Favouring the selection of specific candidates for further assessment from a pool of partially assessed candidates

Authority: This investigation was conducted under section 66 of the Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13).

Issue: The purpose of the investigation was to determine whether an error, an omission or improper conduct affected the selection of a number of people appointed following an external advertised appointment process. Concerns were raised that hiring managers may have favoured the candidacy of the appointees by specifically selecting them for further assessment, instead of randomly selecting candidates based on the merit criteria.

Conclusions: The investigation concluded that the human resources advisor and their team leader made an error during the appointment process by failing to raise concerns about the approach of selecting specific candidates from the pool of partially assessed candidates for further assessment, based on the fact that they were known to the hiring manager.

Facts: The department conducted an external appointment process to create an inventory of candidates for current and future vacancies. After the applications were screened, a partially assessed pool with over 400 candidates was created, and hiring managers could request batches of candidates for further assessment, based on the needs of the positions to be staffed. They could request candidates randomly but were also permitted to request that certain candidates who were known to them be further assessed ahead of others, through a “named referral” approach. The evidence showed that this approach was clearly communicated in instructions distributed to hiring managers, and that the human resources advisor, who was consulted and who provided advice on these instructions before their distribution, did not raise any concerns. During the investigation, the human resources advisor explained that they believed this to be an acceptable use of personal knowledge of candidates in an appointment process.

The Public Service Employment Act allows for all available information to be considered when assessing candidates. Sub-delegated managers also have the authority to determine the information they need to properly assess candidates, which can include personal knowledge of a candidate. However, the Public Service Commission of Canada’s Staffing Interpretation Centre provides the following guidance: As with any assessment method, using personal knowledge must focus on the qualifications for the position and needs to be conducted in a fair manner and in good faith.

In this case, the hiring managers did not use their personal knowledge to conduct the assessment and determine if the appointment was based on merit. Instead, they used it to determine which candidates would be chosen for further assessment. The use of personal knowledge is a valid method of assessment; however, it is not to be used as a conduit for managers to favour the selection of known employees over other unknown candidates.

On the balance of probabilities, the “named referral” approach gave the known candidates an advantage, in that they were chosen from the partially assessed pool for further assessment ahead of other candidates, rather than being randomly selected based on merit criteria relevant for each position. Thus, these candidates were assessed and available for appointment ahead of the other candidates, simply because they were known to the hiring managers.

The human resources advisor committed an error by not raising any concerns about the use of “named referrals,” which affected the selection of the candidates for appointment. The evidence also showed, on a balance of probabilities, that the human resources advisor’s team leader was aware of the approach and did not raise concerns with its use. This also constituted an error that affected the selection of the candidates for appointment.

Corrective actions: Following the conclusion of errors, the Commission ordered the following:

• The human resources advisor and their team leader must have a discussion with their director of human resources to address the irregularities involving the appointment of these candidates
• failure to do so will result in a letter being sent to the deputy head advising them of the non-compliance with the corrective action

Investigation File Number: 23-24-03