|
The staffing review process provides employees who are
unsuccessful applicants with a right of review of the
proposed or pending staffing appointment. The process
has been provided for by the
Public Service
Act, and applies to permanent appointments and
temporary appointments for greater than seven months.
There are up to three levels of review, depending on employee
status and position status. The first two steps of
review are internal to the organization and the third
step, available to employees who are unsuccessful for a
bargaining unit position, is an independent review by
the Merit Commissioner.
|
|
Unsuccessful employee applicants |
Non-employee applicants |
|
Bargaining unit
positions |
Excluded
positions |
|
Feedback from manager/ panel chair |
Step 1 |
Step 1 |
 |
|
Inquiry by deputy minister |
Step 2 |
Step 2 |
N/A |
|
Independent
review by Merit Commissioner |
Step 3 |
N/A |
N/A |
|
It is important to note there is a five-day
(calendar) time limit to request a review at
each level. If the fifth calendar day falls on
a weekend or statutory holiday, the fifth day
moves to the next business day. |
Step 1: Request feedback from the manager/panel chair of the
competition
-
Normally feedback is verbal
-
Expect to receive reasons about performance as an
applicant (i.e. why unsuccessful and what could be
done to improve)
Step 2:
Request an inquiry by the deputy minister of the
organization making the appointment
-
Must provide reasons (“grounds”) why the merit
principle was not complied with
-
Deputy
minister (or designate) investigates
competition and provides a decision
Step 3: Request an independent staffing review by the Merit Commissioner
The Merit Commissioner is responsible for considering
requests for reviews that claim the appointment was not
made based on the principle of merit (i.e. non-partisan
and based on an assessment of competence and ability to
do the job) and/or was not the result of a process
designed to appraise the knowledge, skills and abilities
of eligible applicants.
The Merit Commissioner conducts an independent review
into the appointment on the basis of the grounds
presented by the employee. The grounds must be as those provided to
the deputy minister when the internal inquiry was
requested (step 2).
The comprehensive review starts with the employee who
requests the review and includes, but is not limited to,
all documentation related to the staffing
process. The Merit Commissioner may request additional
information from the parties, including verbal evidence
to support the documentation. Discussions may
take place with the manager responsible for the
appointment decision or other members of the hiring
panel or, if appropriate, the ministry’s strategic human
resources staff, the BC Public Service Agency or with
professional associations. These discussions assist to
identify the issues, establish clear finding of fact,
and lead to reasons for the Merit Commissioner's decision.
The Merit Commissioner generally issues a decision within 30 days
of receipt of the review. A timely decision is important
to the employee who has requested the review, the
ministry (for operational requirements), and the
applicant who has been offered a position.
The decision is sent directly to the employee with a
copy to the deputy minister. The Merit Commissioner may
find that the appointment was based on merit, or direct that the
appointment or the proposed appointment be
reconsidered. The Merit Commissioner’s decision is
final and binding.
After the decision has been issued, the Merit Commissioner sends a Point of Service Survey
to the employee who requested the review. These surveys are for the
purpose of continuous service improvement.
Read more about the review of staffing decisions,
including step-by-step instructions for employees.
|
Non-employee
applicants:
Applicants who are not BC Public Service
employees are encouraged to request feedback
from the panel chair if they have questions
about their performance, the selection process,
or the position. Complaints may also be made to
the Office of the Ombudsman
as
this organization is responsible for
investigating the administrative fairness
of government decisions. |
|