REGULATORY
Appeals Backlog Erased
Why does appeals progress matter? Appeals impact the lives and careers of our Members and the public. The more timely we are in dealing with appeals, the less disruption and uncertainty there is for all parties. Appeal results are also very informative for APEGA itself. They sometimes act as a bit of an audit on other regulatory processes and ultimately drive valuable changes. A recent example includes the need to document consistent and thorough decisions across the regulatory portfolios, to ensure quality decisions and enhanced understanding by those who receive them. If people have a good understanding of why we made a regulatory decision, they are less likely to request a review through appeal.
As of September 1, four new appeals of APEGA decisions had been filed in 2015. That suggests it’s a typical year as far as incoming volume goes. Here’s what isn’t typical, however: For the first time in many years, the APEGA Appeal Board and APEGA staff aren’t managing and administering a backlog as well as incoming appeals. The year 2014 opened with a pre-existing inventory of 10 appeals. All of them have been cleared. Every appeal that’s currently on the books APEGA received this year. Included in the new appeals management system are key per- formance indicators (KPIs). What isn’t measured can’t be improved, so we’re measuring more and making the process accountable — that’s the philosophy the APEGA Regulatory Group is instituting in all of its portfolios.
Compliance Efforts Refocused to Better Protect APEGA Titles
The value of an APEGA licence stems largely from the regulation of Professional Members. An often misunderstood part of our regulatory work, however, actually looks at the actions of non- Members. Only Members and Permit Holders are allowed to use protected terms like engineer and geoscientist in ways that imply that they practise. When unlicensed individuals and companies practise or even suggest that they practise, they may end up eroding public trust. In fact, they are not serving the public interest and may even be posing public safety risks. Enter the APEGA Compliance Department. Its job is to investigate and enforce right-to-title and right-to-practice provisions of the Engineering and Geoscience Professions Act . We rely on several major sources of information about potential compliance violations. These are: • APEGA Members • the public • other APEGA departments • searches of directories and publications like the Alberta Gazette • the Out of Province Campaign. Administered by Engineers Canada, this campaign alerts engineering regulatory associations that Professional Engineers from elsewhere in Canada are moving into their province or territory — because sometimes engineers start practising or calling themselves P.Eng.s before their transfer is complete
Like all Regulatory Group departments, Compliance has been going through process changes to close old files and become more efficient and accountable. For the first part of 2015, the focus was on training and orienting new staff, creating handbooks, and drafting new policies. The Enforcement Review Committee, made up of volunteering professionals, works with staff to bring those in violation into compliance. Through an updated orientation process, we’ve made sure that these volunteers have a clear understanding of their regulatory role. Now, the focus is on files. In a typical year, we open about 350 compliance cases and close about the same number, while also maintaining active cases. By the end of August 2015, we had opened 238 cases and closed 204 for the year. A total of 120 active cases were on the books. The department predicts that by the end of the year it will meet its target of opening 350 cases, closing about the same. One way we’re closing files sooner is by contacting violators by phone or email, right away. Often, a conversation ends the problem quickly — there’s a simple fix like changing an employee’s title, or there’s been an honest misunderstanding of the rules. Before, the process began with a formal letter, and those who received one weren’t always quick to respond. We’re also looking at ways to find out about more potential violations. These will include more external searches and compliance communications focused on Members and Permit Holders.
FALL 2015 PEG | 69
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker