Section 69 – Founded – False information pertaining to work experience in a screening questionnaire

Authority:

This investigation was conducted under section 69 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c.22, ss. 12 and 13.

Issue:

The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether 2 candidates committed fraud in an appointment process by submitting nearly identical answers pertaining to their work experience in the screening questionnaires of their applications.

Conclusions:

The investigation concluded that one of the 2 candidates committed fraud by having their spouse complete and submit an application containing information nearly identical to that provided by another candidate. This candidate knew that the copied information did not reflect their own work experience. The investigation also concluded that while the other candidate did share their answers to the screening questions, they did not commit fraud.

Facts:

An internal appointment process was conducted to staff different positions within the Programme Administration (PM) group. Applicants were required to answer screening questions pertaining to their work experience.

The first of the 2 candidates in question applied to the appointment process. After submitting their application, this candidate informed a colleague (the second candidate), who showed interest in applying. However, the colleague expressed concern about not having enough time to prepare answers for the screening questions before the closing date. The first candidate shared their answers with their colleague to help them write their own answers and to provide examples of appropriate level of detail required.

The colleague then took this information and shared it with their spouse, who applied to the appointment process on their behalf. The spouse used the information provided by the first candidate to answer the screening questions, knowing it did not reflect their spouse’s work experience.

The hiring manager reviewed the applications and realized that the 2 candidates had submitted nearly identical answers to the screening questions. The hiring manager knew both candidates and questioned the information submitted by one of them.

When confronted, the first candidate admitted that they had shared information from their application to help the second candidate prepare their own application, given the short period of time left before the closing date. The second candidate admitted to providing their spouse with this information, and to asking their spouse to use that information to apply on their behalf. After being questioned, the second candidate withdrew from the appointment process.

To conclude that fraud occurred in an appointment process, pursuant to section 69 of the Public Service Employment Act, 2 essential elements of fraud must be met: dishonesty and deprivation or risk of deprivation.

The investigation concluded that the second candidate committed fraud by having their spouse complete and submit their application using some information that was nearly identical to that provided by the first candidate. The second candidate did this knowing that the information submitted did not reflect their own work experience. In doing so, the second candidate acted dishonestly. As well, this action could have compromised the appointment process. The assessment board could have used this false information to assess the candidate against the required qualifications, and the candidate could have been appointed.

The investigation also concluded that the first candidate, who had shared their answers to the screening questions, did not commit fraud; they had not intended to allow their colleague to copy their responses, as they had very different work experiences.

Corrective action:

The person who committed fraud is no longer a public servant. Following the conclusion of fraud in the appointment process, the Commission ordered that:

• for 1 year, the individual must notify the Public Service Commission before accepting any position or work within the federal public service
• failure to do so will result in the revocation of the appointment
• if the individual accepts a position or work in the federal public service within 1 year, they must complete the Values and Ethics Foundations for Employees course offered by the Canada School of Public Service, and then have a discussion with their director
• failure to complete the course or to participate in the discussion will result in the revocation of the appointment

 

Investigation File No.: 20-21-11