Schedule C – Recourse Assessment – Executive Summary

The document below is an excerpt of the Executive Summary of a report titled Canada Revenue Agency Recourse Assessment” (Revised June 15, 2004, © 2004 Deloitte & Touche LLP and related entities, Executive Summary page i.) that consultants Deloitte & Touche prepared on the request of the CCRA. Section 59 of the CCRA Act requires that, after its third full year as an agency, the CCRA publish in its annual report an independent review of the Agency's human resources recourse mechanisms. This report satisfies this requirement of the Act.

In May 2003, Deloitte Consulting was contracted to conduct an independent review of all interest and rights-based recourse administered or managed by Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA), as it was then known. This review was mandated by Section 59 of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency Act and included analysis of grievance or complaint processes for Staff Relations, Non-disciplinary Terminations or Demotions; Classification; Staffing; Harassment; Procedures for Dealing with Grievances Presented on CCRA Policies (Mobility, OSH, Bilingualism Bonus Policies); Official Languages; Refusal to Work/Dangerous Work; and Employment Equity.

CRA has developed an approach to recourse that is developing into a best practice. Its intent is to support the use of interest-based solutions to various issues while safeguarding the ability to avail oneself of rights-based recourse. There is widespread acceptance of this dual approach and extensive support is in place, overseen by the Office of Dispute Management, to educate managers and staff and to provide resources as needed to attempt to find interest-based solutions to issues. This encouragement for interest-based solutions has not hindered the ability of employees to access rights-based processes.

In executing its strategy, however, CRA has not been consistent in educating managers and employees as to the availability of alternate means of dispute resolution and, in many cases, has not monitored the results of communication and training to ensure that key principles are being followed. Given the extensive nature of the change that CRA has undergone since becoming an Agency in 1999, it is to be expected that issues in execution would remain. Failure to continue investment in education, communication and monitoring would exacerbate existing frustrations and would put at risk what is, overall, an emerging best practice in recourse.

With respect to each area of recourse, the process for managing Staff Relations grievances is well-documented and supported; a primary area of concern, however, is in the length of time required to reach resolution. Non-disciplinary terminations are not tracked in a consistent manner, leading to disagreement between CRA and the unions regarding the prevalence of these grievances. The Classification grievance process has undergone significant improvements designed to expedite the process for resolving both job content and classification grievances; this is the key area of concern for employees and is exacerbated by the fact that both CRA and the unions routinely agree to extensions in deadlines. Staffing has struck a reasonable balance between efficiency and fairness in its process; current risk factors relate to the execution of the process, particularly with applying deadlines consistently and ensuring adequate feedback is provided. The Harassment complaint process has been well-communicated and understood; the main issue of concern has been with the length of time to reach resolution, although significant improvements have been made. It represents an internal best practice in data monitoring as comprehensive data is tracked allowing CRA to monitor areas of complaint and successful resolution. The process around Procedures for Dealing with Grievances Presented on CCRA Policies (Mobility, OSH and Bilingual Policies) has not been fully communicated leading to the risk that is may be applied inconsistently. The Official Languages complaints process strikes an ideal balance between prevention and resolution of issues. Widespread education and an extensive administrative support structure have worked to ensure that issues are dealt with efficiently with infrequent need to raise formal complaints either internally or externally. This is similar to the process for Refusal to Work complaints where CRA's approach to treating potential workplace threats is widely-understood and results in most issues being dealt with immediately and informally. Data on Employment Equity recourse is currently not monitored; it appears that equity concerns are not common at CRA but additional efforts should focus on capturing any complaints, formal or informal, that occur.

In conclusion, CRA has undergone (and will continue to undergo) significant change in its transition to Agency status. This strategic context is an important consideration for both the introduction of new human resources initiatives and refinement of existing practices. In terms of recourse, it has articulated a strategic intent to promote and encourage the use of alternate means of resolving disputes, while safeguarding the provision of rights-based recourse. The intent of this approach represents a best practice as it supplements existing rights to recourse with optional avenues that are often more cost-effective and that can have the effect of resolving more fundamental, underlying problems than is typically the case with traditional, rights-based recourse. The challenge, however, will be to ensure that procedural issues are addressed and incremental education and communication efforts are sufficient to ensure that all recourse processes are implemented to the point where CRA's recourse strategy becomes fully operationalized and a sustainable part of its culture.

Date modified:

2004-10-28