Sub-delegated manager favoured appointee in an external non-advertised appointment process

Authority: This investigation was conducted under section 66 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 an error, an omission or improper conduct affected the selection of the person appointed following an external non-advertised appointment process. Concerns were raised that suggested that the sub-delegated manager (the manager) may have favoured the appointee.

Conclusions: The investigation concluded that the manager committed improper conduct in the appointment process by favouring the appointee. The manager did not disclose an existing professional relationship with the appointee, they provided the appointee with information to ensure they met one of the qualifications and they requested a change to the position’s linguistic profile from bilingual to unilingual to facilitate the appointment.

Facts: At the time of the appointment process, the manager’s branch was undergoing a reorganization that required them to staff a position with someone who had relevant experience. After determining that the desired skillset was not available internally or through existing pools of qualified candidates, the manager opted to staff the position using an external non-advertised process.

The evidence showed that the manager and the appointee had an existing professional relationship outside of the public service at the time of the appointment. The manager reached out to the appointee about the above-mentioned position; the appointee then sent the manager their résumé, and the latter proceeded with the next steps in the process. Throughout the appointment process, the manager communicated with the appointee using their personal email address, instead of their work one. The manager did not disclose the relationship, recuse themselves from the assessment or ask another person to participate in the assessment to ensure a fair process. The evidence also showed that the manager was aware of their obligation to disclose any potential conflict of interest situation to human resources.

The investigation revealed that the manager provided the appointee with information about one of the knowledge qualifications that the appointee was not familiar with and then did not ensure that the appointee had read the information related to the knowledge qualification nor assess them to determine whether they met this qualification. The manager nonetheless updated the appointee’s assessment results to show that they met this knowledge qualification.

Finally, since the appointee would not have met the position’s initial linguistic profile, the manager requested a change to it, without considering the advice provided by the designated official languages representative.

A manager can assess someone they have a professional relationship with; this is not necessarily improper conduct. However, doing so could constitute improper conduct in any or all of these cases:

• if the relationship is not disclosed
• if the manager is the only person assessing and selecting the candidate
• if the manager takes improper steps during the process to facilitate the appointment

The evidence demonstrated that for all three reasons listed above the manager committed improper conduct, which affected the selection of the appointee.

The manager left the federal public service during the investigation.

Corrective actions:

Following the conclusion of improper conduct, the Commission ordered the following corrective actions:

• the appointee:
  • appointment be revoked retroactively to the day preceding their appointment and they will cease to be an employee of the public service
• the manager:
  • for a period of 3 years, they must notify the Public Service Commission of Canada in writing before accepting any position or work within the federal public service
    • if they fail to do so, their appointment will be revoked, and they will cease to be an employee of the public service
  • if they accept a position or work in the federal public service within 3 years:
    • they must complete the Values and Ethics for Managers course, followed by a discussion with their manager
      • if they fail to attend the course or to participate in the discussion within the prescribed period, their appointment will be revoked, and the public servant will cease to be an employee of the public service
    • they may not be sub-delegated appointment-related authorities for a period of 3 years
      • 6 months before the end of this 3-year period, they must complete the Staffing: A Resourcing Tool for Manager course, followed by a discussion with their manager

Investigation File No.: 22-23-10