Asking a colleague to review a presentation submitted as part of an assessment, contrary to the instructions

Authority:

Given the nature of the position for the appointment and that the duties of the position may have an impact on the health and safety of Canadians, this investigation was conducted under section 69 of the Public Service Employment Act, (S.C. 2003, c.22, ss. 12, 13).

Issue:

The purpose of the investigation was to determine whether a candidate committed fraud in an external appointment process by requesting the help of a third party when writing a presentation submitted as part of the assessment.

Conclusion:

The investigation concluded that the candidate committed fraud when they asked their colleague to review their presentation before submitting it, knowing the instructions stated that they were to be the sole author of the document and that it was forbidden to discuss their presentation with a third party.

Facts:

In the context of an external appointment process, a candidate had to prepare a presentation and submit it to the assessment board. The instructions sent to the candidate stated that, to protect the integrity of the process, candidates could not discuss the content of the presentation with others. It was also mentioned that the candidate had to write the document on their own, that they had to be the author of the document, and that by submitting the presentation they were attesting that they had not received help in preparing the document.

During the correction of the candidate’s presentation, the assessment board found that it contained comments made by a third party. Since the instructions indicated that candidates were to complete the presentation on their own and without asking for help, it was determined that the candidate did not meet the qualification “Judgement”, and their candidacy was eliminated.

The evidence showed that the instructions for the presentation were clear, and that the candidate confirmed that they received and understood them. Furthermore, the candidate admitted during the investigation that they had asked their colleague to revise their presentation before submitting it. According to the evidence, this person made several comments and recommendations about the content of the presentation.   

During the investigation, the candidate testified that their intention was not dishonest in asking their colleague to review their presentation, as they had already finalized it before sending it to them and were only seeking reassurance. The candidate stated that they did not make the connection between the instructions that stipulated that they had to write the document on their own and asking their colleague to review it, because they were the one who wrote the document. However, the candidate did acknowledge that the instructions forbade candidates to ask for help and that they had to write the presentation themselves. The investigation established, on a balance of probabilities, that the candidate was dishonest when they obtained help in preparing their presentation when they knew that they were not allowed to consult another person.

As well, the investigation established, on a balance of probabilities, that the candidate had made changes to their presentation based on the changes suggested by their colleague, before submitting it to the organization.

The investigation established that the candidate knowingly sought help in preparing their presentation to improve their chances of succeeding, which could have compromised the appointment process had it not been detected by the organization and the candidate been appointed.

Correctives actions:

Following the conclusion of fraud, the Commission ordered the following:

• for a period of 1 year, the candidate 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 their appointment
• if the candidate joins the federal public service within the 1-year period, they must complete the Values and Ethics Foundations for Employees course offered by the Canada School of Public Service, followed by a discussion with their manager
• failure to do so will result in the revocation of their appointment

File No.: 23-24-08