Kozij: The public service needs to get better at firing its underperformers

Firing people is onerous and unappealing, but done systematically it would improve productivity, lower the wage bill and boost public confidence.

Published Jun 06, 2025

Last updated Jun 06, 2025

5 minute read

Poor job performance can manifest itself in many ways, including someone who regularly arrives late, leaves early, takes breaks that are too long, is a constant negative presence, has others do their work, disappears for hours at a time or does not work at a level commensurate with their compensation level. Photo by ROB CROSS /POSTMEDIAArticle content

Growing up in Vancouver in the 1980s meant you knew at least one aspect of the reputation of Jim Pattison. Today, he is around the 200th richest person in the world with a net wealth of more than $9 billion. Back then, he was primarily a car dealer and his reputation was that he fired the lowest-performing salesperson on each of his lots every month.

THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY

Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.

Exclusive articles from Elizabeth Payne, David Pugliese, Andrew Duffy, Bruce Deachman and others. Plus, food reviews and event listings in the weekly newsletter, Ottawa, Out of Office.Unlimited online access to Ottawa Citizen and 15 news sites with one account.Ottawa Citizen ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword.Support local journalism.SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES

Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.

Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.

Access articles from across Canada with one account.Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.Enjoy additional articles per month.Get email updates from your favourite authors.THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK.

Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.

Access articles from across Canada with one accountShare your thoughts and join the conversation in the commentsEnjoy additional articles per monthGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an Accountor

Article content

Imagine even a smidgen of that managerial teeth in the federal public service.

Article content

Mel Cappe, a former clerk of the Privy Council, famously said it was “too hard to hire and too hard to fire in the public service.” He’s still right, but only on the latter count.

Article content

There are many reasons for that, including poor training for public-service managers, especially in dealing with problem employees; few incentives for employees to better their performance; few effective approaches to force underperforming employees to improve; and an overall lack of drive to reduce the size of the public service, though Mark Carney says he will cap it.

Article content

So, what to do?

Article content

Anybody can come up with ideas, but they have to be battle-tested in the real world of people and unions that properly protect their members. Sculpting is better than slashing to align priorities with labour allocation.

Article content

A one-per-cent haircut wouldn’t hurt

Article content

But more can be done across-the-board and it wouldn’t hurt the public service to take a one-per-cent employee haircut every four years, just based on performance. It would improve morale, increase productivity, lower the wage bill, increase public confidence in the public sector and underscore the importance of employees giving it day-in, day-out or facing real consequences.

Article content

I was an executive in the public service for more than 15 years, eventually overseeing a branch of about 90 people with an annual budget of $100 million. The leadership training I received was helpful, but it was more of a conceptual nature rather than the nuts and bolts of supervising employees, especially managing poor performers in a unionized environment.

Article content

Most public-service executives are familiar with the human-resource staff who help hire and reclassify as speedily as the process allows — and it has gotten speedier over the years.

Article content

However, it hasn’t changed much the other way. Even during the period of program review and the pressure to reduce the overall wage bill, the focus was on where the public service writ large was going, then making appropriate staffing adjustments. Smart thinking that, sculpting rather than everyone getting the same-percentage haircut.

Article content

The problem with taking action such as program sculpting only during cyclical times of restraint is that we don’t therefore undertake constant renewal by requiring good employee performance across-the-board on a permanent basis. Ongoing public-sector renewal should include regular pruning to address ongoing poor performance.

Article content

In all my federal government training, I was never given a course on how to demote or fire someone. It wasn’t easy, although I did it more than once. There is a general consensus about the importance of managing employee aspirations and performance. The whole point of a more directive managerial intervention is to get every employee to be a positive, contributing member of the team.

Article content

Many executives have never placed an employee on an “action plan” and often don’t want to deal with that. A public-service action plan is a serious step. Simply put, it’s a hassle, sometimes more than 15 pages with detailed expectations of the underperforming employee.

Article content

An action plan doesn’t cover only the work expectations of the position, but can include details such as when the employee shows up, when they leave and how long their breaks are. Then, the manager needs to supervise assiduously the expected work and behaviours in that plan.

Article content

Micro-oversight is oppressive

Article content

This kind of micro daily oversight must go on for months and is oppressive for any manager who joined the public service to do something much different and more important. It’s not like you can just fire the lowest performer every month.

Article content

It is also oppressive for the employee to be put under a microscope for months, especially since there is already a job description, a statement of merit criteria for their role and an annual performance assessment with midpoint check-ins.

Article content

The public service generally puts limits on how many employees achieve the highest level — “surpassed” — of performance on an annual basis. But there isn’t a similar quota for underperforming employees, although numerous such employees exist in many departments.

Article content

There is no doubt that executives aren’t recognized sufficiently for employee management. That issue is glossed over and there’s an assumption that any group as a whole and the individuals in it are doing well if broader achievements are met. It’s hard to find a comparison between total and individual car sales and its counterpart in the public service.

Article content

Incentives for managerial action are lacking and that probably plays a role. However, managers know, too, that there are few things more undermining to a group than someone who isn’t pulling their weight, especially when it sets a poor example for newer members of the public service.

Article content

… there are few things more undermining to a group than someone who isn’t pulling their weight, especially when it sets a poor example for newer members of the public service.Article content

Poor performance can manifest itself in many ways, including someone who regularly arrives late, leaves early, takes breaks that are too long, is a constant negative presence, has others do their work, disappears for hours at a time or does not work at a level commensurate with their compensation level.

Article content

Think of all the opposites of a model employee and you will find them in both the private sector and the public service. But this behaviour isn’t tolerated in the private sector. There’s a bottom line to meet and others in the job market who could help achieve it if a given employee isn’t performing well.

Article content

The reasons why an employee isn’t performing well are innumerable: issues at home; with the group; with the manager; with mental health or burnout; disinterest in the work; not being the right fit, etc. Managers are supposed to be compassionate about these reasons and make appropriate accommodations within reason.

Article content

No one is suggesting an action plan for transitory issues of underperformance. We are talking about employees who haven’t sold a car in years and yet draw decent taxpayer-funded compensation and who undermine the productivity and morale of a whole team.

Article content

On the flip side, an employee should know the reason for their own poor productivity, when they are a poor fit for their current occupation and when they have the agency to change that.

Article content

If there’s one thing the federal government offers in plenty, it is the opportunity to work on so many different and interesting areas of public policy and programming. There just isn’t any comparison to the narrow job choices on a car lot.

Article content

The bottom line for public servants should be this: You’ve got to sell some cars or why are you there and why is the taxpayer paying you?

Article content

John Kozij is a semi-retired federal senior executive, founder of JWK Consulting Group and an avid basketball coach for the Ottawa Shooting Stars and Lisgar Collegiate. This essay first appeared in Policy Options magazine.

Article content