ARCHIVED - Canadian Artists and Producers Professional Relations Tribunal

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

Section II – Analysis of Program Activities by Strategic Outcome

Strategic Outcome:
Constructive professional relations between artists and producers

Part II of the Act, and the collective bargaining regime set up under it, are intended to encourage constructive professional relations between artists and producers in federal jurisdiction. This is the sole strategic outcome under the Tribunal's Program Activity Architecture approved by Treasury Board for 2006-2007.

During fiscal 2006-2007, the Tribunal pursued two priorities in order to achieve this strategic outcome. It continued to focus on dealing with requests under the legislation with prompt and high quality service. And it greatly increased its focus on fully informing and assisting clients. (As noted in Section I, a third priority identified in the 2006-2007 Report on Plans and Priorities, assistance in the preparation of amendments to the Act, was not pursued, as it was beyond the Tribunal's mandate.)

The performance measurement framework for these priorities is presented in the Tribunal's Report on Plans and Priorities and is summarized below. The performance results are reported below and shown in Tables A, B and C.

Priority 1: Prompt and high-quality service

The level of case activity in 2006-2007 was similar to that in 2005-2006. The Tribunal made final decisions in six cases (five of which were resolved without hearings) and made two interim decisions. At year's end, two cases were pending. Details on the cases are presented in the Tribunal's annual report for 2006-2007 and its Information Bulletins, all available on the Tribunal's Web site at www.capprt-tcrpap.gc.ca.

The Tribunal has assessed promptness by looking at the time taken to issue reasons after a hearing, and the time required to process applications. The first of these indicators remains controversial for the Tribunal; an accurate assessment of the promptness of case processing arguably should take account of cases that are concluded without hearings. The Tribunal has decided to continue using this indicator for now, but it is re-evaluating it and may adjust it in the Report on Plans and Priorities for the coming planning period.

In the one case for which it issued reasons for a decision, the Tribunal took 29 days to issue its decision after the hearing, well within its target of 60. On the second indicator of promptness, the average time required to process applications, the Tribunal exceeded its target and significantly improved its performance over the average for the preceding 10 years. These results are set out in Table A.

Table A — Prompt processing of cases

Indicator	Target	Results
Average time to issue reasons for a decision after the hearing in all cases	Maximum of 60 calendar days	29 days
Average time to process all cases (from the date of receipt of the completed application to the date of the decision)	Maximum of 200 calendar days	73 days

The second aspect of this priority is high-quality processing of cases. This refers to the work of staff, in preparing cases and providing legal advice, and of members, in deliberating and making decisions.

The indicator that has been used is the proportion of Tribunal decisions that are upheld under judicial review. Pursuant to the Status of the Artist Act, a party may, under specific circumstances, challenge a Tribunal decision by requesting a judicial review by the Federal Court of Appeal.

The Tribunal readily acknowledges that this indicator is not ideal. The decision of a party to seek or not to seek judicial review may be unrelated to the quality of the decision. Moreover, the grounds for judicial review of a Tribunal decision are limited. The Federal Court of Appeal does not assess the correctness of the Tribunal's decisions; it will intervene only if the Tribunal has:

• Acted without or beyond its jurisdiction, or refused to exercise its jurisdiction;
• Failed to observe a principle of natural justice, procedural fairness or other procedure that it is required by law to observe; or
• Acted, or failed to act, by reason of fraud or perjured evidence.

Several labour boards and other administrative tribunals monitor and report on this statistic. Most have not established a target to achieve in this regard, however, and they do not relate this reporting to any evaluation of the quality of their work. The Tribunal will continue to look for alternatives to this indicator.

As indicated in Table B, the Tribunal has met its objectives for this indicator. To date, only three of the Tribunal's 86 interim and final decisions have been challenged in this manner. Two requests for judicial review were dismissed by the Federal Court of Appeal, one in 1998-1999 and one in 2004-2005. The third request was withdrawn.

Table B - High-quality processing of cases

Indicator	Target	1996-2007
Percentage of applications for judicial review that have been granted	Less than 50 percent	0 percent

Priority 2: Clients fully informed and assisted

The Tribunal has a responsibility to ensure that artists, artists' associations and producers are fully aware of their rights and responsibilities under the Status of the Artist Act. For parties to benefit from the Act, for negotiations to take place and for the long-term objectives of the Act to be realized, the parties must fully understand the legislation.

This priority has always been treated seriously, but its importance has become more pronounced recently, and accordingly it was the Tribunal's principal focus in 2006-2007. The Tribunal recognizes that it needs to improve its relationship with artists' associations and producers, especially in view of the potential impact on the work of the Tribunal of current developments in broadcasting and new media. Broadcasting is one of the principal areas of the Tribunal's jurisdiction, and the challenges of transformations in the broadcasting industry  – mergers, changes of ownership, new technologies, and the weakening of traditional business models – for artists' associations and broadcasters require new efforts from the Tribunal to facilitate certification and negotiation under the Act.

Table C shows the targets for informing and assisting clients, and the results. The discrepancies between the targets and the results reflect the change in the Tribunal's priorities and strategy. It should also be noted that the indicators themselves are imperfect.

Two information bulletins were issued, rather than the target of three. Information bulletins are intended primarily to advise the public of developments in the Tribunal's core work of dealing with cases brought before it, and two information bulletins were sufficient to address the number of cases. A client survey to assess the quality of the information would have been of little significance, based on two bulletins, and so was not conducted.

The Tribunal's Web site was updated regularly to ensure that the information on it is timely and accurate. It was also significantly modified and reorganized, to emphasize the services that the Tribunal can make available to artists, artists' associations, and producers. In the first major step in what will eventually be a complete overhaul, the Web site now focuses visitors' attention on what the Tribunal can do for them and on how to do business with the Tribunal, with the information tailored according to whether the visitor is an artist, artists' association, or producer. Information about the Status of the Artist Act and answers to questions about its application and significance are now much more prominent. As the modifications on the website are recent, the client survey to assess the effectiveness of the Tribunal's website was not carried out.

The Act is still relatively recent and parties are still learning how to implement it, and this remains a principal communications objective of the Tribunal. Staff members have in the past held information sessions to clarify the obligations and rights of parties in bargaining under the Act, and to allow organizations to share their information and experiences with each other. The information sessions have been useful and well-received by clients. Because information sessions were held within the last two years with both artists' associations and producers, presentations were not held in the course of 2006-2007. Rather, the Tribunal's Communications Branch put its emphasis on revising the communications strategy, focusing on how the Tribunal can be of service to artists, artists' associations and producers.

The Tribunal receives many inquiries from or on behalf of artists, artists' associations, and producers, concerning, for example, their rights and obligations under the Status of the Artist Act or whether their activities fall within the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The Tribunal has undertaken to respond to each request on a timely basis and to assist parties. Accordingly, a performance indicator for the communications function is accuracy and timeliness of responses to enquiries and requests for information.

The target is that enquiries and requests for information are dealt with within two working days, and that clients, as determined by survey, are satisfied. This indicator will be measured over several fiscal years, through a survey of client satisfaction.

Table C - Clients fully informed and assisted

Indicator	Target	Results 2005 –2006	Results 2006-2007
Quality and timeliness of information bulletins	At least three information bulletins are issued annually. Clients are satisfied (as determined by client survey).	Two bulletins were issued. Clients were not surveyed.	Two bulletins were issued. Clients were not surveyed.
Quality of the Tribunal's Web site.	The Web site contains timely and accurate information and meets GOL (Government On- Line) standards. Clients are satisfied (as determined by client survey).	The Web site was made almost completely compliant with GOL standards and contains timely and accurate information. Clients were not surveyed	The Web site was significantly amended to focus on client service. Information is timely and accurate. Clients were not surveyed.
Success of information sessions for clients	Clients are satisfied, as determined by survey of attendees.	2/3 of respondents were pleased to very pleased with the information sessions.	N/A: information sessions were not held, because they had been held recently with all clients.
Accuracy and timeliness of responses to enquiries and requests for information.	Enquiries and requests for information are dealt with within two working days. Clients are satisfied (multi-year average determined by client survey).	Few enquiries or requests were received. Prompt and proper responses are ensured by managers and staff.	65% of enquiries and requests were dealt with within one working day. 85% were dealt with within two working days.

Other indicators of progress

The Tribunal also uses other indicators, over multi-year periods, to monitor the achievement of constructive professional relations in the cultural sector. One is the proportion of complaints that are resolved without the necessity of a hearing by the Tribunal. Joint resolution of issues fosters cooperation between artists and producers, and saves time and money for the parties and the Tribunal by reducing the need for costly hearings. Accordingly, the Tribunal encourages parties to resolve as many issues as possible jointly before proceeding to a hearing, and the parties frequently find that they can resolve all the issues jointly. The Tribunal Secretariat provides assistance, where appropriate, through investigation and mediation, and in 2006-2007 emphasized augmenting staff's knowledge and skills in the issues facing the arts sector, so that the staff members are better able to meet the needs of clients.

Table D shows the progress against this indicator. It should be noted that, as with many performance indicators, this is an approximate measure. Parties will withdraw complaints for various reasons. For example, sometimes the filing of a complaint will in itself bring the parties together to resolve the issue without any intervention of the Tribunal.

The negotiation of scale agreements is another indicator of constructive professional relations. Again, this is an approximate measure. The Tribunal can facilitate negotiations by granting certification, providing information about the Act's provisions for negotiations, and dealing with complaints of failure to bargain in good faith. It has little influence, however, over whether the parties actually pursue negotiations after certification, or over the results of such negotiations. Moreover, because there is no provision for first contract arbitration in the legislation, parties may be involved in bargaining for years without ever concluding an agreement. As was noted in Section 1, a legislative amendment would help to rectify this deficiency. Until that happens, we are likely to continue to see large numbers of outstanding notices to bargain.

With respect to the negotiation of scale agreements, a lot has been accomplished, if less than hoped for, as shown in Table D. Thirty-five percent of certified artists' associations have negotiated a new scale agreement within 5 years of certification, compared to the expected target of 80 percent. An additional 23 percent have negotiated a new agreement after the five-year target period. Sixty-two percent of certified artists' associations have at least one outstanding notice to bargain a new agreement.

Table D - Constructive professional relations

Indicator	Target	Results 1998 –2007
Percentage of complaints resolved without a hearing	At least 50% of all complaints are resolved without a hearing.	54% were resolved without a hearing.
Proportion of certified artists' associations with a first agreement within five years of certification.	A minimum of 80% of certified artists' associations negotiated at least one new scale agreement within five years of being certified.	35% have negotiated at least one new scale agreement within five years of certification. Another 23% have negotiated a new scale agreement more than five years after certification.

Financial Management and Leadership

As in previous years, the Tribunal used outsourcing and cost-saving agreements for many services not required on a full-time basis. For example, since the beginning of its operations, the Tribunal has contracted with the Department of Canadian Heritage for human resources services and with Industry Canada for informatics, security and mail services. It has arrangements with two other federal labour boards to use their hearing rooms and library services. It also contracts for the services of a financial analyst. It continues to select multi-skilled, flexible staff capable of handling a wide variety of responsibilities. The Tribunal members are part-time appointees. This is economically efficient on the whole, as they are called on and paid only as needed, although it can make scheduling more difficult. All Tribunal members are currently bilingual, which facilitates scheduling. The agency continues to share accommodation and administrative and financial services with the Environmental Protection Review Committee (EPRC), thereby lowering the overall costs to the government.

The cost of many of these agreements and services increased from the previous year, along with costs for assets and supplies such as software licences and informatics hardware. As a result, the Tribunal's expenditures increased from the previous year by some $259,000.

In order to improve its operational efficiency as well as its capability to measure performance, the Tribunal has continued to modernize and refine its case management database over the course of 2006-2007.

The Tribunal continued to develop its management practices, working in a cluster group with three other small quasi-judicial agencies, the Competition Tribunal, the Copyright Board and the Transportation Appeal Tribunal. The cluster group focused on the implementation of the new Public Service Modernization Act, particularly on developing an Informal Conflict Management System, and preparing for the Management Accountability Framework Assessment scheduled for the fall of 2007.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page