The Canada Revenue Agency as separate employer: Anomaly or model for the future?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: In 1999, Revenue Canada became the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA), with a governance model that combines traditional ministerial responsibility in program areas and Crown corporation governance in internal management. The greatest changes were in human resources management, where the agency became a separate employer, providing a rare opportunity to design from first principles. This article discusses the factors that led to the single most ambitious federal government “alternative service delivery” project. It then looks at the agency's governance model and the development and implementation of its human resources management regime, which sought to meet agency business requirements while responding to criticisms of the mainstream public‐service model. The agency's workforce is on the scale of the larger provincial governments, and it provides extensive support to the provinces and territories, compounding the need for innovative governance and human resources management. The circumstances of moving to agency status and later reinforcements have contributed to its success and make it unlikely that the decision will be reversed, notwithstanding the later return of the Customs function to the mainstream public service. Tensions with broader public‐service management objectives make it equally unlikely that the move will be replicated on a large scale. Sommaire : En 1999, Revenu Canada est devenu l'Agence des douanes et du revenu du Canada (ADRC), dotée d'un modèle de gouvernance qui associe la responsabilité mi‐nistérielle traditionnelle dans les domaines de programmes et la gouvernance des sociétés d'État pour la gestion interne. Les plus grands changements se sont produits dans la gestion des ressources humaines, lorsque l'Agence est devenue un employeur distinct, fournissant une rare occasion de conception à partir des principes de base. Le présent article aborde les facteurs qui ont conduit au projet le plus ambitieux « diversification des modes de prestation de services » du gouvernement fédéral. Il se penche ensuite sur le modèle de gouvernance de l'Agence et l'établissement et la mise en œuvre de son régime de gestion des ressources humaines, qui a cherchéà répondre aux exigences opérationnelles de l'Agence tout en faisant face aux critiques du modèle de service public ordinaire. La main‐d'œuvre de l'Agence est d'une échelle équivalente à celle des plus grands gouvernements provinciaux, et elle apporte un important soutien aux provinces et territoires, combinant le besoin d'innovation en matière de gou‐vernance et de gestion des ressources humaines. Les circonstances de la transition au statut d'Agence et des renforcements subséquents ont contribuéà son succès et rendent bien improbable que la décision soit infirmée, compte non tenu du retour ultérieur de la fonction de Douanes au service public ordinaire. Les tensions qui accompagnent les plus vastes objectifs de gestion du service public rendent également improbable que l'initiative se reproduise à une grande échelle.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".