Common menu bar

• Français
• Home
• Contact Us
• Help
• Search
• canada.gc.ca

Breadcrumb

1. Home >
2. Equality in the Workplace >
3. Employment Equity >
4. Tools >
5. Annual Reports

Employment Equity Act: Annual Report 2009

• Previous Chapter 7: The Road Ahead - Workplace Equity Initiatives
• Table of Contents
• Next Appendix A: Employers Performance Ratings - Banking and Communications Sector Tables

Appendix A:
Employers Performance Ratings ^{[20] footnote at the bottom of this page}

---

This appendix presents an assessment of the quantitative results that federally regulated private sector employers and Crown corporations achieved during 2008. Additionally, it evaluates the degree to which employers were in compliance with the requirements of the Employment Equity Act, as measured by the Report Compliance Index.

Employers who fail to comply with their employment equity reporting obligations may be subject to a monetary penalty levied by the Labour Program. Cases of non-compliance are referred to the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

---

Performance Summary

Performance ratings provide a quantitative measure of achievement for federally regulated private sector employers and Crown corporations during the reporting year. These ratings are generated using the numerical data gathered from the individual employers annual submission and labour force data from the Census. Six indicators are consolidated into a single score to reflect the situation of the designated groups in the employers workforce at the end of the calendar year. These indicators include: the progress experienced by designated group members in terms of representation, occupational distribution and salary, as well as their shares of hirings, promotions and terminations.

Employers are given a rating of A, B, C, D or Z for each of the four designated groups. An A represents strong performance and D, the poorest. Z indicates no representation of a particular designated group. [21] footnote at the bottom of this page

Employers who submit employment equity reports for the first time are required to only report by gender to allow them sufficient time to complete self-identification surveys of their workforces. In 2008, 38 employers reported for the first time, four were voluntary, and four had no employees on December 31.

Legend

Description of Performance Ratings

Rating	Results	Explanation
A	Strong performance in all six indicators.[22] footnote at the bottom of this page	The employer made exceptional progress in improving the representation of the designated group in its workforce by hiring and promoting group members. The designated groups situation compared well to its Canadian Labour Market Availability (CLMA). The group received adequate shares of hires and promotions, compared favourably with other employees in terms of salary and occupational distribution, and did not suffer adversely from terminations compared to other employees.
B	Good performance, but problems persist.	The situation of the designated group was comparable to its CLMA and to the jobs and salaries of other employees in the organization. However, there were barriers to achieving adequate representation, as well as problems in the occupational distribution and salaries of members of the designated group. This rating indicates that the hiring and promotion of members of the designated group were inadequate, or that members of the particular group were leaving the organization in disproportionate numbers.
C	Average to less than average performance.	The situation of the designated group in the organization did not compare well with its CLMA or with the jobs and salaries of other employees. The organization also failed to hire and/or promote members of the group at a rate sufficient to maintain its representation in the workforce.
D	Poor performance.	Legislative obligations were not met and the employer scored low on all six indicators. A follow-up and an employment systems review are required to detect and remove employment barriers.
Z	No presence of a designated group in the employers workforce.	The organization appears to have had no representation of the designated group in its workforce. This could occur for several reasons: no workforce survey or workforce analysis was conducted; there was no hiring of designated group members; or there were no retention policies. The employer needs to conduct an employment systems review and adopt special measures to hire designated group members.

For more details about the methodology used to calculate the performance ratings, please refer to the Technical Guide here.

Description of Codes

Comment	Results	Explanation
*	A small employee population.	The asterisk indicates that the employer's workforce included fewer than 10 members of a particular designated group.
F	Employer had no employees as of December 31.	Employers are required to submit an employment equity report when they have 100 or more employees on any given day of the calendar year. It is possible for an employer to have 100 or more employees during the year, but no employees on December 31. When this is the case, the employer does not receive a rating.
G	Employers report was submitted by gender only.	Employers reporting for the first time do so by gender only. As a result, the performance rating is calculated only for women.
I	Employer's report was closed with minor discrepancies.	The employer failed to account for yearto-year variances that were found in its quantitative data.
J	Employer's report was closed with major discrepancies.	The employer failed to account for significant year-to-year variances that were found in its quantitative data.
L	Employers report was submitted late.	The employer submitted a report after the deadline of June 1st without permission from the Labour Program and may be subject to a monetary penalty.
M	Late amendment.	An amendment to the employment equity report was requested, but was either not received or received after the closing date of the database.
N	Employer's report was not inclusive of all designated groups in the Annual Report.	The employer's workforce is reported in the Annual Report by gender only. Its complete workforce was submitted by all designated groups after the database had been consolidated.
R	No report submitted.	The employer failed to submit an employment equity report as required by section 18 of the Employment Equity Act.
T1	A Type 1 violator.	Without reasonable excuse, the employer failed to file an employment equity report as required by section 18 of the Act.
T2	A Type 2 violator.	Without reasonable excuse, the employer failed to include in the employment equity report any information that is required by section 18 of the Act and its Regulations; or the employer knowingly filed false or misleading information in its report.
V	Voluntary employer.	The employer is not covered by the Act, but has submitted a voluntary employment equity report.

Number of Federally Regulated Private Sector Employers by Performance Rating and Designated Group (2008)

Designated Group	Rating
	A	B	C	D	Z
Women	95	106	243	101	4
Aboriginal Peoples	218	75	59	83	114
Persons with Disabilities	79	43	108	214	103
Members of Visible Minorities	79	74	217	125	54

• In 2008, among all designated groups, employers received the greatest number of superior ratings (A) and the greatest number of lowest ratings (Z) for Aboriginal peoples.
• Employers weakest (combinedD and Z) ratings occurred for persons with disabilities.
• Employers strongest (combined A and B) ratings occurred for Aboriginal peoples.

Number of Federally Regulated Private Sector Employers by Performance Rating, Designated Group and Sector (2008)

Designated Group	Banking					Communications					Transportation					Other
	A	B	C	D	Z	A	B	C	D	Z	A	B	C	D	Z	A	B	C	D	Z
Women	21	4	1	0	0	29	31	29	6	0	20	59	181	86	4	25	12	32	9	0
Aboriginal Peoples	6	4	7	1	8	38	13	12	12	20	144	50	27	51	78	30	8	13	19	8
Persons with Disabilities	1	3	13	6	3	16	10	24	31	14	45	21	52	153	79	17	9	19	26	7
Members of Visible Minorities	15	8	1	1	1	17	14	42	19	3	36	36	140	92	46	11	16	34	13	4

• The banking sector held the strongest (A) ratings for women. The banks made outstanding progress in improving the representation, hiring and promotion opportunities for this designated group in their workforces. Conversely, the weakest (combined D and Z) rating in the banking sector occurred for Aboriginal peoples and persons with disabilities.
• Employers in the communications sector received high ratings for women and Aboriginal peoples, but struggled with persons with disabilities.
• The transportation sector employers scored the lowest ratings for women, but scored high ratings for Aboriginal peoples.
• The other sector received strong ratings for women and Aboriginal peoples. As with employers in the banking, communications and transportation sectors, the weakest scores (D and Z) were obtained for persons with disabilities.

Report Compliance Index Summary

The Report Compliance Index (RCI) measures the degree to which employers have fulfilled their reporting requirements under the Employment Equity Act. The Labour Program awards a point for each of the following:

1. Submitting a report by June 1^st
2. Describing measures undertaken to implement employment equity
3. Reporting on results achieved
4. Holding consultations with employee representatives
5. Explaining year-to-year data variances

In 2008, 358 employers obtained an RCI of five out of five, while 150 obtained four out of five. Another 27 employers received three out of five, eight received two out of five and two received one out of five. [23] footnote at the bottom of this page

How to Read the Individual Results

In the Performance Ratings Table, employers are listed by their legal name along with their performance ratings for each designated group. The number of employees for each employer appears in the first column after the legal name. Employers with 100 or more employees on any given day of the calendar year receive a rating, but the total number of permanent full-time and permanent part-time employees in this column is based on the figure for December 31, 2008.

---

[20] This years report incorporates labour market availability data from the 2006 Census of Canada and the 2006 Participation and Activity Limitation Survey, both of which were conducted by Statistics Canada. This new labour market availability data has had an impact on the Performance Ratings in this Appendix. While the methodology used to calculate these ratings remained constant, the ratings reflect the new availability data. Some employers will note a lower rating than last year for certain designated groups, even if their workforce remained relatively stable during 2008. [Return to annotation 20]

[21] A indicates superior performance, B good, C adequate, D poor and Z indicates no members of a designated group in the employers workforce. For more information on how the ratings are calculated, please refer to the Technical Guide. [Return to annotation 21]

[22] The designated group performance ratings (A, B, C, and D) are based on a consolidation of six indicators that are submitted annually by employers covered under the Employment Equity Act. They reflect the status of designated groups within an employer's workforce based on progress in terms of 1) representation, 2) occupational distribution, 3) salary, as well as their shares of: 4) hirings, 5) promotions and 6) terminations. [Return to annotation 22]

[23] For more information on the RCI, please refer to the Technical Guide. [Return to annotation 23]

• Previous Chapter 7: The Road Ahead - Workplace Equity Initiatives
• Table of Contents
• Next Appendix A: Employers Performance Ratings - Banking and Communications Sector Tables

Primary navigation (left column)

Date Modified:

2012-03-22