Minutes from the 107th JCC Meeting - 16 juin 2021

107.1 

Approval of Agenda 

Agenda was approved with no new additions.

107.2 

Minutes of the 106^th Meeting of the JCC 

The Minutes were approved with a request that the Minutes be brought  forward in English initially with the request for translation going out after the  JCC meeting is held to then share back with the JCC for a quality  assurance review of the content that was translated to ensure it is  consistent with what was exchanged.

107.3 

Follow-up Action Items of the 106^th Meeting 

91.6 

Terms – Addressing EDI Impacts 

PIPSC has asked if it is possible to produce a report that can be broken  down under the term hire statistics to show how researchers are identified. 

This would outline the data on length of terms as it relates to classification.  PIPSC says that they are still hearing from their members that the RO/RCO  groups are predominantly being hired into term positions for up to five  years with extensions along the way. PIPSC shared that this more detailed  report perhaps could shed some light on where there are potential issues. 

The RCEA shared that in the past the NRC provided a workforce  composition report depicting the number of term employees. They were  encouraged to see in the last report that was shared that most of the  NRC’s workforce were continuing employees.  

Management responded that they continuously look into the workforce  statistics to determine if there are pockets of the population that stand out  and if there are inconsistencies these are addressed, often resulting in  some conversion hiring exercises of term employee taking place. 

Management commits to speaking with Megan Yukich to see if a more in depth report depicting the breakdowns of classifications in term positions  can be produced and shared with the JCC members. 

PIPSC inquired with Management about whether there have been any  further actions undertaken in follow up to the conversation held between  PIPSC and the VP HRB on Equity Diversity Inclusion. This conversation  which was held offline delved into the matter which was raised at a  previous JCC outlining the challenges to employees who are hired into  term positions, particularly women researchers who are disproportionately  affected by not having permanent positions within the organization, who in  turn delay starting a family. PIPSC shared that while there are a limited  number of cases, this is still happening and many term employees are not  being renewed. Further PIPSC shared that they are hearing that under the  workforce composition policy the requirement for a three year review of  term hires is often not happening. That being said, PIPSC has heard that  the five year review of term hires is occurring as there is a requirement for  a justification to extend a term in this situation by the VP.  

The RCEA shared that their understanding is that the workforce  composition is supposed to be reviewed on an ongoing basis and feel that  the same rigour that may be viewing research staff hired into term positions  should be given to term employees that are part of the RCEA. The RCEA  agrees with PIPSC that they do not believe the review at the three year  point after hire is happening and they believe that the information submitted  for the justification is very limited (if it happens at all) and is not a full  business case. 

Management commits to speaking with the HRB Management team to look  into adding rigour into the review of the workforce and to consider  conversions where they are warranted. Management shared that they will  need to explore the process to see if there are options to ensure these  long-term term hires are not overly extended without a strong rationale. 

Management commits to continuing the conversation offline regarding the  EDI impacts affecting term hires and this will feed into the EDI strategy.

E.Harrison 

E.Harrison 

E.Harrison

101.RT3 

Phoenix Damages – MOU Status 

Management shared that since the last meeting of the JCC the MOU has  been signed and we are waiting for implementation guidance that is being  led by TBS and PSPC. We have concluded the agreement and await for  direction. 

Management commits to following up on this topic at the next JCC and  they commit to creating an ECHO article on this topic to go out which will  update employees on the MOU. 

The RCEA has asked that the article also be made available for retirees  and former employees and they would like to post the same message that  is posted in ECHO on the RCEA website. 

NOTE: A communication on the MOU and impacts for employees was sent  out by Amy Campbell in August 2021.

A.Campbell

102.6 

Parental Leave – Tool for Employees 

Management shared that the Compensation team in conjunction with the  Communications Branch is working on updates to MyZone with the hope  that with the renewal project (of MyZone) launched in the Fall, they will be  

able to provide clearer information to employees on maternity and parental  leave options in addition to the impacts of other types of leave. 

Management shared that they have spoken with the HRGs to encourage  them to have their employees/client groups connect with compensation as  soon as possible when entertaining these life decisions which could include  things like adoption, maternity leave, parental leave and other types of  leave with or without pay. 

PIPSC expressed concerns that their members often go to their HRGs who  say that they should firm up their dates before going to compensation. 

Management reiterated that employees should not wait until they firm up  their dates but should reach out before they finalize these decisions to seek  clarity and guidance from compensation around the impacts. 

Management also shared that they intend on sending out a small ECHO  article to give employees a gentle reminder and prompt to seek out input  and guidance from the compensation team when considering these life  decisions to inform themselves of the potential impacts and options  available. 

NOTE: An ECHO article was published on 22 July 2021 providing  employees with a reminder to reach out to the Compensation team for  further guidance and supports when contemplating leaves of absence.

102.RT1 

JCC Article for ECHO 

An article describing the JCC, its role and composition was drafted by Amy  Campbell with Leah Kennedy and was shared with the Bargaining Agents  in May 2021. The article was published in ECHO on June 10^th, 2021. 

The RCEA requested access to the full ECHO article and where possible  other ECHO articles as these are not accessible to the Bargaining Agents.

Management commits to sending the ECHO article and will look into  options for how the ECHO articles can be sent to PIPSC and RCEA. 

NOTE: The ECHO article containing the publication on the JCC in addition  to all ECHO articles that were published since January 2021 were  forwarded to both Bargaining Agents by Leah Kennedy.

A.Campbell

104.6 

December Shutdown Communications 

Management shared that there is currently no communication on  December Shutdown planned however, communications to Directors  General have gone out speaking to vacation leave and encouraging  managers to support their teams to plan and take vacation leave over the  summer which in turn also serves to support employee’s mental health.  This message went on Friday the 11^th of June. Additionally, HRGs have  been speaking with their management teams about supporting employees  to work the necessary hours to be able to bank December Shutdown leave.  

The RCEA inquired if messaging to employees will be sent out early such  that employees have a lot of advanced notice to bank the necessary hours  and that the opportunity to bank December Shutdown leave is not left until  the last minute. 

Management suggested that an InterComm article may be a good way to  address this topic which would give ample time to plan for working and  banking the December Shutdown hours. Management suggests that  Michel Dumoulin should look to raise this topic at a Research Operations  Meeting and commits to doing so. 

The RCEA says that the issue with December Shutdown was more specific  to AEP and requests that HR Management speak with the new DG at AEP about plans for banking December Shutdown hours since discussions for  identifying opportunities for banking December Shutdown hours are not  occurring in some groups. 

Management commits to speaking with the DG of AEP however did share  that they have been pro-active in discussing leave and also December  Shutdown hours, so this will be a continuation of this topic. Management  will suggest that a message go out to staff early such that there is clarity  around working hours and how to bank for December Shutdown. 

The RCEA suggests that if a message is sent out to Management on the  topic of December Shutdown, a note should be highlighted to remind  management that they should respond to messages that come in for  vacation leave requests to ensure that their members are not left  wondering if the request for vacation has been approved or not.  

The RCEA would like it to be clearly articulated in this management  communication that authorized overtime is not the same as working extra  hours to bank December Shutdown. 

M. Dumoulin E.Harrison

The RCEA shared that they get questions from members when they are  told to bank any extra hours that they have worked to December Shutdown  rather than to overtime codes when the work has been assigned by  management. The RCEA stated that this is not the correct application of  time codes. 

Management suggests that the proposed InterComm article could help to  clarify this message and identify the difference between authorized  overtime and December Shutdown. 

The RCEA spoke to cases that they have heard where employees who  requested vacation leave were denied in some pockets of the organization  last year and would like to see that not be a reoccurrence this year. 

Management responded that they were unaware of cases where vacation  leave was denied but did say that there are still pockets of the organization  where scheduling has been challenging due to organizational and  operational needs to have employees working in some specialized areas.  That being said, with coordination of schedules this should not be the case  this year. Further, Management asks that if there is a specific place that  needs to be addressed where vacation leave is consistently being denied,  Management should be made aware so that it can be addressed as soon  as possible to investigate. 

The RCEA said it is possible that some of the same members from last  year may still be impacted and unable to take leave and therefore they will  follow up on these cases. 

PIPSC also highlighted the need for Management to flag to their  employees early to schedule and plan their vacation leave as there are  many who have large banks of days to use this year and some also were  approved carry-over in very rare and specialized situations. It will be  important that people are encouraged to plan and take the leave early. 

NOTE: ECHO messaging was sent out to all employees on 9 September  2021 speaking to December Shutdown leave and requirements for banking  the extra time. A subsequent InterComm article for Managers and  Supervisors will go out in October 2021.

88.9 

CTE – Communications and Calibration 

Management shared that a meeting with the HR Generalists was held in  March 2021 and attended by Amy Campbell and Denise Le Voguer. At this  meeting a discussion took place with the intent to provide HRGs with the  general principles for performance evaluations in a COVID-context.  Statistics for last year’s performance evaluations have shown thus far that  the majority of employees have a met expectations rating. That being said,  there are still CTEs that need to be finalized  

PIPSC asked for an update on the integration of how D1 increments being  attached to the CTE process is going. They would like to know the timeline  for when the outcome of the D1 increments is to be communicated.

Management commits to following up and providing feedback that has  been gathered on how the integration of the CTE and D1 process has gone  and will report back at the next JCC.  

Management shared that their understanding thus far is that the integration  has been well received with the D1 cases and CTEs, however they will  gather more feedback. 

The RCEA shared that they have heard from the Technical Officer  community that there are employees asking questions about a promotion  through the new CTE form. Many of these Technical Officers are unaware  that this promotion section is only to be used for the RO/RCO promotion  guidelines, and feel that it is misleading to suggest a promotion on all CTE forms if it is only intended for the RO/RCO category. 

Management commits to looking into the language on the promotion piece  within the form and will report back if changes can be made. 

The RCEA reports that they continue to have issues with the Performance  Improvement Plan (PIP) process that forms part of performance  management and cited a case where they have a member who has been  put on PIP without having any meetings with their supervisor nor were they  provided with any ongoing feedback. The RCEA stressed that this is not  aligned with the policy and managers may not be meeting with their  employees to have discussions about the CTE. The RCEA reiterates that  this has been an issue for their members and this is not a new  conversation with management, and it continues to be raised to their  attention.  

The RCEA believe there needs to be consequences to these managers for  not meeting with their employees and also to these types of management  decisions which are ignoring the principles of good performance  management. The RCEA believe that managers should not be permitted  to ignore their NRC policy responsibilities. 

Management responded that they can appreciate what the RCEA has  shared and agree that in the context that this was shared by the Bargaining  Agent it does not seem to make sense for why someone is on a PIP  without a conversation happening. That being said, Management has  asked to know more about this case and encourages this discussion to  happen offline with Amy Campbell and Labour Relations. 

A.Campbell 

A.Campbell

106.4 

JCC and LLMCC Terms of Reference Review 

Leah Kennedy made minor edits to update titles within the Terms of  Reference and shared this document with the members of the JCC.  

The RCEA provided some feedback, but no major changes identified. 

The RCEA asks if this item can be deferred to the next JCC in September  such that the Terms of Reference can be reviewed again. The RCEA  requests that the Terms of Reference be re-sent out again to the JCC  members for their input. 

PIPSC inquired about LLMCCs and whether they will start up again since  they have not met since the Pandemic arrived. 

PIPSC shared that there is some interest from the PIPSC membership to  have updates from management and would like to know what the best  practice is to get them restarted? 

Management commits to following up with Louis Poirier to continue this  discussion and to provide some guidance on the restart of LLMCCs. 

The RCEA noted that IRAP management have been holding regular  townhalls with their employees so information is flowing that way in that  organization. 

NOTE: Leah Kennedy re-sent the Terms of Reference to the members of  the JCC on the 16^th of June, 2021 by email.

106.7 

Protocols for holding Classified discussions while teleworking 

PIPSC previously shared that they had sought guidance on how to hold  Classified discussions and had not heard back. 

Management shared that they had spoken with the Security Office there is  more work to be done on investigating options for holding these sensitive  conversations.  

This item will be deferred to the next JCC for further discussion in the Fall.

106.8 

Vaccination Clinics onsite at NRC in Quebec 

The RCEA had previously inquired to see if the NRC would be open and  able to offer their locations in Quebec to be used as possible COVID-19  vaccination sites. Management confirms that this was not being pursued  because the province was launching these at their designated locations. 

This matter was addressed at a bi-weekly meeting COVID meeting.

106.9  

RT1

Access to the HR Manual  

PIPSC previously raised a question about access to the HR Manual.  

Management shared that they spoke with Communications Branch and they are looking at posting it on a collaboration website such that it could  be accessible to those on the outside who do not have access the MyZone.  The challenge is that the HR Manual requires considerable updates and  hence posting on the external website in its current format is not  necessarily acceptable nor appropriate from a communications  perspective. Management shared that while the HR manual is available on  MyZone they understand that the RCEA and outside PIPSC Employee  Relations Officers cannot access this intranet and they will need to work  with communication to find something that is acceptable from various  lenses.  

If an external link or a collaboration site is not a possibility then a printed  copy in .pdf or Word may need to be provided as an interim measure. 

Management commits to continuing to work to provide a copy of the HR  Manual to the Bargaining Agents.

A.Campbell

Recurrent Business

105.8 

Proactive Pay Equity in the Public Service 

The RCEA said the Proactive Pay Equity project is an initiative that is being  implemented in the Core Public Service and they believe that they (the  Bargaining Agents) will be invited and able to attend seminars as a  participant. That being said, it seems that there is still little known about  what these seminars or collaboration activities may look like and the RCEA  would like to know if the NRC has any information they can share. 

Management shared that at NRC within the HR Branch there is a team that  is working with and engaging with TBS to gain further understanding of the  next steps.  

Separate Agencies like the NRC are going to be responsible for doing this  project on their own and our Head of classification, Francis Lalonde has  been engaging with our counterparts in how to address the steps. The  regulations are still going through the process for approval and as such  without these regulations fully blessed, the NRC is limited with what they can do at the moment.  

Management did state that the NRC will be required to have a joint committee, so once there is clarity on the regulations the next step will be  to strike up a committee to put steps in place to address how the  regulations will unfold. Management shared that they too have questions about next steps and also would like to better understand where the NRC  has overlap with what the rest of the Public Service is going to do.  Unfortunately, the timelines are fairly vague in understanding the launch  but the Fall of 2021 has been suggested as the starting point.

105.12 

Time Codes and Finitiative 

The RCEA raised concerns brought forth from their members who stated  that they feel there are more, or the same amount of time codes as  previously, but they had thought that with the Finitiative project this was  going to drop the amount of time codes. The RCEA shared that they have  also heard that in some Research Centres the number of codes for  employees to input has gone up because now there are added expenditure  codes in addition to these time codes. The RCEA cited the Aerospace  Research centre as an example where they have heard there are 5 fewer  time codes but more expenditure codes. 

Management responded that in April 2021 with the push from Finitiative  there was a start to reduce the number of time codes (project time codes)  having the intention to reduce in many areas however there are some time  codes for client projects which must be maintained. The vast majority of  time for these projects is with or for clients, so the Research Centres need  to report and the information gathered is key. The goal is and has been to  see that the majority of time codes are minimized. 

PIPSC shared that at ACRD time codes have been reduced and many are  enjoying the new system. They also added that there are reduced expenditure codes which has been very helpful. 

These are the codes that are used for procurement for projects for when  specific purchases are made. It will show up in SAP as costs.  

The RCEA shared that for some Research Centres, there are trends that  show only one time code is now being used however this is then allocated  to multiple client projects which while simpler has actually created a bit of  challenge for tracking purposes. The RCEA inquired if there is a  suggestion or best practice that could be shared to research staff for how  to track these multiple projects and how to justify any extra time that may  be spent on a particular project. 

Management responded that the system in SAP is set up so that there are  time codes available, so if they are needed to track projects for reporting  purposes then they should be used as they are still accessible, however  the intent is to try and minimize the use of multiple time codes wherever  possible. 

The RCEA questioned whether there are in fact fewer time codes in places  like ACRD or if more time codes are still available to be used and if the  organization is unclear in who should use what codes and when. 

PIPSC responded that at ACRD their understanding is that the research  staff are not required to input as many time codes as they previously did  therefore if the RCEA is hearing concerns that more codes are required to  be entered, perhaps this may be due to a different message extended to  the technical team versus the researcher team. 

PIPSC further shared that within the Aerospace Research Centre, the  Director General has taken a very active role in putting in place the  changes stemming from Finitiative as it relates to time codes and while  employees have been given codes for certain things to code their time to, they have always had expenditure codes. PIPSC stated that this is not  new (having expenditure codes) but maybe TOs did not know that. PIPSC shared that from their perspective the time codes have not all been  eliminated but the timesheets are much simpler.  

PIPSC also added that at OCRE there is a hybrid model for time entries  which has allowed for more flexibilities.

105.9 

Work Life Balance / Update on Wellness and NRC’s Mental Health  Strategy + Update on the BDO Report on Employment Systems (EDI) 

Update on Wellness 

Keith Blundon and Karine Constantineau joined the JCC and shared that  over the course of the past year and a half, a greater emphasis has been  placed on mental health and workplace wellness within the NRC, across  the Public Service. This has been magnified for all having to navigate the  

COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, the NRC was actively building  wellness programming while also developing the NRC’s first wellness  strategy, which was identified as a need through the NRC Dialogue  process. Additionally, in the past few years, the NRC has staffed a number  of key positions including the NRC Wellness Advisor Role, the office of the  Ombudsperson, Informal Conflict Resolution Practitioners etc.

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

∙ 

In the Fall of 2019, Keith Blundon’s team held consultations including with  the bargaining agents on the first wellness strategy for 2020-2023, which  was presented to SEC in March 2020. Two weeks following that  presentation, the organization shifted to remote work and wellness efforts  were redirected toward supporting the NRC and employees through the  pandemic. Throughout the pandemic, the NRC was able to advance some  of the planned foundational elements of the strategy through the context of  COVID-19 including increased awareness, promotion of resources etc. 

The following outlines some key activities which took place this past year: 

The NRC Wellness advisor delivered 125 information/training sessions to  almost 6000 participants. Additional mental health crisis training was  offered to MGTs and HRGs, which will be offered to all supervisors  beginning in the Fall of 2021. A number of additional guest speaker events  were also held throughout the year touching on the topic of wellness. 

Efforts at the NRC were dedicated toward promoting available resources  including the NRC wellness portal, EAP and LifeSpeak, each of which saw  increased usage this past fiscal year. 

A review of the PSES results for NRC showed that there were increases in  the number of employees who reported that the NRC is doing a good job in  raising awareness of mental health in the workplace and survey  participants indicated that the NRC can be described as a psychologically  healthy workplace. Results did show that there continues to be a need to  pay attention to identified workplace stressors such as workload. 

Based on lessons learned during the pandemic, it was decided to refresh  the NRC Wellness Strategy for the period of 2021-2024. Consultations  with PIPSC and RCEA were held in May 2021 and the strategy was  presented to and endorsed by SEC on June 15, 2021. 

The updated strategy includes a number of key initiatives designed to: 

Raise awareness of employee and workplace wellness and the supports  available (e.g. appointing a champion, establishing an ambassador  network) 

Equip NRC employees and managers to support workplace wellness (e.g.  establishing a learning curriculum, practical tools) 

Address and improve psychological health at the NRC (e.g. reviewing/ implementing procedures, establishing a suite of wellness indicators) 

Ensure sustained commitment, leadership and accountability (e.g.  establishing a governance framework, regular progress reports) 

PIPSC inquired whether Union Stewards could also get the information as  well that would be shared with supervisors on Mental Health.

Management requested that the Bargaining Agents provide an updated list  of current stewards such that they could be invited to the fall training  sessions.  

The invite can be extended and stewards can choose to attend or not. In  the future people will be able to sign up in Success Factors for these types  of training opportunities. 

Keith Blundon shared that there has been a 1.8% increase in EAP usage over the year prior and a 34% increase in usage of the LifeSpeak tools. 

The RCEA stated that there is a Wellness Together support program that is  free to government workers and raised it as an option available to NRC  employees. https://wellnesstogether.ca/ 

Karine Constantineau shared that the NRC does advertise this program as  part of their suite of Wellness Offerings; however, they may wish to  promote it more going forward. 

The RCEA shared that many NRC employees struggle with health and  mental health issues.  

Further, the RCEA shared that they have observed that unless their  members disclose this fact (that they are dealing with something) they are  treated as if nothing is wrong. The RCEA stated that it is in some of these  cases that they have seen disciplinary sanctions imposed without  management really knowing the full situation. The RCEA sees many of  these cases where issues may have arisen in the workplace not as  misconduct but as a cry for help. 

PIPSC shared that they too have seen that discipline is often given instead  of investigating further when there are signs that something is going on. 

Management responded that training that has been offered to managers  and supervisors is helping to provide tips for picking up signs and providing  tools for how to address when these situations arise but more work is  needed. 

The RCEA shared that in speaking with members of the Labour Relations  team there seems to be agreement that management need to be listening  and connecting with their employees to investigate when issues arise, but  what they are seeing is that HRGs are advising their management teams to  

go the discipline route first.  

Management commits to discuss what has been raised and agrees that  listening first is important such that discipline is considered carefully, taking  into account the facts that are presented. 

Management further commits to speaking with the HRGs at the next  Community of Practice in June 2021 where this topic will be shared and a  relay of Management’s expectations for how HR professionals should  interact in the workplace and the approach these types of situations.  

Update on EDI 

Keith Blundon shared that NRC hired a consulting company to conduct an  employment systems review and an accessibility assessment to be ready  for the implementation of the accessibility act. 

L. Poirier 

E.Harrison 

E.Harrison

He shared that these reports will be shared with the Bargaining Agents but  are not ready to be circulated yet. The reports are very detailed and there  are Executive Summaries which provide a good overview. The reports  should be available in the coming weeks and by the next JCC there can be  another check in on the EDI strategy. 

Management commits to inviting Keith Blundon back to share any updates  that can be made on the EDI strategy. 

Management offered a Big Kudos to Karine Constantineau, Keith Blundon  and their team for all of their hard work and dedication on the wellness  work they have done this past year.

E.Harrison

New Business 

107.4 

Future of Work 

Dale MacMillan and Antonietta Testa attended the JCC to provide an  overview of the recommendations being put forward as part of the NRC  Future of Work project which will look to implement a gradual roll-out of a  dispersed work environment framework at the NRC.  

In the Fall of 2020, the Future of Work project was launched and a  corporate survey was conducted of all NRC employees. From these  statistics it was clear that approximately 50% of staff would like to continue  to work offsite full or part-time. As part of the project management is  looking at ways that remote working might bring about opportunities to  realize Corporate benefits such as talent attraction and retention,  increasing staff diversity, reducing real estate footprints. This will better  position the NRC for future investment in evolving business objectives,  policy changes and technology solutions. They looked at what changes  would be required, benefits that people could see that would enable them  to work outside of the traditional worksite. Dale MacMillan explained that a  number of tiger teams were established to investigate various work  arrangements: onsite, offsite and hybrid. The Future of Work project  examined a number of factors such as work arrangement definitions,  performance management, health and safety requirements, security  requirements, office set up and training and tools, to name a few. 

Telework agreements to support employees working from home will be  required for off-site and hybrid work arrangements and each CBI will need  to look at how teleworking can work for them. 

Concurrently with the roll out of this project, the NRC will also be looking to  set up onsite collaboration spaces to support employees who will need to  come in from time to time but do not need a dedicated workspace. 

Dale MacMillan explained that the current timelines for the launch of the  Future of Work recommendations is Fall of 2021. The NRC has been running at 30-35% of onsite working which has been working very well and  will re-evaluate in the fall whether the % can increase. She shared that the  NRC does not have to bring everyone back immediately and will be  thoughtful in how individuals are reintegrated. Dale MacMillan explained  that the next steps will include meeting to consult with the Bargaining  Agents and they will continue to develop tools and materials through the  summer to prepare for the fall.

The RCEA shared concerns that this project and launch will be put together  with little or no consultation with the BAs. They worry that they will be  provided with only the final product and that their input will not be taken into  consideration. The RCEA are concerned that their members will not be  given equal opportunity for working off site. For example, employees  requiring access to and storage of sensitive documents may be used as a reasoning for denying the opportunity for employees to work off site part  time even though their work responsibilities may not require full time  access to these sensitive documents. The RCEA expressed worry that  their members may be disadvantaged. 

Dale MacMillan responded that this is new territory for the NRC and she  hears the concerns raised by the RCEA. She shared that there is a lot to  consider in who comes back and who will work remotely and that the NRC  will need to move forward with this initiative as this _is_ the future of work.  Notwithstanding that, she commits to considering the comments and  concerns raised.  

Dale MacMillan shared that there is a steering committee which has been  assembled to work on this project which include: Robert Faulder (IRAP), Guillermo Ordorica Garcia (NANO), Georgette MacDonald (METRO),  Robert DiRaddo (MD) and Joel Martin (DT). 

PIPSC suggested that the corporate survey results may be different today  than they were in November 2020 given much has evolved in the world  relating to COVID-19, therefore people’s choices and circumstances may  have changed. PIPSC also inquired as to how much the PSPC vision for  future of work is affecting NRC and the plans it is defining? 

Dale MacMillan responded that the NRC is aware of what is happening at  PSPC and shared that at that organization they are really looking to reduce  their workspace and are pushing for remote working to reduce the real  property footprints. She shared that the NRC is a research facility and the  parameters we operate under are different from PSPC. People need to  work in labs and have the support and sharing of skills and abilities onsite.  Given this, Dale says that the NRC’s objectives may be a bit different as  most of the NRC are not office workers so we cannot solely look at  reducing office footprints but we can make thoughtful decisions about next  steps. 

The RCEA inquired if their members will be able to also do occasional  telework if they are not teleworking full time or even in a hybrid work model. 

Dale MacMillan responded that the NRC is looking for flexibilities so that  employees may not need to be completely on site and if there are issues they will be addressed; however, often there efficiencies that can be  realized when working remotely, which cannot be discounted. She also  shared that as an organization we also want to be open to people changing  their minds as well, so that people can be mobile.  

PIPSC inquired what the hybrid model would look like. Is there a ratio for  how many days people have to be onsite? Will the telework agreement  have to be set in stone such that those are the only days people are  permitted to work remotely? 

They also inquired if this could be stretched such that it could be a couple  of months working from home and then back in the office again? PIPSC  shared that in the life of a researcher there is often a lot of time that can be  spent writing papers which does not need to be completed in the office.  

Dale MacMillan responded that all of these situations will need to be reviewed on a case by case basis. 

The RCEA inquired whether office spaces will be set up like hotelling  spaces for those who come in occasionally. 

Dale MacMillan responded that the NRC will be looking to have generic  work spaces and there will be a model at M-19 set up to identify community  spaces where there will be available cubicles organized that will respect  pandemic protocols along with places where employees can connect with  other people in the workplace safely to be able to collaborate. There will also be quiet zones that will allow for more focused work and spaces for  more directed conversations.  

Dale shared that there are many older buildings at the NRC that may not  permit the change to generic office set up but there are big visions for  places like M-55 which may lend easily to being set up to be open for  collaborative spaces. 

Dale MacMillan outlined that people wishing to come and use these spaces  will need to reserve the location so that they can come in with certainty to  have a space available through a booking system. They will have cleaning protocols to follow such that people will need to clean before you set up  your work onsite and clean before you leave. 

The RCEA shared that they have members who held administrative  positions, who pre-pandemic were told they could not telework when they  requested to do so. The RCEA says these individuals have clearly  demonstrated that they can do their jobs remotely, however it may come  down to the fact that their supervisor does not prefer remote working of  their employees. The RCEA shares this story as they hope that this will be  considered in the decision making processes surrounding those who are  permitted to work offsite and they feel it should not be a control issue and disguised as an operational need for the organization. The RCEA feels  that this may disadvantage some of their members, especially in the AD  and AS roles. 

Dale MacMillan shared that she hopes that individuals have evolved their thinking and perspectives throughout this pandemic about what are real  options for working and how teleworking is a real way to work and deliver. That being said, she also shared that we need to be self-aware to see  about challenging ourselves to evaluate what is working and what is not  working and why is our thinking that it is this way. 

PIPSC asked for a commitment on a time for when the BAs might expect to  meet with Dale MacMillan and her team to discuss further. 

Dale MacMillan shared that she will leave the scheduling to Amy Campbell  and her team to set up the consultations meetings.

Management commits to the Bargaining Agents that they will be setting up  meetings in the near future to consult on the Future of Work deliverables  which will include: the draft policy, draft telework agreement, and other  related tools.  

The RCEA also requested that the consultation include more than just  discussions on the telework policy. 

Management agreed and stated that additional conversations can continue  at the bi-weekly COVID consultation meetings as well. Management also  reminded the Bargaining Agents that this is not just an NRC project but this  is one that is occurring across the Public Service.

A.Campbell

107.5 

COI Policy Updates and Implementation & Harassment & Violence  Prevention Program 

COI Policy Update 

Erin Skrapek outlined that over the course of the past year there have been  many consultations on the new COI Policy with several stakeholders.  In moving forward to implement the new policy she is inquiring with the  Bargaining Agents how they might suggest getting the word out to their  members such that there is a clear understanding of any changes. The revised policy was approved by SEC on April 6^th, 2021 and replaces  the current Policy on Conflict of Interest and Post-Employment. The policy  is available on the NRC’s external website, was developed in consultation  with bargaining agents and internal stakeholders and responds to the  NRC’s Audit of Conflict of Interest Management. 

The new Policy on COI replaces the NRC existing policy (and related  guidelines) and was developed following an in-depth analysis of NRC’s key  risk areas for conflict of interest. It will help employees to proactively  manage COI, protecting them from real, apparent, and potential COI and  promoting dialogue between employees, managers, and the Senior Ethics  Officer to collectively manage COI risks. Additionally, adherence to the  Policy on COI is a condition of employment. 

The revised policy specifies roles and responsibilities for employees,  management, COI Advisors, Senior Ethics Officer, and the President. It  includes new appendices with detailed guidance on dealing with situations  at higher risk for conflict of interest, such as: outside activities and  employment; adjunct professorships; post-employment; gifts and  hospitality; personal financial interests in companies that do business with  the NRC; and preferential treatment (i.e. relatives and associates).  

There is a new requirement for employees to obtain management approval  for outside employment, adjunct professorships, and third party sponsored  travel. There is also a new COI IT system under development and  currently in testing phases for employees to submit their declarations  electronically. The implementation plan for the revised COI policy will see  the new policy posted on the NRC website with a staggered  implementation/ declaration cycle by CBI occurring in July 2021. 

The Online declaration is scheduled to be launched in July 2021 with  supporting information also available at the same time pertaining to Adjunct  Professor checklists, Post-Employment Guides and FAQs. There will be a  general awareness training session for CBIs launched in the Fall/Winter  2021/2022 with an online training module being created shortly after. 

PIPSC inquired if there is a master list of those NRC employees who are  Adjunct Professors and how this information is tracked. 

Erin Skrapek responded that there is currently no master list that is kept  however the hope is that this information will be able to be tracked and  captured through the COI system as there will be an approval step required  by management. 

PIPSC inquired when the timelines on the new updates will be shared with  employees as there are a number of complaints from NRC employees  about a lack of communication around COI and in particular Adjunct  Professorships. Many Researchers are encouraged to take on these roles but they are unaware of any considerations, impacts or process for  obtaining approvals. If there was a communication this would alleviate the  number of questions that are raised and would reduce frustration for  employees considering taking on these roles. 

Erin Skrapek explained that there will be an FAQ and checklist on Adjunct  Professorships so that employees can walk through this with their  managers to look at considerations for possible issues that may come up. 

Harassment and Violence Prevention (HVP) Program: 

In January 2021 the new HVP policy was launched and this has resulted in  a big change to how we view and treat these cases. It was clear that the  change would be a big undertaking. When the policy was created there  was intent that it could still be a possibility to run a concurrent investigation  under the code of conduct where there was concern that a behaviour was  consistently egregious.  

The RCEA requested that it be noted that they are not in agreement that  the HPV allows for disciplinary actions to ensue following an investigation.  They believe that the Code of Conduct is now being used to tie into these  investigations and this is creating a concurrent process where the  investigators are reviewing both a workplace evaluation under the Canada  Labour Code in addition to also evaluating a case under the NRC’s Code of  Conduct. The RCEA does not agree with this process and does not see  this helping employees. Furthermore, the RCEA would like to understand  what the full definition of egregious misconduct is as they feel that  employees who are complainants or respondents need to be offered a fair  process under this policy. 

Erin Skrapek responded that as part of the consultation process on the  HVP, it appeared that the Bargaining Agents understood and supported the  idea that in some situations it would be a possibility that discipline could be  an outcome where the behaviour was egregious enough. 

The RCEA says that during the time of policy consultation it was not  understood that the Code of Conduct would be the tool used to link to this  process such that an outcome could be discipline.  

The RCEA stated that every notice of occurrence must be investigated  unless an informal conflict resolutions option is undertaken, however they  are concerned that every complaint will bring about a code of conduct  investigation and therefore it is essential that there be a proper  understanding of what is considered egregious conduct and what it means.  

Management responded that this is certainly a challenge. The more we  talk about the cases we are experiencing and handling the more we also  see room for the approach to evolve and be adapted. This is a new  process for all and fundamentally we agree on the important pieces. 

PIPSC shared that if we immediately go into the disciplinary issues it is  easy to say it is an individual issue and not a systemic issue but in some  cases there may be more going on. 

Management also offered that there is an element of timeliness to these  files as well. If there were no concurrent investigations it can take longer to  manage these files. Rigour is required in these investigation with care and  careful consideration to come to a timely conclusion. 

The RCEA shared that they feel it is important to determine if there are  systemic issues that contribute to harassment or violence. The RCEA says  that it is important to understand what egregious conduct is. Not every  occurrence is egregious. Sometime people don’t get along, but this may  not be harassment and therefore not every behaviour that someone takes  exception to should be deemed harassment.  

Erin Skrapek commits to continuing this conversation and will take this  offline to look at how the framework can be reviewed.

A.Campbell/  E.Skrapek

107.6 

PSES – Conclusions and Interpretations 

Megan Yukich and Emily Harrison presented the latest highlights from the  Public Service Employee Survey 

There has been some advance in rates of participation over past years.  NRC’s participation rate was 59.7% in 2020, up by 1.0% from 2019 and  15.3% higher than in 2018. The Public Service participation rate was  60.6% therefore the NRC is closing the gap in comparison to the PS. The  PSES for 2020 covered areas touching on employee engagement, mental  health, diversity/inclusion, work-life balance, harassment, discrimination  and leadership. There were new topics added in this survey round to  address the impacts of COVID-19 and anti-racism. 

The 2020 Results of the top areas of improvement over 2019 showed a: 

∙ 25% increase in those agreeing that NRC does a good job of raising  awareness of mental health in the workplace (2020 result – 84%)

∙ 21% increase in supervisors reporting they feel they are equipped to  support employees who are experiencing mental health issues (2020 result – 77%) 

∙ 14% increase in those reporting that essential information flows  effectively from senior management to staff (2020 result – 66%) 

∙ 14% increase in those that believe senior management make  effective and timely decisions (2020 result – 66%) 

∙ 13% increase in those that would describe their workplace as being  psychologically healthy (2020 result – 76%) 

∙ 12% increase in those reporting they have confidence in senior  management (2020 result – 76%) 

∙ 12% increase in those that feel that change is well managed at the  NRC (2020 result – 61%) 

The areas where results have declined in 2020 compared to 2019 are in a: 

∙ 8% decrease in those that agree their physical work environment is  suitable for their job responsibilities (2020 result – 78%) 

∙ 4% decrease in satisfaction with accommodation measures that were  implemented based on needs (2020 result – 85%) 

∙ 4% more reported that they feel emotionally drained after their  workday (2020 result – 25%) 

Lastly, NRC demonstrated less positive results compared to the total Public  Service in areas such as: 

∙ Opportunities for promotion (-5%) 

∙ Initiatives that promote anti-racism in the workplace (-5%) ∙ Ability to complete workload during work hours (-4%) 

Results reported by employee on Support During the Pandemic showed: 

∙ Strong level of satisfaction with how communication about the COVID 19 pandemic was handled 

∙ Most employees felt supported by their supervisor during the pandemic ∙ Strong level of satisfaction with health and safety measures and mental  health supports during the pandemic 

∙ Employees mostly felt equipped to do their work in a largely remote  workplace, with a high level of perceived support for flexible work  arrangements. Reports of unreliable technology decreased during the  pandemic period. 

∙ Despite a perception of support to balance work and personal life,  workload and work-life balance continue to be significant stressors for  NRC employees with Supervisors and Executives very impacted.  

∙ Diversity and inclusion results have improved, and overall reports of  harassment and discrimination have reduced with a largely remote  workforce. However, there are significant concerns with some of the  experiences of racialized and diverse group members. 

NRC has a number of initiatives in place to manage the PSES results by  continuing to address workplace and workforce challenges through the  Strategic HR Plan and continuing to see through the deliverables of the  Finitiative Project and offering training sessions for management and  employees on harassment and violence prevention, Conflict of Interest and  Research Ethics and integrity to name a few. The Ombudsperson’s office  is also providing a safe space for employees to raise issues without fear of  reprisal and there are informal conflict resolutions practitioners available.  

The results of the NRC’s survey were presented to EXCO on May 27^th,  2021 and CBI results are now available online such that management can  discuss their survey findings with their teams. 

The RCEA inquired if the slide on workload represented only managers. 

Management responded that the results are holistic covering all employees  on that particular slide. 

PIPSC highlighted that there seems to be a pretty marked increase of  perceptions of harassment for persons with disabilities. PIPSC says they  have raised their concerns about this issue quite a bit already. PIPCS  inquired if NRC can speak to how we at NRC might be underserving  indigenous employees and employees with disabilities? 

Management responded that she agrees that there is a gap. We need to  analyze the hiring pipeline to see where people are falling off. Management  shared that the NRC is just not getting nearly the number of indigenous  people nor people with disabilities as applicants. The questions we need to  be asking need to address: Are our job posters not attractive and what  more needs to be done? It is clear that there is a good deal more  investigation to do to understand why it’s not representative. Rachel Boutin  is working to bring a number of recommendations forward. The BDO  report will show some of these elements as well. 

The RCEA shared that they suspect that there may be many employees  who have not come forward, and they are not all physical disabilities and  people may choose not disclose through self-identification. Therefore, harassment on the disability side may be relating to people who never self– identified in the first place. 

Management shared that there was a self-ID campaign earlier in the year  and the definition of disability was also expanded considerably which has  then affected labour market data. Management agrees that we do need to  

speak more about what a disability is. In their self-id campaign,  management asked employees to speak about lived experiences and  ultimately did see a significant jump in representation but there is still a lot  of work to do. Management also agrees that there are likely more people  at NRC who have not self-identified that they have a disability and this will  be incorporated into the strategy for how to address this going forward.  The process of self-identification is always going to remain a choice so  NRC will need to determine ways to build programs and systems all with  accessibility in mind. 

The RCEA inquired as to how many years of data the NRC has relating to  the PSES results.

Management responded that the survey used to be conducted every three  years but now it is every year and hence we have data from 2007 to 2020.  

Management shared that there are members of the Digital Technologies team who are crunching numbers and looking for correlation and causation  between some of the questions and they hope to get this information in the  coming weeks and will share with the bargaining agents when they can. 

107.7 

Update on the Legacy Network 

Management shared that as part of our regular review and update of our  corporate risk profile, NRC has identified ‘Protection of Information Assets’  as a significant risk. There is a risk that protected, classified or proprietary  information belonging to the NRC or its partners could become  compromised. Given this, the Legacy or Black network must be retired &  replaced and a mitigation plan has been required. There has been work on  this for a while and is progressing at a slower pace than hoped, however  this is partially because IT tools for research are rapidly evolving. 

Management added that at NRC, specifically within the KITS team under  François Cordeau, a new program has been initiated led by Tyler Norsten  who is on assignment from the Nanotechnology Research Centre. 

The program involves three Task Forces (TF): 

∙ TF1: Secure and Operate Legacy Environment - Richard Laurin (Lead) o Identify owners of vulnerable systems, 

o Patch vulnerable systems, 

o Upgrade unsupported Linux, Mac operating systems, 

o Upgrade Windows 7 computers 

∙ TF2: Migrate Sensitive Research - Eric Katmarian (Lead) o Engage the research community to identify and resolve the gaps  and barriers to migration to Secure Research 

o Use active migration paths 

o Implement “one device” access to all networks 

∙ TF3: Enable Open & Collaborative Research - Danny D’Amours (Lead) o Open and Collaborative network – imagine the environment  required for collaborative research 

o This will allow for the replacement of the Legacy network. 

Management shared that once the new environment is built, the  expectation will be to migrate all of NRC’s research IT from the Legacy  network to either the new cloud-based environment or the existing Secure  Research environment (also known as the orange network). The Legacy  network will eventually be replaced with this new environment but the  timeline to complete this work has not yet been established. Until such a  time, NRC has a commitment from SSC to continue to provide support for  the Legacy network. 

PIPSC inquired about the consequences to the NRC hardware that is  currently being used within the organization. They shared that many  machines have specialized programs and they are concerned with how  these will be migrated and updated to the new network. 

PIPSC shared that the Researchers at NRC do not like the green network  and find that it is cumbersome. PIPSC says that there is far more flexibility  on the black network than on the green network and this will present  challenges going forward and PIPSC members want to ensure that their  concerns are heard before major changes are implemented as this may  risk projects that they have underway which depend on these programs.  PIPSC stated that they feel the timelines for this project are very tight and it  may not be possible to meet the established goals given it has already  been 7 years since the cyber-attack and there are still ongoing issues. 

Management shared that the Senior Executive Committee is aware of  these concerns and they do understand that there is a fair amount of  hardware that is tied up to instruments which may need to be isolated from  the new network in some cases but this is not an easy question to answer.  Management stated that in most cases using green laptops has been going  well and the migration over has not created major issues.  

PIPSC inquired whether the working groups that existed at NRC on Open  Data and Open Science will be incorporated into the new task force. 

Management responded that they do not believe there will be an  amalgamation of these two working groups into the task force as  Information Technology is not about open data but rather more about open  science. Open Data is more policy work around how to make the science  more publicly available.

107.8 

BMC at Royalmount – Update 

Management shared that the Biologics Manufacturing Centre in  Royalmount has hired 58 employees. There are 22 hiring actions  underway and 4 NRC employees have moved into the BMC. 

The RCEA asked how many NRC employees have applied to work at the  BMC. They shared that they have heard that there may be people from  HHT who want to move over but can’t because they are so heavily involved  at HHT with the work there. They have heard from one individual directly  that they were held back because they were deemed essential for work at  HHT so they were not approved to be assigned into the BMC.  

Management says that they have not heard that there are cases where a  request for assignment have been denied nor have they heard that  employees of HHT have been discouraged to apply. That being said, in all  cases it is important to have all of the information and there have been  cases in the past at NRC where people have not been approved a request  for secondment/ assignment out as their work forms part of a critical need  and the reality of not being able to let people go is possible and has  occurred. 

Management commits to looking into the statistics on the number of NRC  employees who have applied to work at the BMC and will report the  information back offline. 

Management shared that the design and construction of the BMC building  started in August of 2020 with the exterior shell completed and interior fit up started in December 2020. 

A.Campbell

The target was for July 2021 for the construction to be completed and this  actually was accomplished at the end of May which was ahead of  schedule. All major equipment has been received & installation has started  and will continue through summer 2021. From an Operations & Business  view, the transition from Construction site to operational site has occurred  in June 2021. The Operations need to be qualified and approved by  Health Canada and they have been involved since day 1 and ongoing. A  vaccine candidate has been identified, collaboration agreement executed  with Novavax and discussions around tech transfer began in April 2021. A  drug establishment license is expected in the Fall 2021 with trial runs to  take place in December with vaccine production to start also in December  2021. Management shared that the intention is that the facility is to be a  PPP (public-private partnership). The original NRC mandate was to build  and be ready to operate, but with the probable end state having a third  party operator.  

With this in mind, there will be a call for proposals from third parties in  2022. The current intention is for NRC to own the building. 

PIPSC asks for hiring statistics for BMC hires such that it depicts the  breakdown of staffing for all classification groups.  

PIPSC has inquired what the office set up looks like inside the BMC and  they have also inquired whether the people who work there are expected to be working onsite full-time? They would like to know how this will relate to  the Future of Work. 

Management commits to providing hiring stats depicting classification  breakdown offline to the Bargaining Agents. 

Management shared that they do not know the specifics of the office set up  inside but there are some photos that can be shared. Management shared  that the expectation is that these BMC hires will need to be onsite full time.  The design of the workflow has allowed for two different biologics teams to  

be working at the same time so that people and the material will flow freely  and safely such that there is a minimization of crossover of staff. 

A.Campbell

107.9 

Classification Process and Workflow 

The RCEA requested clarification on the process for how reclassifications  are handled at NRC. The RCEA shared that years ago at a previous JCC  meeting they (the Bargaining Agents) were told that it should take 19 days  to determine if someone is going to get reclassified. They shared that they  are seeing in some parts of the organization where employees are actively  

taking a role in outlining and submitting to management a revised job  description denoting changes that have occurred in the duties performed in  their position, and it seems to disappear and go into a black hole. The  RCEA feels this is unacceptable and would like to know what the timeline is  and what the flow through in how to get this to Francis Lalonde and his  team in Classification. The RCEA also shared that they have heard that  part of the reason a reclassification file is not moved forward is because of  budget constraints. 

Francis Lalonde, Team Leader for Classification shared that the Collective  Agreement says that employees are entitled to have an accurate job  description that reflects what they are asked to do. 

He explained that initial interactions do happen with the supervisor and  employee to discuss and outline the changes in the job description and the  possible next steps and then this would be brought forward to the  management team who will look at how this maps to the work and  deliverables. The Manager would then bring this reclassification request  forward to the HRG who would then assemble the appropriate forms and  tools, meaning that if there is a reclassification request, a form would need  to be completed by the Manager to identify what is new what has evolved  in the job description. DG approval of the reclassification request is  required. This would be then be submitted to the classification team.  

The service standard for reclassification requests is 60 business days and  retroactive dates are set by the manager as of when the duties changed. 

The RCEA shared concerns that if the Director General is required to  approve a reclassification action in their higher level management role,  they may not know the actual work that the person is asked to do and has  been performing, which could result in them denying the action. Further,  the RCEA shared that in the past on the topic of Technical Officer generic  job descriptions, they were assured that someone who sought a  reclassification would not be held back from pursuing this action. This was  because they were told that it should not affect other TOs who also held a  generic job description but they have heard that some TO members have  in fact been impacted by this.  

The RCEA shared that they would like to see that when an employee submits a list of changes to their job description to their manager for review  and consideration, that the manager clearly understands their role and  timelines to respond. The RCEA stated that members are coming forward  and believe they have been performing duties outside of their job  description, are seeking support by their supervisor to acknowledge their  efforts and the changes which have arisen.  

Francis Lalonde explained that the DG approval is really to provide  authority that the process was followed and that the reclassification request  makes sense. He explained that for Technical Officers, employees should  not be restricted from submitting a reclassification request if they hold a  generic position if it is believed that their job has changed. The policy was  modified to allow for generics to be reclassified. He acknowledged that  there does need to be some training for managers to refresh their  understanding of the classification and reclassification process and in this  training there should be a clear explanation of manager’s roles and responsibilities. Francis Lalonde shared that the Client Services group within HRB is working on outlining processes so that there are clear written  procedures for handling and managing these classification files. 

The RCEA have heard of cases where an employee has suggested to their  supervisor that they believe their position should be reclassified based on  many changes within the job and then the supervisor responds with a  comment to suggest that they as the manager will write it which does not  allow for input by the employee. 

Francis Lalonde responded that management is responsible for the job  description but the employee has a right to weigh in and add their input. 

The intent should be to have employees and supervisors accurately  describe the work. 

The RCEA shared concerns in the decision making side of a  reclassification request whether it was driven by the employee or the  supervisor. The RCEA has concerns if a reclassification is only going to be  approved when it has been endorsed/submitted at the request of  management. The RCEA requested a flowchart to explain the process that  could be shared with managers and employees to help inform them of the  necessary steps and timelines/standards.  

The RCEA stated that their members do have the right to grieve but if the  issue is more about the ignoring of a request rather than the classification  decision this would result in a staff relations grievance. 

PIPSC agreed with the comments of the RCEA and added that waiting  three years for a response on a reclassification request is unacceptable  and hence would like to know the full process and timelines. 

Management suggests that Francis Lalonde attend an upcoming HRG  Community of Practice meeting to give them the same information that was  shared at today’s JCC meeting so that longstanding HRGs have a refresh  and new HRGs have the current information to help support their clients. 

Francis Lalonde commits to setting up a meeting to talk offline with the  HRGs to discuss this matter further. 

A.Campbell/  F. Lalonde

107.10 

Awards Paid out to NRC Employees 

The RCEA inquired about awards paid out to employees for IP and Patents  and asked if an update could be provided. 

Management shared that back in 2019, Vice-President of Research, Michel  Dumoulin briefed the JCC on the new awards program and in December  2020, Chris Johnstone came to speak and provide further background on  the IP Awards Policy following the official launch in 2020. Management  provided a reminder of the principles of the Awards Policy outlining that it is  comprised of 3 elements: Fixed Milestone Awards, Inventor Revenue  Share Awards and IP Achievement Awards. The Fixed Milestone Awards  provides for: $500 for invention disclosures, $1000 for patent filing and  $500 for patents issued. The Inventor Revenue Share Awards are based  on revenues per licence and need to be calculated during the first quarter of the year. IP Achievement Awards are nominations-based. A call went  out from the Corporate Secretariat on April 8, 2021 for nominations and  the deadline for submissions was May 14, 2021 and a recognition event  will take place in the Fall of 2021. The IP Management team has not  processed the awards for FY20-21 yet, however, they are currently working  on this with the plan to finalize calculations in Quarter 1, e.g. finalized in  late June/early July and paid out soon after. 

The awards will be paid yearly not quarterly and the awards are based on  FY. This is why the IP Management Team compiles the information in the  First quarter of the year.

PIPSC shared that while they understand the intent is to pay out the  awards in the July timeframe, the reality last year was that people who  received these awards were only paid in December 2020. 

Management provided the following statistics for for FY 2019-2020: $565K has been paid out to 327 awardees, which provided for an average  of $1,700 per employee. All 14 Research Centres had awardees with the  highest number of awards paid out to HHT, SDT, AERO and EME. The following information was shared to show the range of awards paid out  to employees:  

∙ $10k+ : 3 employees 

∙ $5k-$10k: 22 employees 

∙ $1k-$5k: 154 employees 

∙ Less than $1K: 148 employees 

The RCEA inquired if these statistics can be shared publicly. 

Management commits to inquiring with Morag Cowell about whether this  can be shared outside of the JCC.  

NOTE: Leah Kennedy confirmed with the Bargaining Agents on 29 June,  2021 that the statistics could be shared publicly.

M. Dumoulin

107.11 

September 30^th – New Statutory Holiday? 

The RCEA inquired with Management if the swift passage of Bill C-5 will  mean that September 30th named as a national day for Truth and  Reconciliation will become a new paid statutory holiday for NRC  employees. 

Management responded that within the NRC’s Collective agreements there  are provisions for how to handle cases when a new statutory holiday is  implemented and how to integrate that within the organization for  employees. Management is still waiting for further guidance from Treasury  Board and will inform the Bargaining Agents once they have new  information to share. 

PIPSC also shared that whenever new holidays are announced these are  tabled with the unions however as with Family Day, this did not become a  new statutory holiday for federal government employees as it was a  provincial holiday. So we will need to wait and see what TBS says. 

NOTE: Messaging to NRC employees was sent out by NRC’s President on 3 August 2021 outlining the new statutory holiday to mark a National Day  for Truth and Reconciliation

107.12 

Round Table - No new round table items to share.

The next meeting of the JCC will take place on the 15^th of September 2021 and NRC Management will be the Chair of this session.

Meeting adjourned at: 2:45 pm