Public service employment has grown by 31 per cent

[Remius]

Its also the Fraser Institute. So take that for what its worth.

Either way show me the numbers. Because while you might be right by definition, having read what I could get from it on DWAN the spirit of it wasn't CAF, LEOs and FFs. But hey, show me the numbers. Maybe I am off on the spirit of it too, and they think we have too many CAF members, FFs and LEOs.

So not rhetorical…

I don’t think they are saying we have too many etc or what not. But when making comparisons some people will include CAF numbers because it helps show a wider gap to fit a stronger narrative. That article is talking all levels and categories.

Public sector is not the same as public service.

Public service grew by 10k total this year. Not sure what the CAF grew by. DnD grew by 1500 I think and my department grew by 900 or so. But those are all civilians.

 

[Halifax Tar]

So not rhetorical…

I don’t think they are saying we have too many etc or what not. But when making comparisons some people will include CAF numbers because it helps show a wider gap to fit a stronger narrative. That article is talking all levels and categories.

Public sector is not the same as public service.

Public service grew by 10k total this year. Not sure what the CAF grew by. DnD grew by 1500 I think and my department grew by 900 or so. But those are all civilians.

No I know you didn't have the numbers. I used my Google prowess and I couldn't find anything.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Our most effective national job creation scheme

Deconstructing Canada’s ballooning $67-billion federal bureaucracy
Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP) | Dec 9, 2024

The federal public service has grown enormously under Justin Trudeau, but a few key departments have dominated growth – including the prime minister’s own Privy Council Office.

Forty-three per cent.

That is how much Canada’s “core” federal public administration — the civil service — has grown since Justin Trudeau’s government took office in 2015. The raw numbers are even more striking. There are 110,738 more federal public servants employed today than a decade ago.

Not surprisingly, this rate of bureaucratic growth has faced some scrutiny.

Some have claimed that the increase was necessary to keep pace with population growth, yet Canada’s population only expanded by about 17 per cent over this period.

The COVID pandemic, and the programs and initiatives that were created to deal with it, is also cited as a factor. To be sure, the federal bureaucracy increased by about 35,000 during the three COVID years. But that means the rest of the personnel growth — more than two-thirds of it — happened before and after the pandemic.

If service to Canadians during this time had improved meaningfully, that might justify the rise, but there is little evidence of that. For example, complaints to the federal Office of the Taxpayers’ Ombudsperson about excessive wait times with Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) call centres were up 45 per cent in 2023. And stories of long wait times at passport offices are legion.

Such scenarios support the conviction that the federal government is bloated and in need of radical surgery. At the very least, some of this swelling of public service ranks should be examined and questioned.


Deconstructing Canada’s ballooning $67-billion federal bureaucracy

 

[captloadie]

I would like to see the breakdown of those raw numbers in to casual, term, and indeterminate positions. Snooping around on some the Public
Service online groups, it appears there has been a very large increase in the number of term employees hired to staff the multiple call centers that they have created to deal with the myriad of programs, both external facing, and internal (pay issues).

If a new government were to scrap a number of the programs, then many of those terms would go away (even now, many Depts have decided not to extend current term positions, an effect that will likely kill some of those by atrophy anyways).

 

[daftandbarmy]

Standby you 'orrible lot ...

Preparing for a Conservative government in the public service​

Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP) | LinkedIn

Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP)​

A former senior federal public servant reflects on how today’s bureaucrats should get ready for a kind of transition they haven’t seen since 2006.​

by Andrew Griffith

Faced with the likelihood of a majority Conservative government in the foreseeable future, Canada’s federal public service should seriously heed the warning of Stephen Harper’s former communications director, Andrew MacDougall, that “the hangman is coming.”

Over 40 per cent of federal public servants have only worked under the Trudeau government, and after nearly a decade in power, many public servants may have internalized Liberal perspectives.

A Conservative majority would signal public desire for change, and the public service, like it or not, will have to support a different and arguably sharper ideological agenda.

While the Clerk of the Privy Council and deputy ministers will provide high-level direction along with transition briefing books, many of the challenges will affect mid-level executives. Looking back at my experience under the Harper government, as detailed in my book Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias: Resetting Citizenship and Multiculturalism, the following lessons may be helpful.

These reflect the specific policy areas I was responsible for (citizenship and multiculturalism at the federal departments of Canadian Heritage and then Citizenship and Immigration), working under the activist and effective minister Jason Kenney, in what was arguably a less polarized political and social media environment. History seldom repeats itself, but hopefully these reflections will still provide some guidance for public servants beyond the usual transition planning.

Preparing for a Conservative government in the public service

A former senior federal public servant reflects on how today’s bureaucrats should get ready for a kind of transition they haven’t seen since 2006. by Andrew Griffith Faced with the likelihood of a majority Conservative government in the foreseeable future, Canada’s federal public service should seri

www.linkedin.com

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Expect a immediate hiring freeze with only a few exceptions. They will likley let most of the temps expire as they figure out where and how they are going to cut. I expect a small 10% cut fairly quickly on programs that are not tied to a particular Act/service, followed by 20-40% cut along with a New set set of Acts and regs like the last Workforce Adjustment.

 

[Good2Golf]

I might have found it.
View attachment 89399

So one area where JT doesn’t live up to PET’s ludicrousity…to think that back in *PET’s day, one in 100 Canadians was a federal public servant…JT still can do it by OCT ‘25…

Over 40 per cent of federal public servants have only worked under the Trudeau government, and after nearly a decade in power, many public servants may have internalized Liberal perspectives.

Trudeau: “Mission: Accomplished!”

 

[Navy_Pete]

Expect a immediate hiring freeze with only a few exceptions. They will likley let most of the temps expire as they figure out where and how they are going to cut. I expect a small 10% cut fairly quickly on programs that are not tied to a particular Act/service, followed by 20-40% cut along with a New set set of Acts and regs like the last Workforce Adjustment.

I find everytime they do a hiring freeze and let numbers drop by attrition, it's never in the bloated areas.

If the temp workers were for a short term program then not transitioning them to perm makes sense, but I find with how crappy the HR process is a lot of the people I work with on temp contracts are doing core work.

There seem to be a huge surge in innovation cells and other similar 'deliverology' era things, as well as oversigh and similar functions. Unless they actually cut programs and processes, getting rid of people but keeping the same requirements just means doing even more with less.

To be fair, we've actually had some really good success under the ISED ISC program, so of course the funding got cut to that. That program gives Canadian companies that are near market status (TR7) funding if there is support from government departments to trial their equipment, and if it all goes well and they go to ready for market you get a supply arrangement contract at the end with up to $5M in purchases available. You can appreciate how much effort that saves.

 

[mariomike]

Specifically, according to our new study, from 2019 to 2023 employment in the government sector (which includes federal, provincial and local governments nationwide) increased by 13.3 per cent compared to just 3.6 per cent in the private sector (including self-employment).

Injuries may have something to do with it, at the local level.

My former muni department had an 882% increase in WSIB costs ( 2013 - 2021 )

There has been an increase in WSIB claims related to Post Traumatic Stress Injuries ( PTSI ) experienced by Paramedics ( Toronto ).

Source: 2023 Toronto Paramedic Services Capital Budget.

 

[Rifleman62]

Add in ALL the Consultants , bet it is well over 50% increase.

Whenever you see a Senior Public Servant testifying at any Parliamentary Committee hearings, it is evident they know nothing, don't know who made the required decision, didn't keep an eye on the project to comply with regulations, didn't follow standard business practices, didn't ensure value for the dollar, didn't ensure standard accounting, etc.

I hope the CPC remember these people.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Add in ALL the Consultants , bet it is well over 50% increase.

Whenever you see a Senior Public Servant testifying at any Parliamentary Committee hearings, it is evident they know nothing, don't know who made the required decision, didn't keep an eye on the project to comply with regulations, didn't follow standard business practices, didn't ensure value for the dollar, didn't ensure standard accounting, etc.

I hope the CPC remember these people.

Speaking of consultants... cutting consulting contracts usually precedes a wave of staff downsizing ...

EY set to shed 150 jobs in UK consulting wing​

With Big Four advisory and audit firms continuing to reckon with falling demand, EY has become the latest firm to announce cuts to its UK headcount. The firm reportedly set to cut 150 roles in its UK consultancy division, while also having to replace one of its most senior executives in the team.

Major consulting firms have struggled to adjust to adapt to fluctuations in demand since the Covid-19 pandemic. While the Big Four enjoyed a major boost to growth amid the crisis period, the years since have seen consulting growth return to normal levels – and left firms with inflated headcounts eating into the profits of their stakeholders.

As mentioned, EY is not the only Big Four firm to be taking such measures. Earlier in the autumn, Deloitte announced it plans to lay off 180 of its own consulting staff. Meanwhile, according to a Wall Steet Journal, PwC US plans to lay off 1,800 employees – or 2.5% of its 75,000-person workforce, while KPMG has similarly announced plans that will affect about 4% of the firm's roughly 9,000 auditing staff in the US alone.

For EY, however, the news also comes as the firm looks to replace its UK and Ireland managing partner of consulting, Benoit Laclau. Laclau, who joined EY 13 years ago, but is stepping down after five years in the role – according to City AM, he will instead continue to serve large EY clients and lead its “technology driven pursuits in the UK”.

The move underscores some of the challenges Anna Anthony will inherit, when she becomes the first-ever woman to lead a UK Big Four firm. Anthony was selected by EY’s leadership earlier in 2024, but will face multiple pressures when she assumes the position in January 2025 – especially as key public sector contractors look to scale back their use of large consulting firms.

EY set to shed 150 jobs in UK consulting wing

With Big Four advisory and audit firms continuing to reckon with falling demand, EY has become the latest firm to announce cuts to its UK headcount.

www.consultancy.uk

 

[Remius]

Add in ALL the Consultants , bet it is well over 50% increase.

Whenever you see a Senior Public Servant testifying at any Parliamentary Committee hearings, it is evident they know nothing, don't know who made the required decision, didn't keep an eye on the project to comply with regulations, didn't follow standard business practices, didn't ensure value for the dollar, didn't ensure standard accounting, etc.

I hope the CPC remember these people.

I’m sure they have a list

 

[Remius]

Expect a immediate hiring freeze with only a few exceptions. They will likley let most of the temps expire as they figure out where and how they are going to cut. I expect a small 10% cut fairly quickly on programs that are not tied to a particular Act/service, followed by 20-40% cut along with a New set set of Acts and regs like the last Workforce Adjustment.

Hiring freeze. Term terminations, hold on acting and most staffing actions and student hiring. Reallocation of people to higher priorities.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The only way to effectively shrink the PS is to close (consolidate) entire programmes - something that is very, very hard to do because every single one has a "cheering section" of voters - and let attrition do its thing.

A good, effective public service needs constant renewal AND it needs good, experienced senior management; hence "natural" attrition.

One way to force some useful attrition is to get rid of some minor portfolios and make several serving ministers into associate (junior) ministers in other departments and then reduce the number of DMs, Assoc DMs and ADMs with their attendant (and generally late large) bands of acolytes.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The only way to effectively shrink the PS is to close (consolidate) entire programmes - something that is very, very hard to do because every single one has a "cheering section" of voters - and let attrition do its thing.

A good, effective public service needs constant renewal AND it needs good, experienced senior management; hence "natural" attrition.

One way to force some useful attrition is to get rid of some minor portfolios and make several serving ministers into associate (junior) ministers in other departments and then reduce the number of DMs, Assoc DMs and ADMs with their attendant (and generally late large) bands of acolytes.

I fully agree, but my guess is it will be another WFA 2.0

 

[daftandbarmy]

I fully agree, but my guess is it will be another WFA 2.0

Without even the courtesy of an interview though, right?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Yea likely no interviews or questions, just bye, bye.

PSAC is in a pickle, there has been a major uptick in people working there, but not a big increase in service levels, in fact the opposite. That is not necessarily the fault of the Public Servant, but of the processes and procedures mandated by the Department. I noticed a push to remove our discretion in applying the Act to a dumbed down system which follows a flow chart and everything must be checked off or the system does not allow you to proceed. The idea was to go from thinking people to trained monkeys, all in the name of "national consistency". The public is not going to have sympathy and most are unaware of the struggles many PS personal went through with phoenix utterly screwing them.

 

[CountDC]

Leaving things at the wrong address, just leaving delivery slips because packages were to bulky/heavy, damaging packages/contents as they toss them from the truck onto the lawn. Needing to pick up parcels at a central depot over an hour away, and only between certain office hours.

That sounds like the service we have received from CP on occasions. My wife even confronted the mailman one day as he walked up to the door to stick the notice on the door indicating no one was home and the parcel had to be picked up at the post office. He was a bit surprised when she opened the door as he was putting it there. Tried to lie his way out of it too. Tried claiming he brought the package, rang the doorbell and there was no answer so he took it back to the vehicle and was returning with the notice. Didn't work well as she watched him drive in and walk to the door with no package, the doorbell ringer was loud and right above her head, our dog would go wild if the doorbell was rung or someone knocked at the door. He admitted he had left the package at the post office and just brought the notice. The package was delivered later that day with an apology. On the other end I have had a parcel delivery company driver call me to ask if I was home and then as I wasn't home offered to drop it off at the nearest pick up location to my residence which was a store in walking distance so it was safe instead of leaving it at my door. I appreciated that as there was a mail thief in the area.

 

[Good2Golf]

Yea likely no interviews or questions, just bye, bye.

PSAC is in a pickle, there has been a major uptick in people working there, but not a big increase in service levels, in fact the opposite. That is not necessarily the fault of the Public Servant, but of the processes and procedures mandated by the Department. I noticed a push to remove our discretion in applying the Act to a dumbed down system which follows a flow chart and everything must be checked off or the system does not allow you to proceed. The idea was to go from thinking people to trained monkeys, all in the name of "national consistency". The public is not going to have sympathy and most are unaware of the struggles many PS personal went through with phoenix utterly screwing them.

A deliberate methodology by PMO/PM - they knew exactly what they were doing, entrenching a mindset in new public servants and the older ones who supported it. Enhanced gross (vice relative) productivity was not a consideration. It’ll would take least as many if not many more governmental cycles to undue the purposeful Liberal plan in support of a balanced, accountable and appropriately productive federal public service.

 

[Haggis]

Recent reports in the media show that CBSA is short between 1800 and 3000 front line officers that were cut during the Harper years and never replaced under Trudeau. Automation projects, such as the PIK machines at airports, have not reduced the human workforce need and some have actually made it worse and slowed traveler processing (cough, cough "ArriveCan"). Their workload has grown exponentially and looks to increase even more thanks to President-elect Trump putting long-overdue pressure on the Liberal government to take border security seriously. I don't see that pressure being relaxed for a CPC government at all.