Agreement will require a lawyer who chooses the extended parental allowance option to work for a period equal to 60% of the period that they were in receipt of the allowance.
 
A lawyer who becomes pregnant would still be entitled to 16 weeks of maternity allowance at 93% of the employee's weekly rate of pay, less any other monies earned during this period in combination with either the standard or extended parental benefit options.

There is very little difference between the amount of parental benefits received by lawyers under the standard and extended options, provided that lawyers choose to take the majority of the extended leave period. The new Collective Agreement would allow members to spread their top-up over 18 months. For those who choose the extended parental benefits option, the rate of the parental allowance will be lower, but the allowance will be received over a longer period of time.

In the interim, prior to the implementation of the new Collective Agreement, we encourage members who are able to sustain a period of unpaid leave with a 33% EI parental benefit, to consider taking advantage of the option to take extended parental leave with top up to 93% for up to 35 weeks. If approved by the employer, this un-negotiated temporary solution implemented by the employer may be financially advantageous for some lawyers.

Lawyers would need to carefully review the options and choose the one that best suits their needs. We recommend that lawyers plan ahead and make this choice well in advance of their leave. Once a lawyer elects the standard or extended parental benefits and the weekly benefit top-up allowance was set, the decision could not be changed if the lawyer returned to worker earlier than originally scheduled. This is also the case for EI benefits.  

You can find a summary chart of maternity and parental leaves and allowances here. You can also find sample parental benefit calculations provided by the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) here.

Québec residents will be eligible for the non-discretionary extended parental leave.   Under the Québec Parental Insurance Program (QPIP) and the new Collective Agreement however, parental allowance would only be payable under the standard parental benefits option. The reason for this is that to be eligible for a parental allowance, lawyers must provide proof that they have applied for and are in receipt of QPIP parental, paternity or adoption benefits. Parental benefits are only available for 32 weeks with the QPIP Basic Plan, and 25 weeks with the QPIP Special plan.

Improvements to QPIP parental benefits have been proposed in Québec Bill 174, but have not yet been adopted.

Under the new Collective Agreement, lawyers residing in Québec will be eligible to receive a top-up of the difference between 93% of their weekly rate of pay and their QPIP benefits, less any other monies earned, for each week that they receive QPIP parental, adoption or paternity benefits.

In Québec, certain parents are eligible for five weeks of QPIP paternity benefits. These parents could be eligible to receive additional parental allowance for this time period. You can find out more about QPIP paternity benefits here.
 
There will also be an additional 2 weeks of parental benefits available to lawyers who have received the full 32 weeks of standard parental benefits or divided them with another parent who has received the full 5 weeks of QPIP paternity benefits. The maximum combined shared maternity and parental allowances payable will not exceed 57 weeks.

Changes to parental leave will come into effect on the date the Collective Agreement is signed  (September 5th, 2019). Changes to existing and new compensation elements, including allowances, will come into effect within 180 days following the signature of the new Collective Agreement. This date has been set as November 18th, 2019.

The date that determines an employee's parental allowance is the date on which the employee starts parental leave, regardless of when a maternity or parental leave period was requested or approved. If an employee divides their parental leave in two periods, the employee will be subject to provisions of the collective agreement under which they first started their leave regardless of the timing of the second part of their leave.

If a lawyer has elected extended parental leave and their parental leave begins:

- before September 5th, 2019: The parental leave and allowance provisions in the previous Collective Agreement will apply to their parental leave. Lawyers opting for an extended parental leave will need to apply for leave without pay for or care of family (caregiving leave) for up to 24 weeks following the end of their parental leave, dipping into their five year entitlement. This type of leave is subject to operational requirements.

- on or after September 5th, 2019 but before November 18th, 2019: The parental leave provisions in the new Collective Agreement will apply to their parental leave. Lawyers will no longer need to apply for leave without pay for care of family (caregiving leave), which is subject to management discretion or operational requirements. Lawyers will be entitled to the parental allowance provisions in the previous Collective Agreement. The maximum combined shared maternity and standard parental allowance payable will be 52 weeks, and will top up lawyers to 93% of their weekly rate of pay.

- after the changes to parental allowance come into effect on November 18th, 2019: the parental leave and allowance provisions in the  new Collective Agreement will apply to their parental leave. Lawyers will no longer need to apply for leave without pay for care of family (caregiving leave), which is subject to management discretion or operational requirements. Lawyers will be entitled to the existing parental allowance provisions. The maximum combined shared maternity and standard parental allowance payable under the Collective Agreement is 86 weeks. Parental allowance would top-up lawyers to 55.8% of their weekly rate of pay.

Under the previous Collective Agreement, lawyers are entitled to a single period of parental leave of up to 37 consecutive weeks during the 52-week period beginning on the date of birth or the date on which a child comes into a lawyer's care. There is no automatic right to extended parental leave under the previous Collective Agreement.

Lawyers who currently choose to extend their leave beyond 52 weeks must apply for leave without pay for care of family (caregiving leave) for up to 24 weeks following the end of their parental leave, dipping into their 5 year entitlement. This type of leave is unpaid and subject to operational requirements.

Under the new Collective Agreement, lawyers will have a choice, effective the date the provisions come into effect, between:
 

• Standard Parental Leave: a single period of parental leave of up to 37 consecutive weeks during the 52-week period beginning on the date of birth or the date on which a child comes into a lawyer's care, OR
• Extended Parental Leave: a single period of parental leave of up to 63 consecutive weeks during the 78-week period beginning on the date of birth or the date on which a child comes into a lawyer's care.

Requests for extended parental leave of 26 additional weeks of leave will no longer be subject to management discretion or operational requirements.

A lawyer who becomes pregnant will see no change to their 16 weeks of maternity leave entitlement.
You can find a summary chart of maternity and parental leaves and allowances here.

Generally, the Law Practitioner Group comprises positions that are primarily involved in the application of a comprehensive knowledge of the law and its practice in the performance of legal functions. For a copy of the current LP Occupational Group Definition, click here.

Please note that LAs are now defined as LPs (Law Practioners).

Pursuant to sections 71 and 72 of the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board Regulations, classification grievances are presented at the final level of the grievance procedure and decisions must be made within 80 days.

Circumstances in which a level may be eliminated

71 An individual grievance may be presented directly at the final level of the individual grievance process without it having been presented at a lower level if the individual grievance relates to classification, a demotion or a termination of employment.

Deadline for decision

72 (1) Unless the individual grievance relates to classification, the person whose decision constitutes the appropriate level of the individual grievance process shall provide the decision to the grievor or the grievor´s representative, if any, no later than 20 days after the day on which the individual grievance was received by the grievor´s immediate supervisor or the grievor´s local officer-in-charge identified under subsection 65(1).

Exception

(2) If the individual grievance relates to classification, the deadline is 80 days.

Please refer to the grievance procedure set out in the AJC collective agreement for further details.

Following the separation of practitioner and management subgroups, a new classification standard for each subgroup was developed with a view to ensuring that each of the following elements are considered when evaluating and classifying each LP subgroup's job description:

• knowledge,
• critical thinking and analysis,
• communication and interaction,
• leadership,
• physical and visual effort, and finally
• work environment.

The classification standard allocates certain point ratings to various levels within the elements described above for the purposes of ranking jobs that fall in one of the 5 subgroups of LPs (excluding LP-00).

In the core public administration classification system, Treasury Board (“TB”) refers to the organization of work and employees as the occupational group structure. The occupational group is a series of jobs or occupations related in broad terms by the nature of the functions performed.

Occupational groups are designated by a two-letter abbreviation that is shorthand for the occupational group's title. For example, there are six LP levels: LP-00 (Articling students), LP-01, LP-02, LP-03, LP-04 and LP-05. The number assigned to the occupational group designator refers to the level within the group.

The AJC encourages all LPs to review, acknowledge and provide comments to their supervisors or managers regarding there generic job descriptions.

Where you are of the view that the generic job description provided to you does not correspond to the work you do, you may ask your supervisor to consult the generic job description rated above or below your description level.

If you feel that another generic description better captures the work that your position requires including the work you are actually performing and you are unable to resolve your differences of opinion with your supervisor in short order, you have a right to grieve the content of your job description within 25 working days following receipt of the job description.

If you feel that none of the current generic descriptions captures the requirements of your position, then we recommend that you file a grievance to preserve your remedial rights and request that a new description be created. In such a case, the manager should write a unique job description in the new format for the position. The job description should then undergo a vetting and classification process.

For more information on how to get support to file a grievance, consult the AJC Representation Services Policy and complete and send an intake form to admin@ajc-ajj.ca.

The Financial Administration Act (“FAA”) outlines the responsibilities and powers of the TB. Amongst TB´s powers, is human resource management in the federal public administration, including the determination of the terms and conditions of employment of persons employed in it (section 7(1) (e)).

Pursuant to section 11.1(b) of the FAA, TB may provide for the classification of positions and persons employed in the public service.

In November 2007, TB announced the LA Classification Reform Project, which involved revisiting the LA Group Definition and the LA Classification Standard. The current Classification Standard dates back to 1987. Attached please find a copy of the old 1987 LA Classification Standard.

In relation to the LA Classification Reform Project, TB had initially been working with the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) in the development and testing of the draft standard. DOJ also conducted an internal review of all job descriptions within DOJ with a view to:

• standardize job descriptions into a generic format,
• reduce the number of generic job descriptions,
• ensure that such job descriptions are drafted in a way that coincides with the new classification standard; and finally,
• test the job descriptions against the new TB LP classification standard.

PPSC also underwent a similar review.

TB since consulted some of the other departments and agencies in relation to the LP classification standard.

For classification and job description information you can forward inquiries to the AJC directly at admin@ajc-ajj.com.

Alternatively, you can consult the following links:

LP Classification Standard
Classification grievance procedure
LP Occupational Group Definition
Organization and Classification : Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat.
Directive on Classification Grievances
Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board Regulations.
Changes to the timeframes for presenting and responding to classification grievances
Reminder - Classification Grievance Resolution Process
Retroactive Reclassification and Appointment

Generic job descriptions list the core duties and responsibilities of a group of similar positions. They are concise and contain only the information needed to apply the classification standard. Job descriptions describe the work assigned to positions.

Approximately 65 generic job descriptions at DOJ applied to all LP positions. At PPSC, there were approximately 12.

According to the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, the “classification standard for the Law Practitioner group is a point-rating plan consisting of an introduction, the definition of the Law Practitioner group, the rating scale and level point boundaries.”

For a copy of the old LA standard, see 1987 LA Classification Standard.

For a copy of the current classification standard which came into effect on January 6 2014, see the LP Classification Standard.

Challenging a job description

If requested to assume as part of your regular duties, additional duties that clearly fall outside the scope of your current job description, you may request a job description review. Alternatively, if you are requested to assume additional duties of a higher LP level for a temporary period on account of the absence of higher-ranked LPs absence for example, you may request acting pay. The AJC collective agreement provides that acting pay is payable when the duties of a higher classification level are substantially performed for at least six (6) consecutive working days.

A job content grievance requires the support of the AJC as this involves the application or interpretation of the collective agreement. However, classification grievances do not require the approval of the AJC. Alternatively, a grievance may be filed with AJC support when the employer fails to provide a “Statement of duties” upon request. The AJC´s decision of whether or not to support a grievance is governed by the principles set out in the AJC´s Representations Policy. In the event a job description is amended, the department must then review the new job description and issue a new classification decision.

For more information, consult the Policy on Classification System and Delegation of Authority.

Challenging a classification decision

A classification grievance can be filed resulting in either a reclassification or no change to the classification. If the decision of the grievance classification committee results in no change to the classification, the decision is final and binding with no further recourse.

The path taken will depend on whether or not the content of the job is in dispute.

The Classification Procedure outlines the processes and procedures for the submission and resolution of classification grievances by a classification grievance committee. For a complete review of the process and composition please refer directly to the Classification grievance procedure.

Yes, the AJC was consulted. In April 2010, TB provided the AJC with early drafts of a new LP Classification Standard.

On January 12, 2011, the AJC met with TB officials responsible for the LA Classification Reform Project.

In the Summer of 2011, AJC, with the assistance of a classification expert, provided comments and proposed some changes, some of which were retained.

AJC also proposed input into the draft of the LP Group Definition which came into effect on December 9, 2010.

The AJC also engaged in consultations directly with DOJ and PPSC on their proposed revised generic job descriptions. These departments focused on consolidating the numerous detailed descriptions into generic job descriptions.

The AJC struck DOJ and PPSC-specific working groups made up of volunteer Governing Council Representatives and a few interested members at large for each of the DOJ and PPSC job description review initiatives. As these were only consultations and not negotiations, nothing was agreed to by the AJC and all LPs maintain their right to grieve.

As indicated in a communique issued to the membership on August 8, 2011, the AJC created working groups and invited members to provide comments.

For managers, signing individual job descriptions based on generic job descriptions confirms that the selected description accurately describes the work assigned to and performed in the position.

For LPs, their signature confirms the employee has seen the job description and has been provided an opportunity to comment.

Signing any other form of acknowledgement is just that, an acknowledgement.  You are not waiving your right to grieve.

Signed job descriptions are then sent to Human Resources and a classification decision is issued once the new standard and group definition are in effect. An LP preserves his or her right to grieve even after he/she may file a work content grievance that will be administered in accordance with normal grievance procedure. Incumbents will be informed of their right to grieve the classification of their positions.

According to the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, “point rating is an analytical, quantitative method of determining the relative values of jobs. Point-rating plans define characteristics or elements common to the jobs being evaluated, define degrees of each element and allocate point values to each degree. The total value determined for each job is the sum of the point values assigned by the evaluators."

Filing a job description grievance will challenge the contents of the position while a classification grievance deals with the assignment of points to a statement of duties and not the contents of the statement of duties.

Job description grievances are adjudicable because they concern a provision in the collective agreement whereas classification grievances do not. Pay is adjudicable and classifications are not.

• Classification grievance committee decisions are final and binding.
• Job description grievances follow the normal grievance procedure path in the collective agreement.

For information on how to seek support from the Representations Committee in relation to your grievance, please refer to the AJC Representations Policy.

On December 13, 2010, TB through the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, launched the creation of the new Law Cadre Occupational Group and Standard (“LC Standard”). Such group is excluded from the bargaining unit and comprises those previously excluded LAs who performed managerial work.

However, such group does not include all excluded LAs as they do not all perform managerial work with delegated authority over human and financial resources. The LC reclassification exercise affected approximately 375 positions.

The LP Classification came into effect on January 6, 2014.

If you receive a notice of decision of classification, you have 2 remedial options in the event you and your supervisor are unable to resolve your differences of opinion.

They are as follows:

1. A right to grieve your job content pursuant to the collective agreement; and/or
2. A right to grieve the actual classification decision pursuant to TB's Policy on Classification Grievances.

Job content and effective date grievances must be filed within 25 working days and classification grievances must be filed within 35 calendar days pursuant to PSLREB Regulations. We note that in the event you disagree with the content of your job description and want to pursue a classification grievance, you must normally file a job content grievance first within the prescribed timelines set out above. The job content is generally the basis on which all classification decisions and classification grievances are made.

Terms and conditions can flow from one of 3 sources: legislation, policy or the collective agreement.  Where terms and conditions of employment are contained in a collective agreement and there is a conflict between an employer's policy and a collective agreement provision, the collective agreement shall prevail.  Where there is a conflict between the collective agreement and legislation however, legislation is likely to prevail subject to the results of any challenge to such legislation.

Generally, terms and conditions of employment are collectively bargained as between the exclusive bargaining agent and Treasury Board, the employer.  However, there exist some statutory limitations to what can and cannot be negotiated.  Below is a table setting out general guidelines on what is generally negotiated and what is generally not negotiated.

Article 5 of the LPs Collective Agreement (Management Rights) and section 11 of the Financial Administration Act provide the employer with the right to modify and introduce new terms and conditions of employment which may not already be covered in a collective agreement.  This could include such things as a harassment prevention policy or a code of conduct, such as the new Public Servants´ Code of Values and Ethics.

The only restriction on introducing new terms and conditions of employment not already covered in a collective agreement is the timing.  Section 107 of the Federal Public Service Labour Relation Act (FPSLRA) prevents the employer from modifying terms and conditions from the time that notice to bargain has been provided until a new collective agreement comes into force.  Modifications to organizational codes such as a Code of Values and Ethics can therefore only become applicable to employees once the occupational group emerges from collective bargaining.

No. The AJC is not questioning the authority of Treasury Board, departments or agencies to unilaterally introduce a new Code of Values and Ethics following the coming into force of the new collective agreement.  The AJC only takes issue with inappropriately worded acknowledgement forms that undermine the AJC´s fundamental exclusive bargaining agent status and that has the potential effect of restricting its members' ability to challenge the reasonableness of some of the new Code's provisions in the event disciplinary action is taken against its members.

No.  Departments and agencies are required to comply with the collective agreement obligations without exception.  A deliberate delay on account of the imposition of a condition precedent that is not already prescribed by the collective agreement would likely be viewed by the AJC as an unreasonable, arbitrary or bad faith application and interpretation of the collective agreement and therefore a violation of the collective agreement.  

Further negotiations will take place later in this fiscal year if Phoenix is still affecting members. For as long as there are Phoenix issues, we will seek damages and compensation through all appropriate channels.

The Employer has committed to fully implementing the agreement within 150 days of signing. The 5th day of leave is to be credited within 150 days of the end of the 2020 fiscal year-end.

As employees who have retired or left the public service need to apply for a cash-out, this process may take longer.

A change in government will not change the Employer's responsibility to honor the agreement.

To qualify for each year's leave, you only need to have been employed one day in that fiscal year. You will receive one day in compensatory leave for each year in which you were employed for one day.

As a starting point, up to five days of leave are being awarded to every employee (2 days for employees who worked at least one day in 2016-17, 1 day for 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively). In addition, we have also created an expedited process for resolving more serious damages cases and expanded what is eligible for reimbursement.

You can complete a Claim Form for Additional Financial Expenses Incurred Because of Phoenix Pay System Errors here:

https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/pay/claim-form-expenses-incurred-phoenix-errors.html

You may also consult our FAQ or contact your regional Governing Council representative for assistance.

In the highly unlikely event that another union secures improvements to this deal, the Employer has committed to making those same improvements to this deal.

The AJC filed Policy Grievances where all members experiencing pay issues are covered with the FPSLREB in response to non-payment of Performance Pay for the 2015-16 and subsequent years, and non-payment of the lockstep pay increments that were due on May 10, 2016 and subsequent years. These grievances were referred to adjudication and were to be heard on March 27th, 2017. However, the parties agreed to adjourn the hearings in order to discuss the issue of damages on a without prejudice basis at a newly established Union Management Consultations Committee (UMCC) subcommittee on damages. We also filed a Policy Grievance on January 27th, 2017 covering all other Phoenix-related pay issues.

All of the Phoenix-related Policy Grievances are being held in abeyance and can be reactivated at any time.

This agreement only resolves what is dealt with within this framework. If you're still owed pay or if you have any outstanding damages claims pursuant to this agreement, the policy grievances continue to preserve your rights both for past and future Phoenix-related breaches. The Representations Committee will not withdraw these grievances until all Phoenix-related pay matters have been resolved.

These additional days are treated the same as annual leave and are subject to the same cash-out provisions in your collective agreement.

No. In fact, the agreement creates a faster, dedicated process for resolving individual claims.

Employees will be able to file claims and the employer will engage in a detailed review of these claims. A threshold of $1,500 will apply, in some cases, and a complete list of eligible expenses will be made available soon.

The five days of leave were reached as an attempt to address the immense frustration caused to employees and as a product of negotiation with the employer. Leave was chosen instead of a monetary form of compensation, as it is a tangible benefit that is both flexible and easily administered without having to further bog down the Phoenix pay system.

All of the criteria are the same as the annual leave provisions in your collective agreement.

Yes. Former employees are eligible for the same entitlements for the years that they were on strength, except it will take the form of a cash payment. These days are subject to any applicable statutory deductions and are non-pensionable.

Details on how to apply are available here.

The collective bargaining process is not affected. This is a partial grievance settlement not a collective agreement.

In order to qualify for each fiscal year's worth of leave, an employee needed only to be employed for one day in that fiscal year(s), whether or not they were on leave, assignment or otherwise not active. For example, if you were hired to the federal public service on September 1, 2018, and have been employed since then, you will get two days of leave credited to your leave bank (2018-19 and 2019-2020 fiscal years).

The full text of the agreement can be viewed here.

You will still receive any outstanding amounts owed to you that you may not have received due to Phoenix. The Association continues to work with the Employer to try and fix old Phoenix pay problems and minimize the risk of new ones.

Complaints cannot be made for an acting appointment of less than four months, unless it extends the cumulative period of acting appointments to four months or more. The Public Service Employment Regulations excludes these appointments from the provisions of the PSEA dealing with staffing complaints to Board.

The PSEA gives managers with staffing authority broad discretion to establish necessary qualifications for the position they want to staff, as well as to choose and use assessment methods that will enable them to determine whether a person meets the essential qualifications. The methods must be reasonable, and assess the essential qualifications fairly - a simple error or omission is not considered an abuse of authority. The onus would be on you to provide evidence that there was an abuse of authority in the appointment process.

You can use a complaint form to make your complaint. Using this form is not required, but you must file a complaint in writing, and it must include the following information:

• your name, telephone number and fax number, and a mailing address or email address that can be disclosed to all parties;
• the name, address, telephone number, fax number and email address of your authorized representative, if any;
• the number or identifier, if any, of the process to which the complaint relates;
• a copy of the notice of lay-off, revocation, appointment or proposed appointment to which the complaint relates;
• the name of the department or agency, branch or sector involved in the process to which the complaint relates;
• a reference to the provision of the PSEA under which the complaint is made;
• a full factual description of the events, circumstances or actions giving rise to the complaint (to the extent known by you). You should provide evidence to support your complaint;
• your signature or the signature of your authorized representative; and,
• the date of the complaint.

Complaints can be made in either official language. At the time of filing your complaint, you must also indicate whether you wish the proceedings and hearing be in English or in French.

No. There are no provisions in the PSEA that require a deputy head to establish an assessment board, or that a board have a certain composition. However, if an assessment board is not properly constituted, and is unable to make a fair decision as a result, then you may be able to show that there has been an abuse of authority in the selection process. This a question of fact which depends on the specific complaint. You would need to provide evidence to show that the selection process was unfair because of the composition of the assessment board.

Yes. You can with your complaint by filing a written notice of withdrawal with the Board. Your notice of withdrawal must include:

• your name, telephone number and fax number, and a mailing address or email address that can be disclosed to all parties;
• the name, address, telephone number, fax number and email address of your authorized representative, if any;
• the Board´s file number for the complaint;
• a statement that you wish to withdraw the complaint;
• the name of the department or agency, branch or sector involved in the process to which the complaint relates;
• your signature or the signature of your authorized representative; and,
• the date of withdrawal.

If you have been represented during the complaint process, it is your responsibility to advise your representative, as soon as possible, that you wish to withdraw your complaint.

Yes. Members of boards assessing candidates in appointment processes have a duty to conduct their assessments fairly. Bias, including a reasonable apprehension of bias, can constitute an abuse of authority in assessment and appointment decisions made under the PSEA.

The test is whether a reasonably informed bystander could reasonably perceive bias on the part of one or more members of the assessment board. You would need prove that you were treated or assessed differently from other candidates in the assessment process, or that there was a reasonable apprehension of bias. Actions, comments and events that occurred before or during the appointment process could create a reasonable apprehension of bias.  

You must file a complaint within 15 calendar days following the date on which you received notice (including public notice) of the appointment, proposed appointment, or revocation. You can consult the Procedural Guide for Staffing Complaints for information on the Board´s hours of business for staffing complaints, and how to calculate time periods.

No. Staffing is not covered under the AJC collective agreement. It is governed by the PSEA and the Public Service Staffing Complaints Regulations. Unsuccessful candidates in an internal advertised appointment process can file a complaint with the Board within 15 calendar days following the date on which you received notice (including public notice) of the appointment, proposed appointment or revocation, as the case may be.

Staffing complaint decisions of the Board are final and may not be appealed. They may however, be subject to judicial review by the Federal Court of Appeal on limited grounds. Applications for judicial review must be filed in accordance with the procedures and timeframes set out in the Federal Courts Act and the Federal Courts Rules. As a matter of general practice, the AJC does not usually apply for judicial review of staffing complaint decisions.

1. See Gaudreau v. Deputy Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, 2013 PSST 0023, available online.

The PSEA provides the Board with the authority to consider, assist with resolving, hear and decide complaints involving:

• The deputy head´s decision to lay-off an employee.
  The ground for complaint is that the manager abused his or her authority in selecting the complainant for lay-off. (s. 65 (1))
• The decision of a deputy head or the Public Service Commission to revoke an appointment.
  The ground for complaint is that the revocation was unreasonable. (s. 74)
• Internal appointments.
  The grounds for complaint are abuse of authority in the application of merit and/or in the choice of process (advertised or non-advertised) and denial of the right to be assessed in the official language of the person´s choice. (s. 77 (1))
• Failure of corrective action following a complaint against an internal appointment that was substantiated.

The ground for complaint is that the person was not appointed or proposed for appointment because of an abuse of authority in the implementation of the corrective action. (s. 83)

No. The Public Service Commission has the authority to investigate external appointments, concerns related to possible political influence or fraud in a selection process or an internal appointment where appointment authority has not been delegated.

If the Commission is satisfied that the appointment was not made or proposed to be made on the basis of merit, or that there was an error, an omission or improper conduct that affected the selection of the person appointed or proposed for appointment, the Commission may revoke (or not make) the appointment, and take any corrective action that it considers appropriate.

The Board handles complaints involving:

• abuse of authority in applying the merit criteria
• abuse of authority in choosing between an advertised and a non-advertised appointment process
• omission in assessing the candidate in the official language of his or her choice.

“Abuse of authority” can include bad faith and personal favouritism. The Board also has the authority to interpret and enforce the Canadian Human Rights Act in dealing with any discriminatory aspects of an appointment. The burden of proof generally rests with the complainant.

You can consult the Procedural Guide for Staffing Complaints (Guide) for information on how to file a complaint with the Board. Complaints may be filed by individuals. Those seeking support from the AJC may refer to the Policy Governing Union Representation Services and fill out and return an Intake form at admin@ajc-ajj.com.

The Procedural Guide includes contact information for filing a complaint. The deadline to file is 15 calendar days following the date on which you received notice (including public notice) of the appointment, proposed appointment or revocation, as the case may be.

Staffing complaints can be sent to the Board by email or fax. They can also be delivered to the Board in person, by courier or by regular or registered mail. Where your notice of complaint is sent by email or fax, you must ensure that a copy with your signature (or your authorized representative´s signature) is sent to the Board as soon as possible by mail, fax or email with a scanned attachment.

The Public Service Commission (PSC) Appointment Policy and the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) (s.29, 48 & 49) gives deputy heads broad discretion in determining appointment processes within their respective departments. Deputy heads must apply a national area of selection, with some exceptions. These exceptions include opportunities of six months or less, seasonal work, certain student appointments, and appointments where an exception is approved by the deputy head.

Although this form is referred to as a performance agreement, you will note in various sections of the form that your signature constitutes an acknowledgement only, and not an agreement with the content. The AJC recommends that LPs provide acknowledgements with or without comments, as LPs consider appropriate.

What to expect from your manager or supervisor is clearly outlined in the Performance management program for employees.  In addition, you may refer to the Directive on Performance Management.

If for whatever reason, you feel unsupported and are being required to do work outside the scope of your job description, due to reasons beyond your control that could have an impact on your ability to meet the performance objectives that were set for you, we encourage you to have a frank discussion with your supervisor and to document any and all instances that have essentially impaired your ability to meet certain objectives.  

This will be relevant and useful to you in the event you are called upon to defend a failure to meet your objectives particularly where any discussions related to a request to reconsider your objectives have failed.  

Examples of situations that could result in your inability to fulfill your obligations may relate to a shortage of support staff and resulting failure to provide you with the administrative support you require to meet your objectives.  In such situations, you may have had to assume administrative tasks that are not normally expected of LPs. Other examples might include the failure to meet minimum certain productivity levels for reasons that fall beyond your control, such as work distribution, client demand, lack of administrative support, competing professional obligations, and the exercise of legitimate leave entitlements.  

Yes, provided management rights are exercised reasonably and in compliance with the collective agreement. Performance objectives are not collectively bargained and management has general discretion in the managing of its staff´s performance. It is understood that management is held to certain policies and ethical standards including those in the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Service.

The AJC also encourages you to have a timely and frank discussion with your supervisor (to be documented) regarding any and all instances that have essentially impaired or are likely to impair your ability to meet certain objectives, so that you may formally request a revision to your performance objectives in accordance with the principles set out in the Manager's and Supervisor's Guide.    

All employees are entitled to engage their direct supervisors and/or managers in a discussion on the appropriateness and reasonableness of the performance objectives. Consideration should be given to the reasonableness of the objectives and whether they are reasonably attainable having regard to current circumstances, i.e. staffing and workload challenges, management support, changes in priority, accommodation requirements, collective agreement entitlements, and the like.

All employees are free to make note of their objections in the performance agreement, where appropriate or in an email.

Article 23 of the AJC Collective Agreement allows you to present counter-arguments (in writing) to the applicable manager and/or committee responsible for the assessment.   In so doing, you may request that the comments you consider baseless be stricken from the assessment.  Alternatively, you may request that your counter-arguments be placed into your personnel file so that these are read in conjunction with the employer´s assessment.  

Where you have facts to support that the assessment lacks foundation and is based on malicious intent, you may complete an Intake Form and forward it to admin@ajc-ajj.com in order to request the AJC's support in the filing of an individual grievance.  The grievance support request process is set out in greater detail in our Policy Governing Union Representation Services.

Anyone with questions regarding any of the above can contact the AJC offices.

It is a form that was prepared by Treasury Board following the implementation of its Directive on Performance Management. This form, as reported in our communique of March 25, 2014 was customized to ensure that the performance management principles contained in our collective agreement are respected.

There may be a range of options that you might want to consider. Advice may be sought from the AJC in order for you to better scope out your options. This course of action may range from requesting that the AJC intervene on your behalf at a more senior management level to considering formal channels to challenge the objectives.

Where you are unable to receive satisfaction with your supervisor regarding the reasonableness of a performance objective, a member of our labour relations staff can provide you with an impartial assessment on whether the performance objective that you object to constitutes an unreasonable objective or a violation of the collective agreement, having regard to the circumstances.

Please be reminded that management has a significant level of discretion and that performance objectives are not directly covered within the scope of the AJC/TB collective agreement. There may therefore be limits in terms of the AJC's role in such circumstances.

For more information on this regarding your specific circumstances, we encourage you to contact us at admin@ajc-ajj.com and include a completed copy of our Intake Form.

Yes, pursuant to Section 1.1.2 of the WFAD, departments are expected to carry out effective human resource planning to minimize the impact of work force adjustment situations on indeterminate employees, on the department and on the public service. This could therefore include terminating term employees early before resorting to workforce adjustment of indeterminate employees.

The department has no obligation under the AJC collective agreement to provide notice to term employees of the department´s decision to not renew. However, Treasury Board´s Term Employment Policy does require that departments/agencies provide one month written notification to the employee of renewal, non-renewal or early termination before the originally specified end of term.

No. Section 58(1) of the Public Service Employment Act (“PSEA”) states that, at the expiration of a specified term, the employee ceases to be an employee and is not entitled to priority status for placement within the federal public service. Accordingly, sections 40, 41(4) and 44 of the PSEA which deal with priority lists and advertised processes do not apply to term employees.

No, you are not covered by the WFAD. As a term employee, you are covered by the Treasury Board´s Term Employment Policy. The WFAD applies exclusively to indeterminate employees.

There is nothing that governs the manner in which term positions are identified as redundant. Management has a great deal of discretion to make these decisions. The AJC can only hope that management will conduct itself in an objective, transparent and respectful manner.

The Federal Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board does not have jurisdiction to hear grievances based upon the term employment policy and/or the non-renewal of term employment.

The decision to renew or not renew falls squarely within the discretion of the department.

As expiry and/or non-renewal of term employment do not constitute a lay-off pursuant to the collective agreement, there is no right of complaint under section 65 of the Public Service Employment Act.

It depends. Term employees employed in the same department for a period of three (3) continuous years (without a break of 60 consecutive calendar days or more) must be appointed as an indeterminate employee at the level of his/her substantive position. Having said this, there may be certain exceptions, where the source of funding for salary dollars is from external sources and for a limited duration (sunset funding) or where the department puts a hold on ongoing accumulation of service for the purposes of conversion to indeterminate status where it can be established that the indeterminate appointment of term employees would result in workforce adjustment situations. For more information on this, see section 7.2 of the Term Employment Policy.

Notice

The Department of Justice and Public Prosecution Service of Canada have exercised their right to suspend the ongoing accumulation of service under the Term Employment Policy for the purposes of conversion to indeterminate status. The decision is effective May 8, 2012 at DOJ and June 1, 2012 at PPSC. The two departments have advised the AJC that service for term employees will not count as continuous for the purposes of conversion to indeterminate status, until further notice.

This means that the accumulation of service for term employees who did not reach 3 years of continuous service before May 8th, 2012 (at DOJ) and June 1, 2012 (at PPSC) will cease on these respective dates.

The provisions of the collective agreement provide that term employees are entitled to Maternity and Parental Allowance payments (top-up) so long as s/he returns to work for a period equal to the period she was in receipt of the maternity and/or parental allowance.

If the term employment is not renewed, the employee may be unable to return to work for a period equal to the period s/he was in receipt of the allowance, thereby becoming indebted to the employer for the repayment of the allowance, in accordance with the provisions of the collective agreement. This obligation may be “waived” if the employee is rehired in any portion of the Core Public Administration within 90 days and if the new period of employment is sufficient to meet the obligations. For more information, see section 19.04 of the AJC Collective Agreement.

No, as of June 20, 2008 as a result of a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision (Lavoie v. Treasury Board of Canada), the period of maternity/parental leave for female term employees is considered in the calculation of the cumulative three year period.

You should contact a the Ministry of Labour under the HRSDC-Labour program at 1-800-641-4049. Contact should be made after exhausting the internal complaint resolution process under Section 127.1 of the CLC. Sections 129. 130. 131. of the CLC Part II addresses the investigation of the Minister.

Section 240. of the Public Service Labour Relations Act (PSLRA) and Part 2 of the Canadian Labour Code (CLC) apply.

Additionally, refer to section 26 of the AJC-AJJ Collective Agreement.

Under the section 147.1 (1) of the CLC, "an employer may, after all the investigations and appeals have been exhausted by the employee who has exercised rights under sections 128 and 129, take disciplinary action against the employee who the employer can demonstrate has wilfully abused those rights."  The employee must be provided with written reasons for the discipline from the employer within 15 days after receiving the employee's request, section 147.1(2) of the CLC. 

Under normal circumstances you are protected under the section 147 of the CLC, "no employer shall dismiss, suspend, lay off or demote an employee, impose a financial or other penalty on an employee, or refuse to pay an employee remuneration in respect of any period that the employee would, but for the exercise of the employee´s rights under this Part, have worked, or take any disciplinary action against or threaten to take any such action against an employee because the employee 

(a) has testified or is about to testify in a proceeding taken or an inquiry held under this Part; 
(b) has provided information to a person engaged in the performance of duties under this Part regarding the conditions of work affecting the health or safety of the employee or of any other employee of the employer; or 
(c) has acted in accordance with this Part or has sought the enforcement of any of the provisions of this Part." 

R.S., 1985, c. L-2, s. 147; R.S., 1985, c. 9 (1st Supp.), s. 4; 2000, c. 20, s. 14.

Other useful links:

Canadian Labour Code Part 2 - Health and Safety 
Treasury Board, Occupational Health and Safety-Policy and Publications 
HRSDC-Labour Program, Health and Safety 
CCOHS Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety 
Part 3 FPSLRA Occupational Health and Safety 
Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations 
Employee Assistance Services 
Crisis and Counselling Resources 
Prevention kit for work-related mental health problems

Prior to filing a complaint or refusal, we encourage our members to first contact their area health and safety representative for advice and ongoing support. If a health and safety representative is unavailable, contact should be made with your Governing Council representative. 

The following internal complaint resolution process must be followed under the CLC prior to contacting a health and safety officer: 

INTERNAL COMPLAINT RESOLUTION PROCESS

Complaint to supervisor 

127.1 (1) An employee who believes on reasonable grounds that there has been a contravention of this Part or that there is likely to be an accident or injury to health arising out of, linked with or occurring in the course of employment shall, before exercising any other recourse available under this Part, except the rights conferred by sections 128, 129 and 132, make a complaint to the employee´s supervisor. 

Resolve complaint 

(2) The employee and the supervisor shall try to resolve the complaint between themselves as soon as possible. 

Investigation of complaint 

(3) The employee or the supervisor may refer an unresolved complaint to a chairperson of the work place committee or to the health and safety representative to be investigated jointly (a) by an employee member and an employer member of the work place committee; or (b) by the health and safety representative and a person designated by the employer. 

Notice 

(4) The persons who investigate the complaint shall inform the employee and the employer in writing, in the form and manner prescribed if any is prescribed, of the results of the investigation. 

Recommendations 

(5) The persons who investigate a complaint may make recommendations to the employer with respect to the situation that gave rise to the complaint, whether or not they conclude that the complaint is justified. 

Employer's duty 

(6) If the persons who investigate the complaint conclude that the complaint is justified, the employer, on being informed of the results of the investigation, shall in writing and without delay inform the persons who investigated the complaint of how and when the employer will resolve the matter, and the employer shall resolve the matter accordingly. 

Stoppage of activity 

(7) If the persons who investigate the complaint conclude that a danger exists as described in subsection 128(1), the employer shall, on receipt of a written notice, ensure that no employee use or operate the machine or thing, work in the place or perform the activity that constituted the danger until the situation is rectified. 

Referral to the Minister

(8) The employee or employer may refer a complaint that there has been a contravention of this Part to the Minister in the following circumstances:

(a) where the employer does not agree with the results of the investigation; 
(b) where the employer has failed to inform the persons who investigated the complaint of how and when the employer intends to resolve the matter or has failed to take action to resolve the matter; or 
(c) where the persons who investigated the complaint do not agree between themselves as to whether the complaint is justified. 

Investigation

(9) The Minister shall investigate the complaint referred to in subsection (8).

 Duty and power of Minister

(10) On completion of the investigation, the Minister

• (a) may issue directions to an employer or employee under subsection 145(1);
• (b) may, if in the Minister's opinion it is appropriate, recommend that the employee and employer resolve the matter between themselves; or
• (c) shall, if the Minister concludes that a danger exists as described in subsection 128(1), issue directions under subsection 145(2).

Section 128(1) of the Canadian Labour Code part II provides for the right to refuse work if you have reasonable cause to believe that a danger exists. Under section 122 (1) of the CLC, 'danger' means any hazard, condition or activity that could reasonably be expected to be an imminent or serious threat to the life or health of a person exposed to it before the hazard or condition can be corrected or the activity altered; 

"Refusal to work if danger" 

128. (1) Subject to this section, an employee may refuse to use or operate a machine or thing, to work in a place or to perform an activity, if the employee while at work has reasonable cause to believe that (a) the use or operation of the machine or thing constitutes a danger to the employee or to another employee; 
(b) a condition exists in the place that constitutes a danger to the employee; or 
(c) the performance of the activity constitutes a danger to the employee or to another employee. 

No refusal permitted in certain dangerous circumstances 

(2) An employee may not, under this section, refuse to use or operate a machine or thing, to work in a place or to perform an activity if 
(a) the refusal puts the life, health or safety of another person directly in danger; or 
(b) the danger referred to in subsection (1) is a normal condition of employment. 

[…]

Report to employer 

(6) An employee who refuses to use or operate a machine or thing, work in a place or perform an activity under subsection (1), or who is prevented from acting in accordance with that subsection by subsection (4), shall report the circumstances of the matter to the employer without delay. 

Select a remedy 

(7) Where an employee makes a report under subsection (6), the employee, if there is a collective agreement in place that provides for a redress mechanism in circumstances described in this section, shall inform the employer, in the prescribed manner and time if any is prescribed, whether the employee intends to exercise recourse under the agreement or this section. The selection of recourse is irrevocable unless the employer and employee agree otherwise. 

Investigation by employer

(7.1) The employer shall, immediately after being informed of a refusal under subsection (6), investigate the matter in the presence of the employee who reported it. Immediately after concluding the investigation, the employer shall prepare a written report setting out the results of the investigation.

Employer to take immediate action

(8) If, following its investigation, the employer agrees that a danger exists, the employer shall take immediate action to protect employees from the danger. The employer shall inform the work place committee or the health and safety representative of the matter and the action taken to resolve it.

Continued refusal 

(9) If the matter is not resolved under subsection (8), the employee may, if otherwise entitled to under this section, continue the refusal and the employee shall without delay report the circumstances of the matter to the employer and to the work place committee or the health and safety representative. 

Investigation of continued refusal

(10) If the work place committee receives a report under subsection (9), it shall designate, to investigate the matter immediately in the presence of the employee who reported it, two members of the committee, namely, one employee member from those chosen under paragraph 135.1(1)(b) and one employer member who is not from those chosen under that paragraph. If the health and safety representative receives a report under subsection (9), they shall immediately investigate the matter in the presence of the employee who reported it and a person who is designated by the employer.

Report

(10.1) Immediately after concluding the investigation, the members of the work place committee designated under subsection (10) or the health and safety representative shall provide a written report to the employer that sets out the results of the investigation and their recommendations, if any.

If more than one report 

(11) If more than one employee has made a report of a similar nature under subsection (9), those employees may designate one employee from among themselves to be present at the investigation. 

Absence of employee

(12) The employer, the members of a work place committee or the health and safety representative may proceed with their investigation in the absence of the employee who reported the matter if that employee or a person designated under subsection (11) chooses not to be present.

Decision of employer

(13) After receiving a report under subsection (10.1) or (10.2) and taking into account any recommendations in it, the employer, if it does not intend to provide additional information under subsection (10.2), shall make one of the following decisions:

• (a) agree that a danger exists;
• (b) agree that a danger exists but consider that the circumstances provided for in paragraph (2)(a) or (b) apply;
• (c) determine that a danger does not exist.

Decision  — paragraph (13)(a)

(14) If the employer agrees that a danger exists under paragraph (13)(a), the employer shall take immediate action to protect employees from the danger. The employer shall inform the work place committee or the health and safety representative of the matter and the action taken to resolve it.

Decision  — paragraph (13)(b) or (c)

(15) If the employer makes a decision under paragraph (13)(b) or (c), the employer shall notify the employee in writing. If the employee disagrees with the employer’s decision, the employee is entitled to continue the refusal, subject to subsections 129(1.2), (1.3), (6) and (7).

Information to Minister

(16) If the employee continues the refusal under subsection (15), the employer shall immediately inform the Minister and the work place committee or the health and safety representative of its decision and the continued refusal. The employer shall also provide a copy of the report on the matter prepared under subsection (7.1) to the Minister along with a copy of any report referred to in subsection (10.1) or (10.2).

Employees on shift during work stoppage 

128.1 (1) Unless otherwise provided in a collective agreement or other agreement, employees who are affected by a stoppage of work arising from the application of section 127.1, 128 or 129 or subsection 145(2) are deemed, for the purpose of calculating wages and benefits, to be at work during the stoppage until work resumes or until the end of the scheduled work period or shift, whichever period is shorter. 

Employees on next shift 

(2) Unless otherwise provided in a collective agreement or other agreement, employees who are due to work on a scheduled work period or shift after a shift during which there has been a stoppage of work arising from the application of section 127.1, 128 or 129 or subsection 145(2) are deemed, for the purpose of calculating wages and benefits, to be at work during their work period or shift, unless they have been given at least one hour´s notice not to attend work. 

Alternative work 

(3) An employer may assign reasonable alternative work to employees who are deemed under subsection (1) or (2) to be at work. 

Repayment 

(4) Unless otherwise provided in a collective agreement or other agreement, employees who are paid wages or benefits under subsection (1) or (2) may be required by the employer to repay those wages and benefits if it is determined, after all avenues of redress have been exhausted by the employee who exercised rights under section 128 or 129, that the employee exercised those rights knowing that no circumstances existed that would warrant it.”

Yes. Although most of the accommodation requests in the employment context are disability-related, the duty to accommodate extends to all grounds enumerated by section 3 of the CHRA.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission defines discrimination as an action or a decision that treats a person or a group differently, whether it is intentional or not, based on one of the prohibited grounds found in section 3 of the Canadian Human Rights Act ("CHRC"):

"For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered."

Discrimination in the workplace will usually take one of the following forms:

• harassment based on a prohibited ground;
• policies or practices that deprive or tend to deprive an individual or class of individuals of any employment opportunities based on a prohibited ground;
• failure to take into account a person's disability; or
• failure to treat two groups of employees differently (e.g. pay equity).

Along with the employer's duty to accommodate comes the employee's corresponding duty to participate in his or her own accommodation. It is important to note that an employee is not entitled to insist on his or her ideal or preferred accommodation.

If the employer's proposal amounts to reasonable accommodation, then the employer will have discharged its obligation. Therefore, the refusal of a reasonable accommodation that appropriately addresses an employee's limitations could result in a complete discharge of the employer´s duty to accommodate. This therefore means that the employer will not be obligated to explore other options.

The end result is that the employee who refuses reasonable accommodation in the case of an employee who is currently on leave with or without pay, may end up on an unapproved leave of absence without pay and at risk of losing his or her employment.

Although the employer has a positive obligation stemming from the current human rights legislative scheme in Canada, the employee also has obligations that must be met in order to benefit from an accommodation request.

As an employee requesting accommodation, you must:

• Identify and communicate, in writing, the need for accommodation to your supervisor;
• Provide the necessary information and documentation to support the accommodation request;
• Maintain open lines of communication with the employer and the union and inform all parties involved if there are any changes to your situation; and,
• Cooperate with the employer and the union to find the appropriate accommodation solutions.

The duty to accommodate is a statutory obligation imposed on the employer to adjust working conditions so that employees identified in one or more of the prohibited grounds under the CHRA can continue working. The statutory duty to accommodate is required to the point of undue hardship. This means that the most appropriate, i.e. reasonable, accommodation must be determined and implemented to the point of undue hardship.

Undue hardship is a high standard that can take into account financial costs, sources of funding and health or safety risks. Each case is to be assessed on its own merits.

The duty to accommodate generally follows an accommodation request from an employee. Although in the employment context the duty to accommodate often involves a disability component, it is important to remember that this duty applies to all protected grounds found in section 3 of the CHRA such as creed, religion, sex or family status, for example.

The duty to accommodate may very well result in different treatment of some employees in order to attain equality and eliminate a negative treatment stemming from an employment policy or practice (“workplace barrier”) that is not intended to be discriminatory in nature in its application.

For instance, even though no employees in a given office may be permitted to telework, an employee with a specific disability could be granted teleworking rights in order to comply with his/her functional limitations. This accommodation is intended to allow the employee to complete assigned duties they might not otherwise be able to do without accommodation.

In 1999, the Supreme Court of Canada case Meiorin adopted a new standard unified approach to ensure a discrimination-free workplace.

The court clearly imposes a duty on the employer to make every reasonable effort, short of undue hardship, to accommodate workers and to proactively eliminate any employment policy or practices that may discriminate against individuals or groups of individuals based on the grounds enumerated in the CHRA.

Since Meiorin, there is now a positive obligation on employers to design workplace standards that will enshrine the spirit of equality and a discrimination-free workplace through its practices and policies.

In the context of the duty to accommodate, a union cannot cause or contribute to a discriminatory practice or impede the employer's accommodation attempts. Although the employer remains primarily responsible for ensuring the accommodation needs of the employee, the union must work with the employer to help find a proper and agreeable accommodation solution.

The union, like the employer, cannot contract out of human rights legislation and will need to work with the employer to help accommodate the member in need of accommodation. Of course, employees can make their accommodation requests without union assistance or involvement if they prefer. However, some more complicated cases could benefit from our intervention to ensure that your needs are being met in a timely manner.

An accommodation is an exemption or a modification to an employment practice or policy that allows the employee to fulfill the essential duties of his or her position and retain his employment.

The types of accommodation one might be entitled to are not prescribed within the CHRA. Every case must be looked at on an individual basis in order to assess which remedy would help rectify the negative impact brought on by the applicable employment practice or policy.

Accommodation can take on a variety of forms. Examples could include redistributing non-essential duties to another worker for a temporary period, reducing an employee´s work schedule, allowing the employee to telework, implementing a gradual return-to-work plan, providing a more quiet workspace or ergonomic equipment.

No, the employer is not entitled to know your diagnosis but it is entitled to receive sufficient information to address the situation properly. Only the information necessary for determining the appropriate form of accommodation has to be shared.

As an employee, you are responsible for ensuring that your employer gets the list of functional limitations your treating physician has set out, having regard to your existing job requirements.

It is therefore a good idea to share your existing job description with your doctor so that he or she can appreciate the scope and nature of the work that you do and properly advise the employer of your functional limitations. Your doctor should also indicate how long such functional limitations are expected to exist. This will provide an estimate of how long the accommodation may be required by the employer.

This kind of information is not usually required for employees who have readily evident disabilities such as permanent physical disabilities for instance.

Accommodation cases must be analyzed on an individual basis.

After an initial written request to your immediate supervisor (preferably with a medical report spelling out functional limitations), should the employer refuse to accommodate you, we ask that you contact the AJC by filling out an intake form and forwarding it to admin@ajc-ajj.ca

A labour relations agent will review and contact you as soon as possible in order to help you identify possible solutions.

The essential duties of your position, also known as Bona Fide Occupational Requirements (BFOR), are the main tasks that are required of you in your job. They are crucial and central to your job. They are not mere preferences, but rather indispensable requirements that must be performed.

The Meiorin* decision sets out the steps to establish what tasks should be considered BFORs:

(1)   [has] the employer adopted the standard for a purpose rationally connected to the performance of the job?
(2)   [has] the employer adopted the particular standard in an honest and good faith belief that it was necessary to the fulfilment of that legitimate work-related purpose? and
(3)   [Is] the standard reasonably necessary to the accomplishment of that legitimate work-related purpose? To show that the standard is reasonably necessary, it must be demonstrated that it is impossible to accommodate individual employees sharing the characteristics of the claimant without imposing undue hardship upon the employer.

* British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3

If you have additional questions, consult the Directive, your Governing Council members, or contact us at: wfa-re@ajc-ajj.ca.

The Public Service Superannuation Act governs pension benefits.   Effective your date of layoff, your service ceases to accrue.  You may contact your Pension Benefits Administrator regarding your pension-related questions.

If you refuse a reasonable job offer, you will be laid off, in which case you will be paid until you are laid off.

If you are an opting employee, you will continue to be paid until you are laid off or choose to resign from the Public Service.

A Work Force Adjustment applies to indeterminate employees upon being informed in writing that his or her services may no longer be required beyond a specified date. See Appendix D outlining a summary of the Key Elements of the WFAD.  

The Work Force Adjustment Directive does not apply to term employees, whose contracts are expected to terminate at the end of their term, unless otherwise renewed.

It is our understanding that it will be possible to withdraw an initial offer to “volunteer”.

The voluntary departure process in no way abridges any rights of employees to participate in the alternation process provided for by their collective agreements.

You and your manager are encouraged to discuss this to determine what is appropriate.  Generally, the departments do provide a certain level of assistance in support of your search for alternate employment.  

For official notification obligations relating to employees being declared surplus, consult section 1.1.6. of the WFAD.

For all other notification obligations, see Part II of the WFAD.

Alternation allows an Opting or Surplus employee to exchange positions with an unaffected employee who wishes to leave the core public administration and accept a TSM (Option B) or Education Allowance (Option C). The Alternation must occur within the 120-day opting period or 12-month surplus period under Option A. The date of Alternation must be specified, and employees must exchange positions on that same day.

If an unaffected employee alternates, they can only select Option B or C(i). If alternation is during Surplus A period, alternate’s TSM will be reduced by 1 week for each completed week between beginning of employee surplus period and date of alternation.

Please refer to section 6.3 Alternation of the WFAD.

Your benefits continue while a surplus employee and extend for up to one year or until you are entitled to an ongoing pension benefit, whichever is shorter. For more details, please refer to the PSHCP.

If you have been given a guarantee of a reasonable job offer, you will continue to be paid until you are offered and accept a reasonable job offer.

You may be the subject of the Work Force Adjustment Directive.  In other words, you may receive notice from your department regarding possible workforce adjustment while you are on official leave, provided that you have not been on leave for a period in excess of one year or where your position has not been permanently backfilled.

No, they are not pursuant to the provisions of the Public Service Superannuation Act and Regulations (PSSA).

All of these amounts are considered income.   For tax advice, the AJC recommends that you consult a tax professional or the Canada Revenue Agency.

See Appendix D Chart outlining the Key Elements of the WFAD, including options.  
For more details regarding your options if you declared a surplus and have not received a guarantee of a reasonable job offer, consult Part VI, section 6.4 of the WFAD.

The Transition Support Measure is based on years of service, both discontinuous and continuous.  For more information please see Appendix C of the WFAD.

If an opting employee were to choose opting “surplus” priority for the 12 months without a guaranteed reasonable job offer and were appointed to a lower level, the AJC if of the view that salary protection should be available because the employee remains “surplus” as per the definition set out in the WFAD.

For more information, please refer to sections 5.1, 5.1.2and the definitions of « surplus employee » and “surplus priority” of the WFAD.

Seniority may be a relevant consideration however it is up to the deputy heads to establish the criteria being used.

Article 34 of the collective agreement requires the employer to make every reasonable effort to ensure that any reduction in the work force is accomplished through attrition.

For information on the merit criteria used, please refer to the Public Service Commission´s Guidance Series: Selecting Employees for Retention or Layoff.

• The AJC Representations Policy
• The LP Collective Agreement
• The National Joint Council Public Service Health Care Plan Directive
• The National Joint Council Work Force Adjustment Directive
• The National Joint Council WFAD Flowchart of Key Elements of the Work Force Adjustment Directive

Legislative References:

• Public Service Employment Act
• Public Service Superannuation Act

Depending on the option you choose from those listed in Appendix D of the WFAD, i.e. surplus priority status, transition support measure or education leave, you may be entitled to layoff priority for 1 year, severance pay at layoff rate in accordance with the terms set out in the collective agreement in addition to a lump-sum amount in accordance with the schedule set Transition Support Measure Table at Appendix C of the WFAD.  Please read Appendix D and the remainder of the WFAD carefully for details on other entitlements you may have.

Pursuant to section 22.01(a) of the collective agreement, a lawyer shall receive severance benefits calculated on the basis of his weekly rate of pay:

(i) On the first lay off after November 28, 1969, two (2) weeks´ pay for the first complete year of continuous employment and one week´s pay for each additional complete year of continuous employment and, in the case of a partial year of continuous employment, one week´s pay multiplied by the number of days of continuous employment divided by three hundred and sixty-five.

(ii) On second or subsequent layoff after November 28, 1969, one week´s pay for each complete year of continuous employment and, in the case of a partial year of continuous employment, one week´s pay multiplied by the number of days of continuous employment divided by three hundred and sixty five, less any period in respect of which he was granted severance pay under subparagraph 22.01(a)(i) above.

In such instances, you will be placed on surplus priority status when a guaranteed reasonable job offer is made (GRJO) until you receive/accept a reasonable job offer (RJO), are laid off or resign.  If a reasonable job offer is extended to you, you may choose to accept or reject the offer.   Consequences relating to the acceptance or rejection of job offers are covered under Appendix D outlining the Key Elements of the WFAD, and more specifically covered under Part I of the WFAD.
 
If for some reason, you refuse a reasonable job offer, you will be placed on lay-off but no sooner than 6 months from the beginning of the surplus period (i.e. the date you were offered a GRJO).  You would remain on lay-off priority status (unpaid) for 1 year.

According to the Work Force Adjustment Directive, a “work force adjustment” is defined as “a situation that occurs when a deputy head decides that the services of one or more indeterminate employees will no longer be required beyond a specified date because of a lack of work, the discontinuance of a function, a relocation in which the employee does not wish to relocate or an alternative delivery initiative.”

For a SNAPSHOT on the process, see Appendix D to the Directive outlining a summary of the Key Elements of the WFAD.

Yes, if the department in question makes this option available.  Departments are considering various ways to reduce the impact of the required reductions on its current employees, which may include inviting employees to express their interest in volunteering to be laid-off.  It is at the discretion of management to accept an expression of interest to “volunteer”.  Accepted volunteers could then be entitled to the appropriate Workforce Adjustment (WFA) provisions whether they have received an affected status letter or not.

NEW Voluntary departure programs (6.2) - A two-prong voluntary departure program has been added to the Directive for employees who are not provided with a guarantee of a reasonable job offer. Departments and organizations must establish the program for situations involving 5 or more employees at the same group and level within a work unit. Also, the DH may establish a program for units where less than 5 employees are affected. The provision also indicates that the program must be subject to meaningful consultation through joint union-management WFA committees, must not be used to exceed reduction targets, must take place before the department or organization engages in the selection of employees for retention or lay-off (SERLO) process(es), provide for a minimum of 30 calendar days for employees to decide to participate, and allow employees to select Options 6.4.1 (b), (c)(i) or (c)(ii). Finally, when the number of volunteers is larger than the required number of positions to be eliminated, volunteers must be selected based on seniority.

Yes, you may be asked to perform duties that are different from the ones you have usually performed.

Generally, disputes relating to the hiring and laying off of public servants fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board pursuant to the Public Service Employment Act (“PSEA”).   As staffing policies are not subject to collective bargaining, your available remedies may be limited to the PSEA, which provides for limited recourse in the case of certain predefined types of complaints.  More specifically, section 65(1) of the PSEA states:
 
“Where some but not all of the employees in a part of an organization are informed by the deputy head that they will be laid off, any employee selected for lay-off may make a complaint to the Tribunal, in the manner and within the time fixed by the Tribunal´s regulations, that his or her selection constituted an abuse of authority.” (Emphasis added.)

Section 65(2) of the PSEA prevents complaints against the actual decision to layoff employees, the determination of the part of the organization impacted or the number of employees to be laid off from that part.

For more information on the evaluation criteria used in determining who should be laid off, you may consult the Public Service Commission´s Guidance Series: Selecting Employees for Retention or Layoff.

For union advice on whether or not you may have other avenues available to you on account of your particular situation which may bring other collective agreement provisions into play, you may contact the AJC by completing an InTake form outlining your details and forwarding it to admin@ajc-ajj.com .  

If an employee receives an Opting letter from the department notifying them that their services are no longer required and that they are not guaranteed a position or continued employment, they have 120 days to pick one of three options: 

1. Option A: 12 Month Surplus Period to Secure a Reasonable Job Offer (RJO)
2. Option B: Transitional Support Measure (TSM)
3. Option C: Educational Allowance

Option A: What is the 12 Month Surplus Priority List?

An Opting employee who chooses Option A, will receive a letter giving them surplus priority rights for appointment to other positions in the Core Public Administration for 12 months; effectively allowing them to be considered ahead of unaffected employees for open positions. During this period, they have 12 months to find a reasonable job offer or else they will be laid-off. They would be entitled to the following:

• qualify for a pension Waiver if they are 55-59 years of age with at least 10 years of service;
• receive pay in lieu of unfulfilled surplus period for a surplus employee who offers to resign before the end of the 12-month surplus period;
• receive a lump-sum payment equal to the surplus regular pay for the balance of the surplus period, up to a maximum of 6 months (the amount cannot exceed the maximum that would have been received under Option B).

When choosing this option, the employee discontinues working as of the resignation day and is considered to have been laid-off for purposes of severance pay entitlement. 

Option B: What is the Transition Support Measure (TSM)?

When choosing this option, the employee receives a taxable cash payment based on years of service in the Public Service.

Under this option, the Employee:

• resigns and receives a lump-sum amount ranging from 4 to 52 weeks salary.
• is considered laid-off for severance pay purposes;
• is entitled to $1,200 for financial and job placement counselling services;
• relinquishes any priority rights for reappointment;
• receives a pension waiver if 55-59 years of age with at least 10 years of service (not in receipt of a reasonable job offer (RJO) and is laid-off)

With this option, the employee receives a pension waiver allowing the employee to receive an unreduced pension provided they are at least 55 years old and have at least 10 years of service.

Information on exact TSM payments in weeks’ pay by year of service can be found in the WFAD (Appendix C).

Option C: What is the Educational Allowance?

When choosing this option, the employee receives a cash payment equivalent to Option B plus reimbursement of up to $17,000 as an Educational Allowance for receipted expenses for tuition fees, costs of books and relevant equipment.

The Employee effectively resigns and receives a lump-sum amount ranging from 4 to 52 weeks salary and $1,200 for financial and job placement counselling services in exchange for pursuing this option. In turn, the employee relinquishes any priority rights for reappointment and is considered to have been laid-off for purposes of severance pay entitlement. 

When picking this option, the employee has the option of taking Leave Without Pay (LWOP) for up to two years to study.

If no proof of registration is provided within 12 months, resignation is assumed and considered a laid-off for severance pay purposes.

At the end of the 2 years, the employee is laid off unless alternate employment is found and during this time, the employee remains on the lay-off priority status for 12 months.

An Opting employee is an indeterminate employee who does not receive a GRJO. In writing, they are offered three options under Section 6.4 of the WFAD. The employee must select one of the options in writing within 120 days of notification. Once one of the options is picked and submitted in writing, the employee cannot change their option.

If no option is selected, Option A is deemed selected by default.

If a reasonable job offer (not requiring relocation) is made before the employee selects an option, they become ineligible for Options A, B, or C.

You may find details on the three options in the WFAD key elements flowchart (Appendix D).

An indeterminate employee is declared a Surplus employee when their position is being eliminated and they are eligible for a GRJO. In such instances, the employee will be placed on Surplus Priority Status allowing them to be appointed to other positions within the public service until:

• They accept or refuse a reasonable job offer,
• Are laid off, or
• Resign.

Details and consequences of job offer decisions are provided in Appendix D of the WFAD.

Deputy heads are responsible for identifying which positions are considered Affected, based on organizational needs. They have the authority to determine the merit criteria, evaluate positions and essential qualifications to decide which roles will be retained and which will be affected, in alignment with both current and anticipated operational and organizational needs, as well as the broader requirements of the public service. This process may taken weeks to years before it is complete and an employee notified of their Official Status.

WFA exercises are focused on positions and the nature of the work performed—not on the individuals occupying those roles. As a result, it is common for all employees performing similar duties within the same team to be affected by the WFA.

After receiving the initial Notification of Affected Status letter, the department will review the status of each affected employee and determine whether the employee will remain on Affected Status or not. After the review, the employee will receive an Official Notification of WFA Status letter. The letter will outline which of the possible scenarios applies to the employee:   
 

1. DECLARED SURPLUS – the department will notify the employee that their position is eliminated and will be declared Surplus with the Guarantee of a Reasonable Job Offer (GRJO);
2. DECLARED AN OPTING EMPLOYEE (NO GRJO) – the department will notify the employee that their position is eliminated and they are declared an Opting employee, where they will have 120 days to choose one of the three options found in Appendix D of the WFAD; or
    
3. DECLARED UNAFFECTED - the department has decided the employee is no longer affected and that they will be retained within the public service either in their current or new position.

After the Volunteer Departure Programs, a Selection of Employees for Retention and Lay-off (SERLO) process is one of the ways in which the department can select employees for retention or lay-off based on merit, in line with organizational requirements in a WFA situation. The process is outlined in the Public Service Commission’s Guide on the Selection of Employees for Retention and Lay-off.

Departments may offer Voluntary Departure Programs to mitigate WFA impacts. These allow employees to express interest in being laid off (only if no Guarantee of a reasonable job offer (GRJO) is available). It is at the discretion of management to accept an expression of interest to volunteer.

For WFA situations involving five (5) or more affected employees in the same group, level, and work unit, departments are required to establish Voluntary Departure Programs. Employees will have at least 30 calendar days to decide whether they wish to participate.

To learn more about these programs, including the benefits and consequences of participation, please refer to Sections 6.4.1 (B), (C)(i), and (C)(ii) of the Directive.

Receiving a Notification of Affected Status means that the department has initiated a WFA process and has identified the position as potentially impacted in accordance with the WFAD.

However, this does not mean the employee will automatically be declared Surplus or an Opting employee. It signals that the department is conducting further analysis of the work unit to determine how they can address the workforce adjustment situation.

Affected employees should continue performing their duties.

The department will review the status of each affected employee annually, or earlier, from the date of initial notification of affected status and determine whether the employee will remain on affected status or not. After the review, the employee will receive an Official Notification of WFA Status letter. In the meantime, the employee may be asked to participate in a Selection of Employees for Retention and Lay-off (SERLO) process or Voluntary Departure Program.

A Workforce Adjustment (WFA) situation arises when a deputy head determines that the services of one or more indeterminate employees will no longer be required beyond a specific date. This may result from a lack of work, the discontinuance of a function, a relocation where the employee chooses not to move, or an alternative delivery initiative. These situations are governed by the National Joint Council (NJC) Workforce Adjustment Directive (referred to as the “WFAD” or “Directive”).

The key elements of the WFAD are depicted in Appendix D of the Directive.

WFA applies to indeterminate employees who are informed in writing that their services may no longer be required for one of the reasons outlined in the WFAD. This includes lack of work, the discontinuation of a function, a relocation the employee does not accept, or an alternative delivery initiative.

Below, please find key terms relating to WFA as defined in the NJC Directive:

“Affected employee (employé touché) – is an indeterminate employee who has been informed in writing that his or her services may no longer be required because of a work force adjustment situation.

Guarantee of a reasonable job offer (garantie d’une offre d'emploi raisonnable) – is a guarantee of an offer of indeterminate employment within the core public administration provided by the deputy head to an indeterminate employee who is affected by work force adjustment. Deputy heads will be expected to provide a guarantee of a reasonable job offer to those affected employees for whom they know or can predict employment availability in the core public administration. Surplus employees in receipt of this guarantee will not have access to the options available in Part VI of this Directive.

Reasonable job offer (offre d'emploi raisonnable) – is an offer of indeterminate employment within the core public administration, normally at an equivalent level. Surplus employees must be both trainable and mobile. Where practicable, a reasonable job offer shall be within the employee's headquarters as defined in the Travel Directive. In alternative delivery situations, a reasonable offer is one that meets the criteria set out in Type 1 and Type 2 of Part VII of this Directive. A reasonable job offer is also an offer from a FAA Schedule V employer, providing that:

1. The appointment is at a rate of pay and an attainable salary maximum not less than the employee’s current salary and attainable maximum that would be in effect on the date of offer;
2. It is a seamless transfer of all employee benefits including recognition of years of service for the definition of continuous employment and accrual of benefits, including the transfer of sick leave credits, severance pay and accumulated vacation leave credits.

Work force adjustment (réaménagement des effectifs) – is a situation that occurs when a deputy head decides that the services of one or more indeterminate employees will no longer be required beyond a specified date because of a lack of work, the discontinuance of a function, a relocation in which the employee does not wish to relocate or an alternative delivery initiative.”

There are a number of options:

• Ask for a meeting with your supervisor to discuss his or her reasons for the denial
• Discuss possible alternative dates or leave categories to see if your supervisor has any flexibility or suggestions for you
• Consult the chart  setting out all your leave entitlements and consider whether there might be another form of leave to which you are eligible.  If you require assistance in interpreting the collective agreement or the chart on leave entitlements, feel free to consult your regional Governing Council representative.  
• If your discussions don’t result in a satisfactory resolution and you wish to challenge the reasons provided by your supervisor on the basis that your supervisor acted unreasonably, unfairly or in bad faith, ask your supervisor for reasons of his or her denial in writing.  Alternatively, you may confirm your discussions in writing including the reasons with a request that your supervisor confirm your understanding.
• After confirming the reasons for the denial with your supervisor in writing, you have the option of asking your supervisor to reconsider.  You may also want to add any additional facts to the extent that these better support your request.
• You can consider escalating your request to higher levels of management or contact the ACJ should you wish to pursue an individual grievance.  For more information on how to request AJC support, please consult the Policy Governing Representation Services. 

Alternatively, you may also consult the ICMS team to facilitate a discussion with your employer.

There are a variety of leaves entitlements with and without pay allowances.  Please refer to the following chart on leaves of absence, which sets out leave entitlements pursuant to the collective agreement and pursuant to the Directive on Terms and Conditions of Employment and the Directive on Leave and Special Arrangements.

In order to increase your chances of having your leave request approved, we recommend that you:

• Notify the employer of your request for leave in writing, and as far in advance as possible
• Provide your employer with a good business case why your leave should be granted (and how operational requirements could be met during your leave)
• Have alternative leave dates or other options available (if possible – this can help to demonstrate flexibility, and may make it easier to grant your request)

 While we can’t guarantee success, these recommendations can help you work with your manager and facilitate the approval your leave request.

Operational requirements must be based on the work itself to be performed, not on administrative or economic criteria.  Operational requirements are a question of fact to be determined in each case.   The management has discretion to grant requests and in exercising that discretion is required to act reasonably, fairly and in good faith pursuant to section 5.02 of the AJC collective agreement.

Submit your request for leave in writing to your immediate supervisor, as far in advance as possible by both email and via Peoplesoft.  Some managers ask that requests be submitted in advance before processing the leave request.  You should check with your manager on his or her preference.  There maybe specific notice requirements please check the relevant provisions/resource to ensure compliance.

The collective agreement applies to all LPs without distinction therefore term employees are entitled to leave in accordance with the terms set out in the collective agreement or relevant Treasury Board policy.  For more information on term employees, consult our FAQ on term employees.

Yes. All lawyers, promoted within a year, and who meet the requirements for a lump-sum performance pay before being promoted, are eligible for performance pay on a pro-rated basis. 

Pay increments in the form of lockstep increases for LP2 and LP3 occur every 12 months whereas lockstep increases occur every 6 months for LP1, except in exceptional cases where such LPs receive a “does not meet” performance rating. ​

No. In order to be eligible for a performance award (lump sum payment) you must already be at the top of your lockstep range. Otherwise, you are only entitled to a lockstep pay increment which, between lockstep increments, represents a 4.7% increase.  This means that an “exceeds” rating while you are still progressing through the lock-steps will not result in any additional awards.   

Yes, you are eligible for a lockstep increase even if you receive “Unable to Assess” rating on your PREA.

The AJC reached a settlement with the employer on this matter.  

Lockstep pay came into effect on May 10, 2013 for LP1, LP2 and LP3 levels.   Lockstep increases for these levels are automatic and no longer merit-based. Only those at the LP1, LP2 and LP3 levels who receive a “does not meet” rating are ineligible to move up the lock step pay grid.  As such, LPs continue to receive performance assessments and ratings but only those already at the top of the range are eligible to receive lump-sum performance pay at the applicable percentage commensurate with their “meets” or “exceeds” rating.  The percentage increase between lock steps is 4.7%, which is higher than the lump-sum performance pay percentage that applies to those who are at the top of the scale and who receive a “meets” rating.  Currently, 20% percent of LPs at DOJ and PPSC receive “exceeds” ratings and approximately 80% receive “meets” ratings.   

Please refer to appendix B the AJC Collective Agreement.

Pay increments for LP2s and LP3s are every 12 months, generally based on one’s anniversary date and every 6 months for LP1s.  For those LPs whose last appointment predates March 31, 2013, you are likely at the top of the scale by now and under the current collective agreement expiring in 2022, now eligible to your lump-sum performance award within one hundred and twenty (120) days from the end of the fiscal period of each year for performance in the prior fiscal year.   This is a change from the prior May 10 payout date.

LPs at the top of the salary range will receive lump-sum performance awards based on their assessed performance. This part of the performance pay plan applies only to lawyers at the LP1, LP2 and LP3 levels when they are already at the maximum of the pay range.  Lawyers who receive a rating of “Unsatisfactory” are not eligible to receive a performance lump-sum award. ​

Should you have inquiries regarding your pay, including performance pay, under the collective agreement, we strongly recommend you first read the relevant collective agreement pay and performance pay provisions at Appendices A and B.  Once there, you can then consult with your Trusted Source-HR within the department. The Trusted Source-HR will have all the relevant information pertaining to your particular salary and pay increment date.   Should any changes be required to your salary, the Trusted Source will be able to file the necessary pay action request (including relevant paperwork if required) if there is an error in how your pay is being processed.   You can consult with your Governing Council representative should you require assistance in relation to the interpretation of the collective agreement provisions.  For information on how to resolve Phoenix Pay issues, you can consult our FAQ on Phoenix pay issues by clicking here.

You must be on strength for the entire period of the fiscal year, from April 1st to March 31^st, to be eligible for a performance award (provided you were at the top of the range). This is reflected under Appendix B, Part 2, section 5.1 of the AJC collective agreement.  For advice on retirement date selections, please contact your Governing Council representative.

Lawyers at the LP4 and LP5 levels are not on a lockstep pay grid.  Their increases, excluding negotiated economic increases, continue to be merit-based in accordance with Appendix C of the collective agreement.

No. Lawyers who are not at the top of the salary range of LP1, LP2 and LP3 levels only receive lock-step increases. Only those who receive a “does not meet” rating are ineligible to move up the lock-step pay grid.  As such, LPs continue to receive performance assessments and ratings but only those already at the top of the range are eligible for a lump-sum performance pay.

Yes, they are, the percentage is applied year-over-year.

Should you have inquiries regarding your pay, including performance pay, under the collective agreement, we strongly recommend you first read the relevant collective agreement pay and performance pay provisions at Appendices A and B.  Once there, you can then consult with your Trusted Source-HR within the department. The Trusted Source-HR will have all the relevant information pertaining to your particular salary and pay increment date.   Should any changes be required to your salary, the Trusted Source will be able to file the necessary pay action request (including relevant paperwork if required) if there is an error in how your pay is being processed.   You can consult with your Governing Council representative should you require assistance in relation to the interpretation of the collective agreement provisions.  For information on how to resolve Phoenix Pay issues, you can consult our FAQ on Phoenix pay issues by clicking here .

All LPs whose last appointments predate March 31, 2013 continue to have a pay increment date of May 10^th.  The pay increment period however is 12 months (6 months for LP-1 although this is likely not relevant as an LP1 appointed prior to March 31, 2013 would already be at the top of the scale). For LPs hired or last appointed to an LP level after March 31, 2013, such LPs’ pay increment date would be based on his or her anniversary date.  For example, if there is a new hire on September 1, such LP´s pay increment would be the following September 1.   If someone is promoted into a new position on July 1, he or she gets a raise on promotion and then again on their next lockstep pay increment date, i.e. the following July 1.

The Employer has a duty to accommodate AJC members who are unable to be fully vaccinated based on a certified medical contraindication, religion, or another prohibited ground of discrimination as defined under the Canadian Human Rights Act or under our collective agreement, which could also include those who are partially vaccinated.

If an employee is protected by one of these listed grounds, the employer must work with the employee to identify possible accommodations, which may include mandatory testing.

First, the legal issue arising from mandatory vaccinations in the face of a global pandemic is uncharted territory.  While we continue to assess the situation, the AJC it is not currently satisfied that the mandatory vaccination policy violates the Charter and, if the policy does violate the Charter, the AJC is satisfied that the Employer has a strong argument to uphold the policy, given the government’s pressing need to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and to protect health and safety of public servants. As well, the policy does not violate any of the protected grounds set out in our collective agreement.  Therefore, the AJC will not be challenging the mandatory vaccination policy in court at this time. 

Should the AJC be mistaken in its assessment regarding Charter violations, we are of the view that such a violation would be justified under s.1 of the Charter and the Oakes test, given the global and national pandemic health crisis.  This view has recently been supported by the Superior court of Quebec in a decision from July 2022, in which the court found that the policy was not in violation of section 7 of the Charter, and was justified under section 1. Having said this, we continue to examine the existing policy to ensure that those requesting accommodation are treated fairly, reasonably and in good faith and that the Employer complies with its legal duty to accommodate. 

Given that the AJC has been a proponent and strong advocate of the precautionary principle when it comes to health and safety as evidenced by its guidance to members on ensuring health and safety in court and tribunal proceedings as well as by formal submissions it has made to Treasury Board, the Department of Justice, Public Prosecution Services Canada, Courts Administration Service, Chief Justices and Attorneys General across Canada, and our support for the broadest possible form of vaccination, the AJC currently has no intention to initiate court injunctions or other grievance proceedings to challenge the mandatory nature of the policy. 

The AJC will however consider individual grievance support requests relating to unreasonable, unfair and bad faith implementation of the policy or discretion under the policy, including the failure to accommodate on grounds protected under the AJC’s collective agreement ( i.e. age, race, creed, colour, national or ethnic origin, religious affiliation, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, family status, mental or physical disability, membership or activity in the Association, marital status.) 

The AJC may also consider policy grievances in connection with any process related issues that in our view undermine the terms of our collective agreement and our members’ rights thereunder, if after, providing the Employer with feedback, the Employer refuses to rectify the situation.

Even if the AJC were to initiate proceedings such as a grievance, the general rule for any employee is to comply and then grieve, otherwise known as the ‘work now, grieve later” rule.  So, in very practical terms, there is no way of avoiding the consequences from a failure to comply by providing an attestation. 

Partially vaccinated employees will be placed on Leave Without Pay if they have not received their second dose by 10 weeks after their first dose. Partially vaccinated employees may be subject to temporary measures, such as teleworking or testing, for the period of time for which they remain partially vaccinated. Please note that 699 Leave or “Other Leave With Pay”, is not available for employees unwilling[1] to be fully vaccinated or unwilling to disclose their vaccination status.

Members require AJC support to file an individual grievance on all matters relating to the application or interpretation of the collective agreement (s. 208 (4) of the FPSLRA).  However, members can file an individual complaint with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner without the AJC’s support.  

Members are encouraged to review the Joint Statement by Federal Provincial and Territorial Privacy Commissioners on Covid-19 Passports. As well, members can visit the offices of the information commissioner’s website for its guidance on exemptions from disclosure in regards to privacy and personal information. 

In a recent decision, the Federal Court of Appeal provided clarification on the interpretation of section 4 of the Privacy Act and confirms the expression “relates directly to an operating program or activity of the institution” does not, “clearly mean “necessary” and that it would have been easy for Parliament to incorporate this stricter burden if it wished to do so”.  

The Government of Canada’s mandatory vaccination policy came into effect on October 6^th 2021, mandating Covid-19 vaccinations for all employees in federally regulated workplaces, including AJC members, regardless of whether they work onsite, remotely, or telework. 

Federal public service employees must attest to being fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by Friday, October 29, 2021. 

Those who are unable to provide a signed attestation of vaccination and/or who do not obtain an accommodation on or before the attestation deadline, will be placed on leave without pay two weeks after the attestation deadline.

Members requesting accommodation or returning from a leave of absence after October 15, 2021 have a revised attestation deadline of 2 weeks after the manager’s decision that the duty to accommodate does not apply or 2 weeks after their return from leave, as the case may be. 

The federal government’s vaccination policy applies to all employees in the core public administration, including the RCMP, CBSA, Correctional Services and employees working remotely.   This is just as much about protecting you from serious illness as it is to protecting others.

The current default work-from-home policy is a temporary pandemic measure put in place to protect the Health & Safety of all Canadians. However, as the Employer has explained, employees may have to enter the workplace to collect equipment, attend scheduled meetings or events, access sensitive information, or address urgent operational requirements.   

In addition, the Employer is in the throes of planning to ease restrictions over time and have employees return to the workplace.  All employees asked to return to the workplace by a certain timeline will be required to comply, subject to any teleworking arrangement they may conclude before or after their return to the workplace.  No one should expect that the current remote working arrangement is a full-time or indefinite arrangement and that all operational requirements are being met during the pandemic.  Courtrooms are expected to also resume their in-person activities over time despite the fact that many technological improvements exist to allow for virtual hearings.

We don’t know.  This is one of many questions that we will be putting forward to Treasury Board. 

The AJC’s priority continues to be the health and safety of its members and our position on the mandatory vaccination policy has not changed. We continue to support the broadest possible vaccination of Canadians, including public servants, as an important layer of protection to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and to protect the health and safety of public servants in the workplace.

We have continued to review this issue in light of the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic. An ever-growing body of scientific studies suggest that while vaccines are less effective at preventing infection and symptomatic illness by Omicron as compared to previous variants, they still provide protection against serious illness, hospitalization and death. Some research supports that a full course of vaccine continues to decrease the risk of infection and symptomatic illness – which in turn assists in lowering the likelihood of transmission. The ongoing burden placed on our healthcare system by Covid-19, and by extension on our members’ ability to seek the preventative and primary care they and their families need can also not be overstated.

The AJC continues to advocate for improvements and changes it considers to be in the best interests of our members. We provided comments in the last round of feedback provided by bargaining agents in March, 2022 in advance of the Employer’s review of the policy, and continue to advocate along with other bargaining agents for the release of a six-month review by the employer.

As it has been the case since the beginning of this global pandemic, the AJC’s priority continues to be the health and safety of its members.   Consequently, the AJC supports the broadest possible vaccination of Canadians, including public servants, to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and to protect the health and safety of public servants in the workplace.  Mandatory vaccinations and mandatory masking in workplaces, including courtrooms, subject to permitted exceptions, are ways to ensure that the health and safety of our members are protected.

Pursuant to the authorities outlined in the Financial Administration Act, Part II of the Canada Labour Code and the collective agreement’s management rights clause (article 5), the Employer has the authority to establish policies including policies that ensure the health and safety of its workers provided such policies A) comply with the law and the constitutional rights of our members (article 6) and B)  are fair, reasonable and in good faith within the limits set out in  collective agreement including the no discrimination clause  (article 36).

The Employer has advised that the policy documents are evergreen, and the AJC intends to continue to advocate for improvements and changes it considers to be in the best interests of our members. We continue to review the various policy documents, tools and guides in order to provide feedback to the Employer on ways to improve the process and ensure that those requiring accommodation receive it.

We continue to encourage all our members to get fully vaccinated and remain committed to assisting our members, on a case-by-case basis, to ensure that the Employer meets its duty to accommodate and complies with its legal and collective agreement obligations.

The AJC will also continue to advocate to the Employer to ensure that all workplaces are healthy and safe, and lobby the Employer to ensure that courts within its jurisdiction universally comply with its mandatory vaccinations policy, notwithstanding any alleged claims of judicial independence.

Yes, there is a risk of a delay in the treatment of your file with the risk of putting you in an overpayment status. https://www.canada.ca/en/government/publicservice/covid-19/vaccination-public-service/i-am-unwilling-to-be-vaccinated.html

So far, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI), the advisory body that provides recommendations on vaccination in Canada, has not recommended booster shots for Canadians.  

No one can be physically forced to get a vaccine against their will.  However, employers have an obligation to keep workplaces safe and, in the context of a global pandemic, can, in the AJC’s view, require employees to be vaccinated to continue to work subject to any duty to accommodate obligations they may have.

The duty to accommodate can be applied if an employee is unable to get the vaccine for grounds listed in the Canadian Human Rights Act, such as disability or religious belief or in the case of the AJC’s collective agreement, creed (which is not listed in the CHRA).   If an employee is protected by one of these listed grounds, the employer must work with the employee to identify possible accommodations, which may include allowing the employee to work remotely for the foreseeable future.

For those who have elected not to be vaccinated based on personal preference, there is no legal obligation for the employer to accommodate the employee.

Information regarding the impact LWOP has on your pay, benefits and group insurances can be obtained from your compensation advisor. You may also wish to explore the list of other things to consider when on LWOP here: https://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/remuneration-compensation/services-pension-services/pension/info/ticnp-lwpip-eng.html

We don’t know.  This is one of many questions that we will be putting forward to Treasury Board

If employees are on leave without pay for a period of 5 days or longer, they will be temporarily struck off strength in the pay system and they will be issued a record of employment.  The rules governing eligibility to EI are available here: https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/ei/ei-list/reports/digest/chapter-6/periods-of-leave.html

Yes, the form requesting accommodation provides for temporary accommodation requests.  We encourage all members with medical conditions to consult their medical practitioner in the event they have concerns regarding vaccination.

The Ontario Human Rights commission and other human rights commissions across Canada maintain that mandating and requiring proof of vaccination during a pandemic to protect people at work is generally permissible as long as there are protections in place to ensure that those who are unable to be vaccinated for a Code-related reason can be reasonably accommodated (such as NB, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Man.).   

According to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, employees have the right to medical privacy and any personal health information that is collected, used, or disclosed must comply with applicable privacy laws. Employers should also limit their questions to gather only the information that is strictly necessary. However, where a mandatory vaccination policy has been implemented for a legitimate purpose and in a reasonable manner, arbitrators have found the collection and disclosure of vaccination status is permitted because it is the only means of administering and enforcing that policy.

Information commissions across Canada have also pronounced themselves on the permissibility of vaccine passports, of which for the purposes of this response, we consider attestations to be effectively a form of the same thing. 

In light of the above, we observe that the employer is not requesting medical evidence as a standard measure but is relying on individual attestations rather than medical documentation.  While managers do have a right to request proof of vaccination, we expect that these requests will be made on case-by-case basis where a manager has reasonable grounds to question the validity of the attestation provided by the employee.  In this regard, the AJC does intend to make recommendations to the Employer to ensure that the manager’s discretion is exercised reasonably, fairly and in good faith.  The AJC is currently reviewing draft managerial tools and guides and will be advocating with the best interests of its membership in mind. 

Yes, employees who have been placed on Leave Without Pay and who become partially vaccinated will resume work and have their pay reinstated.  However, some should plan for delays in the treatment of their pay file.

The Treasury Board issued a memo clarifying that ESDC is recommending how to treat record of employment (ROE) coding in relation to failures to comply with the employer’s mandatory vaccination policy.  

The AJC takes exception to this coding and intends to challenge the Treasury Board’s approach on the basis that this is inconsistent with their policy. We are currently reviewing our options but will keep you informed of the actions we take to have this clarified and/or corrected.

The AJC and other Bargaining Agents (BA) were initially given an opportunity to review draft policy documents relating to mandatory vaccination prior to the election.  Bargaining agents provided extensive input to the Employer at that time.  While the government was in caretaker mode, however, all consultations ceased.  An inadequate and unreasonable deadline was provided to BA’s to review the policy and framework before the government’s official release. 

That said, the Employer has advised that the policy documents are evergreen, and that the AJC and other bargaining agents can continue to provide feedback and propose changes to improve the policy.  If you have any suggestions on how to improve the policy documents, please send your suggestions to your regional GC representative.  

Employees are being asked to fill out an attestation of vaccination form through GC-VATS, a web platform within the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Application Portal (TAP).

GC-VATS will centrally store the attestations and provide access to aggregated data to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, in compliance with the Privacy Act and the security requirements. Similarly, deputy heads and departmental Heads of Human Resources will have access to departmental-level aggregated data.

AJC members must provide truthful information. Failure to do so could constitute a breach of the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector and may result in disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal.

Members who are unable[1] to be vaccinated must advise their manager of their need for accommodation based on a certified medical contraindication, religion, or another prohibited ground of discrimination as defined under the Canadian Human Rights Act or the grounds set out in our collective agreement, including creed (which is not covered under the CHRA) at the earliest opportunity or by the attestation deadline, if possible.  Evidence in support of the ground relied upon for the purposes of the accommodation request will be required.

AJC members who are unwilling[2] to be fully vaccinated or to disclose their vaccination status, will be required to attend an online training session on COVID-19 vaccination within two weeks of the attestation deadline. Two weeks after the attestation deadline, the Employer will restrict their access to the workplace, off-site visits, business travel and conferences and the member may also be placed on administrative Leave Without Pay.

No. The cash out payments under the MOU are limited to the amount necessary to reduce a lawyer’s vacation leave carry over to the seven weeks allowed by art. 17.08 of the AJC Collective Agreement.

Under the MOU, a lawyer who does not wish to use up excess vacation leave or does not want to be cashed out at the rate of 20% per year may still request a cash out of 100% of excess vacation leave. A request for a 100% cash out of excess vacation leave should be made to management.

The Employer, in consultation with the member, may pause the mandatory 20% cash out in a given year, in certain situations where there is an issue with the completeness or accuracy of a lawyer’s leave data.  This could occur, for example, where a member employed by the DOJ accepts a position with the PPSC, and there is a delay in transferring leave data from one department to the other.

A mandatory cash out of excess vacation leave credits (i.e., all vacation leave credits over seven weeks) at the rate of 20% will take place each year over the five-year period from March 31, 2022, to March 31, 2026.

Excess leave credits will be calculated as of March 31, 2022.  A cash out of 20% of the excess leave will occur in the fiscal year commencing April 1, 2022.  As an example:

• Lawyer A has 12 weeks of vacation leave in their bank as of March 31, 2022.
• The excess vacation leave is five weeks (i.e., 12 weeks – 7 week carry over limit).
• In the fiscal year commencing April 1, 2022, Lawyer A will receive a cash-out of one week of vacation leave credits (i.e., 20% of the five weeks of excess leave credits).

The same process will be repeated on March 31, 2023, and so on until all excess leave credits are used up or cashed out.  If Lawyer A still has four weeks (20 days) of excess leave credits on March 31, 2023, a cash out of four days of vacation leave would occur in the fiscal year beginning April 1, 2023 (i.e., 20% of the 20 days of excess vacation leave).  At the end of the period covered by the MOU (March 31, 2026), all remaining excess vacation leave will be cashed out.

No, the MOU only applies to vacation leave and does not apply to other forms of leave, including management leave.

If you are a part-time employee and do not have any vacation banked, the MOU will not apply. If you are a part-time employee, and have a vacation bank that is under the seven-week carry-over allowed in art. 17.08 of the AJC Collective Agreement, then your vacation leave bank will not be reduced. 

If you are a part-time employee, and have a vacation bank that is over the seven-week carry-over allowed in art. 17.08 of the AJC Collective Agreement, then your excess vacation leave credits (i.e., all vacation leave credits over seven weeks) will be cashed out at the rate of 20% each year over the five-year period from March 31, 2022, to March 31, 2026. At the end of the period covered by the MOU (March 31, 2026), all remaining excess vacation leave will be cashed out. 

Vacation leave which was earned but not used in the fiscal year ending March 31, 2022, will be cashed out if a member is carrying over vacation leave in excess of the seven-week limit.  This cash out is in addition to the 20% cash out of excess vacation leave.  The same process applies to each fiscal year covered by the MOU.

Example:

• Lawyer B has ten weeks of vacation leave in their bank as of March 31, 2022, which includes one week of annual leave which was earned in the fiscal year ending March 31, 2022, but was not taken.
• The excess vacation leave is three weeks, or 15 days (i.e., 10 weeks – 7 week carry over limit).
• In the fiscal year commencing April 1, 2022, Lawyer B will receive a cash out of three days of vacation leave credits (i.e., 20% of the 15 days of excess leave credits).
• Because Lawyer B did not take one week of vacation leave earned in the fiscal year ending March 31, 2022, that one week of vacation leave will also be cashed out.
• In total, Lawyer B will be cashed out for eight days of vacation leave, leaving a balance of 42 days (8 weeks + 2 days) in Lawyer B’s vacation leave bank.

Yes, you are expected to take all of your vacation leave credits during the fiscal year in which they are earned, and art. 17.05 of the AJC Collective Agreement permits the employer to schedule your vacation leave. This does not however, appear to be a regular practice. 

There are numerous issues related to the future of work in the public service that the AJC is considering. These include, among others, the location of work, the designation of some positions as telework positions, the pay scales attached to positions, professional mobility, occupational health and safety issues, equity issues related to access to remote work as well as opportunities available to remote workers, and the distribution of expenses between employees and the employer for hybrid and remote work arrangements.

If you have questions or comments related to the future of work in the public service, please contact your regional GC Representative.

Yes, the employer is required to provide you with reasonable notice of your return to the workplace so that you can make any arrangements required prior to your return. The length of notice may vary depending on a number of factors, including the operational requirements of your position.

If you believe that you have not been provided with reasonable notice, or require an accommodation, for example, in relation to caregiving responsibilities, please contact your regional GC Representative for advice and assistance or fill out our online intake form.   

Yes, the employer can require you to return to the workplace provided that there are operational requirements for this request, even where you have relocated to another location from which you can’t easily commute during the Covid-19 pandemic.

If you have relocated, we recommend that you approach your manager with a request to telework on a full-time basis as soon as possible. Provide information on your new location, any accommodation needs you may have, as well as a plan for how you intend to meet operational requirements going forward. The success of your request may depend on your proposed telework location.

Some positions may not be suitable for full-time telework from a remote location, for example litigation positions in which you are required to attend court on a regular basis.

If your request for full-time telework is denied, please contact your regional GC Representative for advice and assistance or fill out our online intake form.

Yes, the employer may require you to sign a telework agreement if you choose to continue working from home following the Covid-19 pandemic. This agreement generally sets out the terms and conditions of your telework arrangement as well as its duration.  

If you would like to work from home full-time, we recommend that you reach out to your manager to discuss a possible telework arrangement. If a telework arrangement has been refused, or if you are concerned with the provisions of a telework agreement that you have been asked to sign, please contact your regional GC Representative for advice and assistance or fill out our online intake form.   

Yes, the employer can require you to share an enclosed office space if you choose a hybrid work option, or take away your office space if you choose to telework full-time. Shared office space would likely mean two lawyers using a shared office at different scheduled times. It continues to be our view that an enclosed office space is required for lawyers working in the workplace in order to meet professional responsibilities.

If you are concerned about sharing or losing your enclosed office space, please contact your regional GC Representative for advice and assistance or fill out our online intake form.

If you have accommodation requirements related to the return to the workplace, you should make an accommodation request to your supervisor or manager, setting out your specific accommodation needs. Requests for accommodation should be considered by the employer on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with article 36 of the AJC Collective Agreement, and the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA).

Accommodation requests can be made, for example, on the protected grounds of family status or disability, such as childcare responsibilities or a health condition which makes you or a family member who you live with or have caregiving responsibilities for has a health condition that makes them vulnerable to Covid-19. This might include a child under five years old who has not yet received their first dose of a Covid-19 vaccine due to vaccine availability, or a child who is under six months old who is not yet eligible for a Covid-19 vaccine. It might also include a request that a member telework on a full-time basis and/or not report to a particular supervisor where they experienced discrimination or harassment in the workplace prior to the pandemic.

Accommodation requests should be supported through appropriate information, such as a summary of reasonable efforts made to secure childcare or medical information from your treating health care practitioner. Medical information should include your functional limitations, as well as an outline of your accommodation needs, it should not include your medical diagnosis.

If you need assistance with your accommodation request, or if your accommodation request is denied, please contact your regional GC Representative for advice and assistance or fill out our online intake form.

The AJC regularly engages with departments and agencies on return to the workplace issues. The AJC shares membership feedback, clarifies expectations surrounding operational requirements and advocates for fairness, transparency and clear communications by management at all levels on return to the workplace plans.

All indications at our national level labour management meetings (NLMCCs) suggest that senior management supports these principles. Regional management should be encouraged to refer to the Guidebook for departments on easing of restrictions: Federal worksites and this FAQ, as well as to reach out to their national labour relations specialists or senior level national management for more information where there are concerns about a return to the workplace plan.

Our members have proven that they can do most of their work virtually, and there is considerable flexibility in the AJC collective agreement to allow for employee preferences in work arrangements and location. Hybrid workplaces are here to stay. If you have questions about what the AJC is doing for its members on return to the workplace issues, please contact your regional GC Representative.

The employer can require you to return to the workplace where there are operational requirements that do not allow you to perform the duties and responsibilities of your position through telework.

For example, a member might be required to return to the workplace one or more days a week where files cannot be removed from the physical workplace for information security reasons. A member might also be required to return to the workplace from time to time for in-person meetings, mentorship and team building exercises.

In our view, these operational requirements must be reasonable and fair, in accordance with article 5.02 of the AJC Collective Agreement, and should not result in arbitrary return to the workplace requirements based on management preference. Articles 13.01(b) and 13.02(b) of the AJC Collective Agreement also permit lawyers reasonable flexibility in making arrangements for hours of work to enable them to balance work and family responsibilities.

If you would like to continue to telework on a full-time basis based on personal preference or increased productivity you can make a request to your supervisor or manager, providing information on how the operational requirements of your position and unit can be met through this arrangement.

If your request to work remotely on a full or part-time basis is refused, or if you believe that a request to return to the workplace is unreasonable or unfair, please ask your manager to provide an operational justification for the requirement in writing. If your manager does not provide sufficient information about why you are required to return to the workplace for operational reasons, please contact your regional GC Representative for advice and assistance or fill out our online intake form. The AJC can also facilitate meetings with a group of members to discuss concerns of this nature as well as possible options to address them, requests for a group meeting can be made through our online intake form.

The employer has an obligation to protect the health and safety of employees under section 240 of the Public Service Labour Relations Act (PSLRA), Part II of the Canadian Labour Code (CLC), and article 26 of the AJC-AJJ Collective Agreement.

The employer follows the guidance of Health Canada’s Public Service Occupational Health Program (PSOHP), whose Occupational Health Advisory helps guide the response of departments and agencies to COVID-19 in their workplaces. In our view, this guidance may not always be sufficient in light of the aerosol transmission of the virus.

Section 128(1) of Part II of the CLC provides for the right to refuse work if you have reasonable cause to believe that a danger exists. Under section 122 (1) of the CLC, 'danger' means any hazard, condition or activity that could reasonably be expected to be an imminent or serious threat to the life or health of a person exposed to it before the hazard or condition can be corrected or the activity altered.

The AJC has continued to advocate for safe and healthy working conditions for our members throughout the pandemic. If you have any concerns about your health and safety on returning to the workplace, you should discuss them with your manager first. If you continue to have concerns, please contact your occupational health and safety representative, or regional GC Representative for advice and assistance or fill out our online intake form.

The AJC bargained hard with Treasury Board in an effort to get a compensation deal that would be retroactive to 2018. Numerous options were pursued with the Employer in order to accomplish this. While the Employer listened to and considered the AJC’s proposals on retroactivity, they were all rejected – primarily on the basis of the significant cost associated with this retroactivity. In the end, it became clear that the deal which was ultimately struck would have been jeopardized if the AJC had insisted on retroactivity to 2018.

In addition, if the joint pay studies had been completed and the issue of compensation had proceeded to arbitration, there was a restrictive path to retroactivity to May 2018. One option open to the arbitrator was to award a percentage economic adjustment uniformly applicable to all LP levels effective May 2018. This option would have precluded a compensation award comparable to what has been achieved by the tentative agreement.

The implementation of the new collective agreement would be governed by the pattern MOU between the AJC and the Employer which can be found at pp. 13-14 of the tentative agreement. The new collective agreement would be implemented over the following time frames:

• 180 days after signature of the collective agreement for the prospective elements of compensation increases (e.g., salary changes and other compensation elements), where there is no need for manual processing;
• 180 days after signature of the collective agreement for the retroactive amounts payable to LPs, where there is no need for manual processing; and
• 460 days after signature of the collective agreement for compensation increases and retroactive amounts that require manual processing.

That being said, our understanding is that other collective agreements which were reached in 2023 (e.g., PSAC) were implemented in approximately three months.

Sections 148 and 175 of the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act give guidance relevant to the determination of compensation in the federal public service. The Act identifies five factors which should be taken into account:

• Necessity of offering compensation and working conditions comparable to the private and public sectors;
• Need to establish compensation and working conditions which are fair and reasonable in relation to qualifications required, work performed, responsibility assumed, and the nature of services rendered;
• Need to maintain appropriate internal relativity of compensation and working conditions within an occupation and as between occupations in the public service;
• Necessity of attracting competent persons to, and retaining them in, the public service in order to meet the needs of Canadians; and
• State of the Canadian economy and the Government of Canada’s fiscal circumstances.

Treasury Board, in its capacity as the Employer, also has a Policy Framework for the Management of Compensation within the federal public administration. Compensation management is guided by four overarching principles:

• External Comparability:  Compensation should be competitive with, but not lead, that provided for similar work in relevant labour markets;
• Internal Relativity:  Compensation should reflect the relative value to the Employer of the work performed;
• Individual/Group Performance:  Compensation should reward performance, where appropriate and practicable, based on individual or group contributions to business results.
• Affordability:  The cost of compensation must be affordable within the context of commitments to provide services to Canadians, the fiscal circumstances of the Government of Canada, and the state of the Canadian economy.

Yes. LPs will receive back pay retroactive to May 10, 2022.

The AJC Negotiations Committee conducts negotiations and collective bargaining with the Employer. The Negotiations Committee consists of the President, who chairs the Committee, and other Governing Council members appointed by the Governing Council.

In the 2022 to 2024 Collective Bargaining negotiations, the Negotiations Committee consisted of LP-02 Governing Council members representing the National Capital Region, Northwest Territories, Ontario Regional Office, Manitoba, Quebec Regional Office and British Columbia. The Committee also had an alternate member from the Atlantic Regional Office.

The duties and responsibilities of the Negotiations Committee are set out in Terms of Reference approved by the Governing Council.

A two-tier pay scheme for LPs has existed since 1990. Under that two-tier scheme, Toronto LPs are paid more than National LPs. The higher Toronto pay grid is sometimes referred to as the “Toronto differential.” The current situation is as follows:

• LP-02s on the Toronto pay grid have three more lock-steps at the top of the grid. The top LP-02 lock-step on the Toronto pay grid is $23,964 higher than the top LP-02 lock-step on the National pay grid, based on the 2021 pay rates currently in effect.
• LP-03s on the Toronto pay grid have two more lock-steps at the top of the grid. The top LP-03 lock-step on the Toronto pay grid is $26,427 higher than the top LP-03 lock-step on the National pay grid, based on the 2021 pay rates currently in effect.
• LP-04s in Toronto have a higher pay range than National LP-04s. The top of the Toronto LP-04 pay range is $17,227 higher than the top of the National LP-04 pay range, based on the based on the 2021 pay rates currently in effect.
• The Toronto and National pay grids for LP-00s, LP-01s and LP-05s are identical.

This pay discrepancy has had a long-term negative impact on the lifetime earnings and pensions of National LP-02s, LP-03s and LP-04s.

Some history helps to understand how this situation came about. Between 1987 and 1990 the Department of Justice’s Ontario Regional Office (ORO) in Toronto experienced serious recruiting and retention problems. Lawyers were leaving the ORO at an alarming rate, and the DOJ was having trouble recruiting new lawyers. Many DOJ lawyers in the ORO were taking employment with the Province of Ontario which had higher rates of pay.

Despite its historic opposition to regional rates of pay, Treasury Board decided to address the ORO recruiting and retention problem by approving a regional rate of pay for the ORO on June 6, 1990. The cost of living in Toronto was not a factor in this decision.

The new Toronto regional rate of pay meant that DOJ lawyers at the LP-02, LP-03 and LP-04 levels in Toronto and in satellite offices in the surrounding area would earn $12,000 - $16,000 more per year than their colleagues elsewhere in the country who were paid on the DOJ national scale.
 

Yes. All LPs (Toronto and National) will receive pay increases totaling 12.5% (13.14% when compounded) over the four-year term of a new collective agreement.

National LP-02s and LP-03s at the top step may receive an additional increase based on their transition to a new step in the single national pay grid. It also possible that some National LP-04s could receive an additional increase if their current rate of pay is below the minimum pay rate in the new single pay grid.

As discussed above, the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act speaks of the need to achieve compensation which is comparable as well as fair and reasonable. Compensation specialists generally consider pay to be comparable if it is within 5-10% of a reasonable comparator. As discussed elsewhere, we believe that the compensation deal in the tentative agreement achieves comparability.

The tentative agreement provides at p. 9 that the joint pay studies are terminated and will not proceed further. The transition to the new single pay grid (formerly the Toronto pay grid) and the pay increases totaling 12.5% have addressed market adjustment and pay concerns for this round of collective bargaining.

The AJC is of the view that the Employer’s recognition that Ontario government lawyers are the reasonable comparator for LP pay is actually a better outcome than what could be achieved in the joint pay studies which would have compared LP pay to the pay of lawyers in numerous Canadian jurisdictions (many of which pay their lawyers poorly) as well as internal public sector comparators.

In any event, the AJC was concerned about how long it would take to complete the joint pay studies, especially in light of the years of work that had been put in without even finalizing methodology and data collection. The Employer suggested that it might take as many as five years or more to complete the joint pay studies and an arbitration which might follow. Our own research analyst concurred that this was possible. Some pay studies and pay equity exercises have taken decades to litigate. If the result at the end of that litigation had been that there was no retroactivity to the adjustments, that would have represented a massive loss of pay for our members.

Finally, the legislative factors discussed above represented a potential headwind that might work against the membership, and the outcome of the pay studies was far from certain.

When a bargaining unit goes on strike, it may be stressful for some employees who are not on strike for a number of reasons, including concern for colleagues and increased workload, as well as health and safety concerns. We encourage our members to reach out to the Employee Assistance Program for support when needed, either by phone, 24 hours per day at 1-800-268-7708, or 1-800-567-5803 (digital service for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing), or by EAP Chat, which is a service available Monday to Friday, 8:00 am to 7:30 pm (Eastern Time), excluding statutory holidays.

There is currently no content classified with this term.

If your management team asks you to perform the work of a colleague on strike, we encourage you to raise concerns that the work is outside of your job description and/or bargaining unit work, preferably in writing.  You may also inquire about whether any essential services agreement reached with the striking bargaining agent may assist the Employer in assigning essential work. If a manager insists that you perform newly assigned work, you should comply in conformity with the ”work now, grieve later” principle.

If you are asked to perform duties outside of your job description and/or the LP bargaining unit description, please report this to a member of the AJC Governing Council or fill out the intake form on our website so that we can document these occurrences and consider ways of ensuring that the Employer respects labour laws, the collective agreement, the parameters of what constitutes LP bargaining unit work, and any essential services agreement the Employer would have reached with the striking bargaining agent.  

While the AJC encourages you to be supportive of your striking colleagues, it is important to remember that the AJC may not currently be in a strike position, and if that is the case, you must abide by the terms and conditions of the LP Collective Agreement, and report to work as scheduled. If a picket line blocks access to your office building, contact your supervisor or another management representative to request that you be permitted to work remotely during the strike, or to request safe passage through the picket line.

In the event of a strike there are many ways in which you may consider showing your support for colleagues who are on strike. These include:

1. Learning about the issues that your colleagues are striking for on the bargaining agent’s website, and sharing information about the strike with friends and family,
2. Following the PSAC’s social media platforms, and sharing or retweeting their messages from your personal accounts,
3. Using PSAC’s strike hashtag, or using their social media frames on your profile pictures,
4. Sending a letter to the Member of Parliament (MP) in your riding,
5. Attending an organized solidarity rally outside of your work hours to walk with colleagues on the picket line,
6. Signing a petition supporting your striking colleagues,
7. Sending a donation or bringing non-perishable food and groceries to the picket line for striking workers and their families, or
8. Honking your horn with a friendly beep if you drive by a picket line for encouragement.