Federal Government & Politics II

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Way too much whiteness on display at that funeral. Very disturbing how the bodies of BIPOC folx are systematically marginalized by a state that celebrates colonial violence like this by commemorating dead white men responsible for genocide.

The fact that not a single, solitary BIPOC person showed up to the Naheed Nenshi rally in Edmonton is further evidence of the ongoing genocide that brown and black folx are experiencing as they are violentally prevented from engaging in the political process in this white supremacist society.

Wake up!


https://x.com/nenshi/status/1772989881368695162?s=20

So could there be a more vivid illustration of how the contemporary left has become more about certain demographics feeling good about themselves than it is about truly helping all sorts of people?

Clearly, minorities have already figured that one out, ahead of everyone else!

[jonny24]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I think they've been discussed here at length. And you can see the stats here:

https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-bo...epartment.html

For reference, Canada's population has grown 13-14% since 2015.

Based on a very simple formula of 2023 vs 2015, the top 5 growth departments by percentage are:

Women and Gender Equality Canada..........+409% (+376)
RCMP External Review Committee..............+317% (+19)
Infrastructure Canada...............................+281% (+996)
Financial Consumer Agency of Canada.........+157% (+132)
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada...+142% (+1,350)

Cumulatively, +2873 people.

By absolute growth, the top 5 are:

Canada Revenue Agency.................................+18,970 (+47%)
Employment and Social Development Canada....+17,276 (+80%)
Indigenous Services Canada............................+7,722 (did not exist, see below*)
Public Services and Procurement Canada...........+6,022 (+50%)
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada...+5,873 (+92%)

Cumulatively, +55,863 people.

There's a little bit of distortion because of changing departments - for example, Polar Knowledge Canada had 89 employees in 2023, didn't exist in 2015, but there was the Canadian Polar Commission, that ended in 2015 with 14 employees.

*The biggest such example is Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, which still exists but dropped 2,204 employees or -53%, offsetting a third of Indigenous Services Canada growth above. If you combined those two, growth from 2015-2023 was +5,242 (+112%), still putting it in the top 5.



Departments that didn't have employees in 2015, but do now, is 8086, but removing the already-discussed, Indigenous Services, it's only 364 people.

Departments that didn't have employees in 2023, but did in 2015, is 61 people

Lastly, the Office of the Prime Minister, only had 1 employee in 2015 and 2021, and 0 the rest of the time.

[acottawa]

I feel bad for the people who are going to lose their jobs, but that kind of employment growth is insane.

[niwell]

I was about to crunch the data as I hadn't seen it before but glad someone else did!

Interesting that much of the growth in raw numbers is in a few areas. While percentage growth of a department like Women and Gender Equality is high it's not actually that many people (though maybe a lot for what they do - not familiar enough though).

Areas I would have assumed to see more growth like Environment and Climate Change are relatively stable.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by jonny24

Cumulatively, +55,863 people.

Oof. Well, at least PSPP will be solvent. We can kick that can down the road another twenty years...

[goodgrowth]

Presented without comment...

Employment and Social Development Canada

Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) works to improve the standard of living and quality of life for all Canadians. We do this by promoting a labour force that is highly skilled. We also promote an efficient and inclusive labour market.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Oof. Well, at least PSPP will be solvent. We can kick that can down the road another twenty years...

PSPP or PSPC?

PSPP = Paul St-Pierre Plamondon

PSPC = Public Services and Procurement Canada

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by goodgrowth

Presented without comment...

Lower payroll taxes and promote economic growth. Done. Or:

The Disability Inclusion Action Plan (DIAP) will use GBA plus analysis to inform an intersectional approach to serve populations experiencing disability. This means that it will take into account the fact that an individual may identify with more than one social identity. To support the intersectional approach, the department is engaging with National Indigenous Organizations and holders of Modern Treaty and Self-Government Agreements. This is to ensure the specific concerns of Indigenous populations are addressed in a culturally appropriate manner and meet all necessary modern treaty obligations and commitments.

The Black-led Philanthropic Endowment Fund is led by Black Canadians for Black Canadian communities. This helps to increase the autonomy of Black Canadian communities to respond to the challenges they face, including combatting anti-Black racism.

As part of the Indigenous Early Learning and Child Care (IELCC) Initiative, the department will work with First Nations, Inuit and Métis partners to identify disaggregated data that could be collected to create new program indicators. The program indicators would allow for a better understanding of results achieved by the IELCC initiative.

The department will develop a National School Food Policy, informed by engagement with provinces, territories, municipalities, Indigenous partners, stakeholders and Canadians. Once developed, the policy will encourage additional collaboration, coordination and investment, so that more children have access to nutritious food in school.

So yeah cutting there will be a breeze.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Acajack

PSPP or PSPC?

PSPP = Paul St-Pierre Plamondon

PSPC = Public Services and Procurement Canada

Public Service Pension Plan

Is that abbreviated PSP? For some reason I thought it was PSPP.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Public Service Pension Plan

Is that abbreviated PSP? For some reason I thought it was PSPP.

Oops, sorry!

[thewave46]

I'm actually curious - has any other organization simply randomly terminated X% of employees as a strategy? Ever?

I don't think whittling down government employment is even particularly difficult. The chart posted shows that federal employment decreased from 283k in 2010 to 257k in 2015.

As per johnny24's math, there seems to be a lot of bloat in particular divisions that have unduly contributed to the swelling of the public service. As late as 2021, CRA only had ~47k employees, not much above its historical trend. Now it's nearly 60k three years later.

It is funny that someone mentioned the IRS hiring plans for ~20k employees for a nation of 330 million people, because CRA somehow managed to bloat its staff by a similar amount in a country 1/9th the size before the United States could. Take that, America! Canada wins on the metric again! Swish!

[goodgrowth]

Seems like the bulk of Employment and Social Development Canada is actually Service Canada.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by thewave46

I'm actually curious - has any other organization simply randomly terminated X% of employees as a strategy? Ever?

I don't think whittling down government employment is even particularly difficult. The chart posted shows that federal employment decreased from 283k in 2010 to 257k in 2015.

As per johnny24's math, there seems to be a lot of bloat in particular divisions that have unduly contributed to the swelling of the public service. As late as 2021, CRA only had ~47k employees, not much above its historical trend. Now it's nearly 60k three years later.

It is funny that someone mentioned the IRS' hiring plans for ~20k employees for a nation of 330 million people, because CRA somehow managed to bloat its staff by a similar amount in a country 1/9th the size before the United States could. Take that, America! Canada wins on the metric again! Swish!

really? Companies do this literally all the time. Most recently Twitter/X cut exactly 40% of their work force from what I remember - that was clearly a directive from above to just cut a fixed number of positions.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

really? Companies do this literally all the time. Most recently Twitter/X cut exactly 40% of their work force from what I remember - that was clearly a directive from above to just cut a fixed number of positions.

Typically divisions are closed or reduced when layoffs happen.

Bell Media didn't just put names in a hat and dismiss anyone whose name came up. They targeted divisions.

It seems a dumb way to do things unless one's operating a system in which employees are essentially completely interchangeable. Factory work, maybe?

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by thewave46

Typically divisions are closed or reduced when layoffs happen.

Bell Media didn't just put names in a hat and dismiss anyone whose name came up. They targeted divisions.

It seems a dumb way to do things unless one's operating a system in which employees are essentially completely interchangeable. Factory work, maybe?

well yea, it's not pulling names out of a hat - but it's frequent for a board to direct x% layoffs, then go through their payroll and figure out where to cut that x%.

Cutting the public service would involve doing the same thing, I imagine.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

well yea, it's not pulling names out of a hat - but it's frequent for a board to direct x% layoffs, then go through their payroll and figure out where to cut that x%.

Cutting the public service would involve doing the same thing, I imagine.

There are unions and collective agreements that enter into it, with often prescriptive processes for how layoffs must happen when they are necessary. Not all public servants are subject to those but a huge majority are.

(And even some like Executives tend to have a lot of their working conditions inspired by what their unionized staff have in their collective agreements.)

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

well yea, it's not pulling names out of a hat - but it's frequent for a board to direct x% layoffs, then go through their payroll and figure out where to cut that x%.

Cutting the public service would involve doing the same thing, I imagine.

Yes though if you've ever been involved in a massive layoffs it ends up almost random.

Public Service is different. Managers can't just make lists. You need to have processes. And the government is horrible at these. Managers all fight for their turf and senior managers try and make cuts visible to reduce them as much as possible which is the opposite of what happens in a properly functioning organization.

Stalin killed people randomly and with lists. The lists killed people who were more essential productive and loyal than the random lists. It works the same in the public service if of course less extreme. But people still get rid of rivals and keep sycophants over the hardest workers.

I am not saying it's perfect but combined with elminating functions it is something worth considering.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There are unions and collective agreements that enter into it, with often prescriptive processes for how layoffs must happen when they are necessary. Not all public servants are subject to those but a huge majority are.

(And even some like Executives tend to have a lot of their working conditions inspired by what their unionized staff have in their collective agreements.)

There are few restrictions on layoffs in the public service, nor are there many seniority restrictions. There is a package for workers who lose their jobs and a requirement to run a reverse competition if there is a need to chose amongst people with identical jobs. Other than that the government can lay off fairly freely.

1.1.6 When a deputy head determines that the services of an employee are no longer required beyond a specified date, the deputy head shall advise the employee, in writing, which of the four workforce adjustment situations applies: lack of work, the discontinuance of a function, a relocation of a work unit or an alternative delivery initiative.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

really? Companies do this literally all the time. Most recently Twitter/X cut exactly 40% of their work force from what I remember - that was clearly a directive from above to just cut a fixed number of positions.

Elon Musk, business genius. Say no more.

[shreddog]

1996 says hello!

Canada cuts federal jobs
By BRUCE HICKS

OTTAWA, Jan. 17 -- Canada's government cut nearly 16,000 federal jobs between April and September, officials said Wednesday. The job cuts, representing 6.9 percent of the non-military federal workforce, were part of the Liberal government's goal to trim the number of public employees by as many as 45,000 over three years in order to balance the budget.

The figures released by Treasury Board President Art Eggleton found the public workforce was reduced by 15,651 jobs, falling from 225,619 on April 1, 1995, to 209,968 on Sept. 30. Eggleton said the reduction was largely accomplished through the much-publicized 'golden handshakes' -- two incentive compensation programs for government employees who voluntarily relinquish their jobs, known as the 'Early Retirement Incentive' and the 'Early Departure Incentive'.

'The departure incentives announced in the 1995 budget are helping departments meet the program reduction levels while minimizing the impact on affected employees,' Eggleton said. The figures show the permanent workforce of the federal government decreased by 5 percent during the period, and short-term and casual employment decreased by 20 percent.

More than half of all the reductions were in the clerical, regulatory and program administration sectors. 'These are the people who do the work, who are on the ground, who are actually providing the services. They are 36 percent of the population of Treasury Board employees and yet they are taking 51 percent of the reductions,' criticized John Baglow, vice-president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada. The group, which represents most of the public service emplyees, said the figures represent a trend of cutting from the bottom.

LINK