Training and Education Committee
April 1, 2017
Present: Kimberley Skanes, Chair
Nancy Lamarche, Director of Regional Labour Relation Services
Emmanuel Costain, Atlantic
Wanda Aschacher, British Columbia / Yukon
Peter S. Jozsa, Ontario Kieth L. Laing, Prairie/NWT Ivana Saula, Education Officer Audrey Joyal, Staff Resource
Alternate: Wanda Aschacher for Peter MacDougall, BC/Yukon
Regrets: Gordon J. Bulmer, NCR Robert Tellier, Québec
1. Call to order
K. Skanes called the meeting to order at 9:16 a.m. (EST) on April 1st, 2017, at the National Office, Ottawa, Ontario.
2. Approval of Agenda
The Agenda items were approved, however, a new item on “CLC Training” developed while updating the list of action items. All other items were reviewed and approved as presented: moved by E. Costain, seconded by W. Aschacher – Carried.
3. Approval of minutes from last meeting
E. Costain observed that his name was referred to in two different ways in the Minutes.1
Otherwise, the Committee reviewed and approved the Minutes as presented: moved by
E. Costain, seconded by K. Laing – Carried.
4. Business arising from the minutes of the last meeting
a. Updating action Items
The committee updated the list of action items from March 4 to February 18, 2017. Action Item: A.Joyal to update list for the next TEC Meeting.
b. Steward Job Description
The TEC members presented their region‟s take on the steward job description. This exercise would allow the TEC to find commonalities and differences between steward levels and roles across the regions. As such, the language would be amended to encompass all stewards.
In combining the regional descriptions, the TEC drafted the following outline:
Role of the Steward: Job Description
A Steward is the union‟s representative in the workplace.
A steward is 1 or more of the following,
1) Mobilizer/Informational Steward
- Assist in organizing
- Upkeep union bulletin board
- Member outreach
- Mobilization of RANDS
- Show commitment to one aspect of a Steward
- Info. Packages to new members
- Distribute information
2) Intermediate Steward
- Representation : Phase 1 – grievances
- Willing to sit or alternate on workplace committee
- Local consultation
- Return to work assistance
3) Advanced Steward
- Representation : Phase 2 - Harassment and Discipline
- National Cons.
- 2nd / 3rd level grievance
- Bargaining, Mentoring, PIPSC Structure
Discussion ensued around the “how, when and by whom” the levels of stewardship would be determined. The Committee determined that a self-identification and a results- based approach would be the most appropriate way to determine the steward‟s level. E. Costain added that renewing stewardship terms yearly versus triennially could help track a steward‟s progress on the steward continuum of experience (especially for more senior stewards).
c. Training Policy
The Committee decided to postpone this item until after the steward roles and job description are finalized. Only then will the TEC know which clauses of the training policy need review and redacting.
d. Training Structure : National, Regional and E-learning
K. Skanes proposed the structure outlined in the Appendix A for the new Education Program.2 As this structure is still in the development phase, the Committee was encouraged to provide their feedback.
K. Skanes is working towards liberating space in the currently vacant floors of 250
Tremblay for classrooms. These classrooms would host national training and regional training for the National Capital Region. This request will be submitted to the Board in August.
K. Laing reflected on the new framework discussing the role of stewards and staff in facilitating at the national level. This would entail developing steward specializations contingent on their level of interest and type of involvement. Also, as P. Jozsa notes, it would entail identifying the stewards who solely take advantage of the fringe benefits of steward status without bringing real value or actively contributing. The focus for national training should be on staff facilitators in order to bypass the aforementioned type of steward.
E. Costain suggested that group annual general meetings (i.e. CS AGM) be reduced to half days therefore freeing time for group specific training. P. Jozsa announced that the CS group recently trialed the meeting/training approach at their last AGM. The course provided on lobbying was successful.
Regarding the steward selection criteria for training, the Committee agrees that the Chair of the Regional Committee is responsible for overseeing the participant list. The issue with allowing stewards to attend on a “first come, first served” basis is that newer and/or more active stewards may not have an opportunity to attend. Instead, the stewards who are solely motivated by the fringe benefits are overrepresented in the classes taking a seat away from a valuable steward.
e. Education Model
The current model and the new (proposed) model for the PIPSC Education Program were both presented to the Committee.3 The new model is shown through a “delivery” lens for both Steward Development and Member Engagement.
K. Skanes clarified that member training was composed of lunch and learns and e- learning in the current model. I.Saula confirmed that E-Learning is available to all members and the learning plans/modules are tracked by group and region. These tracking reports provide Education with information on sought out courses and trends by category. Also, Education continues to work closely with Communications to raise awareness about e-learning via social media.
The matter of providing e-learning from the portal versus an outside source resurfaced from a previous meeting. P.Jozsa relied on his expertise in computer science to confirm that providing e-learning from the portal would be an attainable endeavour.
f. Meeting Summary: Separate Employers (SEs), WGC and AC
K. Skanes reported that the Separate Employers expressed a need for more training tailored to their legislation. The Working Group on Consultation (WGC) echoed the concerns of the Separate Employers and added the need for more material on consultation for their teams (department).
N. Lamarche informed the Committee that she will be attending a meeting with the Separate Employers, April 21st, 2017. She will share her findings with the Committee at the next meeting.
The Advisory Council (AC) provided a general update and expressed their appreciation for this intervention in form of a revamp. It is important to note that despite the SE‟s/WGC‟s need for catered content, they wish to remain included in the general / soft skills training which apply to all regions and groups. These training opportunities provide all parties with a networking platform.
Certain committee members cautioned prudence when canvassing feedback in the outreach phase. There are benefits to PIPSC broadening outreach to the smaller groups; however, it should steer clear from the point of diminishing returns when incorporating feedback. This approach may drain resources unnecessarily, when the focus should be on representing the interests of the public service as a whole.
P. Jozsa shared his experience with separate employer representatives. He suggested that a Separate Employer representative be selected for committees to secure their own interests by being included in the dialogue.
E. Costain informed the Committee that representatives from every separate employer in the Atlantic region are given a seat at the regional council. Also, he stressed the importance of remaining attentive to the training needs of the separate employer as their membership continues to grow in numbers. The Institute does not forecast new recruits from Treasury Board or other CLC affiliates, therefore, the training materials need to represent the interests of separate employers as well.
W. Aschacher informed the TEC that close to twenty percent (20%) of the participants attending her regional negotiations training were retired members. In addition, the schedules for training and the lunch and learns did not accommodate shift work.
K. Laing briefly added that the CLC provides training on topics consistent with the needs of Separate Employers since the majority of their audience consists of non- governmental workers.
- N. Lamarche and K.Skanes attending Separate Employers meeting to prompt specific, April 21st, and will report back to the TEC.
5. Items Arising from Past Items
a. PIPSC Mental Health Resource Guide
The Committee approved the mental health guide which incorporated the feedback from the last meeting.
- TEC to communicate any more feedback on guide before July 7th, 2017(meeting number 3).
6. New Business
a. Ontario Regional Training Committee (ORTC): Ideas
The following action items were assigned to the Committee members in preparation for the rollout of the new PIPSC Education Program:
- Identify the Scope of the Steward
- Format the courses by theme/topic
- Draft Steward Work Description
In response to these assigned tasks, the ORTC suggested a new framework for members and stewards in a presentation titled, “Managed Career Progression”.
P.Jozsa presented the proposed framework to the TEC; see the complete presentation in Appendix A.4 The framework underlines the importance of differentiating between new stewards and advanced stewards. To group training by theme, the structure must accurately identify and reflect a member‟s/steward‟s skills and level of involvement.
In contrast to the traditional approach to training, which was limited to three categories (member, basic steward and advanced steward), this new framework would place the members and steward on a continuum. The milestones on the continuum are as follows, “Rands/New Hires, New Members, Interested Members, Active Members/ Active Retired Members, New Stewards, Intermediate Stewards and Advanced Stewards”. These milestones would help manage union careers, increase activism/involvement and provide a platform for mentoring/guidance.
The portion on member training and engagement permits the gradual progression from the introductory phase to the engagement phase. The idea is to encourage the transition from engaged member to new steward. The steward portion of the continuum focuses on steward engagement, recruitment and advancement. What remains true is that a steward will be more motivated to progress if their accomplishments are acknowledged. The acknowledgment mechanism allows for further dialogue around steward guidance and mentorship. As the member progresses the options for comprehensive training increase. Parameters and privileges could be set for each milestone; this would create an incentive for member/stewards to advance.
The presentation reiterated the need for the e-learning program to be provided within the PIPSC portal. This way, the members/stewards would not require an account to access modules (their membership number would suffice), troubleshooting issues would require less intermediates and the members could select their learning plan. Education concurs with the advantages of having a store front model to e-learning versus the current model which requires manual registrations. However, the roll out of such platform would require further discussions with the Informatics Department.
As it pertains to the “Steward Work Description” label, the ORTC preferred to refer to it as a “Steward Expectation”. According to the ORTC, this label has a more positive connotation and recognizes that stewards are engaged with their union voluntarily without compensation.
K. Laing appreciated the similarities between regions in the framework and also recognized the differences between regions (in this case, the Prairies). When evaluating training, other unions (i.e. PSAC) focus on participation and interest instead of tests/results.
I.Saula agreed that presentation was successful in addressing the reform in greater detail. The e-learning matter was addressed by informing the committee that changes
4 Appendix C, Presentation on Member/Steward Training Framework: Managed Career Progression
were made to the platform to facilitate access. Also, for the unsuccessful participants, a review procedure was established to average their scores and (if deemed reasonable) grant certification. Finally, a resource group was created to formalize the feedback mechanism between the regional offices and the Education Department. The Education Resource Group (ERG)5 was re-established by the Director of Labour Relation
Services, Nancy Lamarche, and serves as a soundboard for the Education Department. This also provides them with a platform to share their feedback on matters such as the reform of the PIPSC Education Program.
- P.Jozsa to contact Catherine Gagnon, PIPSC Mobilization Officer, to discuss a strategy to prompt active members to transition into to new stewards. Also, to gather more detail on activists who are not “stewards” but passionate about the labour movement and syndicalism.
b. CLC Training
The Committee discussed the appropriateness of CLC training for the membership and its accessibility. This was prompted by P.Jozsa‟s query regarding the steps taken in determining the relevance of CLC courses to the PIPSC Education Program. I. Saula advised that she was approached in 2016 to review the CLC portfolio. However, due to the volume of the CLC content and the length of their courses (at times running over one week), the Committee ultimately decided to review the courses on an as-needed basis.
K. Skanes informed the committee that PIPSC President, D. Daviau, suggested that the CLC training be taken by the members of the (national) Training and Education Committee in lieu of the regional training committees. This way, the TEC could determine which CLC courses are pertinent to their regions and report the selection back to their regional committees.
K. Laing spoke to this item explaining that the CLC training often takes place over a week and the themes shift over the span of the training. There have been instances where the topics covered during the week did not apply to PIPSC members. CLC training is expensive; as such it is important to determine their relevance ahead of time. K.Laing recognized the legitimacy of determining applicable CLC training at the national level. However, he suggested that there be a firm and thorough reporting mechanism post-training to fully redeem the benefits of allocating time and resources to CLC training.
W. Aschacher shared a different perspective in that she felt the cost for CLC‟s weeklong training was inexpensive as the rates included meals and accommodation. Also, W. Aschacher recognized the importance of the networking opportunities with the affiliates during CLC training. The diversity of topics covered in the weeklong training allows
5 Appendix D, Education Resource Group: Role and Representatives
participants to acquire knowledge on a variety of topics that may unexpectedly peak their interest. In sum, the value of the CLC training should not rely solely on the relevance of the topics but also on the experience.
I.Saula informed the Committee of the CLC‟s approach when developing training materials. The CLC offers training based on information they receive from their affiliates. Since the majority of CLC affiliates are from the private sector, one can safely assume that the matters which apply to the public service are underrepresented in training as a whole.
P. Jozsa recognized the value in attending the CLC labour schools as a Committee. This way the Committee can reflect on the materials as a group streaming from the same experience. For example, the CLC training in Ontario could be combined with a PIPSC event in Ontario.
K. Skanes will accompany I.Saula to the next Education Advisory Committee (EAC) meeting as an observer (date unspecified). This may shed some light on the matters discussed under this agenda item.
- K. Skanes to report back to the TEC after EAC meeting.
c. Requests: Lunch and Learns and Special Training
In line with the action item assigned to K. Laing last year labelled, “Special Training Requests Form”, he shared ideas regarding the standardization of special training request forms. Utilizing the portal for the data capture of these requests would be advantageous and more efficient. K. Laing suggested that a digital record of forms be kept under the member‟s profile accessible to staff and select representatives. These requests would be processed internally at all times; no paper archives would be required.
P.Jozsa drew parallels between the special training request process and the lunch and learn process. He concurred that an online landing page for both these requests could be developed by Informatics.
By digitizing these processes, data could be pulled for the various types of requests received and captured by region/group. This could relieve the urgency for surveys as the statistics would be derived from the portal. Also, this would allow regions to be more involved and clearer on the policies (i.e. lunch and learn rules).
- K. Laing to contact IT regarding landing page. P.Jozsa and K.Laing to collaborate on creating a landing page (prototype), offline.
d. PIPSC and You : Lunch and Learn Presentation
The Mobilization and Education departments collaborated to combine the various existing presentations on “PIPSC and You” for lunch and learns into on uniform presentation.
The TEC offered feedback on slide format, flow and the selection of sources. Action Item:
- Education to amend presentation (in collaboration with Mobilization) prior to distribution. The finalized presentation will be communicated to the TEC prior to July 7th, 2017.
7. Tentative Meeting Date
The committee agreed to meet again July 7th, 2017 at the Hilton Lac Leamy, Gatineau.
8. Regional Reports
Due to time constraints, no regional reports were provided in this meeting.
9. Round table
The Education team kindly requested that the TEC bear in mind the translation delays when providing staff with materials for the TEC meetings. A chart
with the Translation Department‟s expected turnaround times was provided for reference.
The Committee welcomed W. Aschacher and wished all a safe journey home.
The meeting adjourned at 17:08 p.m. EST.
Separate employers training should come under the regions as that is where they are located and have little if any common issues/legislation with other provincial groups
Basic Steward – this could fit either under the regional training or the national training. This course could also be done in conjunction with a school if there are resources available to facilitate.
Regional School – can be done based on themes, courses that are related, or have the regional training committee will have the ability to choose specific courses. (once or twice a year)
Lunch & Learns - would still be approved through the regional training chair/committee. Presentations should be prepared so that the message is same no matter where the lunch and learn is presented.
Proposed facilitator based courses in length of .5 to 1 day would be most effective, financially, to be held in the regions or areas where the course will have the greatest benefit. These will be of most benefit to shift workers who are not available to attend 3-5 day schools.
National training school, (propose to acquire space for classrooms dedicated to training in the National office.) School will be based on courses that are relevant to all stewards, with dedicated classroom space, 2-3 times a year a 5-day school can be held, depending on the number of classrooms and availability of facilitators will depend on the number that can be trained at a time.
Courses offered at the National level should be related and progressive.
Basic steward can be done at either the regional or national school. When numbers of stewards in waiting are low across the country, a national school could be the most feasible.
Courses that can provide the information in an e-learning environment. This would be open to both stewards and members.
By: K.Skanes, Chair of the TEC
Member/Steward Training Framework
“Managed Career Progression” Presented by Ontario Region Training Committee to:
Training and Education Committee
Strategic Approach and Gap Analysis
Our Goal was to come up with a basic framework for the Training and Education Committee. One that would build on what we had already, but also clearly indicate where certain types of training/education/information would have the biggest impact, where we could do a better job on training/education/information, and where we have gaps that require training/education/information.
- Identify Target Audience and classify by Knowledge and Experience (‘Member / Steward Milestones’)
- Perform Gap Analysis and apply existing and suggested Training best suited to each ‘Career Milestone’.
- Identify Stakeholders and ask them to provide input to further ‘flesh-out’ the framework.
Member / Steward Milestones
- Categories of ‘Basic’ and ‘Advanced’ Steward are limiting. The current model ignores Advanced Steward and Member Training.
- Milestones better identify distinctive points of ‘career’ progression in order to direct specific training.
- The bullet points in this slide attempt to characterize some of a member’s/steward’s knowledge/activity/interest/expectations at these milestones to help us pinpoint the best method/time to deliver training/engagement.
Managed Union ‘Career’ Progression and Guidance
Member Training and Engagement
- Members will have varied levels of interest in PIPSC. The model below allows for a gradual progression from Introduction to Engagement as well as provide (Online) Training and Information to ‘Active’ Non-Stewards including Retired Members.
- From a standpoint of how we deliver this info – the last two boxes - “Interested Members” and “Active Members/Active Retired Members” are somewhat interchangeable – they could both be linked off the same page for instance.
- Online Training For Members should be provided outside of the Web-portal – and not require an account.
Provide: Resources, Information and Opportunities for Self Learning and Advancement
Steward Training and Mentoring
Our Training plan must have elements of Steward Engagement, Recruitment and Advancement. From one milestone to the next, there needs to be some form of acknowledgement of the Steward’s achievements and guidance for future advancement. We may wish to consider a list of minimum expectations at each of these levels as well.
- Online Training For Members should be provided inside the portal and require the Steward’s credentials for tracking and acknowledgement.
Provide: In-Classroom, Peer and ERO Guided Learning, Networking and Mentorship
- Training and Education Committee (TEC)
- PIPSC Education Section
- EROs and Regional Offices
- Regional Training Committees
- Advisory Council (AC) and Working Group on Consultations (WGC)
- Retired Members Guild (RMG)
The TEC Committee should decide to what degree each of the stakeholders should participate in filling out the framework as well as the most valuable way of acquiring their input.)
PIPSC Education Resource Group (ERG):
The ERG is composed of employment relations officers and/or regional managers, appointed by their regional office, to serve as a soundboard for the Education Department in matters ranging from legislation to course amendments.
In an effort to formalize the feedback mechanism between the regional offices and Education, these representatives are spokespersons for their regional offices for training and educational materials pertaining to labour relations. The majority of course amendment requests take place following a labour school and an ERO‟s facilitation. By streamlining feedback, the ERG representative can review the feedback and discern what should be taken back to the resource group.
The ERG representative is the liaison between Education and Labour Relations. The Education Department may share pertinent information with the ERG in an effort to inform regional offices of developments in Education.
Members of the ERG 2017:
Ernie McLean - Vancouver (BC/Yukon Region) Sean Kemball - Winnipeg (Prairies/NWT) Sandra Guéric - Montréal (Québec)
Sara Boulé-Perroni - Ottawa, (National Capital Region) Tony Jones - Toronto (Ontario)
Max Way - Halifax (Atlantic Region)
Education Officer: Ivana Saula
Education Officer, contract: Audrey Joyal
Education‟s Administrative Professional: Karisa Karmali