bout de papier, Vol. 8, No. 3 (1991) — Summer 1991 // Été 1991, pp. 5–6
On posting to Brazil, I found that one of the fastest ways to get a reaction from Latin American diplomats was to introduce myself as a “sindicalista”, or “member of the Canadian diplomats’ union”. The concept of an elite profession being unionized seemed inherently ridiculous to them.
I receive a similar reaction these days in Canada from the many NGOs I deal with in my current job, when I casually toss into the conversation that I, too, am the head of an NGO — the Canadian diplomats’ union. Among my earnest NGO friends, my PAFSO activities are regarded as a kind of comic turn, rather than as a serious statement of political affiliation.
Like Rodney Dangerfield, it seems that a white collar trade unionist “ “just can’t get no respect”. ’ In PAFSO’s case, much of this stems from our historic confusion of roles between being a “professional association” and a “trade union”. The reality is that we have to be both; and in fact we play a multiplicity of other roles as well. To illustrate this point, consider some of the activities in which we are currently involved
This summer, we will start our next round of contract negotiations with the Treasury Board. This is PAFSO’s bedrock activity. The fact we negotiate our own contract is the core of our identity as the bargaining agent for the FS group. Contract negotiations are a sobering experience. Foreign service officers are unaccustomed to operating outside the “life-support” systems of the Department. Yet this is one task that we have no choice but to do for ourselves. It is an even more challenging task when you consider that our side consists of part-time negotiators, with little experience in collective bargaining, who are pitted against full-time labour negotiators from the Treasury Board
This “David and Goliath” situation, however, does not turn to our disadvantage. First, we have excellent professional advice from PAFSO’s full-time Executive Director, Peter Cenne. Second, our research for this round has shown that, contrary to popular wisdom, PAFSO has received wage settlements in recent years consistent with those of other bargaining agents. Furthermore, by using our members to develop bargaining positions, rather than paid negotiators as is done by many other bargaining agents, we tend to be more innovative (witness the precedent-setting lump-sum bonus provisions negotiated in our last contract) and more convincing about the conditions of service in the FS group. Finally, forming a team and doing the job yourself is a tremendous learning experience for those involved — in both the art of negotiation and the intricacies of public service staff relations.
By virtue of serving as the bargaining agent for the FS group, PAFSO has a seat at the table of another body – the National Joint Council. The NJC covers a wide variety of terms and conditions of employment that are shared among different bargaining agents. For the FS group, the most important issue is the Foreign Service Directives. The FSDs are revised only once every three years and the next round comes up in September. In these negotiations, PAFSO shares the employees’ side of the table with a wide range of other bargaining agents; but, FS officers are the most numerous group serving under the FSDs, and no other bargaining agent has such a high percentage of its members overseas. This gives PAFSO a very high stake in the FSD negotiations and significant clout at the table.
PAFSO also serves as the recognized advocate of individual members’ rights vis-à-vis the Department. Indeed, one of PAFSO’s most important responsibilities is to provide a “counselling service.” A significant portion of Peter Cenne’s time is spent giving advice on the FSDs, the collective agreement and other aspects of their rights as public servants. PAFSO staff can take up individual members’ cases informally with the Department or, more formally, PAFSO can act to represent individual members in grievances, disciplinary hearings and appeals. The PAFSO Executive has a standing committee to consider such requests for assistance.
As an extension of this counselling service, PAFSO has started an “information service” by producing PAFSO guides on various aspects of life in the foreign service. Our first effort was the PAFSO Guide to the Foreign Service Directives, written by Laurel Pardy, which we distributed last year. A new PAFSO Guide on Grievances and Appeals has also been distributed to all PAFSO representatives and is available to interested members.
In the same vein, PAFSO is beginning to move into the area of employee training. This summer, we will begin a program of training seminars, in co-operation with the Personnel Branch, on the appraisal and promotion system. We hope that our training material will provide the basis for a future PAFSO Guide on this topic of perpetual interest to the FS group. We also intend to provide training seminars for new recruits on “how to read the collective agreement”
PAFSO has also moved further into the area of census-taking and public-opinion polling. As members may have noticed, this spring we distributed three major surveys: a census designed to build up our data-base on our members, a broad-based questionnaire on many contractual and professional issues; and a specific questionnaire on spousal employment. The response to all three has been phenomenal. On the contract questionnaire, we received 609 replies from 1066 members —- a 57% response rate, the highest PAFSO has ever received in any survey. The data in this questionnaire gives us, for the first time, an accurate survey of our members’ opinions on issues such as career expectations, rotationality and streaming. We are now in the process of analyzing this data and intend to present our findings to senior management.
The response to the spousal employment survey was even more striking with over 500 responses to date, including at least 100 from EX affiliate members of PAFSO or their spouses. Many respondents added extensive personal narratives. It is clear that we have tapped a major source of concern to foreign service officers and their families with this issue. We hope that the results will point the way to achieving new solutions to an issue that continues to grow in importance for members.
In our role as a professional association, PAFSO also functions as a permanent advocacy group within the Department for improvements to the management of our careers. Our dialogue with the Department on professional issues has expanded significantly since the Corporate Review. Last autumn, PAFSO was asked to participate in meetings of the discussion group convened by CRX (the Corporate Review Implementation Team) to examine the “country desk concept. The PAFSO Executive, as well as individual FS officers, ensured that the perspective of “the managed”, as well as “the managers”, was brought to bear on this debate.
Since December, we have held a series of formal consultations with Personnel on their long-term plan to restructure the FS group, and as a result the Department has modified its approach on this issue. Our dialogue will continue, once the Department receives approval in principle to proceed with restructuring from the Treasury Board; and we will be inviting the views of our members on the options before us. We intend to begin similar consultations on the long overdue issue of reforms to the appraisal and promotion system. Our training workshops this summer will be the first stage in this process.
Finally, PAFSO continues to play a unique role in encouraging wider discussion about Canadian foreign policy issues through our two “Crown Corporations”, partially the Professional Committee and bout de papier. Although both are partially funded by PAFSO, use PAFSO staff and facilities, and are governed by PASO’s constitution, the secret to their success lies in the fact that they have autonomous boards and deliberately involve other professional groups throughout the Department, as well as retired members of the foreign service. Through both, PAFSO provides a professional service for the broader Department that no other body plays.
This list is far from complete. (I mention two other recent initiatives – the Foreign Service Officer Award and the PAFSO Evaluation Guide (PEG) — as well as our extensive insurance programs). In the final analysis, what strikes me about the Association is how much we are able to accomplish with only four full-time staff members and a cadre of volunteers — all of whom have other extremely demanding jobs. With summer’s turn-over, PAFSO will need new members for our Executive, the Professional Committee, and the bout de papier Editorial Board. If you would like to join us, please contact PAFSO
View the original scanned pages →
Originally published in bout de papier, Vol. 8, No. 3 (1991) — Summer 1991 // Été 1991, pp. 5–6. Read the rest of this issue →
