National Union-Management Committee (NUMC)

MINUTES OF THE
NATIONAL UNION-MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
BETWEEN THE UNION OF TAXATION EMPLOYEES AND
THE CANADA REVENUE AGENCY
HELD ON JUNE 10, 2004

---

OPENING REMARKS

Mr. David Miller, Assistant Commissioner, Assessment and Collections Branch, and the Management Co-Chair, opened the meeting by welcoming everyone. The Co-chair then extended a special welcome to the Commissioner, Mr. Alan Nymark, and the Deputy Commissioner, Mr. Francois Guimont, who were attending the opening session of the meeting to discuss the future direction of the Agency over the coming year.

Betty Bannon, National President, Union of Taxation Employees (UTE) extended greetings to the Commissioner and the Deputy Assistant Commissioner, and expressed appreciation for their attendance.

Mr. Nymark began by stating that in this day and age, working together was the way to effectively conduct business. He was pleased to note that there were many levels of cooperation and consultation at the CRA, both formal and informal, for union and management to resolve issues of concern. He also recognized the good working relationship that existed between the CRA and the Union of Taxation Employees.

The Commissioner stated that the December 12, 2003 transition announcement set into motion a period of organizational changes within the Agency, which would undoubtedly be followed by supplementary changes following the election. Furthermore, the Commissioner anticipated a request for additional savings above and beyond the $3 billion announcement by the current government. These initiatives along with others such as Compensation Service Delivery Renewal Project and Horizontal Reviews would certainly have an impact on the way the CRA conducted business. The Commissioner noted that the most daunting challenge revolved around human resource implications, given that approximately 80% of the CRA budget was dedicated to human resources.

Traditionally, the CRA has had a good track record of taking care of its employees. Given today’s climate, sustaining that record will prove to be more challenging. Consequently, there was a need to explore other options, specifically, growth through partnerships with other federal and provincial government departments and agencies. This approach could potentially make it easier to manage human resources impacts, particularly if the Agency were faced with significant budget reductions. Therefore, it was critical that Union and Management work together to minimize the disruption to employees.

Mr. Nymark stated that as a revenue agency, it was essential to remain focused on core business goals, by refining the risk assessment and risk management strategies. The Agency counted on a solid ethical base of operation that was not always easy to sustain in today’s environment. Furthermore, it was essential to dedicate resources to areas such as compliance and client services, and to ensure service standards and maintain public trust.

The Commissioner then invited the National President to share her views and thoughts on how the parties could collaborate on common issues and goals.

The National President acknowledged that while UTE shared some of the same concerns, the Union’s focus was on the changes that directly impacted its members. The Union stated that unlike other government departments, the CRA continued to be a revenue generating body with a productive workforce and should be spared any budget reductions.

UTE was encouraged to see the CRA developing partnerships with other organizations, as well as seizing the opportunity to pick up supplementary work that complemented the core business values. CRA employees knew what they were doing and they did it well. The National President was optimistic that the Commissioner could influence positive changes and keep the CRA in the forefront.

The Union then expressed concern that the Government would take the opportunity, once again, to consider contracting-out or privatizing some of the work currently managed by the CRA. UTE emphasized the need for senior management to give serious consideration to the potential impact such a move could have on the organization. Furthermore, Union and Management worked well together on a number of initiatives and UTE believed that collectively, both parties would be able to provide employees with a sense of stability.
The Workforce Adjustment Directive clearly articulated a process that needed to be respected, especially during times of reorganization. The Union stated that it was essential that Management be transparent, consult with the Union, and respect the rules of the WFA. Then employees would better understand what was happening and know that the Employer was following the rules.

The Commissioner agreed with the Union that transparency was very important. However, he noted that the process around government decision-making by the government needed to be recognized. As far as the WFA rules apply, Management was committed to respecting those rules.

UTE then stated that the lack of a current collective agreement had also affected the membership. The Union stressed that if the Agency wanted to retain a strong and productive workforce, the CRA would need to show respect and appreciation for the duties performed and properly compensate its employees. The Union stated that regardless of the ongoing uncertainties and CRA climate, employees continued to provide excellent service to the public and that alone should be reason enough to reach a collective agreement. Furthermore, there was nothing in the legislation that precluded the parties from trying to work out an agreement during the ongoing conciliation process.

The Commissioner agreed with UTE that a collective agreement would be welcomed. He went on to mention that given the uncertainties in the days ahead, he was encouraged by the Union’s willingness to work with Management and build upon the current relationship. He thanked the Committee members for the opportunity to meet and wished everyone a good summer.

AGENCY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ACS)

Management provided a brief overview of the events leading up to the January 28th communication to the Union advising that the ACS-SP had been suspended due to the transfer of the customs functions to the new Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) in December, as well as the announcement of the new fiscal environment.

Management stated that consideration would be given to continuing the efforts already undertaken through the CRA classification reform initiatives, including the work required to revise the draft SP standard. A number of issues still required discussion, including the potential impact of the PSAC pay equity complaint; supporting the identification of like jobs to be amalgamated; adopting a shorter work description and implementing a changed management plan during transition to a new work description format.

As part of the ongoing classification reform endeavours, a study had examined the various components of the Program such as the range of classification services offered, associated resources and costs and work description formats just to name a few. "Management noted that it will present the findings of the classification study to the union and also seek their input on the short version of work descriptions as well as the development of generic jobs''.

The Union expressed frustration over the lack of movement on the ACS-SP initiative. It was of the opinion that the departure of the Customs component should not impact the work conducted on the ACS-SP process. Furthermore, references to Customs could be easily removed and work could continue on the Standard and, in turn, ensure that employees were properly classified and adequately compensated.

UNION-MANAGEMENT CONSULTATION AGREEMENT

Management stated that there had been a number of meetings over the past six months with UTE to discuss changes to the union-management consultation agreement. However, since that time, Management was considering the option of having a consultation agreement with the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) given that the Agency was continuously being faced with the challenge of streamlining processes and eliminating duplication. With the departure of the Customs environment from the CRA, all union concerns now involved office environment matters and were dealt with by the same Senior Management representatives, albeit in various consultative forums.

UTE stated that the PSAC did not have jurisdiction over this issue as the decision rested with the components; however, it was open to considering other alternatives. Management and Union agreed to continue discussions and attempt to find a solution to the matter.

ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM AND RENEWAL (ARR)

Management stated that movement on the ARR initiatives had been delayed. The December 12, 2003, announcement concerning the creation of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) required significant efforts from the Finance and Administration Branch as well as the regions, to identify both employees and resources associated with the transfer to the new Agency. Another factor creating some additional uncertainty centred on the Government’s multi-year $3 billion reallocation exercise and the CRA’s expected contribution. Management was committed to getting back on track, as soon as possible.

The Union drew attention to the fact that inaccurate information had been circulating in the field on the status of the ARR initiatives, which in turn created uncertainty among employees. Management agreed with the Union’s suggestion that a communiqué be issued to employees to clarify the matter.

PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS

Management thanked the Union for its comments regarding the Performance Evaluation “template” and the Adaptive Skills Checklist that would be used in all offices once additional validation had been conducted. The Union had been provided with a response to its questions surrounding, for example, the performance evaluation form, the performance standards and the checklist. Based on the feedback received from all stakeholders, focus group sessions would be conducted in several offices to obtain input. The feedback would then be incorporated into the project and a number of offices would be asked to pilot the process prior to implementation. Management anticipated that the pilot for the PM-02s would take place this summer and early fall, followed by the focus group sessions for the PM-01 and/or ROCCO job in the fall or early winter. As in the past, the Union would continue to be consulted throughout the process.

UTE expressed appreciation for the good work that had been conducted to date on this initiative. The Union stressed that union and management working together provided a solid foundation for a product that would ensure that employees were evaluated based on the duties performed, as intended.

COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT PROCESS

Management stated that during the modifications to the competencies that were introduced in June 2003, a number of options had been presented to the Agency Management Committee with an aim to improving the implementation of PQP. The issue of “deeming” employees to meet certain criteria had been considered; however, it had not been selected as an option because the results would not be portable, which was a key requirement. Therefore, employees would not be “deemed” to possess the required job competencies for other positions unless they had been formally assessed.

Although UTE recognized that some of the changes proved beneficial, it expressed continued frustration with the PQP process. The Union disagreed with the explanation provided on the deeming issue and stressed that Management’s approach did not take into consideration an employee’s experience or contribution within the Agency. Consequently, it would continue to raise the portability of competencies, as well as the need to increase the time allotted to complete the competency profiles, through the collective bargaining process. The Union requested that consideration be given to allow supervisors to assess some employee competencies, as they would be best suited to confirm whether or not an employee met the requirements. They also asked that consideration be given to grandfathering the competencies.

Management acknowledged the Union’s concerns, including the need to address some of the more difficult issues regarding the implementation of PQP. Management went on to mention that earlier in the week, the Competency Based Human Resources Management System (CBHRM) Management Steering Committee met to discuss solutions to a number of implementation issues. Proposals to resolve some of the concerns would be brought forward to senior management for review, followed by a meeting with the Unions to discuss possible changes to the process. Notwithstanding the above, grandfathering would not be an option at this stage of the process.

Management thanked the Union for accepting to work with HR representatives on the implementation of the proposed changes and strategy related to PQP. The PQP Implementation Update meeting held on May 31, 2004 brought forward a number of the changes that had taken place since October 31, 2003, including the reduction in the number of base competencies; the establishment of a new governance structure; and a move to improve the competency catalogue. Management remained committed to meeting with the Union on the implementation of PQP and looked forward to the Union’s continued involvement in this process.

The Union then took the opportunity to express concern that although individuals had been hired in the field to assess competencies, the work had been handed down to the MGs without any consideration of compensation, or indication that those new duties would be reflected in their work descriptions. Furthermore, links had not been established between the work description, the competencies, and the performance evaluations, to the extent that disputes had started over individual values.

Management stated that the individuals hired to assess competencies would continue to perform this function. At the same time management recognized that more work needed to be done, including revaluating the issues, and agreed to get back to the Union.

ELECTRONIC BULLETIN BOARDS

Management stated that discussions had taken place with the Union in March 2004, regarding the possibility of providing employees with a direct link to the union website. However, Management was unaware at the time that a moratorium had been placed on the addition of external sites to the CRA Electronic Network System due to the ever-growing number of requests for new links. In light of that information, as well as some concerns raised regarding website standards, no movement would take place on this initiative until additional work had been conducted and discussions had taken place with the other unions. The Union recognized that the issue of an electronic bulletin board was no longer being considered, however, it asked that efforts be made to add the union link to the Agency website.

The Union took the opportunity to ask the Agency to post the NUMC minutes on Infozone. Management agreed.

UNION-MANAGEMENT INITIATIVE

Management stated that a meeting had been held with the Union in March 2004 to further discuss the status of the Union-Management Initiative and to explore next steps in the process. Some of the work which needed to be undertaken involved updating the philosophy statement to ensure that all parties had a clear understanding of what was meant by statements such as, commitment to constructive, fair, sensitive and courteous dealings and facilitating constructive problem solving. At the same time, senior management needed to discuss the rollout of UMI in practical terms, such as costs and timing.

In light of the upcoming summer holidays and the status of collective bargaining, Management felt it more appropriate to wait until the environment was more conducive before introducing UMI. The Union stated that nothing precluded Management from establishing the National Steering Committee and scheduling its first meeting over the summer months to begin the preliminary work related to implementation. Management stated that further discussions needed to take place with senior management on the initiative before doing so. However, in the meantime, a small group could get together to discuss some preliminary work.

JOINT TERM EMPLOYMENT STUDY

Management began by mentioning that the Agency had tremendous respect for term employees and appreciated their hard work and dedication to the organization. Term employees remained a valued part of the CRA community and Management continued to be committed to ensuring that they were treated fairly and equitably.

As indicated at the December 2003 NUMC, the other union needed to be involved in the discussions on term employment before any further movement was made on the issue since its members would also be affected by future decisions. Therefore, Management held an all-union meeting in January 2004, where the other union was provided with the opportunity to share its views and concerns. The next steps involved a follow-up meeting on June 16th to discuss the draft action plan to implement the Joint Term Employment Study recommendations.

The Union reiterated that the CRA term employees should be automatically appointed to indeterminate positions at their substantive level, once they had been there three years. UTE noted that it would continue to raise this issue and that the CRA term employees should not be given less than those employed by the Treasury Board.

Management acknowledged the Union’s concerns and stated that it was committed to working with the Unions on reviewing and implementing the various recommendations that came forward as a result of the Joint Term Employment Study Union-Management working group.

OFFICIAL LANGUAGES POLICIES

UTE expressed concern with the new Official Languages Policy, specifically with the issue of imperative staffing as the norm for staffing bilingual positions. Union members were concerned that this new approach would definitely have an impact on future career paths. Management acknowledged the Union’s concerns and went on to explain that it was in the process of assessing the impacts of those policy changes and adapting the Official Languages policies and directives to reflect the CRA’s own requirements.

Furthermore, Management recognized the many challenges relating to language training, specifically that the demand for training exceeded the availability. The Agency would be represented at an interdepartmental committee that had been mandated to review the delivery of language training in the Public Service.

The Union drew attention to the fact that as a result of the announcement, UTE had been inundated with calls from members concerned that career progression within the Agency would be non-existent and would result in more external recruitment. With the movement towards streamlining processes and the concerns surrounding fiscal restraint, the Union expressed concern for members who were denied language training due to the lack of resources. They went on to state that serious consideration needed to be given to providing language training to employees during working hours and not to raise the linguistic levels of positions.

Management agreed with the Union’s suggestion to communicate information on the changes to the official languages policies and directives to employees.

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

The Union expressed continued frustration at the pace of negotiations. Contrary to the high expectations envisioned for the January 2004 round of negotiations, the Union was of the view that there had been very limited progress made since the beginning of the bargaining process. The Union reiterated its concerns that the CRA negotiating team did not have a specific mandate or true decision-making powers to ensure that collective bargaining moved forward in a timely manner. Although next steps included the establishment of a conciliation board, the Union stated that nothing prevented the two negotiating teams from making another attempt to reach a tentative agreement.

Management acknowledged the Union’s frustration, yet at the same time remained optimistic that the conciliation process might move the two parties closer to a tentative agreement.

CLOSING REMARKS

UTE took the opportunity to thank David Miller for the work conducted not only as the NUMC Co-chair but as the Assistant Commissioner, Assessment and Collections Branch. The Union acknowledged that communication in such a large organization was challenging, however, David Miller made it a point to strengthen the union-management consultation process at all forums. The Union presented the Assistant Commissioner of A&C with some tokens of appreciation and wished him well in his retirement.

David Miller thanked the Union for the kind words and for a good working relationship that enabled openness, trust, and disclosure on issues of concerns. He was proud of this achievement and hoped that it would continue.

Both Union and Management wished the participants a safe and happy summer.

Visit often, and send us your comments to the webmaster@ute-sei.org if you have any problems.

Copyright © 2000-2007 UTE All Rights Reserved