This page has been archived.
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
The 2006-2007 Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) has one strategic outcome:
The RCMP External Review Committee aims to positively influence the manner in which labour relations issues are addressed within the RCMP
To meet this strategic outcome, the Committee has identified two program activities:
1. Independent, timely, fair and impartial case review leading to the provision of quality findings and recommendations in all cases referred to the Committee.
2. Dissemination of information on the role of the Committee and its findings and recommendations, as well as on relevant legal principles.
With regard to its first program activity, the statutory mandate of the Committee is to conduct an impartial review of cases. The Level II grievances, and disciplinary and discharge and demotion appeals involve disputes that were not resolved through the initial stages of dispute resolution. Therefore, the issues often involve complex, challenging and sensitive problems that require in depth analysis.
The Committee's second program activity is to disseminate information on the role of the Committee, on its findings and recommendations and relevant legal principles.
The expected result of the first program activity of case review is expressed in the activity itself: to ensure sound, independent, timely, fair and impartial findings and recommendations in all cases referred to it. Integrally important to these results therefore are the service standards of the Committee for delivery of recommendations, assurance that the recommendations reflect sound legal principles, fairness in its process and robust adjudication.
The expected result of its second program activity on outreach is increased transparency of the Committee work, easy access to its work to those who are dealing with employment relations problems, and through knowledge transfer, contribution to a fair and open labour relations structure for the RCMP, which benefits all Canadians.
This year, the priorities identified for each program activity in the Report on Plans and Priorities for the 2006-2007 fiscal year were as follows:
Program Activity 1 and Expected Results - Independent, timely, fair and impartial case review leading to the provision of quality findings and recommendations in all cases referred to the Committee
1. Focus on quality of case review and reduction of backlog
2. Maintain optimum environment for ERC staff
3. Ongoing evaluation of operations
These priorities are connected to the expected results in the area of case review. The reduction of the backlog will raise the potential to provide more timely recommendations. An optimum environment for ERC staff will also lead to currency in their areas of expertise, better service orientation, and a capacity to ensure sound, independent, fair and impartial findings and recommendations in all cases referred to it. Ongoing evaluation of its operations provides the capacity to enhance its case review function, and monitor the infrastructure of the Committee to ensure it has the capacity to deliver on its very significant mandate.
Program Activity 2 and Expected Results - Dissemination of information on the role of the Committee and its findings and recommendations, as well as on relevant legal principles.
1. Formalize outreach and raise awareness of the Committee’s work
This priority is tied to its expected results by focusing on efforts to ensure knowledge of the Committee' s work. It also contributes to greater transparency of its work and contribute to openness and understanding in the realm of employment relations decisions, and policies and practices as they pertain to the RCMP.
A general discussion on the two program activities follows, and concludes with a specific review of the Committee's performance on program activity priorities identified in the Report on Plans and Priorities for the 2006-2007 fiscal year.
Independent, timely, fair and impartial case review leading to the provision of quality findings and recommendations in all cases referred to the Committee.
1) General Discussion
Case review is the prominent concern of the Committee. The Committee continues to have a backlog of cases and at the end of this fiscal year acquired additional interim resources to assist its case review function. Due to human resources delays, these could not be staffed in this fiscal year.
As already noted in this Report, the Committee makes recommendations to the Commissioner of the RCMP, who must then make the final decision. Should the Commissioner decide not to follow the Committee recommendation, he or she must give reasons for doing so. The following table outlines key components of the review functions for grievances, discipline and discharge and demotion. It also provides statistics on the total number of cases reviewed by the Committee since its inception and up to March 31, 2007 and the percentage of times that the Commissioner has followed the Committee recommendations. Although this data is frequently requested, it should be noted that it is not used by the Committee in its evaluation, out of a concern to safeguard its independence and impartiality. The Committee considers its independence from the Commissioner’s decision making process critical to meeting its mandate. It does not therefore evaluate its performance based on whether the Commissioner follows its recommendations. Rather, it is the soundness of its recommendations, and the ability to uphold its impartiality in the process that is key to the Committee.
Grievances | Formal Disciplinary Matters | Discharge and Demotion |
---|---|---|
Part III of the RCMP Act | Part IV of the RCMP Act | Part V of the RCMP Act |
Initiated by Member presenting a grievance on an area of concern. | Initiated by investigation and subsequent decision of Commanding Officer to hold a hearing, where allegation that member has violated the Code of Conduct and decision to address under formal disciplinary proceedings. | Initiated by a Commanding Officer serving a Notice of Intention. A member may be subject to discharge or demotion proceedings for failing to perform his or her duties in a satisfactory manner, after having been given "reasonable assistance, guidance and supervision in an attempt to improve the performance of those duties". |
Level I review conducted by an RCMP officer designated as a Level I Adjudicator. | Decision made by Adjudication Board, comprised of three officers of the RCMP. | The member has the right to examine the material in support of the Notice of Intention and to request that a Discharge and Demotion Board, consisting of three senior officers of the Force, be convened. |
The Level I Adjudicator makes a decision based on a review of written submissions. | An Adjudication Board holds a hearing to determine whether there has been a violation of the Code of Conduct. If Code of Conduct is found to have been violated, a subsequent hearing is held to determine sanction. | A Discharge and Demotion Board holds a hearing and issues a decision. |
If a member is dissatisfied with the decision, then the member presents a Level II grievance. | Either the member or the Commanding Officer can appeal the decision to the Commissioner. The member has an unlimited right of appeal. The Commanding Officer can appeal a finding that no violation of the Code of Conduct but has a very limited right to appeal the sanction. | Either the member or the Commanding Officer may appeal the decision of an RCMP Discharge and Demotion Board. |
Five categories of grievances are referred to the Committee for subject to a Level II review.
Grievances not in these categories are reviewed through internal RCMP processes. For those grievances referable to the Committee, the grievance is referred to the Committee, unless the member requests that the matter proceed directly to the RCMP Commissioner. This rarely happens. |
There is no limitation on the type of disciplinary matters that can be reviewed by the Committee. The appeal is referred to the Committee, unless the member requests that the matter proceed directly to the RCMP Commissioner. This rarely happens. | Appeal submissions are made in writing and the appeal is then referred to the Committee unless the member requests that the matter proceed directly to the RCMP Commissioner. This rarely happens. |
The Committee reviews the case and makes a recommendation. | The Committee reviews the case and makes a recommendation. | The Committee reviews the case and makes a recommendation. |
The Committee issues findings and recommendations to the parties and the RCMP Commissioner in those categories of grievances referred to it. | The Committee issues findings and recommendations to the parties and the RCMP Commissioner. | The Committee issues findings and recommendations to the parties and the RCMP Commissioner. |
The RCMP Commissioner makes final decision. | The RCMP Commissioner makes the final decision. | The RCMP Commissioner makes the final decision. |
As of March 31, 2007, the Committee has issued a total of 433 grievance recommendations since its inception. | As of March 31, 2007, the Committee has issued a total of 103 recommendations coming out of disciplinary appeals since its inception. | As of March 31, 2007, the Committee has issued a total of 4 discharge and demotion cases recommendations since its inception. |
In 89% of all the grievance recommendations issued since the Committee’s inception, the RCMP Commissioner has followed the recommendations of the Committee. | In 71% of all disciplinary appeal recommendations issued since the Committee’s inception, the RCMP Commissioner has followed the recommendations of the Committee. | In 75% of all discharge and demotion appeal recommendations since the Committee’s inception, the RCMP Commissioner has followed the recommendations of the Committee. |
2) Recommendations and Case Referrals Data
A discussion on the actual composition of cases referred to the Committee, and case recommendations issued follows. The data provided is based upon the Committee's internal tracking of all cases referred and all recommendations issued.
i) Referrals
The Committee has jurisdiction to review only those cases referred to it by the Commissioner of the RCMP. The referability of grievances is restricted by the RCMP Regulations to five categories that are noted in Table above and at page 4 of this Report in the discussion on day-to-day operations.
The Committee cannot predict the number of cases that will be referred to it in any given year. Although there were fewer cases referred to the Committee in this fiscal year, there has been a general increase in cases referred to it over the last five years.
The following table illustrates the number of cases referred to the Committee in this fiscal year, in comparison to previous years.
A total of 30 grievances were referred to the Committee, compared to 51 in the previous year and 32 in 2004-05. Four disciplinary appeals were referred to the Committee, which is also a decrease from the number of disciplinary cases referred to it in previous years (10 in previous year; 11 in 2004-2005). No discharge and demotion appeals were referred to the Committee this year.
ii) Recommendations Issued
The number of cases completed by the Committee varies depending on the complexity of issues raised. For grievances, the objective of the Committee is to have issued its recommendation within three months of the case being referred to it. For discipline and discharge and demotion cases, the standard that the Committee strives for is six months.
There is a waiting period at this time before cases are reviewed and largely due to this, these service standards are not met. The Committee continues to strive to meet these standards given the importance of timeliness in the recommendations issued and it sought, and was granted, short term additional resources to do so. Putting the resources in place was not possible in this fiscal year, due to human resources delays. The Committee is exploring the possibility of securing resources to assist with rising corporate demands.
There was an increase in the number of recommendations issued this year. The Committee reviewed 42 grievances and issued 40 recommendations, compared to 34 cases reviewed in 2005-06 (and 30 recommendations issued) and 24 cases reviewed (and 23 recommendations issued) in 2004-05. The Committee issued 5 recommendations on disciplinary appeals. No recommendations in the area of discharge and demotion were issued.
The following table illustrates the number of recommendations issued this fiscal year, in comparison to previous years:
The subject matter of this year's grievance recommendations fell into the following general categories:
* In 2006-07, 42 cases were reviewed, but 40 recommendations were issued. In 2005-06, 34 cases were reviewed but 30 recommendations were issued. In 2004-05, 24 cases were reviewed but 23 recommendations issued.
iii) Disciplinary Appeal and Discharge and Demotion Cases
This year, the Committee received four disciplinary appeals. Of these four appeals, three were initiated by the member and one involved an appeal by the Commanding Officer. Only one appeal involved a sanction of an order to resign within 14 days, failing which the member would be dismissed. The Committee issued five findings and recommendations on disciplinary appeals this year and did not review any discharge and demotion cases.
iv) Conclusion
In conclusion, a total of 34 cases were referred to the Committee this year, and 47 cases were completed. At year end, 59 active cases remained before the Committee, including 46 grievances, 12 discipline appeals and one discharge and demotion appeal. sections. The Table below shows the flow of cases and general status of cases before the Committee at the beginning and at the end of this fiscal year.
Grievances | Discipline | Discharge/Demotion | Total | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Cases remaining at the end of fiscal year 2005-06 | 56 | 13 | 1 | 70 |
Cases referred in 2006-07 | 30 | 4 | 0 | 34 |
Recommendations issued in 2006-07 | 40 | 5 | 0 | 45 |
Cases remaining at the end of fiscal year 2006-07 | 46 | 12 | 1 | 59 |
Dissemination of information on the role of the Committee and its findings and recommendations, as well as on relevant legal principles
1) Overview
The Committee considers its communication role with stakeholders essential in ensuring that its mandate is effectively met. The Committee was able to expand on its outreach function this year, notwithstanding its limited resources. The Committee utilizes a number of tools for outreach, including its Web site (www.erc-cee.gc.ca), its quarterly publication, requests for information, and ongoing training, meetings, and capacity building. A review of each area of outreach activity follows. The data provided is based upon the Committee’s internal tracking of its outreach activities.
2) Specific Activities
Specific activities undertaken by the Committee during the reporting period follows.
i) Web Site and Quarterly Publication
The Web site (www.erc-cee.gc.ca) and the Communiqué, a quarterly publication, carry articles of interest, summaries, and updates on all cases that have been before the Committee. The Web site had 390,514 page views this year. The Communiqué itself is sent to approximately 835 subscribers four times a year. This number is higher than the previous years.
ii) Requests for Information
The Committee receives a number of requests for information. Some of these are simple, others can be complicated and require more time. This year, the Committee received and responded to 123 requests for information, on average in 2.8 days.
iii) Ongoing Training and Capacity Building
The Committee gave presentations at training sessions for the Staff Relations Representative Program (SRR), new Disciplinary Board Adjudicators, and staff of the Office for the Coordination of Grievances. It also held meetings with stakeholders.
Overview of Program Activities and Strategic Objective
Both program activities support the strategic objective of positively influencing employment relations within the RCMP. The case review function supports the independence and impartiality of the process, and the integration of current, relevant, legally sound principles and best practices into its analytical function. Both support the transparency and independence of the process of external case review and ensure knowledge of the Committee’s mandate and its cases. Both allow for the monitoring of policy and uptake of other issues raised in recommendations into the RCMP through the Commissioner’s final decision, and any changes of practice.
There are key areas of success for the Committee in the manner in which these program activities have been engaged this year, and therefore also advanced its strategic objective. Perhaps key in the area of case review has been the issuance of a higher number of cases this year than last, and the continued, concerted effort to reduce the case backlog. By facilitating a faster case review, there can be greater confidence in the realm of RCMP employment relations. In the area of outreach, a key success this year was that the Committee enhanced its visibility by sharing information at two regional meetings of staff representatives and attending and contributing to two additional training sessions.
Key deterrents to progress with progress of the strategic objective in relation to the program activities can be linked to the internal and external factors affecting the performance of the Committee that were discussed above. In particular, the small size and limited resources of the Committee, the consequent challenges in meeting workload fluctuations and in enhancing the visibility of the Committee are critical. There may also be a need to revisit the Committee's previous research function, which contributed to its outreach and positively informed labour relations of the RCMP . This research function was eliminated due to funding cuts in the early 1990s.
Planned | Authorities | Actual Spending |
---|---|---|
669 | 779 | 778 |
Planned | Actual * | Difference |
---|---|---|
7 | 5 | 2 |
* From August 4, 2006 to March 31, 2007 one position was vacant.
* Until January 2007, our initial FTE planned was 6. Funding was received, effective January 2007 for 3 additional backlog resources (one for a two year term and two for a five year term). Three positions could not be filled in this fiscal year.
Program Activity 1: Independent, timely, fair and impartial case review leading to the provision of quality findings and recommendations in all cases referred to the Committee
Plans, priorities and commitments
Priority 1 - Focus on quality case review and reduction of backlog
Priority 2 – Maintain optimum environment for Committee staff
Priority 3 – Ongoing evaluation of operations
Program, resources and results linkages
Priority 1 - Focus on quality case review and reduction of backlog
Priority 2 – Maintain optimum environment for Committee staff
Priority 3 – Ongoing evaluation of operations
The Committee continues to spend approximately 80% of its time and resources on case review. Committee Chair and staff wages (not including contributions to employee benefit plans) amounted to $434,508 this year and operating expenses to $217,612.
Priority 1 - Focus on quality of case review and reduction of backlog (ongoing)
The planned activities spelled out in the 2006-2007 Report on Plans and Priorities for this priority included ensuring expeditious and quality case management process; managing the backlog of cases, should resources become available; ensuring research tools are up to date; and seeking additional resources.
Following on the inroads made in 2005-2006 to streamline its recommendation preparation, the Committee continued to implement its backlog reduction strategy. The Committee has integrated its prescreening process to ensure procedural or preliminary issues are addressed early on in the process. In addition, the Committee was able to issue more recommendations this year than last. It is premature to attribute the higher issuance of recommendations to its internal measures to reduce the backlog. There are a number of factors that may also have contributed to this: for example, the relative experience of the core staff who worked on these cases, and the nature of the cases before the Committee.
The Committee maintained its research file and encouraged ongoing training of staff to ensure currency. Each employee attended training pertaining to present demands. In addition, the Committee sought and received additional short term resources for both case facilitation and backlog reduction. These positions were not staffed in this fiscal year due to human resources delays.
The Committee also initiated another business case toward addressing corporate support. Included in this request were additional funds for consultation on appropriate implementation of information technology. In the longer term, should information technology changes be implemented, this could contribute to case facilitation.
Priority 2 - Maintain optimum environment for ERC staff (ongoing)
The planned activities spelled out in the 2006-2007 Report on Plans and Priorities for this priority included ensuring expeditious and quality case management process; managing the backlog of cases, should resources become available; ensuring research tools are up to date; and seeking additional resources.
Following on the inroads made in 2005-2006 to streamline its recommendation preparation, the Committee continued to implement its backlog reduction strategy. The Committee has integrated its prescreening process to ensure procedural or preliminary issues are addressed early on in the process. In addition, the Committee was able to issue more recommendations this year than last. It is premature to attribute the higher issuance of recommendations to its internal measures to reduce the backlog. There are a number of factors that may also have contributed to this: for example, the relative experience of the core staff who worked on these cases, and the nature of the cases before the Committee.
The Committee maintained its research file and encouraged ongoing training of staff to ensure currency. Each employee attended training pertaining to present demands. In addition, the Committee sought and received additional short term resources for both case facilitation and backlog reduction. These positions were not staffed in this fiscal year due to human resources delays.
The Committee also initiated another business case toward addressing corporate support. Included in this request were additional funds for consultation on appropriate implementation of information technology. In the longer term, should information technology changes be implemented, this could contribute to case facilitation.
Priority 3 - Ongoing evaluation of operations (ongoing)
The planned activities spelled out in the 2006-2007 Report on Plans and Priorities for this priority included developing an evaluation plan; initiating a review of service standards, and a review of the effectiveness of outreach to stakeholders, and other relevant issues pertaining to its mandate.
The Committee regularly monitored the case review function and included it as a standing item in its staff meetings. It also developed a plan of action for its twentieth anniversary, which will fall in the 2008-2009 fiscal year. This plan includes outreach activities, a twentieth anniversary publication and an evaluation, which will be contingent on the resources available to the Committee.
The Committee was part of the Management Accountability Framework (MAF) exercise in this fiscal year. The Committee's performance was assessed on the basis of a variety of factors and through its self assessment of the MAF, the Committee also developed or renewed certain objectives. For example, finding ways to develop a more robust evaluation infrastructure and plans to follow up on its Risk Management exercise were renewed objectives identified by the Committee.
Planned | Authorities | Actual Spending |
---|---|---|
226 | 195 | 131 |
Planned | Actual * | Difference |
---|---|---|
2 | 1 | 1 |
* From August 4, 2006 to March 31, 2007 one position was vacant.
* Until January 2007, our initial FTE planned was 6. Funding was received, effective January 2007 for 3 additional backlog resources (one for a two year term and two for a five year term). Three positions could not be filled in this fiscal year.
Program Activity 2: Dissemination of information on the role of the Committee and its findings and recommendations, as well as on relevant legal principles
Plans, priorities and commitments
Priority 1 – Formalize outreach and raise awareness of the Committee's work.
Program, resources and results linkages
Priority 1 – Formalize outreach and raise awareness of the Committee's work.
The Committee estimates that it spends 20% of its time and resources on tasks related to our second program activity. Committee Chair and staff wages (not including contributions to employee benefit plans) amounted to $108,627 for the year and operating expenses of $54,403.
The Committee identified one priority in relation to the program activity related to information sharing and exchange.
Priority 1 - Formalize outreach and raise awareness of the Committee’s work
The planned activities spelled out for this priority in the 2006-2007 Report on Plans and Priorities included providing information about the Committee findings and recommendations and ensuring they are readily available; publishing the Communiqué on a quarterly basis; ongoing meetings with stakeholders in the RCMP; developing a more formalized outreach strategy through consultation and evaluation of its work.
The Committee utilized a variety of outreach strategies and tools this fiscal year.
Website: All recommendations are summarized and put on its Web site (www.erc-cee.gc.ca) as soon as possible in both official languages. Training materials that have been used in prior training sessions are also included on the Web site. Key reports, including its annual reports and government reports (RPPs, DPRs), as well as any submissions made to commissions are included on the Web site.
Recommendation Summaries: All recommendations are summarized and put on its Web site. Full Committee recommendations were available on demand. Summaries of the Commissioner’s subsequent decision are also placed on the Web site.
Communiqué: The Committee published the Communiqué four times in the 2006-2007 fiscal year. In the Communiqué, the Committee has also offered articles on areas of interest, such as referability, and relevant federal court decisions.
Stakeholders: The Committee met with a variety of stakeholders in this fiscal year:
Requests for Information: The Committee responded to requests for information and while some of these are straightforward, others involve more complex legal issues. In the large majority of these requests for information, the Committee has responded within 2.8 days and in some cases has provided additional information in more detailed responses within a longer time frame.
Formalized Outreach Strategy: the Committee developed a formal Twentieth Anniversary Plan for the 2008-2009 fiscal year and this included a component on outreach. It is developing an evaluation plan, which will incorporate issues on outreach in the coming fiscal year (2007-2008) . Due to operational pressures and resource issues, it did not develop a formalized outreach strategy but is conducting outreach focussed on key stakeholders. The Committee also conducted a short evaluation of its outreach tools with the Staff Representatives and representatives of Professional Standards and External Review. The overall feedback from this survey was positive.
Overall, the Committee continued to build on the efforts it had made in the 2005-2006 fiscal year toward a more robust infrastructure and streamlined system of case review to meet its statutory mandate. The active monitoring of its output of cases and of its backlog has had positive effects: the output of cases in this fiscal year has been much higher than previous years. However, it is important to note that a core group of very experienced staff contributed to this result. Case monitoring therefore, remains an essential part of the Committee’s internal evaluation of its program activity of case review.
While there was not a formal outreach strategy, it was clear that the Committee's efforts to solidify its outreach has had beneficial effects and demonstrated a deliberate focus on key stakeholders, keeping in mind the Committee's limited resources. The Committee reached a high number of stakeholders in this last fiscal year , and the Committee views a high level of outreach as integral to its ongoing efforts to meet its statutory mandate and ensure knowledge on the part of RCMP members of its activities.
The Committee has also had beneficial results from its implementation of the PSMA, the issues it has raised in its Submission to the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar, and the ongoing review of its Risk Management Profile. For example,
In addition, the Committee considers it important to maintain ongoing engagement with the central agencies on the current pressures and demands faced by it as a very small agency. Such dialogues are important. The Committee has also addressed these demands in specific ways by developing a discussion paper on Micro Agencies that was distributed to a number of stakeholders and included in its Management Accountability Framework documentation. It has also participated in an action research group on the reporting burden on small agencies. This research group was coordinated and facilitated by the Canada School of Public Service and provided an avenue for constructive dialogue on the issue of reporting burden.