Youth Program Review

---

May 2002

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary
   • Background
   • Observations and Recommendations
     
2. Introduction
   • 2.1 Background
   • 2.2 Objectives and Scope
   • 2.3 Level of Assurance and Methodology
     
3. Observations and recommendations
   • 3.1 Scan of Programs, Initiatives and Activities
     • 3.1.1 Definition of what is included as a program, initiative and activity
     • 3.1.2 Description of programs, initiatives and activities
     • 3.1.3 Advantages of using these programs, initiatives and activities
     • 3.1.4 Disadvantages of using these programs, initiatives and activities
     • 3.1.5 Risks from participating in these programs, initiatives and activities
   • 3.2 Complaints
   • 3.3 Policies, Procedures and Directives
     • 3.3.1 Directives
       
4. Management action plan

Appendix A - inventory

1.0 Executive Summary

Background

Over the years the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) has been providing youth with opportunities to gain work experience. At the request of the Assistant Deputy Minister, Human Resources, the Audit and Evaluation Directorate conducted a review of the hiring practices and supervision of youth in the Department.

The objective was to provide a level of assurance that appropriate controls are in place to safeguard youth (those less than 25 years old) employed by DFO. This review covered all regions and sectors and all existing policies, strategies and frameworks. An environmental scan of policies and strategies of similar operational Departments was also carried out.

The Department is the fifth largest student employer in the Public Service. The review covered all DFO programs, initiatives and activities in which youth were involved, including tours and open houses. The participation of youth has numerous advantages and disadvantages for both the Department and the young participants.

Observations and Recommendations

Youth involvement in DFO presents the Department in a positive light in communities, as a good corporate citizen committed to providing youth with desirable educational opportunities and experience. It also creates a base of potential future employees to replace retiring public servants, reducing efforts and costs of recruitment in the future. Moreover, since some departmental activities are seasonal in nature, the Department can achieve portions of its mandate by tapping into a pool of motivated young people who are seeking seasonal employment. DFO also benefits from the high energy, knowledge of new technologies and innovative ideas of youth; students from many different disciplines bring fresh perspectives to their assignments and to people with whom they work.

Youth who participate in DFO programs and activities also reap advantages beyond earning money to continue their education. According to the summer 2000 survey by the Public Service Commission (PSC), almost two-thirds of students felt they acquired valuable work experience related to their studies. Their experiences may also help students to identify role models or decide whether they would like to work in a particular field. Successful work experience boosts a young person’s confidence and self-esteem. Youth who have had an opportunity to experience working with the Department may choose to pursue Public Service careers; in fact, 81 percent of students surveyed by the PSC indicated they would recommend the experience to fellow students, and 56 percent said they would seek a career in the Public Service.

In terms of disadvantages, young people come into these programs with little work experience. Given that these inexperienced youth are serving the public, some Canadians may perceive that they are not being well served. Thus, the Department should provide youth with training and enhanced supervision in the workplace.

Young people are also at risk when they are working in areas with potential health and safety issues, such as laboratories, hatcheries and vessels. In addition, youth may be easier to intimidate or harass than more experienced employees.

The Review Team sought to determine the risks associated with youth programs. The methodology to do involved five steps: understanding objectives; identifying risk areas; assessing risk; devising a risk response (options to minimize threats and maximize opportunities); and developing strategies and an action plan. As a result of this process three key risk areas were identified: inappropriate behaviour, due diligence and orientation.

Inappropriate behaviour is any objectionable conduct, comment or display, on a one-time or continuing basis, that demeans, belittles or causes humiliation. The risk of inappropriate behaviour could affect health and safety, human resources, program results, real property and financial liability.

Although the Department has a long history as a major employer of youth and has received few complaints, it must remain vigilant to potential instances of harassment and abuse. In March 2001 DFO issued its harassment policy. To complement this, a kit entitled "Building a Harassment-Free Workplace" was provided to each employee. Treasury Board also provided a revised harassment policy in June 2001.

However, the existence of a policy framework is not sufficient in itself; it is vital that departmental managers, supervisors and employees are aware of the framework and ensure that it is being implemented. The Department must ensure that appropriate safeguards and controls are in place, not only when dealing with youth but also with regard to all employees.

Due diligence is defined as "a measure of prudence, activity or assiduity, as is properly to be expected from, and ordinarily exercised by, a reasonable and prudent person under the particular circumstances."

Departmental managers do not always have the necessary skill sets or training to deal with young people entering the work force for the first time. The provision of such training could be one measure of due diligence.

Young people often work in hazardous conditions, such as in laboratories, ships, hatcheries and remote camps. To minimize risk to the Department this report recommends that, in case of unforeseen incidents, vital information about all people at remote locations should be centrally maintained in each region. Existing medical conditions, allergies, etc., should be noted on forms for this purpose.

The Review Team did not always find documentation on file to indicate that all youth working in DFO facilities were covered by some type of insurance. While students hired under FSWEP or co-op programs are covered, unpaid students may not have adequate insurance. As a result, this report recommends the Department ensure that unpaid students working in DFO facilities are covered by appropriate insurance.

Orientation is another important way to minimize risks, both to new employees and to the Department. Youth should be receiving proper orientation to their new work environment, be made aware of the risks involved for the task at hand, and be informed about all relevant policies and procedures. While orientation may in fact take place, the Review Team found little documentation of exactly what was provided to young employees. This report recommends that an orientation checklist should be instituted for use when hiring youth. The checklist should provide a record of training and briefings on such important things as health and safety, harassment policies, and redress policies and procedures, and should be signed by the employee and the manager.

Consistency in provision of orientation is also required to reduce risks to employees and the Department. New employees must be consistently and adequately informed of any dangers in the workplace, along with precautions to take and processes for redress. The greatest risk is to the health or safety of young persons but the Department could also be placed at risk if a young person is injured and takes legal action based on lack of knowledge. Therefore, to ensure consistency in providing orientation information to employees and to assist managers, specific orientation information pertaining to the task at hand should be compiled for work sites to complement the National Orientation Kit.

A complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction by an employee relating to his or her employment. Most complaints filed involve some form of harassment, such as unwelcome or offensive conduct, threats, sexual harassment or conduct that is discriminatory under the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Although few complaints involved young people in the period under review, (2000-01; 2001-02), there may be factors discouraging young people from filing them, such as fear of repercussion. Or they may worry that a complaint would jeopardize future employment with the Department. If Staff Relations or senior management is not informed, complaints could be mishandled or treated inconsistently by lower management, leaving the Department vulnerable to blind-siding if the incident escalates to a higher level of management.

DFO’s harassment policy requires the tracking of all complaints so that trends can be analyzed. However, since Staff Relations is not being informed of all informal complaints, any such tracking can only give an incomplete picture and be of limited value. Managers are responsible for preventing harassment through training and awareness, and for taking all necessary actions and measures to put an end to harassment that they are aware of or ought reasonably to be aware of whether or not a complaint has been made.

To reduce risks associated with complaints and increase managers’ awareness of their responsibilities whether or not a complaint has been made, this report recommends the following: senior management be informed of all formal and informal complaints of harassment; a central record of all complaints received (formal and informal) be maintained in each region to analyze trends and identify potential areas for training; all situations in which harassment may have occurred be investigated as required by departmental policy, whether or not a complaint has been received; and harassment training should emphasize that managers are responsible for dealing with, and resolving, harassment issues as they become aware of them.

The Department has a long history as a major employer of youth and a positive overall track record. Nevertheless, there are inherent risks associated with youth involvement in the Department. Although managers and supervisors have been given the tools they require to ensure that young employees are working in a safe, healthy and respectful workplace, the Department must remain vigilant and proactive to ensure that the intent of the policy framework is reflected in the day-to-day work environment.

This report demonstrates that the benefits of being involved with young people and having them work with DFO employees outweigh any disadvantages. It is the Review Team’s opinion that the Department should continue to provide opportunities for youth to gain work experience and plan for their future, as well as to learn the operations of the Department.

This report offers recommendations to strengthen the tools already available and enhance managers’ ability to deal with young people. Given that there are mechanisms in place to deal with young people — even though they need strengthening — the Review Team is providing a moderate level of assurance that appropriate controls are in place to safeguard youths and students in the employ of the Department.

2.0 Introduction

2.1 Background

Over the years the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) has been hiring youth and students to provide them with opportunities to gain work experience and plan for their future. At the request of the Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM), Human Resources, the Audit and Evaluation Directorate conducted a review of the hiring practices and supervision of youth and students in the Department.

2.2 Objectives and Scope

The overall objective of the review was to ensure that appropriate controls are in place to safeguard youth and students employed by DFO. The more specific objectives of the review were:

• to carry out an environmental scan of programs, initiatives and activities within DFO that involve youth and students and to develop an inventory of these;
• to review complaints and cases of litigation involving youth and students in the last two fiscal years (2000-01, 2001-02), to clarify issues about youth programs;
• to review current policies and procedures to ensure that youth and students have a safe working environment and that safeguards are in place to avoid potential vicarious civil liability; and
• to build upon policies and procedures to provide management with a high level of assurance that the potential liability within the Department is relatively low.

The scope of the review included all regions and sectors and all existing policies, strategies and frameworks. An environmental scan of policies and strategies of other similar operational Departments was also carried out.

The Review Team defined youth as people less than 25 years old; however, some participants of these programs could be older.

2.3 Level of Assurance and Methodology

In accordance with the terms of reference for the review, the Review Team attempted to provide a high level of assurance using the following methodology:

• an analysis of the management request for the review;
• an analysis of formal complaints the Department has received involving youth and students;
• a risk assessment to determine activities and functions where more focus is required and a representative sample of regions to visit and cases to be further examined;
• collection of appropriate evidence to support the Review Team’s findings and conclusions; and
• a set of recommendations for management to develop solutions and to improve policies on the basis of the Review Team’s analysis.

3.0 Observations and recommendations

3.1 Scan of Programs, Initiatives and Activities

An objective of this review was to carry out an environmental scan of DFO programs, initiatives and activities that involve youth and students and to develop an inventory of these. During the review the scan was expanded to include situations in which youth would have occasion to be on DFO property and facilities other than as employees.

The regions were initially asked by the former Associate Deputy Minister to provide an inventory of all the programs, initiatives and activities they participated in that involved youth. The Review Team followed up on this request. Some regions provided more thorough information than others. As the Review Team did not verify this information, it cannot provide assurance that the information provided is complete. (Appendix A contains the information provided by the regions.)

This section provides an overview of the various programs, initiatives and activities reported by the regions, along with those identified during the review.

3.1.1 Definition of what is included as a program, initiative and activity

The review covered all programs, initiatives and activities that youth participate in at departmental facilities or under departmental auspices. This includes youth hired through programs or initiatives that primarily target students; youth participating in work-experience or job-shadowing activities; youth on tours or at open-house events at the Department’s facilities; and youth at information sessions provided in shopping centres, schools, etc.

3.1.2 Description of programs, initiatives and activities

The Department uses a considerable number of programs and activities to achieve its objectives, and through many of these involves itself in the lives of young Canadians. A recent report by the Public Service Commission (PSC) indicates that DFO is the fifth largest student employer in the Public Service. This demonstrates that the Department is committed to providing young people with opportunities to explore career options.

DFO’s involvement with young people presents special and unique challenges to departmental staff. For many young people, it is their first exposure to the work environment; for many employees, their first experience dealing with youth in the workplace. It should be noted that some staff interviewed did have other experience in dealing with young people, having spent time teaching in schools or universities. However, the Department provides no special training for employees who must supervise or interact with young people. Sports organizations and community groups, such as Guides and Scouts, give their coaches and leaders structured training programs on dealing with young people.

The more significant initiatives are listed below.

3.1.2.1 Federal Student Work Experience Program

The Federal Student Work Experience Program (FSWEP) is a national program that provides students with opportunities to learn about the federal government and gain valuable experience while developing and improving their employable skills. It is accessible year round.

FSWEP provides opportunities for full-time students at secondary schools, CEGEPs, colleges, technical institutes and universities. A stipulation of the program is that students must be returning to school after their assignment. The assignments under this program need not be related to a student’s field of study. Students apply directly to the PSC to participate in the program.

This program is very popular with the Department and is used by all regions. It is the largest of all federal student programs, and since 1990 it has provided more than 9,000 assignments each year to Canadian youth. Most managers were satisfied with how FSWEP worked; however, some expressed frustration with the referral process, saying that the PSC did not always refer the most qualified person to the Department for consideration. This was a result of the PSC’s very restrictive, computer-based selection criteria.

Students are referred to the Department by the PSC, based on the PSC’s computer match of skills identified by the student and the skills required for a particular job, as determined by the manager. The system allows no flexibility for a manager to recommend to the PSC a particular student with the required skills. In a case identified in one region, a student had worked during high school as a volunteer at DFO. When that student became eligible for FSWEP, the manager wanted to hire that student to do similar work. But the PSC would not allow it and sent a somewhat critical letter to the manager, implying favouritism. While it is recognized that the system is in place to prevent any abuse or favouritism in hiring, it may be appropriate to allow for exceptions in fully documented and justified cases.

3.1.2.2 Post-Secondary Co-operative Education and Internship Programs

Post-secondary co-operative education (co-op) and internship programs provide students with learning experiences and opportunities to develop their competencies through study-related assignments that enable them to use their knowledge in a real working environment. Since 1990 the federal government has employed more than 4,000 students each year under these programs and is the largest employer of co-op and internship students in Canada.

The academic institutions play an important role in the placement of students under these programs. A partnership between the employer, the academic institution and the student is mandatory and a key element. The programs are available only to post-secondary students. To be eligible, students must be enrolled in a co-op or internship program in which work experience is a requirement for graduation. The PSC approves and publishes a list of eligible academic institutions.

3.1.2.3 Federal Public Sector Youth Internships Program

In its budget of February 1997, the federal government announced a Youth Employment Strategy (YES) to help youth across Canada move into the world of work and to alleviate youth unemployment. In the spirit of YES, the federal government is committed to alleviating youth unemployment through the Federal Public Sector Youth Internship Program (FPSYIP). The main objective of the program is to provide unemployed or underemployed young Canadians, between the ages of 15 and 30 years, the opportunity to acquire the experience and skills they need to enter and fully participate in the labour market. Since October 1997, FPSYIP has created a total of 4,500 internship opportunities for youth. Initially a three-year program, FPSYIP was renewed in February 2000.

The Treasury Board Secretariat and host organizations, in partnership with Career Edge Incorporated (a national nonprofit organization) and the YMCA of Canada, provide recruitment, placement and employment services under FPSYIP. The program places interns into assignments of up to 12 months. As a host organization, DFO partners with local YMCA branches to provide such internship opportunities.

An internship is not a specific position, and the intern does not replace a federal employee. An internship is a flexible, practical assignment, geared to providing a young person with meaningful opportunities to develop employable skills and prepare for employment or self-employment. The concept of internship implies structured learning experiences and coaching by a mentor from the host organization.

The YMCA is the legal employer of the youth interns. Its responsibilities include processing the interns’ pay and other expenses related to their employment (employment insurance, pension plan, etc.). Interns are not federal employees and are not entitled to the same benefits. Managers and mentors are encouraged to integrate young interns into the workplace as much as possible, thereby enabling the interns to derive maximum benefit from their experience and to feel that they belong to the work group.

3.1.2.4 Federal Science and Technology Youth Internships Program

DFO also participates in YES through the Science Horizons – Science and Technology Youth Internships Program (S&T Internships Program). In the past four years, DFO, through its partners in S&T Internships Program, has helped more than 350 youth across Canada gain meaningful and relevant work experience.

The science component of Science Horizons programs provides recent graduates with work on cutting-edge scientific projects with commercial potential in fields such as agriculture, environment, heritage, natural resources, and marine and aquatic research. The technology component expands access to the Information Highway and provides youth with technology-related work experience in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and organizations.

DFO participates in the S&T Internships Program in collaboration with Canadian universities and colleges, SMEs and nongovernmental organizations. The program offers promising young post-secondary graduates hands-on experience under the mentorship and coaching of experienced scientists and program managers. It also offers these scientists and managers a unique opportunity to rejuvenate in-house expertise while helping to develop the next generation of aquatic and oceanic ecosystem scientists.

Students hired under this program are employees of the public sector sponsors, not employees of DFO, although they may, on occasion, work in DFO facilities during their internships. Arrangements are made between the sponsor and DFO in these situations. The interns are the responsibility of the sponsor, but they must abide by DFO’s policies while on site, such as its policies on harassment and health and safety.

3.1.2.5 Secondary School Co-op Education Programs (Non-paid Assignments)

Secondary school co-op education programs are designed to introduce secondary school students to the world of work while enabling them to gain academic credits leading to graduation. The organized co-op assignments help the students develop effective work habits, a sense of personal responsibility, essential job skills, and an awareness of occupational possibilities.

To be eligible, students must be in an academically linked co-op program at a secondary school. Adult students participating in a secondary school co-op education program are also eligible if they need a non-salaried training assignment in order to graduate.

Assignments run concurrently with school terms, typically over four months, and are usually arranged on a half-day basis. This does not preclude other scheduling arrangements that might be negotiated by the student, school and manager. Assignments with working days longer than the standard 7.5 hours are considered inappropriate, and hours per week should not exceed an average of 18.75 over the duration of the assignment.

Referral and placement are done through the academic institution and do not require the participation of the PSC. Participating students do not receive a salary, but the manager may pay them a nominal amount to cover their bus fare or other minor expenses.

These programs could give DFO an opportunity to instill in young people the values of working for the Department and an opportunity to identify future employees. High school students would have a greater incentive to take part in such a co-op program if DFO could offer them employment once they reach university. However, despite their training and experience with DFO, the Department is unable to hire specific students, as discussed earlier in the FSWEP section (3.1.2.1).

3.1.2.6 Research Affiliate Program

The Research Affiliate Program is specifically designed to give post-secondary students experience in applied research (design, execution, evaluation) when they must attain such knowledge and skills in order to graduate. It is also designed to help the Government of Canada conduct research, retain possession of intellectual property and patents, control the use of information, and promote the transfer of scientific findings. Students are normally placed with ongoing research operations in federal government facilities. The research projects must be related to the students’ current degree program and help them develop specific knowledge and research skills.

The Review Team asked DFO interviewees whether they knew of the Research Affiliate Program; however, they did not seem familiar with it. Nevertheless, the informal activities that the Department gets involved in closely mirror the activities of this program. In a similar vein, departmental scientists often work as professors at local universities. In this capacity, they may have graduate students performing work under their supervision. Some of these graduate students receive permission to do some of their research in departmental laboratories, and in one region, separate work stations were set up specifically for these students.

It may be of benefit to the Department to consider formalizing, under the auspices of the Research Affiliate Program, the activities it is already undertaking with graduate students.

3.1.2.7 Other Activities and Programs

In addition to the programs described above, the Department is involved in a variety of programs for primary and secondary school students. Some programs aim to provide youth with an idea of what the work world is like. Others have the objective of exposing young people to the important work of the Department, with the hope that they will start to take an active interest in DFO, as well as the aquatic environment. Arrangements vary from one day a week, to a few half days a week, to simply one day.

Across the country, DFO often offers tours of departmental sites, facilities, laboratories and vessels. Not only are these tours interesting to youth and the public at large, but also they give the Department a chance to showcase the interesting and important things it does. Various departmental facilities also host open houses. These events provide opportunities for the general public to see examples of research being conducted, demonstrations of search-and-rescue techniques, and a wide variety of other departmental initiatives.

In addition to seeing young people when the public comes to DFO facilities, employees of the Department come in contact with them during information sessions at shopping centres, schools, etc. Some DFO employees are also asked to go into schools and give lectures on their work activities.

Another way in which DFO employees come in contact with young people is through Take Our Kids to Work, a national program that gives parents an opportunity to bring their children to work. This program has the participation and support of all provinces and territories. Over the past seven years, more than one million students have participated in Take Our Kids to Work at 75,000 workplaces. The program offers an authentic learning opportunity to students. But the Review Team found that the Department has no structured program for taking part in this initiative. Employees of all working groups, either administrative or operational, may participate in it. In DFO, employees in some regions are left on their own to decide on the curriculum of the day, while others have an organized program. The team concluded that this is an area of potential risk that should be addressed if DFO’s offices are to participate in the program. In speaking with other government departments, the Review Team found that the Department of the Solicitor General has a program structured in such a way that it lessens the potential associated risks for departmental employees and children.

Workplace health and safety are vital facets of the Take Our Kids to Work program, and it is important to give young people this necessary information before the workplace visit. This initiative should strengthen the health and safety aspects of the program. It should do everything possible to support participating employers, to ensure that the children not only come away from the visit more knowledgeable about the realities of the workplace, but also come away from the visit safely.

3.1.2.8 Volunteers

Another area that was touched upon during the review was the involvement of volunteers in DFO activities. While not specifically included in the scope of the review, there are instances where a youth may be involved with DFO on a volunteer basis. It could be a student wanting to obtain some work experience, but not as part of a secondary school co-op program. It could be a student fulfilling a requirement to do community services hours. It could be a student participating in a DFO-sponsored event, such as the beach cleanup that has been held in the Pacific Region for the past two years. At this event, volunteers, often very young, pick up garbage on local beaches as part of an international effort to reduce debris in oceans and waterways.

Although activities with volunteers are not as widespread or well known as the formal programs, they do pose potential risks for the Department. These risks include health and safety concerns, liability, property damage, and embarrassment to the Department if the volunteers are perceived as its agents. The Department must safeguard itself from potentially damaging situations.

While working for DFO, adult volunteers may have occasion to come in contact with young people working at departmental facilities. The Department could be responsible for any incidents that occur in these situations and must ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place.

3.1.3 Advantages of using these programs, initiatives and activities

There are both pros and cons to consider in determining whether the Department should participate in programs and activities. This section presents some of the advantages, while the next one suggests some disadvantages.

3.1.3.1 Advantages to the Department

• The Department is seen in a positive light — as a good corporate citizen — in the communities in which it has a presence. This involvement with youth demonstrates that DFO and the federal government are committed to providing youth with an opportunity to acquire a desirable education and work experience.
• Through its participation in youth programs, the Department is creating a base of young people who may be interested in pursuing a career with DFO or elsewhere in the Public Service.
• A pool of young people already interested in pursuing a job with the federal government can reduce the effort and cost of future recruitment and contribute to the replacement of retiring public servants.
• Youth can be hired at various times in the year, full-time over the summer or during session breaks, or part-time year round. The Department can achieve a portion of its mandate by tapping into the pool of motivated young people seeking seasonal work. Some departmental operations are very much seasonal in nature, such as the Inshore Rescue Boat Program (IRB).
• The Department has access to students from many disciplines and can take advantage of youth’s high energy levels, knowledge and fascination with new technologies, and familiarity with current and innovative ideas. Students can be open-minded and inquiring and bring fresh perspectives to their assignments and to the people with whom they work.

3.1.3.2 Advantages to Youth

• Youth participating in DFO youth programs and activities get an opportunity to acquire valuable work experience in their field of study, as did 64% of the students in programs in 2000. This experience helps students crystallize their thoughts and decide whether they would like to work in a particular field. Furthermore, students may identify role models in their fields of interest.
• Employment with the Department through the youth programs helps students earn money to continue their education.
• A successful work term boosts a young person’s confidence and self-esteem.
• As a result of their exposure to government operations and practices, youth who have had an assignment with the Department may find the Public Service a positive place to pursue a career. Youth who have had an opportunity to experience first hand the operations and practices of the Department may conclude that it is an interesting and positive place for a future career. In fact, 56% of youth participating in FSWEP and co-op programs with the Department in 2000 said they would seek a Public Service career. Furthermore, 81% indicated that they would recommend an assignment like the one they had to a fellow student.

3.1.4 Disadvantages of using these programs, initiatives and activities

3.1.4.1 Disadvantages to the Department

• Young people come into these programs with little work experience. For some, it is their first exposure to the workplace. Owing to their inexperience, young people in the workplace need training and enhanced supervision, which the Department must provide.
• In some instances, youth are dealing directly with the public. Given that these young people are inexperienced, some clients may have the perception that they are not being well served. Managers must be aware of this potential misperception and impress upon the young people the behaviour and performance level expected of them.
• Young people with little experience increase the risk to the occupational health and safety of departmental staff and managers, as well as that of themselves, particularly when they work in areas with potential health and safety issues, such as laboratories and vessels.

3.1.4.2 Disadvantages to Youth

• Issues discussed under "Disadvantages to the Department," particularly in the area of health and safety, are also of significance to young people because of their lack of training and experience.
• Young people in a work environment are vulnerable and could be placed in situations that older, more experienced workers would not tolerate. The inexperience of young people makes them uncertain about what behaviour is appropriate and expected by all parties in the workplace.
• Young people may be easier to intimidate, and the potential for harassment could be higher than for more experienced employees. This situation could be complicated by a young person’s hesitancy to complain about inappropriate or unwanted behaviour in others. Like many people, youth may not wish the attention that comes with making a complaint, formal or otherwise. These young people do not wish to jeopardize their jobs, which they may need to finance their education. Many young people may have aspirations to return to work for the Department in the future.

As demonstrated above, youth programs and activities carry both advantages and disadvantages for the Department and for young people. In the Review Team’s opinion, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, and the Department should continue providing opportunities for employment and related experience to young people. These are also important opportunities to showcase departmental operations and achievements.

3.1.5 Risks from participating in these programs, initiatives and activities

Although the Department faces risks in being involved in these programs, it can take steps to minimize these risks. The Review Team examined the potential risks to the Department and identified three key areas where improvements in policy would alleviate them.

The Review Team sought to determine to what extent the Department could recognize and manage risk with due diligence. For the purpose of this risk analysis, the team defined risk as "an uncertain future event or outcome with the potential to affect the achievement of departmental objectives." The methodology for the risk analysis involved a five-step process.

1. Understanding objectives
   
   The Review Team reviewed documentation and working papers and made on-site visits of activities to develop an understanding of the objectives of the youth programs and activities and their risk profile.
    
2. Identifying risk areas
   
   The Review Team identified areas of risk through document review, on-site visits, observation, in-person interviews with departmental staff and a brainstorming session.
    
3. Assessing risk
   
   The Review Team analyzed 10 risk areas brought forward from the brainstorming session. From these, the team further analyzed five key risk areas, using a risk matrix to measure the likelihood and impact of the risk. Three risk areas are reported in detail below. The team identified the type, source and impact of each risk; determined what measures DFO already has in place to control the risk; and assessed the Department’s ability to control that risk as high, moderate or low.
    
4. Risk response
   
   Based on level of risk, the Review Team developed incremental risk-management strategies by defining objectives and expected outcomes for rated risks and identifying and analyzing options for minimizing threats and maximizing opportunities, such as approaches or tools.
    
5. Strategies and action plan
   
   The team analyzed strategies to minimize risks and developed an action plan identifying the officer of primary interest.

3.1.5.1 Key Risk Area 1: Inappropriate Behaviour

Inappropriate behaviour is any improper conduct by an individual directed at, and offensive to, another person in the workplace. It is behaviour the individual knew or ought reasonably to have known would cause offence or harm. It is any objectionable act, comment or display that demeans, belittles or causes personal humiliation or embarrassment. It is any act of intimidation or threat.

Preventing conflict, harassment and discrimination is preferable to trying to undo damage that has already taken place. The Department cannot and does not — nor should an employee have to — condone behaviour in the workplace that is unacceptable and likely to influence work relationships and productivity.

While the review identified few instances of inappropriate behaviour (see section 3.2, "Complaints"), the Review Team considered it an area of significant risk. The team concluded that though the rate of occurrence of inappropriate behaviour is moderate, the impact of any such behaviour is high. This type of risk can affect health and safety, human resources, program results and financial liability.

Existing Measures to Manage Risk

There are tools in place for managers and supervisors to use to manage the risk of inappropriate behaviour. In June 2001, Treasury Board issued a revised harassment policy to replace the one it had established in 1994. To complement this, DFO developed its own policy and distributed it to all staff in the winter of 2001. Since January 2002 employees have been attending awareness sessions designed to give every employee an opportunity to understand the DFO policy.

In addition to having this policy structure, the Department has had a long history as a major employer of youth and has a positive overall track record in terms of complaints involving youth. Nonetheless, DFO must remain vigilant and be proactive in its efforts to prevent harassment and abuse. The existence of this framework is not in itself sufficient. The behaviour of individuals in the Public Service needs to reflect the intent of the framework. It is vital that departmental managers, supervisors and employees be aware of this framework and ensure its implementation.

3.1.5.2 Key Risk Area 2: Due Diligence

Due diligence is defined as "a measure of prudence, activity or assiduity, as is properly to be expected from, and ordinarily exercised by, a reasonable and prudent person under the particular circumstances." To this end, it is imperative that the Department have in place appropriate safeguards and controls for dealing not only with youth but also with all employees and the Department overall.

Young people have access to departmental facilities — such as laboratories, ships, hatcheries and remote camps — where risks to safety or health are high unless appropriate precautions are taken. A proactive approach for DFO would be to provide these young people with a briefing on the risks and hazards of their work location; identify and provide relevant training; and review all appropriate policies.

Managers and supervisors informed the Review Team that in most instances, new youth employees are met by their manager the first day, given a tour of the work location, and introduced to their co-workers. They are usually referred to the departmental intranet site for the orientation material, although in some instances they are provided with actual copies. The Review Team was informed that youth working in laboratories, hatcheries and Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) stations are given an explanation of relevant safety precautions. Although orientation may take place, the review team found that the process is not always documented. Failure to adequately document any orientation process given to young employees could leave the Department in a precarious situation and at significant risk should something happen to an employee. The Department would have no written evidence that the injured person had received a proper orientation to the workplace. Documenting the orientation provided to the youth and having both parties sign it could minimize the risk to the Department. DFO can accomplish this by having the employee and the manager sign a checklist indicating what was discussed at the time of orientation.

Young people have occasion to visit and work at DFO facilities at various locations, urban or remote. In a remote location, ordinary situations can become significantly more dangerous and complicated. The Department usually knows the names of people at its facilities; however, the Department would be better prepared to respond to unforeseen situations at remote locations if more substantive information, such as a person’s age or medical condition, were maintained at a central location. Something similar to the information form used for people going to sea on CCG ships would be sufficient. This form contains information such as age, existing medical conditions and allergies. This kind of information is not a burden to collect and could prove invaluable in an emergency.

To limit its liability for injuries sustained by youth on the job, the Department must ensure that the employees are adequately protected. Students hired under FSWEP and university co-op programs are protected by various employer insurance packages. In the case of unpaid workers, such as those from secondary school co-op education programs, the Department must ensure that it has sufficient protection for itself and the employees.

In some cases, the Department had documentation on file showing that unpaid secondary school co-op or university students were covered by their respective Board of Education or university insurance while working at DFO facilities. In other cases, this documentation was not on file; therefore there was no evidence that the student had insurance coverage. Some managers explained to the Review Team that they assumed that Board of Education insurance was applicable. However, due diligence would require having proof of this insurance coverage on file.

Dealing with young people poses special and unique challenges to managers. Some managers said they were unprepared or did not have the skill sets to deal with young people entering the work force for the first time. Young people bring new ideas and enthusiasm to the workplace. Managers may not know how to accept these new initiatives. Unlike community groups or sports organizations, whose leaders and coaches receive special training in dealing with young people, the Department does not equip its managers with skill sets to deal with young people in the workplace. Such training in handling young people could be a measure of due diligence and would help both the manager and the employee adapt to new workplace situations.

Existing Measures to Manage Risk

The review team did find some evidence of due diligence; however, it was inconsistent and often depended on the initiatives of individual managers. For example, checklists indicating what was covered in the orientation are used at hatcheries and CCG lifeboat stations in the Pacific Region and are signed by both student and supervisor. A similar checklist is used at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography, in the Maritimes Region. An entrance interview guide is used at the Sea Lamprey Control Centre in the Central and Arctic Region. These documents serve as a guide for the welcoming manager or supervisor and help ensure that important issues are discussed. A checklist signed by both parties also serves as a record of the nature and scope of the orientation provided. Excellent training packages are also in place for students hired under FSWEP for the inshore rescue boats and Office of Boating Safety.

Recommendations

1.   In case of unforeseen incidents, vital information about all people at remote locations should be centrally maintained in each region. Existing medical conditions, allergies, etc., should be noted on forms for this purpose.

2.   An orientation checklist should be instituted for use when hiring youth. This checklist should provide a record of training and briefings on such important things as health and safety, harassment policies, and redress policies and procedures. This form should be signed by the employee and the manager.

3.   The Department should ensure that unpaid students working in DFO facilities are covered by appropriate insurance.

3.1.5.3 Key Risk Area 3: Orientation

An orientation should give new employees an overview of DFO in general, information on regional operations, and specific information about the facility and the work environment. Supervisors or managers should explain to the employees their specific roles and responsibilities and identify the inherent risks and dangers they may encounter.

The Review Team expected to find that employees were welcomed on their first day on the job, introduced to co-workers, and shown around the work location. Furthermore, the Review Team expected that new employees would be given appropriate training on the health and safety policies covering their workplace, as well as on site-specific concerns. The Review Team also expected that new employees would be informed about the federal and departmental policies on harassment. The Review Team expected that part of this orientation would be to advise new employees about what to do if they observed unsafe conditions or inappropriate behaviour.

The Review Team concluded that the absence of a consistent and complete orientation package poses a high level of risk to the Department. The impact on the Department of not having a consistent and complete orientation package would depend on the work environment. In an administrative environment, such as a regional headquarters, the risk would be low; however, in an operational environment, such as a laboratory or a CCG station, the risk would be high. The greatest risk is that the safety or health of youth (or for that matter, new indeterminate employees) could be endangered because the dangers are unclear or the process to reduce the dangers is unknown to them. Another risk is that a young person could be injured and could plead a lack of knowledge of the proper processes and launch legal action against the Department or a departmental employee.

The Review Team found that there are orientation processes in place for new youth employees, but they are inconsistent and incomplete, and their availability often depends on the initiative of local managers. Consistency of information passed on to employees is important for their safety and well-being.

Working in a departmental program may be a youth’s first point of contact with the working world. Orientation is an important tool, as it can influence perceptions and enhance a young person’s ambition to participate and contribute, leading to recruitment as a future employee. Such an orientation is particularly important at DFO, whose work sites include laboratories and ships.

Existing Measures to Manage Risk

The Department already has measures in place that could minimize risks associated with inconsistent and incomplete orientation packages.

DFO released its National Orientation Kit for all employees in March 2001. It is designed to assist newly appointed employees to gain a better understanding of the nature and scope of the organization. The kit includes pertinent information on DFO’s structure and operations, components, roles and responsibilities, working environment, and working conditions. Some regions have adapted, or are in the process of adapting, this kit to meet their specific needs. The National Orientation Kit is also available on the departmental intranet site.

Despite the efforts to make the National Orientation Kit widely available, the Review Team found a surprising lack of awareness of it. There is no apparent formality in providing these kits to new employees. In the Pacific Region, for example, it is up to the administrative assistants to ensure that they have enough kits to give out to new employees. In the Quebec Region, the National Orientation Kit was not sent to all employees when staff ran out of the French version and had to wait for more to be printed. In the Maritimes Region, the staffing section informs Staff Relations of a new arrival, at which point the manager is sent a letter indicating her or his role in providing the orientation.

Some initiatives are being taken to improve the orientation process. Extensive orientation packages were found in both, hatcheries and CCG Stations in the Pacific region. The Central and Arctic Region has developed its own orientation package, which is on its intranet site and also available on CD. Other excellent examples of training and orientation for new employees are the national IRB, throughout the Department, and the Office of Boating Safety’s Walk the Dock program, in the Central and Arctic Region.

Recommendation

4.  To ensure consistency in providing orientation information to employees and to assist managers, specific orientation information pertaining to the task at hand should be compiled for work sites to complement the National Orientation Kit.

3.2 Complaints

A complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction by an employee about his or her employment. A complaint may arise between employees or between an employee and a supervisor, but at whatever level the complaint arises, the complainant has the right to file a complaint and obtain a review of that complaint without fear of embarrassment or reprisal. This complaint can be conveyed either verbally or in writing to the supervisor or, if that person is implicated, to someone at a higher level.

Most complaints that are filed involve some form of harassment, such as unwelcome or offensive conduct, threats, sexual harassment or conduct that is discriminatory under the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA). DFO’s policy on harassment is quite explicit.

— DFO policy on harassment

The Review Team asked managers whether students had made any complaints over the past two years (1999–00; 2000–01). The team found that few such complaints (approximately 10) had been lodged. But this could have been for several reasons. One would be that there were very few complaints in total. However, young employees may be reluctant to make complaints against a peer or a superior for fear of repercussion or being labeled a complainer. If they make a complaint, it may jeopardize their future employment with the Department. Another reason for few complaints is that the situation might have been handled directly by the Early Conflict Resolution Advisor or, in the Pacific Region, by a Critical-Incident Stress counsellor.

Managers or supervisors try to deal with any complaints without bringing the complaint to the attention of their superiors or soliciting advice from Staff Relations experts. That so few complaints were identified indicates that managers and supervisors do not have to deal with them on a regular basis. Consequently, they are inexperienced in handling complaints and in deciding on the appropriate course of action to resolve them.

While individuals would prefer to deal with a complaint without involving senior staff or soliciting Staff Relations expertise, the complaint may escalate into something more serious and leave the Department vulnerable to greater consequences. Failing to inform senior levels of management of potential problems could leave them ’blind-sided’ if the incident escalates.

In accordance with its policy, Building a Harassment-Free Workplace, DFO is to maintain a confidential monitoring system to identify trends in complaints. But Human Resources (Staff Relations) is not informed of all informal complaints made to supervisors or managers. Staff Relations is informed only if the complaint is elevated to the grievance level or comes through a Regional Director General’s (RDG’s) office or the Deputy Minister’s office when a complaint is made to the Canadian Human Rights Commission or the PSC. Failure to inform Staff Relations about the existence of a complaint increases the possibility of mishandling the complaint or of inconsistency in the application of any corrective action or resolution.

In accordance with policy, managers have a responsibility to put an end to any harassment they are aware of, whether or not anyone has made a complaint. The manager may have to conduct some preliminary fact-finding in some instances to determine whether harassment has taken place. Some managers appear to have a misperception of how to handle situations where no actual complaint has been filed or where an allegation has been made but subsequently withdrawn.

Managers are responsible for preventing harassment through training and awareness and for taking all necessary actions and measures to put an end to any harassment they are aware of, or ought reasonably to be aware of, whether or not a complaint has been made.

Weaknesses in the handling of complaints may be a result of the lack of training on the implementation and application of the harassment policy. The review team learned that the Department is delivering one-day awareness sessions on harassment sensitivity. This training is being provided to all employees as part of the National Workplace Improvement Plan and is to be completed by March 2003. It should be noted that some regions had training on harassment before the release of DFO’s policy in 2001.

Redress Mechanisms

Complaints that are filed may be handled informally through face-to-face discussion between the complainant and the respondent. Also, if both parties agree, they can have third-party mediation to try to resolve the problem. In that case, the Regional Early Conflict Resolution Advisor can attempt to bring both parties to an agreeable resolution. The Department also offers the confidential and voluntary Employee Assistance Program — or the Critical Incident Stress program in the Pacific Region — for employees experiencing difficulties in their work or professional lives.

Some conflicts caused by inappropriate actions, comments or complaints of harassment either do not lend themselves to informal resolution or fail to be resolved through mediation. Five redress mechanisms are available to employees who wish to pursue a formal process for resolving a dispute about incidents of alleged harassment:

• internal formal harassment complaint process (RDG or ADM);
• grievance (including adjudication);
• PSC complaint process;
• CHRA complaint process; and
• other investigation, in cases of alleged misconduct or impropriety potentially having an impact on the Department.

The steps for each redress mechanism are described in the Department’s publication, "A Practical Guide for the Handling and Processing of Formal Harassment Complaints and Other Investigations in DFO."

Youth are often employed with the Department for short periods, normally 3–4 months, at any one time. With the formal redress mechanisms, resolution of a complaint can take a significant amount of time. Nevertheless, a young person should be supported if she or he feels that pursuing a formal redress mechanism is the most equitable means of resolving a dispute.

Recommendations

5.   Senior management should be informed of all complaints of harassment.

6.   A central record of all complaints received (formal and informal) should be maintained in each region so that trends can be analyzed and potential areas for training can be identified.

7.   All situations in which harassment may have occurred should be investigated, whether or not a complaint has been received as required by departmental policy.

8.   Harassment training should emphasize that managers are responsible for dealing with, and resolving, harassment issues as they become aware of them.

3.3 Policies, Procedures and Directives

There are federal regulations governing workplace conduct, health and safety. In addition, both Treasury Board and the Department have established policies and processes to complement the legislation and regulations. Also, a number of policy statements have been specifically designed for using youth in the Public Service. The collective intent of these documents is to create a framework for the workplace environment that benefits both regular and youth employees.

Most policies have been in effect for a long time. Some are more recent. For example, the Treasury Board policy on Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Workplace was revised in June 2001. The DFO policy, Building a Harassment-Free Workplace, became effective in March 2001. Training on the departmental policy is still being implemented across the Department. The Review Team has been informed that all employees have received a package containing the policy and related materials and that discussions of the policy have occurred at staff meetings in many offices and at middle managers’ conferences.

In summary, this framework covers health and safety, from both occupational and environmental perspectives; human rights (including the right to a harassment-free workplace); and terms and conditions for employment of students. The existence of this framework is not in itself sufficient. The behaviour of individuals in the Public Service needs to reflect the intent of the framework. It is vital that departmental managers, supervisors and employees be aware of this framework and ensure that it is implemented.

Throughout the review, the team sought evidence that departmental managers were aware of this framework and were indeed implementing these policies. The review team concluded that managers and supervisors have been given the tools they require to ensure that new employees have a safe, healthy and respectful workplace.

While not looking specifically at the operations of the IRB, the Review Team did note one situation that did not fit well elsewhere in this report. IRB employees hired under FSWEP live in various types of accommodation during their summer employment. In some regions, they live in accommodations provided by the Department. In another region, the employees are responsible for finding their own accommodation. Regardless of where they live, the Department should share some responsibility for ensuring the well-being of students during their time with the IRB.

In the Maritimes Region, students in the IRB live in recreational trailers at yacht clubs. This is a health and safety issue. The Review Team has been informed that these trailers do not meet the Sanitation regulation (Part IX) of the Canada Occupational Safety and Health Regulations under Part II of the Canada Labour Code. This regulation has provisions governing exits, fire rating, etc. The regulation also defines space requirements for bedrooms, which these accommodations do not meet. Basically, if the Department is going to use trailers, then these must have the same size door opening as normal residences, comprise materials with fire rating similar to that of drywall, and have a second exit. The Department is putting employees and itself at risk.

Recommendation

9.   Accommodations for employees of the Inshore Rescue Boat Program in the Maritimes Region should meet the requirements of the Canada Labour Code.

3.3.1 Directives

From time to time, senior management issues directives to departmental employees until a policy is formally implemented or a further review is undertaken. In the past two years, two such directives were issued that impact upon young people employed in the Department.

On July 5, 2001, the Deputy Minister wrote to the members of the Departmental Management Committee about the safety of youth under departmental supervision. One safeguard for youth, to be in place for the summer of 2001, was to prohibit employees from being alone with any young person under DFO supervision. This instruction was put in place pending the outcome of a complete review of policies and procedures. Of concern to the review team is that some managers indicated that they were not aware of this directive. Considering the significance of this instruction and the risk associated with dealing with young people, the Department could have been left in a vulnerable position because of this lack of awareness.

A number of managers told the Review Team that the instruction is impractical in many small offices and laboratories or for travelling within the regions by vehicle or boat. They felt it was not cost-effective in many operations and travel situations to have more than two people involved. Some managers indicated that they would have to revise their thinking about using youth for some tasks if this is to remain a policy of the Department. One manager suggested that if such a directive is essential, the Department consider applying it only to situations involving minors.

Some people who commented on this directive felt that it questioned their integrity and the trust that the Department had in them. The Review Team does not feel that this directive is meant to question the integrity of DFO employees who find themselves alone with a young person but that it is meant to avoid the possibility of unfounded allegations that could be very damaging.

DFO employees prove themselves on a daily basis to be very dedicated and professional. Rare cases of harassment should not prevent senior management from feeling comfortable leaving operational issues, such as managing youth, with their officials. Managers must not feel that their integrity is being questioned, or they may decide to not participate in youth programs.

There are risks associated with having young people employed in the Department. As discussed previously in this report, young people run the risk of sustaining injuries, if not properly informed and prepared for potential dangers. As well, both they and other employees are at risk of being subjected to inappropriate behaviour.

Despite the risks involved, the Review Team suggests the Department reconsider its position on the necessity of two employees being with youth at all times when working on departmental premises. The Review Team bases this opinion on DFO’s long history as a major employer of youth and its positive overall track record in terms of complaints involving youth. DFO must remain vigilant and prepare for the possibility of harassment and abuse. Mechanisms are in place to prevent issues from escalating into major problems. Such mechanisms include the harassment policy and the Early Conflict Resolution process. All employees, including youth, should be reminded, on a regular basis, of the availability of these mechanisms, to emphasize the implications of potential incidents.

The use of exit interviews was approved by the Departmental Executive Committee in February 2000, and the then Associate Deputy Minister announced to all employees that departing employees would be asked to share their experiences and suggestions directly with senior management. There was no indication that this policy applied only to departing indeterminate employees. In fact, it is reasonable to assume that youth would have valuable insights, unique to their age group, to share. Most managers interviewed during this review indicated that they rarely conducted exit interviews. Many said that they thought it was a good idea. By not conducting exit interviews, managers and supervisors are missing a useful opportunity to learn from departing employees. The Review Team noted that the Central and Arctic, Maritimes, and Pacific Regions have developed a policy, format and process for exit interviews and are implementing them.

Recommendations

10.  The Department should reconsider the directive that its employees never be alone with a young person under the supervision of the Department.

11.  Reminders should be given to all employees, including young people, of the mechanisms in place for dealing with inappropriate behaviour and of the values and ethics adhered to in the Department.

12.  Supervisors should be reminded of the requirements for, and benefits of, exit interviews.

4.0 Management action plan

(See note)

Recommendation	Management Action Plan	Officer of Primary Interest	Initial Target date
1.    In case of unforeseen incidents, vital information about all people at remote locations should be centrally maintained in each region. Existing medical conditions, allergies, etc., should be noted on forms for this purpose.
2.    An orientation checklist should be instituted for use when hiring youth. This checklist should provide a record of training and briefings on such important things as health and safety, harassment policies, and redress policies and procedures. This form should be signed by the employee and the manager.
3.    The Department should ensure that unpaid students working in DFO facilities are covered by appropriate insurance.
4.    To ensure consistency in providing orientation information to employees and to assist managers, specific orientation information pertaining to the task at hand should be compiled for work sites to complement the National Orientation Kit.
5.    Senior management should be informed of all complaints of harassment.
6.    A central record of all complaints received (formal and informal) should be maintained in each region so that trends can be analyzed and potential areas for training can be identified.
7.    All situations in which harassment may have occurred should be investigated, whether or not a complaint has been received as required by departmental policy.
8.    Harassment training should emphasize that managers are responsible for dealing with, and resolving, harassment issues as they become aware of them.
9.    Accommodations for employees of the Inshore Rescue Boat Program in the Maritimes Region should meet the requirements of the Canada Labour Code.
10.   The Department should reconsider the directive its employees never being alone with a young person under the supervision of the Department.
11.   Reminders should be given to all employees, including young people, of the mechanisms in place for dealing with inappropriate behaviour and of the values and ethics adhered to in the Department.
12.   Supervisors should be reminded of the requirements for, and benefits of, exit interviews.

*Note
As this is a Manager Requested Review, action as deemed appropriate, is being taken by the Human Resources Sector.

Appendix A - Inventory

INVENTORY OF YOUTH PROGRAMS, INITIATIVES AND ACTIVITIES

Inventory of Youth Programs and Activities as provided by Fisheries and Oceans Regional Offices.

In accordance with the Terms of Reference, the following is an inventory of Fisheries and Oceans programs or areas where youth and students may be hired. Programs or areas may include the Federal Student Work Employment Program (FSWEP), CO-OP programs, the Science and Technology Internship Program and the YMCA Internship Program. Unpaid high school experience programs and volunteer arrangements are also considered, as well as school visits/career day events.

Pacific Region

Habitat and Environmental Science

• The Biological and Engineering Support Division & Oceans/Watershed Planning and Restoration Division typically hire two to four undergraduate engineering/biology CO-OP and/or FSWEP students to assist technical staff each year with projects throughout the province.
• On occasion, students are hired on a casual basis to assist non-technical staff.

Canadian Coast Guard

• Work experience students – Lifeboat Stations: Using a defined selection and hiring process and monitoring process. Secondary students are brought on for work experience assignments throughout the year. Job shadowing, assistance with boating safety displays, go out to schools to give lectures on boating safety, etc. They are given pollution response training.
• Various work experience assignments have and will continue to take place. Past examples have been a work experience student going to sea for six weeks on one leg of an Arctic trip. Some students work in the Regional Operations Centre while others work doing refits.
• Inshore Rescue Boat Program hires approximately eight students to work with Coxswains from the fleet. Students are placed in various locations throughout the province.
• Office of Boating Safety Summer Programs – in 2001, three FSWEP students were hired, in addition to two casuals.
• Cadets – Pacific Marine Training Centre: CCG Operational Services sponsors Ship’s Officer cadets from PMTC with two intakes per year. Within a four-year period, they complete three four-month long sea phases. Currently, eight cadets are in the program. The Director, Operational Services sits on the board at the school for the program and is involved in the selection process for the cadets.

Science

• Aquaculture Division at PBS hires FSWEP and CO-OP students each year to assist with special projects, heavy workloads and staff shortages.
• Aquaculture Division at PBS – high school students each year to gain work experience.
• Aquaculture Division at WVL – high school students each year to gain work experience.
• Aquaculture Division at WVL – under graduate and graduate students to work on project related to thesis or directed studies.
• Aquaculture Division at PBS hires under the Youth Intern Program.
• Stock Assessment Division at PBS – high school students each year to gain work experience.
• Stock Assessment Division at PBS – under graduate and graduate students to work on project related to thesis or directed studies.
• Stock Assessment Division at PBS – hires COOP students who could work at PBS, in labs, do field and/or work at sea.
• Stock Assessment Division at PBS – hires FSWEP students for summer work experience, could work in labs, in field or at sea.
• Stock Assessment Division at PBS – hires Youth Interns.
• The Pacific Biological Station conducts Open Houses every three years. The Station is open to the general public, and school groups are invited to book tours.
• The Pacific Biological Station provides tours to school groups and the general public throughout the year.
• Institute of Ocean Sciences (IOS) has an open house once every two to three years. The institute is open to the general public, and school groups are invited to book tours.
• IOS provides tours to school groups and the general public throughout the year.
• Marine Environment & Habitat Science Division at IOS/PBS/WVL/SFU/CLL hires one to two youth interns (early twenties) each year under the Federal Science Youth Internship Program to undertake work in laboratories and in the field.
• Marine Environment & Habitat Science Division at IOS/PBS/WVL/SFU/CLL usually has three to four graduate students and/or Post Doctoral Fellows per year. Students are in mid twenties or older and undertake lab and field work.
• Marine Environment & Habitat Science Division, IOS & WVL hire three to four CO-OP program (early twenties) summer students per year to undertake work in laboratories.
• IOS – high school students in building on "day shadow" or "career preparation" sessions are usually one to four days. (Huge pressure from schools to do more – resistance from staff to do more).
• OSAP at IOS usually has three to five students around as partnerships with universities. People are in mid twenties or older and frequently go into the field (primarily research vessels).
• IOS – 3-4 undergraduates (early twenties) summer students or COOP students /year. They frequently go into the field.

Treaty And Aboriginal Policy Directorate

• 1 student to provide data & information compilation, report writing and general support to treaty Negotiators and Policy Analysts.
• 1 student to provide mapping, data & information compilation, report writing and general support to Negotiators and Data Management Unit.

British Columbia Interior

• Normally hire two to three students in Habitat and Environment Branch North and Habitat and Environment Branch South. Biology background. The Habitat and Environment Branch south students have been working out of our Kamloops office and the Habitat and Environment Branch North students have been working in the Prince George area.
• Stock Assessment program – six to ten students per year, Chinook and Coho stock assessment, sockeye stock assessment programs. Working in a variety of locations quite often along the Shuswap River, or the Quesnel River, horsefly, or the Chilco River.

Central Coast

• Quinsam Hatchery – Campbell River –hires 1 FSWEP student June-September to feed fish and cut lawns. One other youth hired through temp agency in fall/winter to feed fish weekends only.
• Snootli Hatchery – Bella Coola hires seven to ten students per summer to feed fish, perform yard maintenance duties, participate in egg takes & assessment and to conduct hatchery tours for visitors. All through FSWEP except one week work experience with local high school.
• Regulatory Affairs - Port Hardy two students for work experience from Malispina College. They ride along with Fishery Officers.
• Regulatory Affairs – Bella Coola - one student – patrolled with enforcement officers, went out with stock assessment on creels patrols, boundary and sport fish patrols, boat counts. Assisted with vessel maintenance.
• Regulatory Affairs – Campbell River – two to three students per year - ride along with Enforcement Officers.

Lower Fraser Area

• Regulatory Affairs – Campbell River – two to three students per year - ride along with Enforcement Officers.
• Capilano Hatchery
• Chilliwack Hatchery
• Chilliwack Hatchery
• Tenderfoot Hatchery
• Chehalis Hatchery
• Stock Assessment – Lower Fraser Area hires Co-op students to work in the field. Also hires high school students from the Surrey Sub-District’s Career Education Program. Some hatcheries do this as well.

Maritimes Region

Science

• School tours of BIO (mainly) May/June
• Youth Group Tours of BIO (July/August)
• hours on site at BIO on projects defined by staff
• Aquaculture Research (five)
• Aquaculture Grad Students (twelve)
• Aquaculture Internships (three)
• Diadromous ( Invertebrate Field Technicians (various/twelve)
• Marine Fish & Oceans Sciences Computer Support (SABS)
• Tour guides (five BIO & Mactaquac Hatchery)
• Secretary (one) BIO

Oceans

• Marine Environment Science Tech. (two)
• Habitat Management Technicians (two)

Library

• Library Assistants/Researchers (three)

Real Property and Asset Management

• Environmental Assessment, RHQ (one)

Small Craft Harbours

• Harbour Authority Operations, RHQ (two)

Canadian Coast Guard

• Office of Boating Safety (one)
• Inshore Rescue Boat Program, Marine Programs (forty)
• Training Co-ordination RHQ, Operations (one)
• Land Surveyor, Technical Services (two)
• Y Interns – (four)
• Dietician, Vessel Support (one)

Canadian Coast Guard College

• Laboratory Technician (one)

Policy and Economics

• Policy Analysts, RHQ (three)

Informatics

• Computer Specialists, RHQ (three)
• Provincial School Science Tour (planned for this year at BIO)
• School projects with individual staff at BIO/SABS (i.e. student spend approx. 120)

Gulf Region

Gulf Region participates in the FSWEP, Science and Technology Youth Internships Program as well as various university co-op programs (local MOU arrangements). Gulf region also participates to a small degree with volunteer programs aimed at providing youth with work experience such as the YMCA Career Education Program. High school programs where youth achieve school credits for working with the Department in lieu of pay have also been active in Gulf region. FSWEP and co-op programs are by far the most popular and usage continues to increase each year.

Newfoundland Region

Newfoundland Region participates in a number of youth programs. Post-Secondary Co-operative Education Program (COOP), Federal Student Work Experience Program and the Federal Public Sector Youth Internship Program are all active among regional offices. Unpaid work terms where local colleges and schools contact DFO to see if students as part of their curriculum can be placed with on-the-job training and exposure to a work environment for approx. four weeks. Done through informal arrangement between DFO and school/college.

National Capital Region

Fisheries Management Sector

• eleven co-op students
• one "other" student
• two casual students

Canadian Coast Guard

• two specific period appointments
• one acting appointment
• twenty-three co-op students
• eleven "other" students
• two re-appointments

Corporate Services Sector

• four specific period appointments
• seven co-op students
• twelve "other" students
• one casual student
• five re-appointments

Human Resources Sector

• one specific period appointment
• one casual student

Communications Sector

• one co-op student

Oceans Sector

• one specific appointment
• ten co-op students
• two "other" students
• two casual students

Policy Sector

• one co-op student
• three "other" students

Science Sector

• fourteen co-op students
• seven "other" students

Central And Arctic Region

Canadian Hydrographic Service

• Co-op students – two in field operations, one in Burlington office (six-twelve month terms).
• Bring Your Child to Work Day, Bayfield Institute (early November).
• Co-op students – two in field operations, one in Burlington boat shop (two to four month terms).
• Co-op students – two in Burlington office (four to eight month terms).

Environmental Science Division, including the Experimental Lakes Area

• Summer students – four through PSC co-op education program, thirteen through U. of Manitoba, one graduate student.
• Families of some researchers visit area (when researcher is on site), frequency and duration of visits not logged.

Great Lakes Laboratory for Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences (Environmental Science)

• Approximately twenty-two young people as casual employees, summer students and interns (Burlington, Sault Ste. Marie).
• Approximately three graduate students, working outside DFO with private employers, should have same level of understanding of harassment issues as other DFO employees.

Sea Lamprey Control Program

• High school co-op students (one to two per year).
• Sea Lamprey travelling display set up at large boating and outdoor shows visited by young people in large open public forum.
• SLCC field programs – up to sixteen college and university students hired to assist field staff to assess fish populations and control lampreys in Great Lakes tributaries.
• Grounds maintenance and office assistants (one to two students per summer) – recently have hired only college or university students but have also hired high school in the past.
• Local community college students assist staff in office environment (short-term co-op placement).
• Take child to work Program.
• Community Science Education Programs: school group tours (elementary, high school and college); High school Envirothon Contest (almost always in groups accompanied by instructor).
• Mini-Aquarium display facility visited by many youth. Display is normally self-guided (not staffed) Student groups are accompanied by teachers in spring and fall; Otherwise youth may or may not be supervised by parents or other adults.
• Sea Lamprey Outreach -travelling display set up at large boating and outdoor shows visited by young people in large open public forum.

Canadian Coast Guard

Operations Directorate

Regional Operations Centre

• High school co-op students – support operations officers compile weather information, filing, computer spreadsheets, and experience in office environment.
• Summer students – paid position – same as high school duties with additional responsibilities including morning message.

Marine Superintendent

• High school co-op – three students – responsible for clerical duties in regional office.
• Internship Program – YMCA – one individual performing clerical duties – reporting to Supervisor, Sea-going personnel.
• Co-op – summer program – volunteer position – two months – duties as a seaman.
• Port Weller Search and Rescue Station – high school co-op program – responsibilities include limited seaman duties, on the job training, ship based duties – reports to the Coxswain.
• Goderich Search and Rescue Station – high school co-op program – responsibilities include limited seaman duties, on the job training, ship based duties – reports to the Coxswain.

(Superintendent, Operational Business)

• High-school co-op program – computer work, database maintenance; reports to Staff Officer.

CCG Marine Programs

Walk the Dock FSWEP Program

• seven students (see locations below)
  • one in Alberta; one in Saskatchewan
  • one in Manitoba; one in N. Ontario
  • one in Eastern Ontario; one in South Central Ontario
  • one in South Western Ontario
  • Office Assistant – one in Sarnia

CCG Navigable Waters Protection Program

• Sarnia – one student – summer – May to September – reports to NWP officer – responsibilities include assisting with inspections, navigabilities, finals, planning, filing, clerical support, GIS.
• Edmonton – one student – summer – co-op or FSWEP – reports to NWP officer – responsibilities include assisting with inspections, finals, trip planning, clerical duties.
• Prescott – one student – summer – co-op or FSWEP – reports to NWP officer – responsibilities include assisting with inspections, finals, trip planning, clerical duties.
• Kenora – one student – summer – co-op or FSWEP – reports to NWP officer – responsibilities include assisting with inspections, finals, trip planning, clerical duties.

CCG Arctic Issues Office

• two summer students – assisting with sea lift operations.
• one summer student – clerical support within office.
• one student – university co-op student – assisted region with development of mentoring program.

Aids to Navigation

• Sarnia – three high school students – co-op program – employed ½ day five days a week during semester – assists with chart work including updates, spreadsheets and computer graphics.

CCG Search and Rescue

• FSWEP program – six university/college students at each of six Inshore Rescue stations – responsible for search and rescue activities.

CCG Environmental Response

• College co-op program through the local college firefighter program that offers an emergency response background. Responsibilities include inventory and general equipment maintenance.

Technical Support Services

Director, Technical Support Services

• one university student – FSWEP – clerical support functions.

Field Services

• Kenora – two students – FSWEP program – one employed with NWP program, the other assists with general base maintenance.
• Thunder Bay –one student – FSWEP – assists with general base duties.
• Selkirk – one student – FSWEP – assists with clerical duties.
• Amherstburg – one high school co-op student per semester – works with five areas of responsibility on the base including Search and Rescue, yard, office, technical support.

Vessel Support

• One or two high school co-op students per semester – assists in boat shop with carpentry, mechanical repairs and general maintenance – offers a lot of on-the-job training.
• YMCA Internship Program – one employee job shadowing with various employees in directorate for technical experience.

Arctic Research Division

• Students visit Freshwater Institute, Winnipeg as part of school programs (ten per year, two to three days).
• Field camp visits – local youth accompanied by parents.
• six co-op students.

Finance and Administration

• one FSWEP student in Assets & Materiel Mgmt Winnipeg.
• one student (casual) updating F&A web page in Burlington.

Western Arctic Area

• FJMC/DFO Youth Mentoring Program
• Ontario Great Lakes Area, Habitat Management Program
• First Nations (Metis) Training program - Ken Legacy
• Co-op Students – Marty Temmemagi
• Andy Bramburger
• Andrea Ito

Oceans Programs Division

• two graduate students (Masters) – current.
• one Inuvialuit high school graduate - Fisheries Joint Management Committee Mentoring Program July 9-17/01.
• Natural Resources Institute class field trip to FWI Nov 9/01.
• one law student (ended Apr/01).
• two recent graduates (ended Jan/01 and Jun/01).

Resource Management and Aboriginal Affairs

• one summer student.
• School visits (responsible person on leave so I can’t ask about this – L de March).

Other

• Prairies Area – Alberta
• Prairies Area – Saskatchewan
• Western Arctic –Yellowknife

Quebec Region

• Occasional visits to MLI by young people, who are always accompanied by teachers or parents.
• Youth internships (a few youth interns, a day or two per year) with trustworthy employees and the approval of their schools.
• Talks to be given in schools by our professionals in the presence of teachers.
• Federal Student Work Experience Program (FSWEP).
• Post-Secondary Co-operative Education and Internship Program (COOP).
• Federal Public Sector Youth Internship Program (previously Career Edge).
• ***Science, Canadian Coast Guard, Corporate Services, Fisheries Management and Policy and Economics have all actively participated with youth programs. FSWEP and co-op were the primary programs utilized in Quebec region.

The Oceans and Environment Branch

• FSWEP: Biologist/Technician, Contaminants Analyst, and Research Assistant positions.
• COOP: one Geomatics Specialist.

Science

• FSWEP: Technician and Hydrographic Surveyor positions.
• COOP: Technician, Computer Specialist-Physicist, Food Expert Intern and Biologist positions.

Regional Corporate Services and Human Resources

• FSWEP: a Finance Clerk assigned to prepare contractual documents, keep the registry of suppliers current, enter and check data, and answer information requests. An Information Clerk assigned to do filing, coding, and information searches.
• COOP: Computer Specialists assigned to answer requests for assistance (software and hardware) and to replace the call dispatcher as needed.

CCG/ Marine Programs

• FSWEP: Inshore Rescue Boat Program
• Under the jurisdiction of Marine Programs, these students work in teams assigned as follows:
• A Coxswain and two crew members. Their duty is to help mariners in distress and to promote marine safety.
• A Clerk/Secretary and a Data Entry Clerk to work with Michel Demers, André Bégin and Sylvie Pelletier.

CCG/Technical Services

• FSWEP: a labourer for maintenance or repair work, a Mechanic assigned to do minor maintenance work on vehicles, a Geomatics intern assigned to carry out geomatic and levelling surveys as well as computations and calculations, a Digitization Technician assigned to digitize plans, remove impurities and record data in the document management system, and a Junior Engineer.

CCG/Operational Services

• FSWEP: a Clerk assigned to do clerical work associated with administrative support and the updating of files and databases, a Database Clerk assigned to enter, gate and retrieve graphic reports on incidents involving ships, a Financial Clerk assigned to pay invoices, do payroll follow up and clerical work, an Electrician assigned to work with experienced Chief Electricians in doing electrical work on board ships when the ships are moored during the maintenance period.
• COOP: an Intern from the organizational analysis and development program to assist management in putting performance indicators into place.

Policy and Economics

• FSWEP: an Economist assigned to collect data on marine transportation, analyze data, draft documents and draw graphs.

Small Craft Harbours and Real Estate Services

• FSWEP: a Generalist Clerk assigned to archive files and enter statistical data.

Fisheries Management

• FSWEP: a Generalist Clerk assigned to do word processing, take calls and do clerical work and a database operator assigned to set coordinates on maps and enter data.
• COOP: a Statistics Officer assigned to check and correct production databases and draft publications aimed at solving problems.