Providing false information about their first official language and not meeting the language requirements of the position to which they were appointed

Title: Providing false information about their first official language and not meeting the language requirements of the position to which they were appointed

Authority: This investigation was conducted under sections 66 and 69 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 the employee committed fraud by providing false information about their first official language in their application, and whether the employee’s appointment was based on merit or whether an error, an omission or improper conduct affected the selection of the person appointed.

Conclusions: The investigation concluded that the employee committed fraud when they knowingly changed their first official language to get around the language requirements of the position. The investigation also concluded that the employee’s appointment was not based on merit, as they did not meet the language requirements of the position.

Facts: The employee applied to two PM-1 inventories. In the first appointment process, the employee indicated that English was their first official language. They underwent second language evaluations in French. Their results did not meet the language requirements of the position and they were eliminated from the process.

The employee then applied to the second appointment process, and indicated that French was their first official language. They underwent second language evaluations in English, and their results met the language requirements of the position. The employee was offered a one year, full-time, term appointment in a bilingual imperative position.

The department later discovered discrepancies with the employee’s second language evaluation results. The employee had valid results in both French and English, and a review of their results revealed that they did not meet the language requirements of the position in French. The employee was sent for further testing in French to ensure that they met the language requirements of the position. Their results did not meet the requirements of the position, and their file was sent to the Public Service Commission to determine if there should be an investigation.

During the investigation, the employee explained that they had made an error in selecting English as their first official language in the first process. They maintained that they were equally proficient in both official languages. However, the evidence demonstrated that, on the balance of probabilities, the employee committed fraud when they knowingly changed their first official language from English to French less than one month after being eliminated from the first process to get around the language requirements of the second position. Additionally, the evidence showed that the employee’s appointment was not based on merit, because they did not meet the language requirements of the position.

Corrective action:

Following the conclusions of fraud and the appointment not being based on merit, the Commission ordered that:

• the appointment be revoked and that following revocation, the public servant no longer be employed in the federal public service
• for a period of three years, the individual must notify the Public Service Commission before accepting any position or work within the federal public service
  • failure to do so will result in the revocation of the appointment
• if the individual accepts a position or work in the federal public service within three years, they must complete the course Values and Ethics Foundations for Employees offered by the Canada School of Public Service, followed by a discussion with their director
  • failure to complete the course or to participate in the discussion will lead to the revocation of the appointment

Investigation File No.: 20-21-01