Highlights
Page 2 of 14
The Individual Training and Education (IT&E) system in the Canadian Forces (CF) is a key element that supports the CF in meeting its operational mandate and international commitments abroad. The IT&E system trains men and women to perform more than 150 military occupations in the CF. This training system touches the lives of all military members and must be managed with utmost respect for individual rights and aspirations, including language of work rights as stipulated in the Official Languages Act.
This audit set out to determine to what extent the current IT&E system within the CF complies with the Act for requirements related to the language of work (Part V) and equitable participation (Part VI). We wanted to verify whether the processes and systems in place ensure that military members can be trained in their official language of choice (Part V) and that there are no systemic barriers to the employment or advancement of Anglophones or Francophones with respect to their choice of language for occupational training (Part VI). The audit objectives and criteria are presented in the methodology section of this report as well as in Appendix B.
The audit began in June 2008 and fact gathering occurred between September 2008 and January 2009. It included visits and interviews in CF training establishments and at National Defence Headquarters. The audit team met with more than 600 people during the audit, including 250 students from all environments of the CF. A dozen pilots from other countries being trained as NATO fighter pilots at Air Force training facilities were also interviewed.
The audit team used a systemic approach to audit the IT&E system. The goal was not to verify one school’s compliance compared to another’s or to encourage comparisons among the training establishments it visited. Rather, we used an approach that focused on the processes and systems in place for IT&E as a whole. The audit examined, within the CF’s structure and operations, the required controls to ensure compliance with the Act. These controls became the audit criteria against which the CF’s performance was measured. It is believed that this approach was best suited to diagnose any implementation problems related to official languages and to recommend lasting solutions for compliance with the Act.
The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages has analyzed language of training many times over the years. These analyses demonstrated that many issues prevent the CF from being fully compliant with the Act in the area of IT&E. This audit showed that some issues are still present today, notably the shortage of linguistically qualified instructors and an inability to provide all teaching materials in both official languages.
First, the audit showed that there were deficiencies in strategic and operational planning leading up to the preparation of IT&E plans. Such deficiencies hindered the CF’s capacity to anticipate accurately the number of courses needed to meet demand in both official languages and to ensure that waiting times for courses in either official language were kept to a minimum. Similarly, we found that the CF is facing serious problems in ensuring that there are enough linguistically qualified instructors to meet the demand for training in the official language of choice of the students.
Second, with regard to the management framework and actual delivery of courses, the findings reveal there is room for improvement. Official languages are not yet integrated as a vital component of the IT&E management framework. Furthermore, the CF is still not able to provide all teaching materials in both official languages. There are also major issues related to the impact of operational requirements on language of instruction, such as the training of pilots. As well, while the CF is aware that its approach to teaching must become more learner-centric and while various initiatives, such as distance learning and greater use of computer technology, are underway to vary the teaching methods used, the CF must integrate official languages more explicitly as one of the anticipated results to be achieved in curriculum development and establish performance measures accordingly.
The third area of examination focused on the recruiting, assignment and promotion policies and practices to ensure that they are not a hindrance to the hiring and advancement of military members from both official language groups. The findings revealed that basic recruit training and new officer training is carried out in both official languages. However, the CF has serious difficulties posting members who have completed their training in one language and who are looking to pursue their career in the same language. Furthermore, while efforts are currently underway to ensure that senior leadership roles are exercised by linguistically qualified senior officers, too many of these senior officers, including commandants of national training establishments, still do not meet the language requirements of their rank.
Finally, the audit showed that, while second-language training should be viewed as a critical component of the success of IT&E from an official languages point of view, it is still not integrated into IT&E planning and career management well enough to achieve maximum benefits. However, recent efforts by the Director of Official Languages to ensure that better integration is achieved were noted. Furthermore, other problems, such as accessibility to second-language training, the wide use of the so-called functional level of linguistic competency to meet most requirements for bilingualism, and maintaining second-language skills once acquired, still limit the potential benefits this program could bring to IT&E.
It is important to note that this IT&E audit was undertaken in a context where the National Defence official languages program is being renewed under the Official Languages Program Transformation Model (2007–2012). The audit touched on some of the initiatives covered by the Transformation Model. The analysis from an IT&E point of view showed that deficiencies exist in some areas covered by the model and that these deficiencies could prevent the CF from achieving its intended targets. These areas include second-language training and retention, and the availability of linguistically qualified instructors.
It should be noted that CF representatives were extremely cooperative during the course of the audit. In fact, from the outset, the CF expressed a desire to participate fully in this audit. The Office of the Commissioner also received the support of senior CF officials to ensure the audit’s success.
CF officials believe in the strategic importance of the IT&E system from an official languages standpoint. The CF also sees this audit as an instrument of change with respect to the delivery of this important training system across the organization. To this end, a CF action plan is attached to the final audit report. The plan includes measures the CF intends to take over 24 months to implement this report’s recommendations. The Office of the Commissioner intends to carry out the necessary follow-up on the various CF initiatives.
The Commissioner is making 20 recommendations to the CF with a view to improving IT&E management from an official languages point of view within the organization. A list of these recommendations is found in Appendix C.
