At this time I’d like to ask the Minister responsible for Human Resources if he’ll be bringing in any witnesses.
Yes, I’d like to bring in some witnesses, please.
Does the committee agree that the Minister bring in his witnesses?
Agreed.
Sergeant-at-Arms, escort the witnesses in.
For the record, Minister, can you introduce your witnesses, please.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. On my left I have Sharilyn Alexander, acting deputy minister of Human Resources, and on my right I have Shaleen Woodward, the director of human resources strategy and policy.
Thank you, Mr. Minister. Welcome witnesses. We are on page 2-59, Human Resource Strategy and Policy, and also we have received additional information from the Minister, which I believe has been circulated. Any general comments in regard to page 2-59? Mr. Abernethy.
Yesterday in some of your comments you mentioned the Hackett Report. My timing might be a little wrong on this — it might have been the previous fiscal year, not last fiscal year — but I believe that report cost about $400,000-plus, and I believe that you funded that from within. I’m curious. If you were in fact able to find that money from within, it may suggest that there might be some room or some additional saving possibilities within the department itself. I was wondering if you could talk a bit about where those dollars came from and whether or not that provides room for some additional savings within the Department of Human Resources.
Minister McLeod.
The Hackett Report was funded at the time when Human Resources was still under the Department of Financial Management Board Secretariat. There was more flexibility with resources, and one of the issues with Human Resources is that we don’t have that flexibility, so if we wanted to do something similar now, we wouldn’t be able to.
Strategy and Policy, page 2-59. Operations Expenditure Summary: $4.855 million.
Department of Human Resources, Human Resource Strategy and Policy, Operations Expenditure Summary: $4.855 million, approved.
Human Resource Strategy and Policy, Active Positions, information item. Page 2-61.
Department of Human Resources, Human Resource Strategy and Policy, Active Positions, information item, approved.
Management and Recruitment Services, Operations Expenditure Summary: $7.341 million.
Department of Human Resources, Management and Recruitment Services, Operations Expenditure Summary: $7.341 million, approved.
Mr. McLeod.
I’m not sure if this is the area it falls under, but I just wanted to ask the Minister and his officials a couple of questions. I wanted to ask the Minister how many job competitions are being run now through the GNWT, through HR.
Minister McLeod.
Mr. Chair, I think it’s in the neighbourhood of 500 staffing actions.
Mr. Chair, with 500 job competitions being run right now, we’re proposing to lay off some people. I just want to know: has a hiring freeze been considered by the departments rather than laying off employees?
Certainly, when there was early talk about possible budget reductions, there were a few departments that initiated their own freeze. We felt that was premature and would adversely affect government operations, so we gave direction that they were to continue with normal activities until such time as they received direction and approval of budgets by this body.
I still find the figure of 500 new competitions, in light of what we’re doing now…. We’re looking to bring on 500 people on the one hand. On the other hand we’re looking to lay off 135 employees. I’m sure those 135 employees could have fit within that 500.
I’d like to ask the Minister: when the announcements were coming out that there were going to be some staffing reductions, were any competitions cancelled as a result of this announcement?
My understanding is that there were some competitions that were cancelled as a result of that.
Mr. Chair, again I will say that you’re looking at the fact that we’re proposing to lay off 135 employees with these competitions. Of 500, I’m not sure how many of them are essential to the operations of the government, other than maybe nurses, teachers and a few other essential services. I still find it mind-boggling that we’re looking to bring on 500 new people. There are 500 competitions out there, and I’m not sure what they are. I suppose I could find out; I’ve just got to go on the web site.
I’d like to ask the Minister if there’s an opportunity here, maybe, to revisit this whole scenario rather than lay off 135 employees. Why not cancel a couple of hundred job competitions and maybe look at keeping these 135 employees, or as many as we can keep? I wonder if there’s an opportunity here to revisit that and come back to this committee with some options.
I think, when we talk about the number, I was referring to the number of competitions on an annual basis, so I expect that number would probably go down this year. A lot of the competitions are in areas that are hard to staff: positions such as nurses and so on. On that basis I think it would be difficult to take the approach that the Member is mentioning.
Thank you, Mr. Minister. Just one other point I think I would like to make, or maybe a question to ask, is: with all these competitions that are out there, I’d be curious to know — and I suppose the Minister can supply me with the information after the hiring is done — how many of these new hires would be from outside the Northwest Territories?
I’m sure the Minister would commit to providing me with that information once the hiring is done, because, again, I will say that…. Looking at all these job competitions, and we’re proposing to lay off all these employees, I would probably be safe to assume that 75 to 80 per cent of these employees are long-term Northerners. I don’t know how many — 41 per cent, or something like that — are aboriginal.
I’d be really curious to see, once all the firing is done, how many folks were hired from outside the Northwest Territories. And if we have a few, then that should cause this Assembly a lot of concern.
As I mentioned, it would depend on what kind of jobs we’re advertising for. For jobs that are hard to fill, we normally take whatever we can.
With regard to the potentially affected employees, they would get first priority on the hiring. And with the affirmative action policy we have, that would still apply as well. So I would expect that we would still hire people from the Northwest Territories on that basis.
Members, we’re on page 2-63, Management and Recruitment Services, Operations Expenditure Summary. Next on the list I have Mr. Bob Bromley and Mr. Abernethy, then Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Following some of the words from Mr. McLeod from Inuvik Twin Lakes, I’m wondering if the department considered additional mandatory leave days in the summer.
My impression — and it’s just that — is that productivity has actually gone up during mid-winter in relation to the so-called Donnie Days that employees still enjoy. That’s leave without pay. But it allows some extended family time. It’s got to be healthy for families as well as labour relations and so on. I know there’s interest out there in our brief but beautiful summer season.
If employees had access to…. Say if we wanted to stay open all the time, but choose six out of the ten Fridays in summer, or Mondays — choose what you like — over the course of the entire government, that would probably produce some of the savings — maybe all of the savings — we’re looking for from this department. Has the department considered that, or would you consider that in the near future as one option to pursue? That would possibly bump up productivity as well as labour relations and savings on dollars.
Minister McLeod.
Mr. Chair, certainly that was something that was looked at, not something that Human Resources would be responsible for. But we did provide some input to the Financial Management Board Secretariat.
I think there’s a number of considerations. One is we would have to negotiate something with the unions for it to occur. With Donnie Days, there was a rollback in wages.
I think the biggest consideration is the fact that we do have a significant number of facilities and operations that operate 24-7, 365 days a year. And those facilities, by giving more days off, would result in additional costs to the government and more difficulty in finding people to fill in for those days off. So having said all of that, this is looked at. For this budget it wasn’t considered for being put into place. I’m not saying that’s out of the question for future years.
Again, I’m always looking for a new approach from this government, and some innovation. I think that’s what our public is asking for too. I’m sure the Minister and others are aware there are reports coming out showing that productivity actually goes up with various schemes, such as shorter work weeks and so on. This also results in direct savings. Between those things, I would think that increased productivity and the money saved on 5,000 employees, or whatever we have, taking six days off should account for those 24-hour services. I’m hoping the Minister could have his staff start looking into that sort of thing, to see what the opportunities might be. I have one other point, but I’ll stop there for now in case there are comments.
Mr. Chair, I just want to make a couple of points. The majority of the employees concur with more time off. That would certainly be something we would look at. I’d like to point out that 58 per cent of our workforce works shift work, in 24-7, 365-day-a-year facilities, so I think in those areas it wouldn’t save us money, because we would have to probably pay more. I guess the other consideration is that for those employees at lower levels of the wage scale who work for the government.... I would think that a rollback of one week’s wages would probably have some implications for them. But I think that if employees want more time off, that would certainly be a consideration.
I appreciate the Minister’s comments on that. I too would be interested in the research on that. I would just note that the average wage of employees in the Northwest Territories is 50 per cent above the Canadian average, and I suspect that if you just took the GNWT employees, it would be even greater than that. Our cost of living, especially in our larger centres, is more like 20 per cent higher. So I think there would be some room for some exploration there.
Mr. Chairman, the other question or frustration I have is that I feel I’m sort of finessed into dealing with this situation of vacant positions when, really, what we had been expecting was that layoffs would have been based on program review. I’m sure it doesn’t help labour relations and recruitment to base things on this rather than showing we’re looking to improve effectiveness, efficiency and so on. Again, that’s just a comment. I’m hoping to see the program review finally implemented as fast as possible and, also, layoffs not resulting from the random selection of vacant positions but actually being based on program review and increased efficiency.
Mr. Chair, the Premier did talk to that very point yesterday in response to a certain question and is really looking forward to the program review as well.
On page 2-63, Management and Recruitment Services. Next on the list, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Looking at the Mains on page 2-63, I notice that in this section, Management and Recruitment Services, the only reductions that seem to have occurred are a small percentage in travel and a small percentage in materials and supplies, as well as the elimination of one vacant position.
Yesterday I talked about efficiencies and how large organizations with less staff are able to manage their human resources services — organizations with far more staff than the GNWT has. I was wondering if you could help me understand or go through the process you went through to identify reductions in this area through identifying efficiencies and increasing the effectiveness of this division. What is in the books? Obviously, there were no reductions in this area. I am mostly curious.
Ms. Alexander.
Mr. Chair, we looked at a number of things in this area to determine whether or not we could accomplish some efficiencies. Certainly we have done some internal restructuring. We have created a dedicated recruitment unit. We have put in place some functional recruitment officers, and in so doing we were able to reduce one position of an HR assistant by spreading some of that workload among others. We have also looked at other ways we can be more efficient and effective in recruitment services, such as looking at the eligibility lists to reduce the number of competitions we have to hold, looking at under-filleds where possible. So there has been a conscious effort to streamline, and we will continue to do so.
Have you explored new technologies that are available that might assist the staff increase their efficiencies and increase productivity?
Minister McLeod.
Mr. Chair, we are looking at a number of areas. Certainly in the area of staffing, we are looking at moving away from recruiting through the papers and moving more toward the Internet and computers like other jurisdictions do. We are looking at those kinds of areas. Certainly we think that with the vast expanses of the Northwest Territories, that would be one area where we can grow and reduce our costs.
Next on the list I have Mr. Hawkins.
Mr. Chairman, on page 2-63 of the Compensation and Benefits section we recognize that one position has been deleted. My first question on this specific area is: what position has been deleted? Furthermore, what analysis was done to come down to the fact that this position has been deleted, and was it filled at the time that the decision was made to delete it?
Minister McLeod.
The position was a human resources assistant. It was filled with a casual at the time, and it was felt we could spread the workload among the other three people.
Mr. Chairman, does the Minister mean an analysis was done or an assumption was done?
Well, I guess the analysis that was done was identified as an area in which we could get away with one less person, so I guess you could call that an analysis. I am not sure how detailed an analysis the Member would have been looking for, but we did look across the department to see if there were areas where we could make reductions, and this was one area.
I guess what I am getting at is the fact that you define a position by looking at dollar value and make an assumption that because it is an assistant position, maybe it’s not that important. And they ask themselves — well, whatever they probably do. And when I say “whatever,” I assume you know what they do.
I’m just saying I’m sure we could divide these up and make people pick up those duties, versus an analysis, which, in my interpretation, would be where they actually break down what this person specifically does and then try to put some time allocations behind it before they then saddle someone else with those responsibilities.
Mr. Chair, I guess we didn’t want to create more work than we needed to. Based on the knowledge of the programs, we felt we knew in what areas we could make reductions. I guess, essentially, we did an analysis without formalizing it.
Mr. Chairman, I didn’t think Donnie Days fell under this, but another Member raised it and I just want to seek some clarity, if I can, because the Minister did respond to those questions earlier. My area of concern, just for clarity, is: does the contribution a member pays into Donnie Days — in other words, they get reduced salary but theoretically take those days off with pay…. How does that affect students, terms and casuals? Would they pay into that reduced-salary pool, which would theoretically guarantee them those days? Or are they losing salary? And if they are, is there a way for them to recoup that potential loss? I ask because they don’t necessarily qualify for those days.
