April 7, 2023

  1. Adoption of Agenda

    A. Peart and M. Gosselin requested to add an update from the Joint Learning Program to the agenda. The JLP update was added to the agenda as item 6.

    The agenda was adopted as modified.
  2. Presentation: Committee on Mental Health Support Mechanisms

    Jennifer Feeney-Svab, Director, Wellness and Mental Health, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer (OCHRO), Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS), and Brenda Shillington, Negotiator, Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), provided an update on the work developing mental health support mechanisms for at-risk workers following the study and initial conclusions that were made. In October 2020, a new collective agreement was signed between the TBS and the PSAC. Within the collective agreement were two mental health memoranda of understanding (MOU), one for employees in the Program Administrative Services (PA) and one in the Technical Services (TC) bargaining units, specifically workers within those units exposed to explicit and disturbing material, and/or threatening situations.

    The scope for these studies was to draw from existing research and identify specific needs for support measures, best practices, and how to implement these. It was noted that one joint Committee was made to conduct the studies, co-chaired by the two presenters and consisting of 16 employer representatives and 11 PSAC representatives. B. Shillington indicated that since their first meeting in March 2021, the joint Committee has developed criteria for the identification of positions that can be used for the departments involved in the study. It was noted that the joint Committee has also collected and analyzed promising mental health support mechanisms in each participating department with the aim of identifying gaps.

    Instead of best practices, it was noted that promising practices, particularly in relation to trauma, were found. To identify these practices, a literature review was conducted with respect to trauma in the workplace. Once the draft report is complete, it was noted that this will be shared with the Committee.

    J. Feeney-Svab reviewed the three (3) categories that the mental health support mechanisms identified fall under: prevention, response, and support. It was noted that most programs cannot be categorized unilaterally and are often found in multiple categories. With respect to prevention, the findings indicated that psychoeducational programs which help workers understand their personal health risk factors are shown to be helpful for organizations to identify warning signs of trauma. It was further noted that the frequency and use of mental health training programs is not well known and not generally tracked within departments. Based on the findings, it is being considered that evidence-based mental health training and guidance for employees about foundational psychologically healthy and safe leadership behavioural practices be recommended. It is also being considered that the need for better integration of mental health and psychological health and safety into occupational health and safety be recommended.

    With respect to response, the findings indicated that supporting emotionally distressed workers after exposure to psychological harm, including chronic stress, is of critical importance. It was shared that Critical Incident Stress Debriefing, Trauma Risk Management, and Incident Stress Debriefing are shown to be somewhat effective when they include peers, and when management and a mental health professional are involved. It was found that cognitive behavioural therapies offer the most effective treatment for trauma. In terms of recommendations, the joint Committee is considering exploring ways to expand response and recovery options for employees and executives that include promising pilot projects or other evidence-based practices.

    With respect to supports, the research was unable to identify best practices and it was noted that there are not many mechanisms for managers and Executives. The findings indicated that informal social support based around positive workplace camaraderie and a sense of belonging to an occupation is associated with lightening the impact of stress. Also, that tailoring programs specifically to ensure they are appropriate for different situations and individuals impacts their efficacy. B. Shillington indicated that there is a need to provide evidence-based support beyond Employee Assistance Program (EAP) and suggests the TBS to work with Health Canada (HC) and other EAP providers to increase culturally appropriate, diverse, and trauma-informed mental health professionals. Additionally, it was noted that there is a need to provide an environment to build relationships and that these recommendations be considered in hybrid workplaces. It was clarified that the intent of providing informal social support based around workplace camaraderie would be to encourage open and frank discussions to ensure workers can feel they can talk about their trauma as opposed to shutting down.

    The presenters noted that the conclusions and recommendations are being finalized and that the final report should be complete by the end of the fiscal year. N. Porteous suggested that HC could work with TBS to map occupational groups that have pre-placement and occupational physical and psychological health assessments. M. Gosselin asked how the report can be scaled for the entire public service. B. Shillington noted that the work completed can be viewed and referred to across the public service. J. Feeney-Svab added that the number of organizations involved went well beyond the two groups covered under the MOU and many organizations have indicated that they plan to take the recommendations and apply them within their whole department and not just within these two groups. A. Peart noted concern around the lack of data collected and that empirical data around the efficacy of these programs is needed. In addition, it was noted that examining Department of National Defense (DND) programs could be an interesting addition to the project. With respect to the lack of data, it was shared that the Management Accountability Framework (MAF) is asking about progress on conducting workplace assessments of risks and hazards, and to what extent they are reviewing their Hazard Prevention Program (HPP).
  3. Update from the Sub-Committees:
    1. OHS Training/Learning Sub-Committee

      The Committee Advisor indicated that the Sub-Committee is looking for dates to meet.

    2. Harassment and Violence Prevention Tools Working Group

      A. Peart and Rhianna Clark, sub-committee co-chairs, advised that the working group has updated existing questions and added questions to the frequently asked questions that is currently on the NJC website. It was noted that there is also a Designated Recipient (DR) guide that the group has been working on. R. Clark advised that the working group is looking forward to the feedback received from SWOHS on these documents. The Committee Advisor indicated that the DR guide will also be going to the Executive of the DR Community of Practice for their review at the same time, with feedback being requested from both groups approximately three (3) weeks later.

      A. Peart noted that the DR guide does not have sufficient human rights related content and therefore suggested that the working group create an addendum document that addresses harassment and violence on prohibited grounds. She indicated that this guide would need specialists, such as the Joint Employment Equity Committee, to draft and review it. M. Dyck noted that JEEC identified concerns with the process, and so might be able to provide advice on the topic. M. Gosselin noted he would explore the topic with his team to prepare some groundwork.
  4. Standing Items
    1. Asbestos

      Nil.

    2. Mental Health

      Christine Gagnon, Manager, Engagement, Outreach and Promotion, and John Florence, Senior OHS Advisor, Policy and Data, from the Centre of Expertise on Mental Health in the Workplace (CoEMHW), at the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) provided updates on the work being done. It was reported that the Office of Primary Interest (OPI) is supporting the implementation of the national standard and the federal public service mental health strategy. Given that there is a high turnover rate in the mental health sphere, they frequently have to go back to basics. When doing so, they revisit what is mental health and the roles of the OPI, including looking at psychological health and safety, its integration into the OHS framework, the creation of programs within the departments, in addition to the mindfulness and yoga programs that already exist. C. Gagnon noted that their next meeting will focus on how to bring them together to work on psychological health and safety, to think outside of a siloed approach and examine where they are in relation to the national standard and the federal public service strategy.

    3. Harassment

      A. Peart advised that the Labour Program will be re-establishing a committee to review the guidance materials. She noted the meetings should begin soon.

      M. Gosselin reported that PSPC published the new National Master Standing Offer (NMSO) for investigators, which included more technical requirements and experience in the federal sector. He noted that approximately 27 firms and 80 vendors are included on this list, with the possibility of adding more in the future as it is still open. The information about the NMSO has been distributed to the DR community with the reminder to departments and agencies to create their own list, as well as completing the feedback form so that PSPC and TBS may assess the quality of work being provided by the vendors.

      M. Gosselin remarked that this will better equip departments on the investigation side of things, allowing the focus to shift to the prevention side. The end goal is to not have to use the investigator list.

      It was requested that the NMSO information be shared with the Committee for the benefit of the bargaining agents. It was indicated that there have been times where the bargaining agent does not agree with a specific investigator. M. Gosselin advised he will share the list with the Committee and reviewed the options for the selection of an investigator, being first, a jointly developed list, second, the NMSO to be used to jointly select an investigator, and then finally, the CCOHS list. A. Peart advised that an excellent solution is to indicate in the policy who will be selected for investigations involving human rights, for example, as the policy would make such decisions clear.

    4. Legionella

      C. Robinson advised that his team is reviewing and revising the existing Legionella communiqué to bring it into alignment with the current situation. It is expected the document will be shared with the Committee for review shortly in order for the communiqué to be released in March.

      It was noted that legionella is still a risk in winter, albeit much reduced, and requested that the communiqué be reviewed with this in mind.
  5. Common Hybrid Work Model for the Federal Public Service

    M. Dyck remarked that policy committees should remind the local committees that if their workforce is returning to the worksite, they need to look at the return-to-work plan and any changes to the worksite, including office modifications, to update the worksite assessment and conduct inspections before or while implementing the return to work. M. Gosselin responded that this is clearly outlined in the legislation and noted that his team reminds departments to work in conjunction with the OHS committee in almost every communication they send out and has done so throughout the COVID pandemic. If the inspections are not being completed, a committee member should be raising the issue through the appropriate accountability structure.

    C. Fraser expressed a concern that the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) may be inundated with requests for assistance with mental stress due to the return to work. A. Taillefer-McLaren reiterated that the impact of change management of the new direction on people’s mental and psychological health has been noted and communicated to deputy heads to make sure they are providing resources to employees as required. There have been communications to the community of practice in OHS, Labour Relations and Human Resources to remind their deputy heads of various tasks, such as reviewing their HPPs and ensuring needed measures are put in place, to ensure the workplace is ready for employees for whom this is a change. M. Dyck noted that this is a topic of importance to his members as well. N. Porteous reassured the Committee that the capacity for EAP is not an issue, noting a small increase in calls related to return to work, as well as a steady demand for assistance with family-related issues. Health Canada’s (HC) specialized organizational services can also provide support to managers to provide responses tailored to their teams regarding conflicts that may have arisen with the implementation of the hybrid work model and any associated perceptions or other issues, as well as reminding managers to reach out to their departmental Informal Conflict Management teams for assistance. She emphasized that concern that EAP might be too busy should not prevent members or employees from reaching out.
  6. Joint Learning Program Update

    A. Peart and M. Gosselin reported on the draft report of the Joint Learning Program (JLP) OHS training pilot project that they had provided at the end of 2022. It was noted that the evaluations were impressive with 90% of attendees indicating they really enjoyed the training and would recommend it to their colleagues. There were 400 people trained with only 25% rate of no shows, most of which were likely linked to COVID as the training was in person. A. Peart noted that the steering committee is looking to continue the project into the future and are therefore looking for funding. She noted it may be possible to arrange a temporary infusion of cash to bridge funding. She remarked that this training is being well received, it is employer funded, jointly delivered, and that there continues to be a need for basic OHS training.

    The OHS training attendees appreciated the fact that the training was interdepartmental which encouraged the exchange of best practices. They also appreciated the quality of the material and the co-facilitation of the sessions. M. Gosselin noted there are approximately 10,000 people to be trained across the government, and indicated it is important to involve SWOHS to determine how to scale the training up since the project, which was the result of an MOU, has now ended. He offered some suggestions as well as some barriers to scaling up, remarking that these will be the topics of further discussions once the final report is shared.
  7. Round table

    N. Porteous offered to share information on the tailored programs HC offers, as well as the decompression program, EAP, and psychosocial emergency response team who are available, if the Committee is interested. The Committee indicated they would like to hear more on these programs.

    It was noted that a pattern is emerging where policy committees are not receiving the information they are entitled to under the NJC OHS Directive. M. Gosselin suggested reaching out to TBS OHS team to work together to see what is going wrong and where. A. Taillefer-McLaren also suggesting sharing additional information on the specific issues to help determine if it is specific to a department or more widespread and offered solutions that could be taken in both circumstances.

Next Meeting

The next meeting is scheduled for March 23, 2023.