FPSLREB Decisions

The Costing Centre within the Office of the Comptroller General of Canada was established to improve the quality of costing information within the federal government. The Canadian chapter of the International Cost Estimating and Analysis Association (ICEAA) aims to develop Canadian training and accreditations in costing. The Costing Centre had to fill two senior policy analyst positions. The delegated manager was the director of training for ICEAA and filled the positions through non-advertised appointment processes. The complainant made complaints against the two appointments, alleging abuse of authority in the choice of a non-advertised appointment process and in the application of merit. The Board found that both appointments were not assignments but in fact continuations of acting appointments. For one of the appointees, the Board concluded that the respondent was deceitful and not transparent, that it acted in bad faith when it used a non-advertised process to retroactively appoint the appointee, and that it disregarded the requirements of the Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13; PSEA). The appointment, made through a reclassification, was not based on merit, as the appointee did not meet the bilingual-imperative requirement. The appointment was a subterfuge by the respondent to circumvent the PSEA’s requirements. For the other appointee, there was no rationale explaining why a non-advertised process was chosen. Neither transparency nor fairness were considered. The Board found that the respondent acted in bad faith in one of the appointments, as it arbitrarily determined the language proficiency level by disregarding Treasury Board and Public Service Commission policies, while knowing that the appointee did not have the level required to meet the merit criteria. The Board found that the delegated manager was not in a conflict of interest in his ICEAA role, for which he did not receive any monetary benefits. His involvement was aligned with the federal government's initiative to improve costing. The Board found that the respondent did not make the appointments for reasons of personal favouritism, as the delegated manager had no personal relationships with the appointees. The Board found a reasonable apprehension of bias on the respondent’s part to favour the appointees because they supported ICEAA training in the federal government. Because one appointee’s appointment was not based on merit, the Board ordered it revoked.

Complaints allowed.