PSAC is disappointed to see the government ignore our union’s recommendations and move forward with changes to the Public Service Employment Regulations that reaffirm the existing Selection of Employees for Retention and Lay Off (SERLO) process in its current flawed state.

Similar to the misguided implementation of the  three-day in-office mandate, the government is proceeding without examining the evidence or engaging in proper consultation, despite commitments made at the bargaining table.

SERLO is flawed in its current form

The SERLO process, introduced in 2012 by the Public Service Commission, allows management to unilaterally determine individual merit, leading to arbitrary and inconsistent layoff decisions. The process lacks fairness and transparency and does not include sufficient accountability measures.

SERLO was particularly disastrous under the Harper government’s Deficit Reduction Action Plan (DRAP), which resulted in more than 35,000 federal public service job losses and untold levels of stress and anxiety for PSAC members, who were forced to interview and compete for their own jobs that they were fully qualified for.

Equitable seniority-based layoff

In 2023, PSAC suggested changes to SERLO that would establish an equitable seniority-based process, reducing some of the stress caused by layoffs while maintaining equity considerations.

The Public Service Commission's decision not to include these recommendations overlooks the potential benefits of incorporating seniority, which would make the SERLO process more transparent and fairer, particularly for equity-designated workers.

Seniority provides workers with a clear understanding of their job security and status. While no layoff is welcome, workers laid off through a seniority system know that the process for the layoff, like the layoff itself, is based on factors beyond their control. This is why the vast majority of unionized workers in both the private and public sectors in Canada have negotiated the use of seniority to determine layoffs. Federal government workers, however, remain an exception to this norm.

Seniority processes do not tend to negatively impact workers’ mental health in the same harmful way that arbitrary layoff processes do. When seniority is used as a determinant in layoffs, workers do not feel stigmatized or believe they have done something wrong, nor do they think they should have acted differently or that they were not “good enough” for unclear reasons. A seniority-based layoff system is superior to one that relies on individual merit and management discretion in deciding who should be laid off.

Moving forward

PSAC has attempted to address this issue in several rounds of bargaining, but Treasury Board maintains that our union does not have the right to negotiate these terms of employment under the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act. PSAC will continue to push for changes to the legislation and is prepared to explore other legal avenues, including a potential Charter challenge.

We urge the Public Service Commission to reconsider its position and work collaboratively toward a resolution that respects the principles of fairness and workers’ rights.

Read PSAC’s full response, submitted to the Canada Gazette.