|
|
|
Phases of a co-development model
The Preamble to the Public Service Labour Relations Act significantly affirms that collaborative efforts between the parties, through sustained communication and dialogue, improve the ability of the Public Service to serve and protect the public interest.
In the Act, there are two key provisions designed to promote dialogue, communication, and interaction between the parties:
This framework briefly describes and clarifies the concept of co-development of workplace improvements that is available to the parties to work together and will provide employer and bargaining agents with some considerations for its use.
The Public Service Labour Relations Act (PSLRA, sections 9,10, and 11), enacted by the Public Service Modernization Act, contains a provision under which the employer and a bargaining agent or the deputy head and a bargaining agent may engage in co‑development of workplace improvements. PSLRA also provides that the parties can work together through the National Joint Council or any other organization on which they agree, such as a labour-management advisory committee, or a subcommittee or working group.
The existing guidelines apply to departments and agencies listed in Schedules I and IV of the Financial Administration Act for which the Treasury Board is identified as the Employer.
Definitions of the various expressions (e.g., bargaining agent, bargaining unit, employee, employer) used throughout this proposal will be found in the PSLRA.
Section 9 of PSLRA defines co-development of workplace improvements as "consultation between the parties on workplace issues and their participation in the identification of workplace problems and the development and analysis of solutions to those problems with a view to adopting mutually agreed to solutions."
This definition can be understood as a mechanism that offers the parties an opportunity to broaden the scope of management-bargaining agent consultation already provided under the Act, which in itself is an obligation of the deputy head.
While the definition in the Act refers to "problems," co-development of workplace improvements can also be understood as a useful mechanism to allow the parties to work together in developing a project designed to respond to a question or a need that promotes continuing improvement of the workplace.
It is very important that the parties ensure at the outset that:
The results of a co-development can take many forms, such as a directive, a policy, a rule of procedure, a set of procedures, a method of implementation for a measure determined by the parties, or a jointly identified project.
Co-development and co-management are often terms that are seen as synonyms, however they are distinct and separate processes.
Key principles and attributes are critical for successful co-development. They encourage new ways of seeing and doing things that enable the participants to address and solve issues or to achieve a project. They include the following:
It is recommended that an organization make a preliminary evaluation of the state of management-bargaining agent relations if the parties are considering committing themselves to a co-development.
It is necessary to evaluate carefully and jointly the capacity and maturity of employer-bargaining agent relations in order to ensure that the problem or project being considered is suitable for such an approach.
This evaluation may include:
Co-development is based on a problem-solving approach. To succeed, the parties must previously agree to participate on the basis of clear and converging interests and to the principles and attributes previously enunciated.
Co-development has four main phases:
It should be recognized that, at some point during the course of the initiative, either party or both parties might want to review the definition of the problem, to clarify the project, or to explore other possible solutions. This feedback loop is key to keep the process viable. It is possible that an impasse may be reached. The participants must demonstrate a determination to overcome the impasse and may seek the services of a facilitator to do so. If a consensus cannot be reached, the parties may come to the conclusion that the initiative cannot succeed.
It is important that co-development of workplace improvement activities be well documented. The existing guidelines on consultation committees include appropriate recommendations.
Consultation committees should be involved in overseeing co-development. Depending on the size of the organization, it could be appropriate to establish a steering committee to monitor or co-ordinate co-development activities.
Although the implementation of all products resulting from co-development efforts remains the employer's responsibility, it should be jointly planned, endorsed, and marketed. Clear accountabilities need to be outlined and feedback shared.
Current examples of departments where co-development has been used to handle workplace issues include National Defence, Health Canada, and Industry Canada. Details regarding their successful efforts at co-developing policy can be obtained from their corporate Human Resources officials.
Other examples of co-development initiatives include the following:
Wherever possible, organizations that have worked out co-development Terms of Reference or framework are encouraged to share these, for example by posting them on their Web sites.
Public Service Modernization Act
Public Service Labour Relations Act
The following publications provide interesting reading or reference on the subject of co‑operation in labour relations and on the concept of co-development of workplace improvements. They are a useful introduction or enhancement of knowledge on this subject.
Inquiries should be directed to departmental human resources officers who, in turn, may direct inquiries to:
Labour Relations Sector
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
