The purpose of this paper is to begin the discussion about “Shifting Sands: Managing People in Public Bureaucracies.” The first half of this paper will provide a quantitative overview of some recent trends in employment in the public sector. The second half then analyses these trends and identifies cer- tain political and management consequences which flow from them. When people speak about public sector expenditure or employment, they frequently imply that “government ” is a totally autonomous organization operating in an isolated environment, completely separated from any of the societal trends around it. A deeper examination shows that, in fact, trends in public employment in Canada are very much in line with trends in other countries and in line with trends in the service sector generally. This is an important point because it makes it clear that, while govern- ment frequently experiences problems not found in the private sector, there are a whole host of problems which affect government in exactly the manner in which they affect any other service industry. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the industrial revolution produced a massive shift away from employment in agriculture and toward employment in factory settings. In the post-World War Two period, there has been a similar shift from the industrial to the service sector. Government - predominantly a service industry - has grown in line with this trend. In fact, in recent years government has grown even more slowly than other service industries. However, it is unlikely that this trend will continue indefinitely. After the great shift triggered by the industrial revolution, there was a period of levell- ing off and consolidation within the industrial sector. In the same sense it is likely that the “revolutionary” part of the service revolution ended in the mid-1970s. Now there is likely to be a consolidation of the revolution with some shifts of power between various industries and some fine-tuning within The author is chairman and associate professor, Department of Politics, Brock University. This paper was prepared for the Institute of Public Administration of Canada’s seminar on “Shifting Sands: Managing People in Public Bureaucracies.”Niagara-on-the-Lake,Ontaria October 28-30, 1987. CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION I ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA VOLUME 31. NO. 2 (SUMMEWETI? 1988). PP.159 - 193.
Transcript
The purpose of this paper is to begin the discussion about “Shifting Sands: Managing People in Public Bureaucracies.” The first half of this paper will provide a quantitative overview of some recent trends in employment in the public sector. The second half then analyses these trends and identifies cer- tain political and management consequences which flow from them.
When people speak about public sector expenditure or employment, they frequently imply that “government ” is a totally autonomous organization operating in an isolated environment, completely separated from any of the societal trends around it. A deeper examination shows that, in fact, trends in public employment in Canada are very much in line with trends in other countries and in line with trends in the service sector generally.
This is an important point because it makes it clear that, while govern- ment frequently experiences problems not found in the private sector, there are a whole host of problems which affect government in exactly the manner in which they affect any other service industry.
During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the industrial revolution produced a massive shift away from employment in agriculture and toward employment in factory settings. In the post-World War Two period, there has been a similar shift from the industrial to the service sector. Government - predominantly a service industry - has grown in line with this trend. In fact, in recent years government has grown even more slowly than other service industries.
However, it is unlikely that this trend will continue indefinitely. After the great shift triggered by the industrial revolution, there was a period of levell- ing off and consolidation within the industrial sector. In the same sense it is likely that the “revolutionary” part of the service revolution ended in the mid-1970s. Now there is likely to be a consolidation of the revolution with some shifts of power between various industries and some fine-tuning within
The author is chairman and associate professor, Department of Politics, Brock University. This paper was prepared for the Institute of Public Administration of Canada’s seminar on “Shifting Sands: Managing People in Public Bureaucracies.” Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontaria October 28-30, 1987.
CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION I ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA VOLUME 31. NO. 2 (SUMMEWETI? 1988). PP.159 - 193.
DAVID SIECEL
service industries. This does not mean that there will be no change in the current environment.
The early part of the industrial revolution was characterized by sweatshop working conditions, rudimentary forms of mechanization and the dominance of the textile industry. By the post-World War Two period, these had been replaced by greater concern for workplace safety, high levels of mechaniza- tion and the waning dominance of the steel and auto industries. This “evolu- tion” makes it clear that significant changes occur even in times which are not marked by revolutions. It is likely that future years will see major evolu-
TABLE 1. International Comparison of Public Employment, 19801
Public employment Public employment as % of m-agr i -
County per 100 population cultural employment
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21.
Sweden Denmark Australia United Kingdom Norway New Zealand Finland Austria United States Belgium Iceland Canada Germany France Netherlands Italy Switzerland Luxembourg Ireland Spain Japan
SOURCE: Peter S. Heller and Alan A. Tait, Cwernment Employment and Pay: Some international Comparisons (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 1983). pp. 41-42.
‘Actual dates vary, but all are close to 1980. ZGeneral government consists of employment in the core departments and agencies of all levels of government. Total public sector employment is general government employment plus employ- ment in enterprises.
160 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CHANGING PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
tions within the service revolution What changes are likely to occur during this consolidation phase of the
“service revolution”? This paper will pose more questions than it will answer. In the first part of the paper recent employment trends will be discussed. Then the second section will pose some questions about where trends might be leading and identify some problems which could be on the horizon.
The ovanll picture of public mwice employment
The conventional wisdom within Canada is that public expenditure and public employment have been growing rapidly and have reached excessive levels in recent years.’ Table 1 provides data on public employment in twenty-one democratic, industrialized counties. It indicates that by the measure of public employees per 100 population, Canada ranks approximately in the middle, below the average and even below that champion of free enterprise, the United States.2 By the other measure on the table - public employment as a percentage of the non-agricultural work force - Canada ranks even closer to the bottom. The Canadian figures are below the average, in spite of the fact that it is a large, sparsely populated country. This could well generate certain diseconomies compared to more compact, densely populated European coun- tries. It may well be that Canada has too many public employees for the taste of some commentators, but when international comparisons are made, it seems that Canada does not stand out at either the high or low end of the spectrum.
If Canada does not stand out by international comparison, then why has there been so much concern recently about the level of public service employ- ment in Canadd Does it stem from a recent rapid increase in the number of public servants? Table 2 uses census data to provide a long-term look at government employment in Canada. The clear picture is that government growth has come in spurts, set off by lengthy periods of much slower growth. There was an early spurt between 1901 and 19U. If one looks at public employ- ment as a percentage of total population, there was a later spurt which lasted from World War Two to 1981. However, if one looks at public employment as a percentage of the labour force, the spurt lasted only from 1941 to 1961. Since 1961 the absolute number of government employees has increased, but this increase has just kept pace with a rapidly increasing labour force. Public employment as a percentage of the total labour force has changed little since 1961.
Since the data suggest that public employment has leveled off in recent years, some of the concerns being heard now could stem from a fear that the
1 Appendix A provides some background information about the data used. As with any exten- sive dataset there are certain caveats about using the data. I t is suggested that readers take a quick look at this appendix. 2 One observer of the U.S. scene suggests that even thew figures are purposely understated for ideological reasons. E.E. Savas, Primtizing the Public Sextor (<:hatham, N J : Chatham House, 1982).
161 ADMINISTRATION P U R L I ~ U E oii CANADA
DAVID SIEGEL
TMLE 2. Trends in Public Employment, 1881-1981 ~~
Total Public employment as a % of public Total Labour
SOURCE: Census data. When dealing with such a lengthy time series it is important to remember that terminology and definitions change. This will have some effect on the precision of the data, but the figures presented here should provide a reasonable approxima- tion of trends.
earlier spurt would continue into the indefinite future. A longer look at history indicates that this is unlikely because government has a history of growing in spurts and levelling off.
Given this levelling off of overall government employment, the next ques- tion is, what has happened in terms of shifts between the three orders of government? First of all, the quality of data available to address this issue is somewhat problematic. The federal figures seem quite straightforward, but provincial figures have sometimes not been available for some provinces. For local governments, Statistics Canada has only recently begun to collect data for special purpose bodies such as boards of education. Data available for 1985 indicate that these bodies represent large numbers of employees and their previous exclusion significantly understated the number of employees in the local sector. It also means that local government figures are not prepared on a basis consistent with those of the other spheres of government. In spite of these caveats, the data in Table 3 are probably as clear a picture of the changing scene as can be prepared.
Not surprisingly, the picture painted by these statistics is quite similar to the one drawn from public expenditure data. The long-term trend is a relative decline in employment in the federal government matched by a relative in- crease in provincial governments, with little relative change in local govern- ments. These divergent general trends suggest that there could be rather dif- ferent phenomena occurring in the different orders of government. The follow- ing sections discuss each order of government in more detail.
162 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
TA
BL
E 3
. Tre
nds
in P
ublic
Em
ploy
men
t by
Ord
er of
C
om
me
nt
1960
19
65
1970
19
75
1980
19
85
N %
N
%
N %
N
8
N %
N
0
Feak
ral
Gnm
nmen
t'
Gen
eral
Gov
ernm
ent2
19
7,97
0 38
.8
208,
439
33.8
G
over
nmen
t E
nter
pris
e 14
3,10
4 28
.1
139,
105
22.5
T
otal
34
1,07
4 66
.9
347,
544
56.3
Provincial G
olje
rnm
ent
Gen
eral
Gov
ernm
ent
103,
926
20.4
17
2,00
4 27
.9
Gov
ernm
ent
Ent
erpr
ise
65,0
12
12.7
97
,736
15
.8
Tot
al
168,
938
33.1
26
9,74
0 43
.7
Loca
l C
ooer
nmen
t NI
A N
IA
TOTA
L G
OV
ER
NM
EN
T
EMPL
OYME
NT
510,
012
100.
0 61
7,28
4 10
0.0
Add
ition
al F
igur
es fm L
ocal
Gow
mm
ent E
mpl
oym
ent
(ava
ilabl
e on
ly f
or 1
985)
Mun
icip
al g
over
nmen
t Sp
ecia
l fu
nds
Scho
ol b
oard
s
Tot
al L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
237,
802
25.3
32
6,09
4 27
.7
340,
833
25.6
29
0,14
9 20
.4
138,
506
14.7
13
6,14
9 11
.6
159,
605
12.0
21
0,27
3 14
.8
376,
308
40.0
46
2,24
3 39
.3
500,
438
37.6
50
0.42
2 35
.1
217.
915
23.2
32
6,79
9 27
.8
399,
701
30.0
46
7,17
8 32
.8
144.
985
15.4
13
4,51
3 11
.4
148,
460
11.2
15
8,40
1 11
.1
362,
900
38.6
46
1,31
2 39
.2
548,
161
41.2
62
5,57
9 43
.9
$
202,
058
21.5
25
3,71
4 21
.6
281,
813
21.2
29
7,73
5 20
.9
$ W C
m B
941,
266
100.
0 1,
177,
269
100.
0 1,
330,
412
100.
0 1,
423.
736
100.
0 k v1
m
Ya n
m s m
297,
735
5 s B r
59,6
59
461,
307
z m
297,
735
5 59
,659
6
461,
307
% z B 1
818,
701
SOURCE:
Stat
istic
s C
anad
a, F
eder
al G
owm
men
t Em
ploy
men
t (c
atal
ogue
72-
004)
. Fig
ures
are
for
Oct
ober
of
stat
ed y
ears
. Fi
gure
s fo
r 19
80 a
nd 1
985
incl
ude
Bri
tish
Col
umbi
a; e
arlie
r fi
gure
s do
not
. Fi
gure
s fo
r 19
60 d
o no
t in
clud
e Q
uebe
c.
'All
figu
res
excl
ude
mem
bers
of
Can
adia
n Fo
rces
ZP
ost
Off
ice
is c
ount
ed a
s ge
nera
l go
vern
men
t in
196
0-19
80 an
d as
gov
ernm
ent
ente
rpri
se in
198
5 N
IA -
Not
ava
ilabl
e on
a c
ompa
rabl
e ba
sis
DAVID SIECEL
The federal government scene Table 4 indicates that total federal government employment as a percentage of the labour force has been declining fairly steadily since 1960. This does not reflect a decline in the absolute level of federal employment, but rather it reflects the rapid growth in the labour force in that period and suggests that most of that growth has been absorbed by employers other than the federal government.
The decline in federal employment has been mostly in the sphere of federal enterprises. This decline was reversed somewhat recently as a result of the shift of the Post Ofice from general government to enterprise. However, had that shift not occurred, enterprise employment would have declined from 2.2 per cent of the labour force in 1960 to only 1.1 per cent in 1985.
Employment in government departments has remained relatively stable as a percentage of the total labour force. The decline between 1980 and 1985 is accounted for entirely by the shift of the Post Office to the enterprise sector.
What functions do these public employees perform? Richard Rose has argued that government should not be viewed as one homogeneous entity. Governments operate a variety of programs in a variety of manners. A stable level of total government employment could obscure some major shifts be- tween programs. Rose suggests that all government activity can be divided into three broad categories.3 The defining functions are the minimal, but essential, responsibilities of government: “a military force, a police force, courts, prisons, and tax collectors.”4 Economic uctioities involve transportation, postal service, services to agriculture and similar activities. SOcMl services are health, education, and social assistance.
Table 5 provides data about the distribution of federal government employees by function.5 The total employment figures indicate that there was a major growth in federal employment in the 1970-75 period, followed by a significant decrease in the growth rate in the following five years and then some rebound in the 1980-85 period. This ties in with Table 4, which suggested that federal employment has been growing, but not as rapidly as the growth in the labour force.
The two functions which employed the greatest number of people in 1985 were protection of persons and property (not including Canadian Forces per- wnnel) and general government services (tax collection, provision of com- mon services). However, over the 1960-85 period, the big gainer has been economic activities (if the Post Ofice is excluded throughout the period for consistency). Employment in general government services has also grown rapidly as has employment in health and recreation and culture, although these
1 “The Significance of Public Employment:’ in Richard Rose, ed., Public Employment in Western Vations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), pp. 1-53. I Ibid., p. 19. Ij
ing with public finance A full definition of these functions is provided in various Statistics Canada publications deal-
164 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
TABLE
4. F
eder
al E
mpl
oym
ent as a
Per
cent
age
of L
abou
r F
orce
Fed
eral
gen
eral
F
eder
al g
mer
nmen
t Po
st T
otal
gm
ernm
ent1
en
terp
rise
cy
Y,e
z em
ploy
men
t Y
ear
N %
N
8
N %
N
YO
1960
19
7,97
0 3.
1 14
3,10
4 2.
2 25
,490
.4
34
1,07
4 5.
3 19
65
208,
439
2.9
139,
105
1.9
28,0
52
.4
347,
544
4.8
1970
23
7,80
2 2.
8 13
8,50
6 1.
6 43
,778
.5
37
6,30
8 4.
5 19
75
326,
094
3.2
136,
149
1.3
59,9
97
.6
462,
243
4.6
1980
34
0,83
3 2.
9 15
9,60
5 1.
4 74
,738
.6
50
0,43
8 4.
3 19
85
290.
149
2.3
2 10.
273
1.7
NIA
-
500.
422
3.9
.
W
3 SOURCE:
Stat
istic
s C
anad
a, F
eder
al G
ooer
nmen
t Em
ploy
men
t (c
atal
ogue
72-
004)
and
The
Lab
our
For
ce (
cata
logu
e 71
-001
). Fi
gure
s c:
are
for
Oct
ober
of
stat
ed y
ears
. m 5
$
m 'M
I fig
ures
exc
lude
mem
bers
of
Can
adia
n F
orce
s r
"Post
O
ffic
e is
cou
nted
as
gene
ral
gove
rnm
ent
in 1
960-
1980
and
as
gove
rnm
ent
ente
rpri
se in
198
5 2
9 1
m
' N
IA - N
ot a
vaila
ble
on a
com
para
ble
basi
s 5 z
5 5!
DAVID SIEGEL
grew from a much smaller base. The growth over more recent periods tells a somewhat different story. The
overall growth rate in the 1975-85 period has been considerably lower than the earlier period. This trend has been felt most strongly in the social ser- vices area. Both defining and economic activities have grown over the 1975-85 period. Sharon Sutherland has painted a picture of a federal government which is withdrawing from support of social and cultural activities and instead focus- ing only on the most rudimentary defining functions of government.6 The data in Table 5 support Sutherland’s rather bleak commentary.
Table 6 shows federal employment by occupational group. The two groups listed at the top of the table are the most senior and highest paid. It is in- teresting to note that in a general scene of government restraint the highest paid groups are the ones which are increasing most rapidly.7 The slowest growth in the labour force has occurred in the lower-level “operational” category. It is of more than passing interest that as the number of people in the operational category has declined, the number of senior level personnel needed to supervise them has increased.
The decline in the operational category could have come about as a result of more contracting out. If this is the case, then any financial savings expected from this reduction in staff could be illusory. It might be politically wise to reduce government payrolls and increase payments to outside contractors, but the financial savings are questionable.
Table 7 provides data about the geographic distribution of federal employees. The numbers are index numbers representing levels of over- or underrepresen- tation of federal employees in each province. The indices were calculated by dividing per capita federal employment in a province by per capita federal employment in the entire country. Thus, if there were .12 federal employees per capita in a particular province and .1 federal employees in the country as a whole, this would produce an index number of 120, indicating over- representation of federal employees in that province.
The distribution of government employment is significant for both sym- bolic and economic reasons. However, one cannot expect governments to ar- range employees solely to satisfy regional concerns. Operational needs are obviously important. Oceanographers cannot be moved to Saskatoon to fill some quota, and it is quite reasonable that public servants would be over- represented in the national capital area.
The general picture is that federal employees are overrepresented in the east (except Quebec) and underrepresented in the west (except Manitolia).
6 “Fedral,Bureaucracy: The Pinch Test,” in Michael J . Prince, ed.. H o w ottowu S7~fnu!s: 1987-88: Restruining the Stab (Toronto: Methuen, 1987). pp. 74-76. 7 Some of these apparent shifts are a bit illusory. A part of the increase in the Execntive category came ahont as a result of a reorganiiation of the senior categories in 1981. Ilowever, the ahsolutc~ numbers in the Executive category are still quite small and there has heen no decline i n the administrative and foreign servicr category which would have given up the most positions to the revised c,xecutive category.
166 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
TA
BL
E 5
Fe
dera
l G
ener
d G
over
nmen
t Em
pbym
ent by
Fun
ctio
n 19
60
R c
hang
e 19
65
% c
hang
e 19
70 8 c
hang
e 19
75
R c
hang
e 19
80
R c
hang
e 19
85
96 c
hang
e 8 c
hang
e D
efin
ing
4cti
trti
es
1975
-85
1960
-85
Gen
eral
ser
vice
s 31
,399
6
1 33
,323
31
0
43,6
48
45
8
63,6
27
-9
63,0
78
10
6
69,7
56
96
1
22
2
Prot
ectio
n of
per
sons
Fore
ign
affa
irs
and
SUB
-TO
TA
L
95,3
36
-1.7
93
,746
8.
0 10
1,27
7 39
.3
141,
038
2.0
143.
870
10.6
15
9,10
0 12
.8
66.9
and
prop
ertv
63
,937
-5
.5
60,4
23
-4.6
57
,629
23
.1
70,9
47
5.0
74,5
01
7.1
79,7
69
12.4
24
.8
inte
rnat
iona
l as
sist
ance
6,
464
-2.7
6,
291
52.2
9,
575
48.1
Eco
nom
ic A
ctiv
ities
T
rans
port
atio
n an
d co
mm
unic
atio
ns
40,9
89
11.6
45
,726
24
.1
56,7
54
45.2
82
,388
13
.1
93,1
82
-72.
2 25
,890
-6
8.6
-36.
8 T
rans
port
atio
n an
d ;;;
com
mun
icat
ions
n
4
(exc
ludi
ng P
ost
Off
ice)
14
,880
10
.5
16,4
42
15.4
18
,969
18
.0
22,3
91
9.2
24,4
42
5.9
25,8
90
15.6
74
.0
5 R
esou
rce
cons
erva
tion
and
4
Env
iron
men
t 7,
556
-9.6
6,
831
6.2
7.25
5 -4
.0
n
>
indu
stri
al d
evel
opm
ent
17,8
59
12.6
20
,110
8.
3 21
,781
11
.0
24,1
80
17.1
28
,304
8.
2 30
,627
26
.7
71.5
f
- -
Reg
iona
l pl
anni
ng
a
3 R
esea
rch
esta
blis
hmen
ts
8,44
4 26
.5
10,6
80
-10.
6 9,
546
13.1
E:
SUB
-TO
TA
L (
excl
udin
g m
C
W
z m an
d de
velo
pmen
t 3,
872
-18.
1 3,
170
-28.
4 2,
271
-41.
3
2 SU
B-T
OT
AL
58
,848
11
.9
65,8
36
19.3
78
,535
61
.0
126,
440
12.4
14
2,16
7 -4
6.8
75,5
89
-40.
2 28
.4
0
32,7
39
11.6
36
,552
11
.5
40,7
50
63.1
66
,443
10
.5
73,4
27
2.9
75,5
89
13.8
13
0.9
7 a
h
v1
I
Post
Off
ice)
i.i H
ealth
3,
298
32.0
4,
352
23.0
5,
352
25.8
6,
732
4.7
7,05
1 -3
.1
6,83
2 1.
5 10
7.2
m
Soci
al s
ervi
ces
11,5
13
13.7
13
,092
48
.1
19,3
87
28.9
24
,988
-2
5.8
18,5
39
4.3
19,3
27
-22.
7 67
.9
5 E
duca
tion
1,82
6 .4
1.
833
-18.
5 1,
494
106.
1 3,
079
-24.
2 2,
334
-25.
4 1,
741
-43.
5 -4
.7
2 R
ecre
atio
n an
d cu
ltur
e 3,
464
23.7
4,
284
-7.4
3,
966
118.
8 8,
677
4.6
9,07
4 5.
5 9,
569
10.3
17
6.2
9 z -1
>
imm
igra
tion
14,8
18
20.1
17
,798
.5
17
,883
20
.7
+ H
ousi
ng
L
m
Soci
al S
ervi
ces
Lab
our,
em
ploy
men
t an
d m
322
NIA
10
8 -6
6.5
z 9 V
erer
ans
bene
fits
13
,228
3.
1 13
,643
-1
8.9
11,0
61
SUB
-TO
TA
L
33,3
29
11.6
37
,204
10
.9
41,2
60
42.1
58
,616
-6
.5
54,7
96
1.2
55,4
60
-5.4
66
.4
Oth
er
10.4
57
11.4
11
,648
43
.6
16,7
30
TO
TA
L (e
xclu
dine
Po
st'o
ffic
e) -
171,
861
4.2
179,
150
11.6
20
0,01
7 33
.0
266,
097
2.3
272,
093
6.6
290,
149
9.0
68.8
T
OT
AL
19
7,97
0 5.
3 20
8,43
4 14
.1
237,
802
37.1
32
6,09
4 4.
5 34
0,83
3 -1
4.9
290,
149
-11.
0 46
.6
SOURCE:
Stat
isti
cs C
anad
a, F
eder
al C
olje
rnm
ent E
mpl
oym
ent
(Cat
alog
ue 7
2-00
4). F
igur
es a
re f
or O
ctob
er o
f st
ated
yea
r.
TABLE
6. F
eder
al E
mpl
oym
ent b
y O
ccup
atio
nal C
ateg
ory
1970
8 ch
ange
19
75
% c
hang
e 19
80
8 ch
ange
19
85
% c
hang
e 19
70-8
5
g
Exe
cuti
ve,
scie
ntif
ic
W
m
and
prof
essi
onal
16
,541
50
.6
24,9
15
-.9
24,6
91
21.1
29
,901
80
.8
>
fore
ign
serv
ice
24,7
81
94.8
48
,267
9.
7 52
,938
13
.0
59,8
12
141.
4 '
Tec
hnic
al
17,8
92
49.6
26
,764
6.
0 28
,357
5.
8 29
,998
67
.7
$ A
dmin
istr
ativ
e su
ppor
t 54
,329
45
.6
79,1
24
-3.7
76
,168
.5
76
,528
40
.9
E! v
Ope
ratio
nal
85,5
27
19.6
10
2,31
3 12
.5
115,
127
-57.
7 48
,742
-4
3.0
i3 A
dmin
istr
ativ
e an
d E
C
W
Ope
ratio
nal (
excl
udin
g n
Pos
t O
fhe)
47
,742
17
.8
56,2
18
-6.9
52
,357
-6
.9
48,7
42
2.1
' T
OT
AL
23
7,80
2 37
.1
326,
094
4.5
340,
833
-14.
9 29
0,14
9 22
.0
2 ' O
ther
38
,822
15
.2
44,7
11
-2.6
43
,552
3.
7 45
,168
16
.3
E 5
SOURCE:
Stat
istic
s C
anad
a, F
eder
al G
over
nmen
t Em
ploy
men
t (c
atal
ogue
72-
004)
. Fi
gure
s ar
e fo
r O
ctob
er o
f th
e st
ated
yea
rs.
CHANGING PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
TABLE 7. lndex of Federal Government Empkyment by Province 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985
cenerol Gooernment Newfoundland Prince Edward Island Nova Scotia New Brunswick Quebec Ontario Manitoba Saskatchewan Alberta British Columbia Standard deviation Range
Government Enterprise Newfoundland Prince Edward Island Nova Scotia New Brunswick Quebec Ontario Manitoba Saskatchewan Alberta British Columbia Standard deviation Range
100 118 177 115 57
128 103 67 96
111 31
120
178 124 105 177 89 93
240 93 69 59 55
181
87 120 176 114 57
130 106 70 87
111 32
119
209 127 108 177 94 91
235 69 75 56 59
179
Total Federal Gooernment Employment Newfoundland 132 134 Prince Edward Island 120 122 Nova Scotia 148 149 New Brunswick 140 139 Quebec 70 72 Ontario 113 115 Manitoba 159 157 Saskatchewan 77 70 Alberta 85 82 British Columbia 90 89 Standard deviation 30 31 Range 89 87
76 124 169 113 61
127 105 85 84
107 29
108
165 126 191 176 94 90
228 63 75 57 57
171
108 125 177 136 73
114 149 77 81 89 33
104
86 94
173 96 63
131 101 84 81 89 29
110
199 144 116 194 107 81
233 88 80 55 57
178
118 109 157 124 76
117 139 85 81 79 26 81
88 131 249 121 75
112 110 82 79 90 48
174
141 111 94
169 113 87
226 81 88 53 48
174
102 126 207 134 85
105 142 82 81 80 38
127
95 190 267 127 71
113 115 73 77 89 59
196
122 92 88
137 111 93
174 78 95 72 29
102
106 156 204 132 86
105 137 75 83 82 39
129
SOURCE: Calculated from Statistics Canada, F&d Gooernment Employment (catalogue number 72-004). Esrimotes ofPopu&m for CUM& und the P r o d n c a (catalogue number 91-201) November 1983, and Canadiun Statistical Reoiew (catalogue ll-003E). June 1987
Tlie index numbers used above are calculated by dividing per capita federal government employ- ment in a province by per capita federal government employment in all provinces.
169 ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA
DAVID SIECEI.
This maldistribution seems to be getting worse over time in spite of federal efforts to move jobs out of the National Capital Region. The underrepresen- tation in Quebec is particularly striking, given the recent significant shifts of many federal employees to Hull.
The position of women in the public service has been a major concern in recent years. Table 8 shows the index of female representation over several years and in a number of occupational categories. This index is calculated by dividing the percentage of women in a particular Occupational category by the percentge of women in the total labour force.8
In terms of total federal employment across all categories, women are represented at slightly less than the perfectly equitable representative level. This situation has improved somewhat in recent years, but is still below the 1960 level. However, the picture is more complex when one examines specific occupational categories. In the management category, women are grossly underrepresented, although this situation has improved significantly in re- cent years. Another positive sign is that in the administrative and foreign ser- vice category, which is the main feeder to the management category, the posi- tion of women has improved rapidly between 1980 and 1985. This means that, while women are underrepresented in the senior management category now, a significant number of women are strategically positioned to move into those top jobs in the near future.
Table 9 provides a similar analysis of the representation of francophones in the federal government.9 The table indicates that while francophones are closer to proportional representation than are women, they are still somewhat underrepresented in the senior categories. Both women and francophones owe their equitable overall presence in the public service to their significant overrepresentation in the lower echelon Administrative Support categories.
Table 10 provides data about the age distribution of federal public servants. While the average age of 39 means that there are few fears about approaching senility, there is one basic fact with a number of problematic consequences. The average age of federal public servants fell by almost three years in the 1970-75 period when large numbers of people in the 20 to 35-year age bracket were hired. This bulge is now centred in the 30 to 39-year age range. This is an age where people expect to be moving into those responsible senior positions where the organizational pyramid narrows considerably. The bulge in this age group ensures that there will be intense competition for the small number of positions available at the narrow end of the organiza-
8 It was decided to use women’s labour force participation rate rather than percentage of women in the total population, because there still are different participation rates between men and women, although these differences are declining. 9 The index of representation for francophona was calculated in the same manner as i t was for women, except that the divisor of the index was the percentage of francophones in the total population, rather than in the labour force. This was necessary because consistent data were not available on francophone participation in the labour force.
170 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CIIANGINC PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
TABLE 8 . Level of Femule Employment in the Federal Government
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985
All Employees Number of female employees 36,408 37,560 55,861 Total employees 130,565 139,631 198,701 Women as % of total employees 27.9 26.9 28.1 Women as 8 of labour force 26.5 29.8 32.5 Index of female representation’ 105.2 90.4 86.5
Management Category Number of female employees Total employees in this category Women as % of total employees Index of female representation
scientijw and Professional Number of female employees Total employees in this category Women as % of total employees Index of female representation
Administratice and Foreign Service Number of female employees Total employees in this category Women as % of total employees Index of female representation
Technical Number of female employees Total employees in this category Women as % of total employees Index of female representation
Administratice Support Number of female employees Total employees in this category Women as % of total employees Index of female representation
Operational Number of female employees Total employees in this category Women as % of total employees Index of female representation
89,129 273,167
32.6 35.1 93.0
21 1,186
1.8 5.0
5,759 23,444
24.6 70.0
9.152 38,427
23.8 67.9
2,516 25,866
9.7 27.7
58,109 74,574
77.9 222.1
13,572 100,518
13.5 38.5
95,487 268,139
35.6 40.2 88.6
52 1,309
4.0 9.9
4,506 21,460
21.0 52.2
13,639 51,539
26.5 65.8
2,684 25,918
10.4 25.8
54,996 68,169
80.7 200.7
19,451 99,555
19.5 48.6
92,797 223.1 73
41.6 42.8 97.2
342 4,400
7.8 18.2
5,595 23,220
24.1 56.3
21,241 57,978
36.6 85.7
3,564 27,184
13.1 30.7
56,606 68,437
82.7 193.4
5,389 41,813
12.9 30.1
SOURCE: Public Service Commission of Canada, Annual Reports. ‘Index of female representation is calculated by dividing “Women as % of total employees” by “Women as % of total labour force.” An index of less than 100 indicates that women are underrepresented relative to their overall position in the workplace.
171 ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA,
DAVID SIEGEL
TABLE 9. Level of Francophone Employment in the Federal Government 1975 1980 1985
AU Employees Number of francophone employees Total employees in this category Francophones as % of total employees Francophones as % of population’ Index of francophone representation*
Management Category Number of francophone employees Total employees in this category Francophones as % of total employees Index of francophone representation
Scientifx and Professional Number of francophone employees Total employees in this category Francophones as % of total employees Index of francophone representation
Administrative and Foreign Service Number of francophone employees Total employees in this category Francophones as % of total employees Index of francophone representation
Technical Number of francophone employees Total employees in this category Francophones as 76 of total employees Index of francophone representation
Administrative Support Number of francophone employees Total employees in this category Francophones as % of total employees Index of francophone representation
Operational Number of francophone employees Total employees in this category Francophones as % of total employees Index of francODhone remesentation
NIA NIA
25.6
246 1,217 20.2 78.9
4,282 23,214
18.4 72.0
10,299 48,098
21.4 83.6
3,238 25,789
12.6 49.0
NIA NIA
NIA NIA
67,308 25 1,048
26.8 25.6
104.5
281 1,309 21.5 83.7
3,881 19,806
19.6 76.4
13,550 49,326
27.5 107.1
4,675 24,881
18.8 73.3
19,750 62,515
31.6 123.2
25,135 93,042
27.0 105.3
61,741 223,173
27.7 25.6
108.1
893 4,400 20.3 79.3
5,067 23,220
21.8 85.2
17,240 57,978
29.7 116.2
5,612 27,184
20.6 80.6
22,539 68,437
32.9 128.6
10,330 41,813
24.7 96.5
SOURCE: Public Service Commission of Canada, Ann& Reports. ‘Figures for 1975 and 1980 were calculated from census data for 1976 and 1981. The 1985 figure was assumed to be the same as 1981. ’Index of francophone representation is calculated by dividing “Francophones as % of total employees” by “Francophones as 5% of total population.” An index of less than 100 indicates that francophones are underrepresented relative to their overall position in the population.
172 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
TAB
LE 1
0. D
istr
ibut
ion of
Fed
eral
Gov
ernm
ent E
mpl
oyee
s by
Age
1965
' 19
70
1975
19
80
1985
%
cu
mul
ativ
e %
cu
mul
ativ
e %
cu
mul
atiu
e %
cu
mul
ativ
e 8
cum
ulat
ive
Age
Gro
up
Und
er 2
0 c
20-2
4 2 G
25-2
9 6
30-3
4 v1 a
35-3
9
3 45
-49
40-4
4 J 3 P
50-5
4
c: 2 65
+
2 55
-59
60-6
4 eer
?6
2.4
2.4
7.8
10.2
8.
5 18
.7
9.1
27.8
9.
7 37
.5
16.4
53
.9
16.4
70
.3
13.3
83
.6
9.2
92.8
5.
1 97
.9
1 .o
98.9
8
8
?6
1.6
1.6
11.0
12
.6
10.1
22
.7
8.8
31.5
9.
3 40
.8
10.2
51
.0
15.6
66
.6
15.2
81
.8
11.6
93
.4
6.2
99.6
.4
10
0.0
2.4
14.2
16
.5
10.9
8.
7 8.
9 9.
4 12
.7
10.4
5.
6 .2
2.4
16.6
33
.1
44.0
52
.7
61.6
71
.1
83.8
94
.2
99.8
10
0.0
.8
9.2
16.8
16
.7
11.5
9.
5 9.
8 9.
7 10
.3
5.6 .1
.8
10.0
26
.8
43.5
55
.0
64.5
74
.3
84.0
94
.3
99.9
10
0.0
.1
5.1
14.0
18
.2
18.2
12
.4
9.9
9.3
7.5
4.9 .2
%
n 5
5.2
z Ei 19
.3
z 0
37.5
z
55.7
f:
68.0
n
78.0
m
87.3
9 ij
94.9
m f
100.
0 a
.1
v)
99.8
r
42.0
41
.9
39.1
39
.4
39.7
2 6
m
C
Ave
rage
age
SOURCE:
Publ
ic S
ervi
ce C
omm
issi
on o
f C
anad
a, A
nnuu
l R
epw
ts.
z J ' 2 F!
I In
196
5, a
ges
wer
e no
t re
port
ed fo
r 1.
1 ?k
of e
mpl
oyee
s.
DAVID SIEGEL
tional pyramid. Some of the consequences of this will be discussed in the next section.
Table U provides information about the level of education of government employees. Richard Rose found that the level of education of public sector employees was higher than that found in the general labour force.10 He at- tributed this to the activities which governments usually carry out, such as health care, education, social services. These are all activities which usually require a university education.
TABLE ll. Pmentoge of Employees with U n i d t y Degree 1971 % change 1981
Females Total labour force Federal government Provincial governments Local governments Local governments (including primary
All governments All governments (including primary
and secondary teachers
and secondary teachers)
Males Total labour force Federal government Provincial governments Local governments Local governments (including primary
All governments All governments (including primary
and secondary teachers)
and secondary teachers)
AU Employees Total labour force Federal government Provincial governments Local governments Local governments (including primary
All governments All governments (including primary
and secondary teachers
and secondarv teachers)
4.9 7.2 8.0 5.7
25.3 7.2
19.2
7.9 13.2 17.5 4.7
29.0 12.0
21.0
6.9 ll.7 14.3 4.8
27.2 10.8
20.3
89.9 77.8 83.8 57.9
54.2 76.4
47.9
48.1 52.3 54.3 57.4
29.3 50.0
42.9
55.1 48.7 50.3 62.5
40.8 48.1
44.3
9.3 12.8 14.7 9.0
39.0 12.7
28.4
ll.7 20.1 27.0 7.4
37.5 18.0
30.0
10.7 17.4 21.5 7.8
38.3 16.0
29.3 SOURCE: Statistics Canada, Census data.
10 “The Significance of Public Employment,” p. 37.
174 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CHANCING PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
Table 11 indicates that Canada follows the international trend identified by Rose. In 1981, just over 10 per cent of the total labour force held a university degree, while almost 30 per cent of government employees (including primary and secondary school teachers") had the same level of education. However, in the ten-year interval, the percentage of people with university education has grown faster in the overall labour force than in government employment. This has been particularly the case among women where the overall growth rate has been twice that of the growth rate in governments.
Another gender difference is that federal and provincial governments employ a greater percentage of highly-educated males than females. In the overall figures, women catch up because of the large number of women employed as primary and secondary teachers. However, the 1971-1981 growth rates in- dicate that the situation of educated women is improving relative to men in the federal and provincial governments.
The provincial government scene Table 12 provides information on employment in provincial general govern- ment activities (not enterprises). One important caveat must be registered about using these data to compare provinces. Levels of provincial employ- ment are very much influenced by the division of responsibilities between the provincial and local governments. For example, the apparent huge increase in employment in New Brunswick between 1970 and 1975 is actually caused by the fact that Statistics Canada shifted teachers from local to provincial employment in that period.
The total employment figures indicate that there were major increases in provincial employment in the 1965-75 period, followed by continuing slower increases. The figures for employment per thousand population suggest that a significant portion of that increase was a response to increasing population. In the 1980-85 period virtually all growth in government employment was accounted for by increases in population.
Table 13 indicates that growth in provincial government enterprise employ- ment is similar to the growth in provincial general government employment: rapid increases in 1965-75, followed by more modest increases in 1975-85. Again, growth rates are moderated considerably when they are controlled for increases in population.
An interesting point which emerges in comparing tables 12 and 13 with earlier federal figures is that, while federal employment is becoming more concentrated in the general government sector, provincial employment is mov- ing toward the enterprise sector.
U Including all primary and secondary teachers as government employees inflates the figures slightly, since there ;uc some teachen who work for private schools. This assumption was necessary because data allowing the separation of public school and pnvate school teachers are not available.
175 ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA
TA
BL
E 1
2. Provincial
Gen
eral
Goo
ernm
ent E
mpl
oym
ent
by Province
1960
Q
cha
nge
196.
5 46 c
hang
e 19
70
%ch
ange
19
7.5
% c
hang
e 19
60
46 c
hang
e 19
8.5'
8 c
hang
e 96 c
hang
e 19
75-8
5 19
60-8
5
Tota
l Em
ploy
men
t N
ewfo
undl
and
7,16
2 39
.3
9,97
4 9.
8 10
,950
11
.1
12,1
66
10.7
13
,473
14
.1
15,3
72
26.4
11
4.6
Prin
ce E
dwar
d Is
land
1,
636
22.4
2,
002
51.4
3,
032
37.9
4,
180
1.4
4,23
7 3.
9 4,
404
5.4
169.
2
24,7
33
10.3
27
,290
14
.1
266.
0 02
.750
-3
.5
99.1
06
16.0
20,9
87
-3.5
20
,262
4.
5 11
0.0
Nov
a Sc
otia
9,
648
31.2
12
,659
44
.6
18,3
05
5.9
19,3
87
8.3
New
Bru
nsw
ick
7,45
6 4.
1 7,
761
40.4
10
,893
11
9.6
23,9
20
3.4
Que
bec
NIA
49
,883
19
.3
59,4
92
43.7
85
,465
20
.2
Ont
ario
48
,543
17
.8
57,1
81
35.0
77
,171
36
.5
105,
304
3.7
Man
itoba
7,
276
30.4
9,
486
25.2
11
,878
24
.1
14,7
42
-5.3
Sa
skat
chew
an
11,3
06
-2.8
10
.991
10
.8
12,1
74
40.7
17
,125
-.6
A
lber
ta
14,4
86
27.9
18
.523
37
.7
25,4
99
74.6
44
,510
17
.0
Bri
tish
Col
umbi
a N
IA
NIA
N
IA
NIA
Y
ukon
}
NIA
56
5 57
6.3
3,82
1 1,
485
35.2
N
orth
wes
t T
erri
tori
es
2,65
5 19
.6
6;2
00
6.
6 11
6:36
0 10
.5
139.
7 13
,968
21
.2
16,9
32
14.9
13
2.7
17,0
30
-11.
6 15
,052
-1
2.1
33.1
52
,067
22
.9
63,9
73
43.7
34
1.6
41,2
56
-1.0
40
,864
2,
007
16.6
2,
341
57.6
3,
175
19.3
3,
789
42.7
T
OT
AL
(exc
ludi
ng B
.C.)
10
7,51
6 66
.5
179,
025
30.3
23
3,21
5 41
.9
330,
939
9.9
363,
627
5.8
384,
881
16.3
25
8.0
TO
TA
L (i
nclu
ding
B.C
.)
404,
883
5.2
425,
745
Em
ploy
men
t pe
r Thousand P
opul
atio
n N
ewfo
undl
and
16.0
27
.8
20.4
3.
6 21
.2
4.6
22.2
7.
5 23
.8
11.1
26
.5
19.4
65
.5
Prin
ce E
dwar
d Is
land
15
.9
15.6
18
.4
50.1
27
.6
29.5
35
.7
-3.3
34
.5
.1
34.5
-3
.2
117.
5 N
ova
Scot
ia
13.3
26
.2
16.7
39
.8
23.4
1.
1 23
.7
5.0
24.8
-7
.3
23.0
-2
.7
73.4
N
ew B
runs
wic
k 12
.7
-.3
12.6
37
.7
17.4
10
7.0
36.0
-1
.1
35.6
6.
6 37
.9
5.4
199.
5 Q
uebe
c N
IA
8.8
12.8
9.
9 39
.8
13.8
16
.3
16.1
-6
.5
15.0
8.
8 O
ntar
io
7.9
6.0
8.4
21.3
10
.2
26.1
12
.9
-1.1
12
.7
.6
12.8
-.5
61
.4
Man
itoba
8.
0 22
.4
9.8
22.9
12
.1
20.4
14
.5
-6.3
13
.6
16.0
15
.8
8.7
96.8
Sa
skat
chew
an
12.4
-6
.4
11.6
11
.8
12.9
45
.9
18.9
-5
.9
17.8
-1
6.7
14.8
-2
1.7
19.7
A
lber
ta
11.2
13
.8
12.8
25
.1
16.0
56
.6
25.0
-2
.8
24.3
11
.4
27.1
8.
3 14
1.6
Yuk
on
} N
IA
40.4
45
6.9
224.
8 69
.7
29.1
90
.0
12.1
10
0.9
44.7
N
orth
wes
t T
erri
tori
es
64.4
10
.2
71.0
4.
6 74
.3
15:3
Bri
tish
Col
umbi
a 15
.5
-8.5
14
.2
TO
TA
L (e
xclu
ding
B.C
.)
6.6
51.8
10
.0
21.3
12
.2
34.2
16
.3
4.2
17.0
.6
17
.1
4.8
158.
9 TO
TAL
(inc
ludi
ng B
.C.)
16
.8
-.4
16.8
SOU
RC
E:
Stat
istic
s C
anad
a. P
rmin
ciol
and
Ter
rito
rial
Gow
mm
ent
Em
ploy
men
t (C
atal
ogue
72-
007)
. !-
Stat
isti
cs C
anad
a ch
ange
d ce
rtai
n de
finiti
ons
betw
een
1980
and
198
5. T
he e
ffec
t of
the
se c
hang
es h
as b
een
elim
inat
ed s
o th
at t
he 1
985
figur
es a
re c
ompa
rabl
e to
NIA
- N
ot A
vaila
ble.
th
ose
of p
revi
ous
year
s.
TABLE 13.
Em
ploy
men
t in
Pro
vinc
ial
Ent
erpr
ises
by
Prov
ince
19
60
% c
hang
e 19
65
% c
hang
e 19
70
% c
hang
e 19
75
% c
hang
e 19
80
% c
hang
e 19
85'
W ch
ange
%
cha
nge
1975
-85
1960
-85
Tn
tnl
Fm
nln
imm
t r-
-Y--
-'--
- _- -. .
- N
ewfo
undl
and
437
-24.
7 32
9 21
8.2
1,04
7 13
1.8
2,42
7 31
.7
3,19
6 -7
.3
2,96
2 22
.0
577.
8 Pr
ince
Edw
ard
Isla
nd
48
25.0
60
36
.7
82
213.
4 25
7 -1
8.3
210
36.7
28
7 11
.7
497.
9 N
ova
Scot
ia
1,26
7 16
.7
1,47
9 26
6.1
5,41
5 26
.0
6.82
4 -1
3.1
5.92
7 -1
3.6
5.12
3 -2
4.9
304.
3 N
ew B
runs
wic
k Q
uebe
c O
ntar
io
Man
itoba
7
Sask
atch
ewan
41
Alb
erta
1,76
9 33
.9
2,36
9 -5
.5
2,23
9 61
.2
3,60
9 -1
.4
3,55
9 12
.7
4,01
0 11
.1
126.
7 N
/A
14.9
28
26.9
18
.937
42
.8
27.0
47
19.5
32
.326
28
.1
41.3
99
53.1
22
,307
-6
.1
20,9
50
43.2
30
,002
16
.0
34;8
09
-4.4
33
;265
20
.3
40;0
17
15.0
79
.4
6,72
4 3.
6 6,
965
16.6
8,
119
45.6
11
,819
-2
.3
11,5
46
2.5
11,8
37
.2
76.0
6,
228
9.9
6,84
5 -3
.4
6,60
9 35
.4
8.94
9 47
.8
13,2
26
-.6
13,1
52
47.0
11
1.2
C 5,
538
39.0
7,
698
20.6
9,
283
67.9
15
,589
41
.0
21.9
77
-19.
6 17
.669
13
.3
219.
1 B
ritis
h C
olum
bia
NIA
N
IA
NIA
23
,120
.O
23
,125
-6
.1
21;7
21
-6.1
2
Q N
orth
wes
t T
erri
tori
es
20
45.0
29
40
0.0
145
625.
0 0
E
Em
ploy
men
t per Thousand
Popu
latio
n D z
$ Y
ukon
}
NIA
64
35
.9
87
43
72.1
74
6.
8 79
83
.7
2 TOTAL (e
xclu
ding
B.C
.)
44,3
18
39.3
61
,756
32
.5
81,8
20
36.1
11
1,39
3 12
.5
125,
335
9.1
136,
680
22.7
20
8.4
a
5 3 3 TOTAL (i
nclu
ding
B.C
.)
134,
513
10.4
14
8,46
0 6.
7 15
8,40
1 17
.8
5 z
New
foun
dlan
d 1.
0 -3
0.9
.7
200.
4 2.
0 11
8.3
4.4
27.8
5.
7 -9
.8
5.1
15.3
42
2.6
4 Pr
ince
Edw
ard
Isla
nd
.5
18.1
.6
35
.4
.7
194.
4 2.
2 -2
2.1
1.7
31.6
2.
3 2.
6 38
3.0
51
Nov
a Sc
otia
1.
7 12
.3
2.0
254.
0 6.
9 20
.3
8.3
-15.
8 7.
0 -1
7.0
5.8
-30.
1 23
3.9
5 m
N
ew B
runs
wic
k 3.
0 28
.3
3.9
-7.3
3.
6 51
.9
5.4
-5.7
5.
1 8.
9 5.
6 2.
7 85
.5
m
5 O
ntar
io
3.7
-15.
5 3.
1 28
.7
4.0
7.2
4.3
-8.9
3.
9 13
.6
4.4
3.5
20.8
5
Que
bec
NIA
2.
6 19
.9
3.1
39.0
4.
4 15
.6
5.1
24.2
6.
3 43
.6
m
m
Man
itoba
7.
4 -2
.7
7.2
14.4
8.
3 41
.2
11.7
-3
.4
11.3
-1
.9
11.1
-5
.2
48.9
5
0
Sask
atch
ewan
6.
8 5.
9 7.
2 -2
.5
7.0
40.4
9.
9 39
.8
13.8
-6
.3
12.9
31
.0
89.8
A
bert
a 4.
3 23
.8
5.3
9.6
5.8
50.6
8.
8 17
.1
10.3
-2
7.1
7.5
-14.
6 74
.5
2 9
Bri
tish
Col
umbi
a N
IA
NIA
9.
5 -8
.7
8.7
-13.
2 7.
5 -2
0.8
z f:
Y
ukon
)
NIA
4.
6 11
.9
5.1
2.0
64.4
3.
3 2.
6 3.
4 68
.7
4
2.8
485.
7 TO
TAL
(exc
ludi
ng B
.C.)
3.
5 23
.4
4.3
28.8
5.
5 6.
7 5.
9 3.
6 6.
1 10
.5
TOTAL
(inc
ludi
ng B
.C.)
5.9
4.2
6.2
1.1
6.2
5.3
SOU
RC
E:
Stat
isti
cs C
anad
a. P
moi
ncd
ond
Ter
rito
rial
Coo
ernm
ent
Em
ploy
men
t (C
atal
ogue
num
ber
72-0
07).
g N
orth
wes
t T
erri
tori
es
.5
33.6
.6
33
8.2
DAVID SIEGEL
Table 14 shows provincial employment broken down by functional activity. The social service function has seen the greatest increase over the 1970-85 period, growing twice as fast as the defining activities and four times faster than economic activities. Specifically, the major increases have been in educa- tion, and recreation and culture, with a substantial increase in social welfare as well. The defining functions of general services and protection of persons and property have also been major gainers.
Federal and provincial combined figures A good picture of the overall changes in government activity by functional activity could be obtained if it were possible to combine employment figures for all three spheres of government. Unfortunately, comparable figures are not available for local governments. Table 15 provides the data for federal and provincial employment combined. The overall pattern is quite similar to the provincial pattern, which should not be surprising considering the high and increasing level of provincial employment. In the 1970-85 period the big gainer has been social services, with defining activities increasing by about half, and economic activities hardly increasing at all. Changes of this magnitude signal major changes in the sorts of activities which governments are emphasizing. The significance of these trends will be discussed in more detail later.
It is very difficult to capture information on the local government universe consisting of approximately four thousand municipalities and an equal number of special purpose bodies such as school boards, electrical utilities, and tran- sit commissions.
Until 1985, Statistics Canada collected employment information on municipalities only, not the broader local government universe. Table 3 in- dicated that these were only the tip of the iceberg; many more people are employed in special purpose bodies than in municipalities. However, the on- ly data available on a long-term comparable basis relate solely to municipalities.
Table 16 indicates that the 1970-75 period was a rapid growth period for municipal government, just as it was for the other spheres. It further indicates that the growth was occurring in all provinces although at widely varying rates. The second half of the 1970s presents a mixed pattern. Municipalities in pro- vinces such as Alberta were still growing rapidly, while restraint had set in in others. By the 1980s, municipalities in all provinces (with the possible ex- ception of Ontario) were beginning to feel the pinch.
The bottom part of the table converts the raw numbers to municipal employees per thousand population. This allows comparisons between prov- inces and also controls for growth in population so that real growth can be measured.
The percentage increase figures are moderated somewhat, indicating that some portion of the growth was caused by increasing population, but there
The municipal government scene
178 CANADIAN PUBLlC ADMINISTRATION
TA
BL
E
14. P
rovi
ncia
l G
ener
al G
mer
nmen
t E
mrd
oum
ent
bv F
unct
ion.
A11
Proc
ince
s
1970
%
cha
nge
1975
%
cha
nge
1980
8 c
hang
e
Def
inin
g A
ctiv
ities
G
ener
al s
ervi
ces
Pro
tect
ion
of p
erso
ns
and
prop
erty
Su
perv
isio
n of
reg
ions
an
d lo
calit
ies
SUB
-TO
TA
L
Eco
nom
ic A
ctiv
ities
T
rans
port
atio
n an
d co
mm
unic
atio
ns
Nat
ural
res
ourc
es
Agr
icul
ture
, tr
ade
and
indu
stry
, an
d to
uris
m
Env
iron
men
t R
esea
rch
esta
blis
hmen
ts
SUB
-TO
TA
L
Socia
l Se
rvic
es
Hea
lth
Soci
al W
elfa
re
Edu
cati
on
Rec
reat
ion
and
cult
ure
Lab
our,
em
ploy
men
t an
d
Hou
sing
Oth
er
imm
igra
tion
SUB
-TO
TA
L
23,4
72
36,6
25
4,63
4 64
,731
43,5
04
16,8
53
11,3
95
71,7
52
49,4
32
16,1
99
19,6
21
3,13
6
288
88,6
76
410
45.2
26.7
-18.
9 30
.2
-.6
-4.1
29.4
10.8
40.3
25
.6
238.
7 11
7.4
265.
3 88
.5
34,0
91
46,4
03
3,75
8 84
,252
43,2
22
16,1
65
14,7
44
4,69
8 68
4 79
,513
69,3
53
20,3
48
66,4
49
6,81
8
3,15
4 1,
052
167,
174 -
26.4
22.6
39.5
24
.9
16.5
49
.0
8.3
24.7
55
.3
22.4
12.4
46
.7
14.8
52
.3
69.8
98
.7
20.8
TO
TA
L
225,
569
46.7
33
0.93
9 22
.3
43,1
01
56,9
01
5,24
2 10
5,24
4
50,3
61
24,0
83
15,9
66
5,85
9 1,
062
97,3
31
77,9
20
29,8
48
76,2
82
10,3
84
5,35
7 2,
090
201,
881
427
404.
883
5.5
7.5
5.1
6.5
-6.2
-1
.8
24.8
11
.0
37.9
1.
5
-3.5
18
.5
14.3
22
.0
56.9
-4
7.5 8.9
501.
6 7.
0
45,4
71
61,1
52
5,50
8 11
2,13
1
47,2
48
23,6
58
19,9
30
6,50
3 1,
464
98,8
03
75,1
96
35,3
69
87,1
53
12,6
68
8,40
7 1,
097
219,
890
2,56
9 43
3.39
3
93.7
67.0
18.9
73
.2
8.6
40.4
74.9
37.7
52.1
11
8.3
344.
2 30
4.0
280.
9
148.
0 52
6.6
92.1
1985
%
cha
nge
1970
-85
SOU
RC
E:
Stat
isti
cs C
anad
a. P
rovi
ncia
l and
Tem
twia
l G
ooem
men
t E
mvb
umen
t (C
atd
ome
num
ber
7'2-
007)
TABLE
15. Combined
Fed
eral
and
Pro
vinc
ial
Em
ploy
men
t by
Fun
ctio
n, A11
Pros
ince
s 19
75
% c
hang
e 19
80
% c
hang
e 19
85
% c
hane
e 19
70
% c
hang
e
Def
inin
A
ctiv
ities
Pro
tect
ion
of p
erso
ns
Gen
er af
serv
ices
inte
rnat
iona
l ass
ista
nce
and
loca
litie
s Su
perv
isio
n of
reg
ions
SUB
-TO
TA
L
Eco
nom
ic A
ctiv
ities
T
rans
port
atio
n an
d co
mm
unic
atio
ns
Res
ourc
es a
nd i
ndus
try
Env
iron
men
t R
egio
nal p
lann
ing
Res
earc
h es
tgli
shm
ents
and
deve
lo m
ent
SUB
-TO
TA
L
Soc
ial S
ervi
ces
Hea
lth
Soci
al s
ervi
ces
Edu
cati
on
Rec
reat
ion
and
cult
ure
Lab
our,
em
ploy
men
t an
d im
mig
ratio
n H
ousi
ng
Vet
eran
s be
nefi
ts
Oth
er
SUB
-TO
TA
L
67,1
20
94,2
54
-
4,63
4 16
6,00
8
100,
258
50,0
29
- - -
150,
287
54,7
84
35,5
86
21,1
15
7,10
2
- 288
11,0
61
129,
936
17,1
40
45.6
24.5
-18.
9 35
.7
25.3
10
.1
37.0
38.9
27
.4
229.
3 11
8.2
377.
1
73.8
97,7
18
8.7
1 17,
350
12.0
6.46
4 -2
.7
3,75
8 39
.5
225,
290
10.6
125,
610
14.3
55
,089
24
.1
12,2
54
3.6
3,87
2 -1
8.1
9,12
8 28
.6
205,
953
16.3
76,0
85
11.7
45
,336
6.
7 69
,528
13
.1
15,4
95
25.6
17,9
72
28.8
1,
374
52.1
225,
790
13.7
- -
106,
179
13 1,
402
6,29
1
5,24
2 24
9,11
4
143,
543
68,3
53
12,6
90
3,17
0 11
,742
2 3 9,
4 9 8
84,9
71
48,3
87
78,6
16
19,4
58
23,1
55
2,09
0
256,
677
427 -
8.5
7.2
52.2
5.1
8.9
-49.
0 8.
6 8.
4
-28.
4 -6
.2
-27.
2
-3.5
13
.0
13.1
14
.3
13.5
-4
2.3
7.3
1 9 7
0-8y
5
115,
227
71.7
140,
921
49.5
9,57
5 -
5,50
8 18
.9
271.
23 1
63
.4
73,1
38
-27.
1 74
,215
48
.3
13,7
58
-
2,27
1 -
11,0
10
-
174,
392
16.0
82,0
28
49.7
54
,696
53
.7
88,8
94
321.
0 22
,237
21
3.1
26,2
90
- 1,
205
318.
4
275,
350
111.
9 2,
569
-85.
0
- -
TOTA
L 46
3,37
1 41
.8
657,
033
13.5
74
5,71
6 -3
.0
723,
542
56.1
SO
UR
CE
: T
able
s 5
and
14
TABLE
16. M
unic
ipal
Gov
ernm
ent
Em
ploy
men
t by
Pro
uinc
e ?k
cha
nge
1985
?k
cha
nge
1970
%
chan
ge
1975
O/c
cha
nge
1980
19
70-8
5 To
tal
Em
ploy
men
t N
ewfo
undl
and
1,70
1 67
.6
2,85
1 -4
.1
2,73
3 8.
2 2,
957
73.8
Pr
ince
Edw
ard
Isla
nd
275
17.5
32
3 11
.5
360
.6
362
31.6
N
ova
Scot
ia
4,49
5 19
.1
5,35
4 19
.9
6,4 1
8 8.
9 6,
992
55.6
N
ew B
runs
wic
k 2,
750
34.7
3,
703
9.6
4,05
8 2.
1 4,
143
50.7
Ont
ario
82
,741
29
.6
107,
194
14.6
12
2,80
0 11
.5
136,
962
65.5
2
+
Sask
atch
ewan
7,
314
28.1
9,
371
17.5
11
,008
1 .o
11
,120
52
.0
2 A
lber
ta
17,3
12
27.1
22
,000
38
.0
30,3
49
4.4
3 1,
688
83.0
F
B
ritis
h C
olum
bia
20,3
30
24.0
25
,208
14
.8
28,9
42
2.3
29,6
10
45.6
-C
3 to
tal
201,
839
25.5
25
3,38
2 11
.1
281,
419
5.4
296,
586
46.9
c
p. E
mpl
oym
ent
per Thousand P
opth
twn
2.5
10.3
2.
8 6.
3 2.
9 -3
.2
2.8
13.6
2
c
Pri
nce
Edw
ard
Isla
nd
@ N
ew B
runs
wic
k 4.
4 26
.9
5.6
4.8
5.8
-1.4
5.
8 31
.2
5
Que
bec
56,5
48
17.9
66
,690
-4
.1
63,9
86
-2.3
62
,525
10
.6
' M
anito
ba
8,37
3 27
.6
10,6
88
.7
10,7
65
-5.0
10
,227
22
.1
2 s
New
foun
dlan
d 3.
3 57
.8
5.2
-6.9
4.
8 5.
3 5.
1 54
.7
2
Que
bec
9.4
14.8
10
.8
-7.2
10
.0
-5.3
9.
5 .9
r
Z O
ntar
io
11.0
19
.7
13.1
9.
2 14
.3
5.3
15.1
37
.7
%
- c? m m
-C
m
5.7
13.7
6.
5 16
.2
7.6
4.6
7.9
38.2
m
N
ova
Scot
ia
9 M
anito
ba
8.5
23.8
10
.5
-.4
10.5
-9
.1
9.5
12.1
$
f:
Sask
atch
ewan
7.
8 32
.9
10.3
11
.1
11.5
-4
.8
10.9
40
.5
-i
Alb
erta
10
.9
14.0
12
.4
14.6
14
.2
-5.3
13
.4
23.7
B
ritis
h C
olum
bia
9.6
8.4
10.4
4.
8 10
.9
-5.5
10
.3
7.4
TO
TA
L
9.5
17.8
11
.2
4.9
11.7
-.
l 11
.7
23.4
SOURCE:
Stat
istic
s C
anad
a, L
ocal
Gol
jern
men
t E
mpl
oym
ent
(cat
alog
ue n
umbe
r 72
-009
)
DAVID SIEGEL
is still a sizeable remaining growth rate, indicating that there was significant real growth in employment.
The number of municipal employees per thousand population shows a wide variance between provinces. The interpretation of this variance is difficult. It could suggest differences in levels of service, but it more likely reflects differences in the division of responsibilities between provincial and municipal governments in different provinces. For example, the level of employment is higher in municipalities in the western provinces because they carry out many functions which are either performed by the province or delegated to special purpose bodies in the east.
Since Statistics Canada does not collect data on the number of local govern- ment employees by function, it is necessary to use expenditure as a proxy for number of employees. This is safer in local government than in the other spheres because local governments do not provide major transfer payments, and so a major portion of expenditure goes to salaries. The major item of local government expenditure is far and away education (except in a few prov- inces where it is funded almost entirely by the province). The second item (usually quite far back) is fairly consistently transportation services, mostly roads, with a significant allocation to public transit. Both of these are capital- intensive and so might not attract a matching number of employees.
Two functions which usually follow the transportation function, but are growing rapidly, are protection of persons and property (police and fire), and recreation and culture. Since both of these tend to be labour-intensive, it is likely that there has been a major increase in employment in these areas in the past few years.
Consequences To this point, this paper has focused on a quantitative review of trends in public employment. These trends point to a number of factors which have produced and likely will continue to produce major problems for the public sector in the future. This section will discuss some of these trends and problems.
A qualitatiuely different kind of government
The information discussed above describes a sort of government which is qualitatiuely different from the kind of government which existed before the Second World War. The earlier style of government was concerned with what Richard Rose has described as the defining activities of government: collec- ting taxes, defending the country from external threat, keeping order inter- nally. Over the postwar period the role of government in social functions has increased markedly. Many functions have increased in scope over that period - social assistance, workers’ compensation, children’s services - and other functions which were unheard-of before the war have since become impor-
182 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CHANGING PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
tant - rent control, elimination of gender and other kinds of discrimination. This has been more apparent in provincial governments than in the federal,
at least when looking at employment statistics. However, the federal govern- ment has been involved in funding some portion of many of the programs which result in increasing provincial employment. It is quite clear that the entire scope and character of government has changed in the forty years since the end of the Second World War.
The appearance of more contentious issues
In shifting their focus from the defining functions of government to social issues, governments have moved into areas which are very contentious and which require high levels of skill and judgment on the part of the individual public servant.
Issues related to the defining functions sometimes cause difficulties. The traditional highway engineer could run into opposition about the routing of a highway, but there would be adequate time to consider a decision and the possibility of compromise always existed. The children’s services worker who must make a decision about leaving a child in a questionable home environ- ment is in a much more difficult situation. Baseball umpires sometimes quip that they are expected to be perfect their first day on the job and show steady improvement thereafter. Modern social service workers must feel much the same pressure.
High-visibility issues
These social issues are also high-visibility issues. Education of children is much more important to contemporary parents who know that their children will have to compete in a high-tech world than it was to their forebears whose children were working on the unsophisticated family farm. Clients of govern- ment services are demanding and receiving a greater role in the delivery of those services. This client involvement is beneficial to the extent that it results in a better quality of service, but it usually vastly complicates the job of the service deliverer.
This high visibility is both cause and effect of a heightened media interest in how public servants do their jobs. Journalists have long been interested in politicians, but lately they have discovered the activities of administrators as well. One problem with this is the public perception which can be created. By definition, the media report events which are out of the ordinary: man bites dog, rapist is sentenced to three-month jail term, child abuse occurs after worker decides to leave child with family. However, the public can sometimes carry away the impression that these stories are the usual, not the unusual.
Consider the situation of the conscientious worker who is pilloried in the press for a decision which the media have the benefit of hindsight to assess.
183 ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA
DAVID SIEGEL
Add to that the fact that the employee cannot usually respond for either legal or political reasons. More important, consider the effect of this on other workers who must go into the field every day and make the same kind of decision. This pressure has an effect on the way in which this new kind of employee must be managed and motivated. There is a tendency to lump all employees together and try to manage and motivate all of them using the same techniques. In a complex and evolving work world, this might not be an adequate way of responding to the needs of employees.
There is no such thing as a typical government employee
Just as government has changed in the postwar period, so has the govern- ment employee. If there ever was a “typical” government employee, he or she no longer exists. Government employees have a wide variety of educa- tional and experiential backgrounds and work in a vast array of jobs. This is an important consideration because it makes such questions as: “What sort of person makes an ideal government employee?” or “How should govern- ment employees be motivated?” meaningless. There are a myriad of govern- ment jobs and government employees. Each must be dealt with in a different manner.12
In the early days of the merit system, all employees had the same kind of education. Clerical employees had had enough high school to be able to read and write, and officers had a general classical or liberal arts background. In no case were these people really trained to do their jobs More they entered govem- ment service; government socialized and trained these malleable employees. Now graduates of professional schools come to their employment with a hll tool-box of skills and attitudes - usually including a strong scepticism about the way in which the “old guard’ (the current senior management) practises the profmion. Instead of inexperienced generalists, governments now employ a wide range of h&ly trained people in a variety of specialities. Managing and motivating such a diverse workforce can be very ditlicult.
This problem is hr ther exacerbated because public personnel management is not noted for its flexibility - and with just cause. When dealing with such concerns as working conditions and rates of pay, it is important that all employees be treated in a like manner. However, bending to bureaucratic rules does not come easily to people with certain skills and backgrounds. When scientists are in the middle of important experiments they want par- ticular kinds of equipment quickly, and they have little regard for purchas- ing regulations. 13 Public bureaucracies face the very difficult problem of
12 The paper prepared by Jak Jabes and David Zussman for this seminar suggests this by con- firming that employees at different levels in the federal government respond to different factors for job satisfaction. 13 The classic case study in this regard which all new students of public administration study is “Dr. Stockfield’s Resignation,” in Kenneth Kernaghan, C a d i o n Cases in Public Administra- tion (Toronto: Methuen. 1977). pp. 18-21.
184 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CHANGING PUBLIC: SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
keeping creative, individualistic employees satisfied without jettisoning need- ed rules and regulations.
The geographic distribution of federal employment
Table 7 indicated that federal government employees are not distributed across the country exactly in line with population. To a certain extent, this is inevitable. One would not expect the same coast guard presence in both Regina and St. John’s. However, federal employment is important both because it “shows the flag” (both figuratively and literally, in most cases), and because it is a source of clean, non-polluting, high-paying jobs.
For a number of years, successive governments have had decentralization programs geared to moving jobs away from the National Capital Region. These have created some good job opportunities in high unemployment areas, but the figures in Table 7 indicate that they have not produced a massive geographic shift of jobs. Federal employment is still underrepresented in the western provinces. I t would be simplistic to suggest that western alienation could be eliminated by shifting a few federal jobs west of Manitoba, but it might be the case that at least a small part of western alienation stems from the fact that Westerners do not see how their tax dollars are spent as much as easterners do.
Nowhere to Go
However, it is not just the geographic distribution of federal employees which is problematic, the age distribution is also problematic in two respects: the huge bulge of people in the 30 to 39 age range and the small number of peo- ple in the below 30 age range.
Nicole Morgan has written a monograph titled Nowhere to (2114 - a phrase which aptly describes the fate of those in the 30 to 39 age range. These are people hired in the last ten years, generally possessing very good educational and other qualifications. The only mistake they made was being born during the baby boom years. These people are now ready, in terms of qualifications, to enter the senior management echelons of the federal government. The problem is that in many occupational groups their progress is blocked by a large number of people who are not yet close to retirement. And even when these jobs do become available, there will be incredibly intense competition within this large cohort for jobs, for which many applicants hold the minimum qualifications but only a few will be chosen. This leads to the problem of “plateauing” when an employee reaches his or her highest level of promo- tion considerably before retirement age.15
14 15 Resources Secretariat lor this seminar.
(Montreal: The Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1981). This problem is discussed in more depth in the paper prepared by the Ontario Human
185 ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA
DAVID SIEGEL
Morgan predicted that the members of this blocked cohort would respond in two ways. One way would be to become much more competitive in fighting for the few available jobs. This could lead to such destructive gamesmanship as workers actively seeking to make others look bad in order to enhance their own positions.
The second way in which this blocked cohort could respond would be by dropping out of the competition, accepting one’s lot as a life-long middle manager and developing major interests outside the workplace. The recent emergence of fern bars, fancy restaurants and health clubs in the Ottawa area might not be entirely accidental.
This will not necessarily have a detrimental impact on the operation or morale of the public service. Presumably most people will continue to per- form their jobs in an acceptable, if unenthusiastic, manner. However, this blockage could create certain problems in motivation and management. Morgan suggests that
demands in relation to conditions of employment are likely to become, by way of compensation [for lack of promotion opportunities], more and more meticulous and petty. This is a well-known fact as regards a blocked group par excellence: the air traffic controllers. Reaching the peak of their career before age 30, they make demands in every direction in order to have the feeling they still have something to gain, even if it is not to rise in the hierarchy.16
The missing cohort
The second major problem with the current age distribution is the missing under-30-year-old cohort. After the bonanza of hiring in the 1970s, federal government hiring virtually dried up.17 The absence of employees in this younger age range is not necessarily a problem in itself. The missing cohort will create a somewhat unusual situation over time, just as the 30 to 39 bulge does. However, the gap can be filled by a combination of some people in the current 30 to 39 range staying on a bit longer and a return to a more nonnal hiring policy. A ten-year gap can be dealt with in a number of ways; a longer gap poses more serious problems. In sum, this gap is not a problem now, but action must be taken soon or it could develop into a serious problem.
The drying-up of government employment prospects
For many people, this drying-up of government job prospects in the last ten years has meant that the possibilities of their obtaining any kind of job have been reduced. The data in the previous section of this paper indicate that governments have been major employers of women and university graduates.
Women are not yet equally represented in the top jobs, but the overall
16 Morgan, Nowhere to Go, p. 7. 17 Papers prepared for this seminar by Nicole Malo and the Ontario Human Resources Secretariat suggest that this S a m phenomenon occurred in Quebec and Ontario.
186 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CHANGING PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
percentage of women in federal government employment is just about equal to their position in the labour force. Many of these jobs are not high-paying and high-prestige jobs, but they are the kinds of jobs many women need to get back into the workplace and begin their climb up the bureaucratic lad- der. These are good entry-level positions for women just out of school or returning to the workplace after raising children or experiencing a marriage break-up.
The effect which this restraint will have on women will be magnified if technological changes eliminate the kinds of jobs which have traditionally been held by women.18 The current generation of micro-computers makes typing a letter or even a lengthy report so simple that even a man can do it. They also reduce the total volume of work that needs to be done. Prepar- ing successive drafts of a report is no longer a lengthy typing process for each new draft. One simply makes the necessary changes, enters the print com- mand, and goes to the coffee room to join the everlasting conversation about the high level of stress in the modern-day workplace.
In the past, governments have also been major employers of university graduates. If this source of employment is no longer available, these people will have to be absorbed by the private sector. But since the private sector has shown that it does not need huge numbers of people with university qualifications, these people will likely either be unable to find positions or they will be in positions for which they are overqualified.
Again, women are particularly hurt by this situation. It is ironic that just at the time when women are virtually equal to men in the university popula- tion, opportunities for university graduates become more limited.
Public employees as objects of public policy
Sharon L. Sutherland and G. Bruce Doern have argued that in recent years public servants have become the objects of public policy as well as the implementers of it. Specifically, they argue that this has occurred in three areas:
Public service bureaucracies have increasingly become social policy laboratories in the sense that they are required by statute, or expected by declaratory intent, to deal with a range of social issues encompassing various rights and concepts of equity, equali- ty and fairness. This is not to suggest that they had no similar obligations in the past, but rather that newer examples have been added to the list of obligations, using both federal and provincial policies.19
18 (Montreal: The Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1981). 19 p. 141 (emphasis added).
The nature of this problem is stated succinctly in Heather Menzies, Wumen and the Chip
Bureaucracy in Canada: Control and R e j b m (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985),
187 ADMlNlSTRATlON PUBLIQUE D U CANADA
DAVID SIEGEI,
Sutherland and Doern go on to cite six specific areas where this has occurred:
1) conflict of interest provisions; 2) collective bargaining; 3) language policy and rights; 4) affirmative action and broader views of a representative bureacracy; S) human rights legislation; and 6) the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.2”
One specific example makes this situation and its attendant difficulties clear. In Ontario the new Liberal government in 1985 promised to legislate pay equity. When the private sector complained that this would be expensive and disruptive, the government then promised to implement it first in the public sector and later extend it to the private sector.
Governments have decided that the public service will be the laboratory in which both the difficulties and the costs of implementing these initiatives will be determined. Of course, the public service will still be expected to operate at its usual level of effeciency while dealing with all of these major changes.
Government employees have also been the target of government economic management policy. For example, public servants have frequently been the first line of conflict in the fight against inflation. The federal government’s “six and five” program of the early 1980s fell entirely on federal civil ser- vants, while some provinces chose to implement similar programs.
Public servants have also been the object of new measures of political con- trol. These include:
1) strengthened central agencies; 2) value-for-money auditing and other budgetary reforms; 3) ombudsmen and access to information legislation; and 4) decentraliza- tion and/or the geographic dispersal of government ofices.2’
Sutherland and Doern suggest that some of these things are either un- necessary in any form or at least overdone: for example, comprehensive auditing and program evaluation. Other measures are highly beneficial and in some cases long overdue, but there is a cost in both dollars and ad- ministrative efficiency in implementing them. Politicians and the general public do not always accept the fact that if numerous control mechanisms are being installed either costs will increase or efficiency will suffer.
Public employees as an interest group
However, public servants have not always accepted their lot as guinea pigs quietly. The postwar years have seen the increasing unionization and profes- sionalization of the public service, accompanied by a greater willingness on the part of leaders of both unions and professional associations to speak out on public issues. These outbursts are not confined to demands for higher wages. Leaders of teachers’ associations suggest that the quality of educa-
20 Ibid. 21 Ibid., p. 149
188 CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CHANCING PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
tion would be improved if class sizes were reduced. Are they really only con- cerned about the children or are they more concerned that shrinking enrolments will jeopardize their members’ jobs? The answer to the question does not matter; the point is that public servants either individually or through their associations are speaking out about policy matters in ways which were unheard-of only a few years ago.
These public pronouncements put governments in a very difficult position. Over the next few years governments must either find ways of muzzling their employees (unlikely in the face of the Charter of Rights) or channelling these criticisms so that they are not so embarrassing.
Manager as manager or policy adviser?
There are three more issues which are part of the shifting sands. All three are being discussed widely, but none is amenable to precise quantification.
The traditional view of the role of senior public servants was that they func- tioned as both managers of the public service and policy advisers to ministers. In fact, some had lamented that the policy adviser role had become so strong that there were few incentives to be a good manager22
The conventional wisdom now is that the role of the manager as policy ad- viser has been supplanted by the role of the manager as manager.23 In the halcyon days of expanding government, the minister needed policy advice about which initiatives to pursue and which new programs to adopt. In an era of restraint, the emphasis is on a manager who is able to do more with less or who is able to motivate employees even though the financial and other rewards are no longer there. The current government has also provided ministers with more high-profile political advisers so that the policy advice of permanent public servants is simply not asked for as much as it was by previous governments.
This trend is not necessarily a problem. In fact, the increasing separation of policy advice and management roles might be welcomed by some as a way of reducing the ambiguity inherent in the position of the senior manager. However, this is a new way of conducting government business to which managers will be required to adjust.
Politicizatwn
Another perceived trend which defies quantification is the alleged increas-
22 Auditor General of Canada, Report of the Auditor Ceneml of Canada to the House of Com- mas - Fiscal Yeur Ending 31 March 1983 (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services 1983). chapter 2. 23 Gordon Osbaldeston, “The Myth of the Mandarin: The Role of a Deputy Minister in the Wrliamentary-Cabinet System of Government,” (National C e n k for Management Research and Development, n. d.), pp. 2-8; Timothy Plumptre, “New Perspectives on the Role of the Deputy Minister,” CANADIAN Pual~c ADMINISTMTION 30, no. 3 (Fall 1987). pp 376-98.
189 ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA
DAVID SIEGEL
ing politicization of the public service. Examples cited to support this sup- posed trend range from the wholesale firings which have occurred with changes in some. provincial governments to individual actions such as the hiring of Dalton Camp in the Privy Council Office.
It is exceptionally difficult to measure exactly the level of politicization of the public service. Clearly the present situation is not like the “bad old days” before the creation of the federal Civil Service Commission when patronage was rampant.24 However, the allegation is sometimes made that the current form of politicization is both more insidious and more damaging in that it attempts to supplant the permanent, professional public service by the strategic placement of a small number of key advisers. This is why any sort of quantitative analysis of order-in-council appointments or other staff- ing actions is not useful.
The basic dilemma is that there is absolutely nothing wrong with politicians hiring their own advisers to help them filter the advice ofpublic servants. The complaints of public servants about politicization are sometimes self-serving when they are spurred by a fear that they will lose their direct access to the minister or that the minister will have competing sources of information. The minister has very good reason to seek advice widely before making impor- tant decisions. The problem is not simply the presence of political advisers. Politicization becomes a serious problem when the dividing line between political advisers and public servants is blurred. This a step away from the per- manent, professional public service which has always served Canada so well.
The changing status of the public service
One of the most serious of all of the problems currently facing the public service is the changing status of the public service in the eyes of the general public. Traditionally, Canadians have had a very high opinion of their public servants. Former public servants such as Mackenzie King, Lester Pearson, Mitchell Sharp and many others have gone on to high political office. Federal mandarins such as Clifford Clark, 0. D. Skelton and Robert Bryce and the so-called Saskatchewan Mafia assembled under the CCF government in the 1940s were highly respected, almost mythical creatures.
Not only did these people set the tone for a very professional and efficient public service, but they also provided role modes for the best and the brightest of the next generation who clamoured for the opportunity to join the public service and serve their country even though the monetary rewards were con- siderably less than they could have obtained in the private sector. This is one factor which clearly distinguishes the Canadian political culture from the American, in which there is a long tradition of bureaucrat-bashing.
In the last few years this positive perception of the public service by the
24 J.E. Hodgetts. William McCloskey, Reginald Whitaker and V. Seymour Wilson, 7he Biography ofan Institution: The C i d Service Cmmission o f C u d : 1908-1967 (Montreal: M K i I l - Queen’s University Press, 1972).
190 C A N A D I A N PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
CHANCING PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
public has been changing for reasons which are not clear. The current genera- tion of public servants’is no less dedicated than the previous one and is con- siderably better educated. No one would argue that the country is run perfect- ly, but it is clear that the current generation of public servants is doing a good job in the face of an ever more complex environment.
Whatever the reasons for the change in public perception, it is likely to have at least two consequences. The most immediate impact is on the morale of the public service. Everyone wants to be respected for the work which he or she does. This is particularly so when that job is very complex and dif- ficult, but does not attract the same levels of pay as comparable jobs in other sectors of the economy. When that respect is not forthcoming, people no longer approach their jobs with the same enthusiasm and no longer perform them to the utmost.
The longer-term effect of the declining status of the public service could be a reduction in the level of attraction of the public service as a career for the most promising members of the next generation. It could be some time before the full force of this shift is seen, but many university teachers are seeing this antipathy to government service already appearing in their students.
John Manion, a very experienced senior public servant, has summed up the situation in this manner.
[I]f our public services are perceiued to be second-rate at home, unfortunately they will become second-rate. We cannot continue to maintain the quality of the public service if we cannot continue to attract the best young Canadians to our ranks. They will not devote their lives to serving people who demean them.25
Conclusion One frequently reads that government is in a time of crisis. In fact, one reads this so frequently that one wonders when the times of non-crisis have occur- red which set off the times of crisis. If government is not at one of these times of crisis, it is clearly at a time when certain major issues affecting the public service of a future must be discussed. There are stories of plummeting morale in Ottawa, confusion and fear in some provincial bureaucracies, and ques- tions of unethical conduct in many jurisdictions. The purpose of this paper was not to answer questions, but rather to raise some of the issues which must be discussed in analysing the “shifting sands” of contemporary government employment. There clearly are a great many questions facing the public ser- vice at this juncture. The other papers in this seminar provide some ideas for answers to these questions.
25 University, reprinted in this issue of CANADIAN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, p. 234.
“New Challenges in Public Administration,” the 1987 Donald Cow Memorid Lecture, Queen’s
191 ADMINISTRATION PUBLIQUE DU CANADA
DAVID SIECEL
Appendix A: A note about the data It is very difficult to find one single source of data about public employment which has been collected in adequate detail and prepared on a consistent basis over a reasonably long period of time. The data in this paper have come from three different sources. This is necessary because the different sources capture and present Merent information. However, the use of several sources of information is problematic because the data are prepared from different sources using different definitions of very basic phrases such as “public employment.” This makes certain comparisons awkward.
Statistics Canada public employment figures are useful because they have been prepared in a reasonably consistent basis for a number of years. These data are also useful because Statistics Canada uses a fairly broad definition of public employment and applies the same definition across all jurisdictions. However, Statistics Canada has made some changes in definitions and some improvements in data collection which restrict the comparability of data. Full details about this are available in the various Statistics Canada publications.
In Statistics Canada terminology, general government refers to the core government activities usually organized in departments, agencies and com- missions. Government enterprise refers to separately incorporated commer- cial operations commonly called crown corporations.
The second source of information is the Public Service Commission of Canada. It publishes extensive data about public servants employed under the terms of the Public Service Employment Act. This is roughly speaking the core departments and agencies, although it is not exactly the same group which Statistics Canada calls general government. A problem encountered with these data is that the universe covered by the Public Service Employ- ment Act changes from time to time and not always for reasons of improved data collection.* However, these data are the only ones available about the gender, language and age distribution of public servants.
Finally, census data are used in a few places where they provide informa- tion not available elsewhere. Census data provide the longest continuous series. The main difficulty is that they rely on respondents’ coding their own information so that there is some concern about consistency and accuracy.
One difficulty encountered in preparing this paper was the lack of readily available data for the provincial and local spheres of government. This paper has focused on the federal government by necessity, although some data have been presented for the other spheres of government. The evidence available is that the characteristics of the different orders of government vary so much that is would not be wise to generalize from the federal to other spheres of government.
*S.L. Sutherland has argued that the Treasury Board controlled area of the public service has been changed recently to create the illusion that public employment has been reduced. “Federal Bureaucracy: The Pinch Test,” pp. 60-63.
192 CANADIAN PUBLIC: ADMINISTRATION
CHANCING PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
Another potential problem in analysing these data is that certain changes which at first appear to be significant turn out to be not real changes, but
rather merely administrative rearrangements. For example, between 1970 and 1975 employment in the New Brunswick public service appears to increase by a huge percentage. In reality, this reflects the fact that with the introduc- tion of the Equal Opportunity program Statistics Canada began to consider school teachers to be provincial rather than local government employees. This is not a significant “real” change in overall government employment; it is simp- ly an administrative rearrangement, but it appears at first glance to constitute a major shift.
An important caveat is that government employment is a rather imprecise indicator of real government activity. When governments want to accomplish certain objectives, there are a number of mechanisms at their disposal. An example concerning child care is illustrative.
If some future government chose to subsidize child care, it could proceed in one of at least three different ways. It could open a vast network of govern- ment owned and operated daycare centres staffed by public servants. This would have a huge impact on government employment. Alternatively, it could provide a system of monthly payments to parents who used private daycare centres. This would have a much smaller impact on overall government employment. Finally, government could use the income tax system to pro- vide a deduction or credit for parents who used private daycare facilities. This would have virtually no impact on government employment. In terms of the provision of daycare, each of these alternatives would have a similar final effect. However, their impact on public employment would be very different.
As this list of difficulties and caveats indicates, the data presented in this paper must be used carefully. In particular, the different datasets use different universes; for example the Public Service Commission universe is much smaller than the Statistics Canada universe. However, when the data are us- ed carefully they present a very interesting picture of the changes which have occurred in public employment in the last few years.
