Public Service Employment Rules Update

Summary#

The Government published proposed changes to the Public Service Employment Regulations on September 7, 2024. These proposals would update how priority hiring rights and lay-offs work across the federal public service and add clearer rules about temporary (acting) appointments, tests, and fairness checks. This is a proposal, not final law; comments are open for 30 days from publication.

What it does#

• Clarifies the meaning of an acting appointment by linking it to how promotions are defined under the existing promotion rules.
• Broadens the definition of a standardized test to include non‑competency tests used in investigations.
• Changes several priority‑hire rules:
  • Renames and refocuses the entitlement for people who become unable to carry out their duties.
  • Extends some medical‑related priority entitlements from two years to five years, and gives an extra three‑year top‑up to people whose two‑year period ended within the three years before these rules come in.
  • Extends the time surviving spouses or common‑law partners have to request a priority entitlement from two years to five years, with a three‑year catch‑up window for recent cases.
  • Clarifies and limits the “reinstatement” priority so it applies only to positions at levels above someone’s current job and removes Canadian Forces members from that specific entitlement.
  • Removes some old transitional rules that no longer apply.
• Rewrites lay‑off rules to make them clearer and more transparent:
  • Distinguishes between direct identification for lay‑off and selection exercises where only some employees in a group are kept.
  • Requires written notice to laid‑off employees that explains the reason, the date, and (if selected) the basis for their selection and their right to complain.
  • Requires departments to tell employees what qualifications and assessment methods will be used, and to offer a way to request accommodation.
  • Allows departments to use any reasonable assessment method, but they must check those methods first for biases or barriers that could disadvantage equity‑seeking groups and try to remove or limit any harm.
  • Removes a special seniority rule that applied to the Ship Repair group at National Defence, making lay‑off rules uniform across groups.
  • Removes the requirement for departments to send names of laid‑off employees to the Public Service Commission (departments are expected to register priority persons themselves).
• Keeps most of the current system (incumbent‑based processes, executive underfill/overfill) but modernizes wording and record‑keeping requirements.
• States the proposed rules would come into force on the 30th day after they are registered if finalized.

Who's affected#

• Federal public service employees and job applicants — especially those with priority entitlements (for example, people unable to carry out duties for medical reasons, some former Royal Canadian Mounted Police members, and surviving spouses/common‑law partners).
• Human resources teams and deputy heads in federal departments and agencies who run hiring and lay‑off processes.
• Bargaining agents and unions such as the Public Service Alliance of Canada, which took part in consultations.
• People facing lay‑off decisions: they will see clearer notices and explanations about why they were selected.
• The proposal will not directly affect small businesses outside the federal public service.

Why it matters#

• It aims to make lay‑off and rehiring rules clearer and fairer. That can reduce confusion and help employees know their rights.
• Extending some medical and survivor priority periods (to five years) gives affected people more time to find permanent work in the public service.
• Requiring bias checks on assessment methods is meant to protect equity‑seeking groups and reduce unfair outcomes in who gets kept or laid off.
• The changes standardize how different occupational groups are treated (removing special rules), which could change who keeps a job in workforce adjustments.
• The government says the cost impact is small (under $1 million a year) and that departments will get guidance to help implement the changes.
• These are proposed changes. They could change after the consultation period that began with the September 7, 2024 publication. Comments were invited for 30 days.