Procedural errors in staffing process

Statement

At their session held on June 19, 2019, the CFPM members analyzed a complaint concerning a staffing process for a permanent professional position relating to the following allegation:

THE COMPLAINANT ALLEGES HE/SHE WAS SUBJECT TO UNFAIR TREATMENT BECAUSE PROCEDURAL FAILURES HAVE OCCURRED DURING THE PROCESS, PREVENTING HIM/HER FROM PROVIDING AN OPTIMUM PERFORMANCE DURING THE INTERVIEW.

In order to fully understand the nature of the complainant's allegation, the Commission carefully gathered his/her testimony and went over the elements contained in the complaint form, as well as any other relevant facts the complainant wanted to bring to our attention.

Investigation Methodology

• A meeting with the complainant was held to determine the nature of the complaint, to analyze its admissibility and study the complaint thoroughly.
• An interview with the human resources department’s representative was then conducted, with the consent of the complainant, to obtain his/her version of the facts.
• The CFPM interviewed other witnesses concerned with the complaint.
• All the parties met or interviewed were informed of the confidentiality of the process and agreed to abide thereby.
• A review of the documentary evidence was also conducted.
• The investigation process including meetings or telephone interviews, the analysis of the testimonies and the documentation, as well as the conclusions, was then presented during a board meeting with CFPM members.

Facts

By rigorously analyzing all the steps of the staffing process in question, the Commission found several procedural flaws, which could effectively have had a negative impact on the complainant's performance during his/her interview.
These procedural flaws mainly concerned the preparatory exercise for the evaluation interview.

Conclusions

After an analysis of all the facts brought to their attention, the CFPM members found that the complainant's allegation was well-founded.
The Commission understands that the human resources department did not knowingly intend to impose this situation on the complainant, but nevertheless considers that a recommendation is necessary to avoid similar problems in the future.

Recommendation

The Commission recommends that the instructions for the preparatory exercise for the position to which the complaint relates be standardized. More specifically, it is suggested that the guidelines, whether in the form of printed documentation or in a computerized file, be identical. This recommendation is intended to avoid confusion by candidates during their preparation and to ensure that candidates clearly understand what is expected of them during the exercise.