SAC Meeting Minutes - August 02, 2024

Present:

Regret:

Norma Domey - SP - Chair & Board Liaison
Tina MacDonald - Windsor Regional Hospital Radiation Therapists - Member
Lawrence Mak - NRC - RORCO - Member
Matthew MacLeod - RE - Member
Lionel Siniyunguruza - Staff Support
Ira Hill - SP - Member
Darius Emadi - NR - Friend of the Committee

Terri D’Souza - CFIA - Member
 

Guests:

No guests.

1.Call to Order 

The meeting was called to order. The agenda was approved as presented.

2.Business arising from previous meeting and general discussion

Lionel presented the previous minutes (SAC Meeting June 21, 2024). There were several typos and clarifications that were fixed. 

SAC Strategic and Operational plan was presented, and key points mentioned. It was mentioned that some Women in Science events were being organized without any SAC input. 

Action item: Lionel to talk to the WiS team - SAC should at least be aware of the meetings before they are publicly announced. 

Reviving Women in Science Learning Labs

Norma would like to see this revived. These labs are good opportunities to improve conditions for women and promote PIPSC. It was suggested to better include gender-non-conforming members and to have a hybrid attendance model for flexibility. The committee should create a strong business case to the Board; the objective is to create more opportunities for women to have their voices heard and build support networks.. The committee will consider creating a taskforce to help with this. Action item: Norma and Lionel to meet to discuss this further. 

Challenges to Employment Equity

The Employment Equity in the Public Service of Canada for Fiscal Year 2021 to 2022 was discussed. It doesn’t look at profession-specific issues, which make it difficult to capture systematic barriers and biases. Employers should also use clearer language on promotion requirements and reasons for denial. 

Tina asked about PIPSC Policy on Official Languages - does this policy help support this issue? Matt responded saying the PIPSC policy is not particularly relevant for employer negotiations, though its existence might keep language issues a priority for bargaining teams. Tina also asked if QC language policies would have an impact. Matt responded no, as federal policies were separate. It was noted that the SAC QC representative was unable to participate, and a new representative was to be found. Norma was raising this at the next Board meeting. Annex was added to previous minutes, with text for new Group Language on Professional Development and also leave policy.

2024 Science Member Survey Update

Chair very pleased with the survey, which had been sent out a week previous to the meeting. The email informing members of the survey did identify the survey as coming from SAC but the Email team felt including more general information about the Committee wasn’t necessary. Committee mentioned it was difficult to always know who to send survey to, and there was some negative feedback from some members (due to increased administrative load on members). Action: Tina to send list of branch presidents to Norma, to find out which ones should get information about the survey.

Science Integrity Steward training. 

Matt has been working with Joanna Simpson, and Sally Hannah, to update the training based on previous feedback. The delivery is on track for a Fall rollout. Tina asked for more information on this steward training, how often it is run and how stewards are selected for training - based on the Ontario region having demand for more training. Matt pointed out that, despite the training being virtual, there is a limit on numbers as the training is participatory and interactive. He also said that many EROs had not done SI training, and not all negotiators were well informed. Committee recognised that there was still work that needed to be done and also highlighted Matt’s hard work in getting to this stage. Lawrence suggested the training have EROs and PIPSC staff as well, so both parties clearly understand the importance of SI training. Matt also informed the Committee that the last training session (about 60 people over 3 sessions) only had a few people on the waitlist. Action item: Lionel to follow up with the criteria for selection.

Matt highlighted that meeting with employers is very difficult with the RE Group/inter-departmental career development consultation committee. Tina raised the question of grievances. Matt responded by saying PIPSC grievance processes are unclear and so many people don’t raise grievances when they could. Action item: Norma will raise this at the next Working Group on Consultation meeting but reminded people that people can raise this at their own consultation meetings. The group acknowledged that this was a difficult issue at times.

Governance Committee Update

PIPSC, the Treasury Board and the Chief Science Advisor’s office meet regularly to improve scientific integrity implementation across the public service. Several people work on this but Matt in particular has done a lot of work on this. There are various meetings but a major meeting (including governance of this process) happens every spring (roughly). This meeting keeps getting rescheduled. Action: Lionel to check if Mona Nemer’s (Chief Science Advisor) Office to see if they still wish to have the meeting. Norma, Lionel, Michael to meet about this as well. Lionel to change the style of the briefing document to match Eleanor’s style to fit Treasury Board/Science Advisor guidelines, and provide a committee of the revised document, for review. 

Matt noted that the Science Advisor’s Office has started to work unilaterally and sending information to departments, without union oversight. Norma mentioned there has been some turnover with key staff. There is concern as the upcoming governance meeting might be the last before a federal election, where the next government might not be so positive to this specific measure.

Challenges impacting government scientists today (report put together by Darius)

HR/Hiring: 

Temporary employees follow the same process as indeterminate employees. If temporary staff are needed, there should be a quicker process for these temporary needs. Matt pointed out that some departments could be using term employees as a way to reduce costs, as term employees have different progression rules. 

Many staff aren’t officially recognised for the actual work they do (especially for senior, non-management work) as they cannot be promoted, due to language requirements. Darius’ workplace is looking at creating another staffing level to reflect roles that require higher technical expertise but not necessarily management functions. Matt pointed out that we should be careful to not contradict the spirit of PIPSC’s own language policy. Darius responded that the idea was to keep bilingualism where needed but to acknowledge there were certain gaps in the the structure (particularly when it came to technical advising) where people were going for more management positions as there was nothing else more suitable. 

To be fully staffed during a high workload period, that can lead to periods of extended downtime. A suggestion is to create a workpool of employees that can be called upon to help even the workload. Matt said that seasonality is an issue but that often aligns across departments, so a shared pool would face this issue. Darius acknowledged this but that another point for the shared pool was to avoid silos and a spirit of competitiveness (that comes from funding models) and to encourage cooperation.

Financial Procurement:

A challenge is that funding announcements are usually made in April//May but submission deadlines for purchase are July/August - too short a turnaround time. This can significantly delay some projects. Sometimes the delay is because management doesn't realize the limitations set by deadlines, so awareness is also an issue. There is also an issue with some procurements that get approved and unapproved. These issues are seemingly common across departments.

IP/Copyright/Agreements/Open Science:

Current copyright policy discourages publication due to government owning research, which can impede international collaboration and joint projects with private industry (and other players). It can also conflict with publishing policies of some journals. Also, publishing fees are sometimes not included in project budgets, and can be prohibitive. This is an issue with new scientific integrity directives mandating open access for published work. Matt raised that, in Defence, patents/agreements are a bit different, as the government tries to have industry retain those. This can create problems with continued access to joint work once a contract is finished. It was clarified that the aim of collaboration was not primarily to serve private industry but to serve the public to productive collaboration and sharing of staff and resources. 

Facility:

There is a shortage of appropriate research space. Some research was even being conducted in shipping containers due to lack of space. What exists is sometimes outdated or poorly maintained. Some government buildings don’t have proper HVAC systems and all rooms require portable heaters. There are times when wear and tear is attributed to research teams, so those teams have to bear a disproportionate cost of building maintenance. There are also bureaucratic/legal hurdles to giving access to private companies. 

Classification/Promotions:

Darius asserted that promotion is too heavily tied to publishing, but this conflicts with external stakeholders not wanting proprietary information being released too soon. This sometimes leads in withholding publications, or publishing limited information. There was some discussion as to the role of government scientists and who their primary audiences are. Matt noted the ongoing advocacy of PIPSC in the right of scientists to express and to publish. In the end, the suggestion, instead of necessarily changing how and what we publish, to somehow allow for recognition of work that doesn’t lead to publication. 

IT/SSC/Research Security:

Security concerns have resulted in revocation of certain IT administrative rights (such as installing programs, using USBs) which impact work and collaboration with external partners. Where access has been limited or revoked, alternatives have not always been put in place.

Travel:

Restrictions on travel reduce networking opportunities, hinders exchange of ideas, and limits professional development. Another impact is reduced visibility of different research. 

Lack of clear KPIs/metrics

When research is done, it isn’t always clear afterwards what the impact and benefit of research was. It was noted that while practical benefits are important, long-term research can often be very useful and should also be valued (example given was that of CO2 research in the 70s having no clear mandate but that research has been instrumental in current climate research). 

The Chair thanked Darius for his work in preparing the report. Action: Lionel/Darius to change the report to clarify that we work for primarily the public and then industry. Lionel to send file to Darius. 

Action: Lionel to investigate document access issues that various members were having (Tina, Darius). Norma mentioned that the SAC mailing list has various members that don’t appear to be part of the committee. Action: Lionel to investigate the mailing list. 

3.New Business

Coralie is working on planning for the next meetings.

4.Regional Reports on Science Activities

BC and Yukon (Terri) - no update

Atlantic (Lawrence) 

There have been complaints about new RTO mandates, and difficulties with members applying for accommodation. There is also no current Consultation Team President. It is unclear whether an election has been held and what the results are. There is a proposal for another Women in Science lab session that Lawrence and Lina put together but first, the budget for the previous sessions need to be reviewed. Action: once update from Finance team, Lionel will update budgets and Lawrence will finalise proposal. Lawrence will propose in-person and virtual sessions and depending on SAC feedback, that will decide whether meetings will be in-person, virtual or both. Norma said, based on previous sessions, virtual meetings for these labs didn’t work but that could a worst case scenario option. 

Prairies and NWT () 

At Regional Council, ECCC member talked to Ira about which regions will be classified as drought-affected or not (which has funding implications). The criteria for drought have been changed by her managers, seemingly as a result of ministerial interference wanting to have fewer drought areas listed. Group discussions only resulted in two options: accept but try and speak up; or quit. Matt responded that, while it might not be successful, the member could file a grievance. Member could also put out a public paper, not directly criticising the government, but offering their own interpretation of data. This option might take too long however. 

Quebec () - no update

Ontario () 

No activity reports. Tina mentioned how collaborating with the committee has always been fruitful. She mentioned it might be useful to start planning for the AGM. Also, perhaps a brochure or something similar (explaining PIPSC committees in general) could be made for stewards at the upcoming Steward Council. Norma mentioned that perhaps all the documentation doesn’t exist. She wil raise committee visibility at the next directors’ meeting. At this stage, it would be too late to create a brochure (though Norma will raise it with the PIPSC Board) but the aim should be to get SAC reports to groups/steward councils. 

Action: Lionel to send email to start preparing SAC presence at the PIPSC AGM. 

NCR (Matt) -

NRC had recently received funding to physically relocate several sections in Ottawa. RE Group has updated a guide for members who have been denied travel. Some members in DND have had their managers try to interfere with scientific results. This might be due to more managers being brought in with non-scientific backgrounds and not understanding the issue. DND also has no current Scientific Integrity Lead, no acting person in that position. There are scientific integrity cases that can’t be dealt with due to lack of SI lead. DND has also filed a grievance about poor follow up regarding a breach that had occurred (the breach concerned a software glitch making identities of blind reviewers known). It was noted that Environment were trying to be more flexible with RTO mandates but with the change to a 3-day mandate has lost that flexibility, which is upsetting members.

Darius: update on other NCR activities

Branch Executive and NR Group planning to host two events (one in August, one in September) that will be a joint activity with PSAC, to allow members and unions to meet one another. 

7.Closing comments and Adjournment

Tina mentioned that there could be cost-effective materials that could be prepared for the AGM to promote SAC. Action: Lionel to email committee to start a brainstorming thread about AGM materials. Also, Lionel to investigate budget for previous SAC presence at AGM, and find previous business cases for previous activities. 

Chair thanked members for their contributions and especially Lionel for his support to the committee.