Interpretation bulletins on the Official Languages Act

Canada’s Open Government Portal

The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat has created a platform for all federal institutions to put their data and information in one place. This platform, Canada’s Open Government Portal, provides one-stop access to searchable open data and open information, together with open dialogue, in order to enhance transparency and accountability.

Federal institutions can identify whatever information or data they want to make available on the Open Government Portal. However, once it has been made available, it must be equally accessible to the public in either official language. This means that you have the right to access both small documents and large data sets, for example, in your preferred official language.

Open dialogue

When federal institutions seek public engagement on an issue through dialogue with interested stakeholders and citizens, the objective is to make better policies, programs and services for Canadians. Members of the public must therefore be able to fully participate in these on-line consultations or other activities in their preferred official language.

This means that not only do you have the right to use your preferred official language when responding to questions, you also have the right to receive services and communications, including drafts of policies, for instance, in the official language you are most comfortable using.

When does Part IV of the Official Languages Act begin to apply?

A federal institution must make an active offer of service from the moment you come into contact with it. Please see the Interpretation Bulletin on Active Offer for more information.

What if it is another person or organization that is providing services and communications on behalf of the federal institution?

You have language rights when a person or organization acts on behalf of the federal institution. When a federal institution is obligated to serve you in both official languages, it must make sure that anyone acting on its behalf does the same.

What if another participant in the consultation is unilingual?

The Official Languages Act does not apply to communications made by members of the public. The federal institution, on the other hand, must ensure that participants from both language communities are able to fully engage with the federal institution throughout the consultation process in their preferred official language.

Do I have rights under Part IV of the Official Languages Act even if I’m not a Canadian citizen?

Yes, you do.

In person

The federal institution must take measures to make it clear that its services are available in both official languages. Here are some examples:

• Bilingual greetings (“Bonjour! Hello!”)
• Posters and documentation available in both official languages (for example, a poster that describes the services or the procedure for obtaining the service)
• The active offer symbol or another sign in the reception area indicating that the services are available in both languages.

 

Active offer symbol in Quebec

Active offer symbol elsewhere in Canada

 

On the telephone

Here are some examples of measures that the federal institution must set up to make it clear that its services are available in both official languages.

• Bilingual greeting (“Bonjour! Hello!”)
• Bilingual voicemail message

On a website

Here are some examples of measures that the federal institution must take to make it clear that its services are available in both official languages.

• A domain name in each official language if the name of the government institution is not bilingual (for example, www.securitepublique.gc.ca and www.publicsafety.gc.ca)
• A bilingual domain name and a choice of language on the homepage if the name of the government institution is bilingual (for example, www.justice.gc.ca)
• For additional examples of measures that federal institutions can take, please see the active offer guide.

A federal employee can use only the language of your choice if you have already expressed that choice

If you are in an ongoing relationship with an institution, the employee does not have to ask you which language you prefer each time. However, if the service changes, the institution must again actively offer you the service in both languages.

For example, if you are speaking with several employees from Canada Revenue Agency during the same call, they will not each ask you to select a language. However, if you contact the Agency at another time for another question, the institution will again offer to speak in either official language.

An institution may also ask you in a form to indicate in which language you would like to receive future communications. In this context, the institution can use your answer for your future communications. The institution should give you the option to change this choice.

A federal employee may not presume the language in which you want to be served

For example, an employee cannot assume that you want to be served in English simply because you say “Hello.” The employee must actively offer the service in both official languages and let you choose.

You are not required to choose your own official language. You have the right to choose either official language, as you prefer.

Equal status

English and French have the same status. One language is not more important than the other, even if more people use it in a particular region. Neither linguistic group should ever feel it is inferior to the other.

That’s why, for example, the signs on the buildings of public institutions have the same size letters in both languages. It’s also why the English and French versions of federal institutions’ forms and information documents are equally authoritative.

Equal use

Individuals have the right to receive services from a federal institution and communicate with it in either official language at their choice. 

A federal institution can’t make anyone receive services or communicate with it in a certain language just because the person understands it or uses it every day.

Equal access

For individuals to truly have the right to use the official language of their choice, the services must be equally accessible and attractive in either language.

For example, the waiting time for a service must not be longer in one language than in the other. Federal employees don’t all have to be bilingual, but services must be equally accessible in both official languages.

Equal quality

Substantive equality is not achieved if the quality of service is better in one language than in the other. But this doesn’t mean there’s a precise standard of quality. A service can be equally bad in both languages.

To ensure services of substantive equality, the needs and characteristics of the two linguistic groups must be considered. So, the same service might be provided in a different way to each linguistic group.

When a private organization provides the service

When a private organization (company, not-for-profit organization, etc.) delivers a service for a federal institution, it must provide services in both official languages if the following three things are all true:

• There is a strong enough connection between the service and the federal institution’s mandate or activities.
• The federal institution has control over the delivery of the service (that is, it has an important say in how the services are provided—a financial contribution alone is probably not enough).
• The service would have to be delivered in both languages if the federal institution itself were providing the service.

Take, for example, a federal institution that has the mandate to develop long-term health practices for all Canadians. If an organization provides workshops on long-term health practices on behalf of the federal institution, and the federal institution has control over the delivery of those workshops, then the organization is required to give the workshops in both official languages.

When another level of government provides the service

Your right to receive services in the official language of your choice depends on which level of government has constitutional jurisdiction over the service—in other words, which level is responsible for providing the service to the public. There are three possibilities:

1. When the federal government is entirely responsible for providing this type of service to the public

   The federal government is entirely responsible for providing services in certain areas, like criminal law and procedure. If another level of government provides a service on its behalf, you have the same language rights you would have had if the federal government had provided the service.

2. When the federal government shares responsibility for providing this type of service with another level of government

   The federal government shares responsibility for services in some areas, like certain issues related to health and the environment. In these cases, you have the right to receive services in the official language of your choice from the other level of government if the following two things are both true:

   • The federal institution has control over delivery of the service (that is, it has an important say in how the services are provided—a financial contribution alone is probably not enough).
   • The service would have to be delivered in both languages if the federal institution itself were providing the service.
3. When the federal government is not responsible for providing this type of service

   The federal government is not responsible for providing certain services, like elementary or high school education. In this case, you do not have the right to receive service in the official language of your choice under the federal Official Languages Act. (You might, however, have the right under another law, like New Brunswick’s Official Languages Act.)

If you are not sure which level of government is responsible for providing the service, contact the Office of the Commissioner for help.

1) Objectively define whether a position is “English”, “French”, “Bilingual” or “Either/or”

Where federal institutions have an obligation to be bilingual, they must have enough English, French, Bilingual and Either/or positions (“Either/or” meaning that the position may be either English or French, at the candidate's choice). In order to objectively establish the language requirements for a position, the federal institution must analyze the duties and tasks of the position. For example:

• Does the person in the position provide service to the public at the federal institution’s head or central office?
• Does the person in the position supervise employees who work in a designated bilingual region?

2) Objectively establish the level of language skills required for bilingual positions

To determine the level of language skills required for a bilingual position, federal institutions use a code to rate the level of proficiency in the employee’s second official language:

• A = Low
• B = Intermediate
• C = High

This code is used for each of the following second language skills:

• Written comprehension
• Written expression
• Oral proficiency (comprehension and expression)

For example, a position with a CBC-level for second language skills requires a high level of bilingualism:

• C = High level of written comprehension
• B = Intermediate level of written expression
• C = High level of oral proficiency (comprehension and expression)

There is an interactive tool called Determining the Linguistic Profile of Bilingual Positions to help managers in federal institutions objectively establish a linguistic profile. The tool is publicly available.

3) Objectively determine when the candidate must have the required language skills

Every time a bilingual position is being staffed, the federal institution can require candidates to meet the language requirements of the position in one of two ways:

• Imperative (at the time of hiring)
• Non-imperative (after hiring)

When language requirements are imperative, the successful candidate must meet them before taking up the position. Non-imperative language requirements can be met after the employee has taken office.
Generally, language requirements for bilingual positions are imperative. Only in exceptional situations can a bilingual position be staffed non-imperatively—for example, when there are no candidates who meet the language requirements. In these exceptional cases, the manager must justify the decision in writing.

Executive and supervisory positions are a special case

For executive and supervisory positions, federal institutions must comply with specific requirements in order to meet their obligations under the Official Languages Act. To respect the right of employees to be supervised in the official language of their choice in regions that are designated as bilingual for work purposes, these positions must be bilingual, and the language requirements are imperative.

Publications must be of equal quality in each official language

All efforts must be made to provide English- and French-speaking Canadians with information of the same quality. Here are some examples:

• Ads or official notices should take up the same amount of space on the page in English and French publications.
• Information must be published in English and French publications at the same time.

Federal institutions must make sure that their information appears in English and French media at the same time. The goal is to ensure that both language groups have equal opportunities to see the information.

When it is impossible to publish the two language versions at the same time, all efforts must be made to reach the linguistic minority group. For example, let’s say a region has a daily newspaper in the official language of the majority, but only a weekly newspaper in the official language of the minority. If a federal institution places several ads in the daily paper during a three-week period, it would be acceptable to place the same ad in the weekly paper every week for three weeks.

Official notices of national interest must be published in English and French media across Canada

If a federal institution publishes an official notice that is meant for all Canadians, it must be sure to reach French speakers across the country. This can be difficult because there are no national French-language daily newspapers. If the institution publishes its English notice in a national English-language daily paper (like The Globe and Mail), it would have to publish its French version in a French publication in each province and territory.

In some cases, bilingual messages can be used

Federal institutions should normally publish English messages in the English media and French messages in the French media, as this is considered the best way to reach everyone in their preferred official language. But if an institution can show that publishing a bilingual message would be a more efficient and effective way to reach the linguistic minority group, it can do so. Here are some examples:

• If there is no newspaper in the official language of the minority in a region, federal Institutions can publish a bilingual notice in a newspaper in the official language of the majority if this is more effective than using other media. The notices in each language should be side by side.
• Federal institutions that use a multilingual social media platform for their notices or ads, like Facebook, can publish a bilingual message if it is the most efficient way to reach both English and French audiences on this platform.
• If a federal institution is trying to reach a specific audience through specialized media that is available in only one official language, like an industry magazine, it can publish a bilingual notice or ad without placing it in a publication of the other official language. An example would be Ontario Reports, an English publication that all Ontario lawyers use as their main source of legal information.

When publishing something bilingually, federal institutions must make sure that:

• the text is the same size in each language;
• the texts are presented side by side, if possible; and
• the text in the official language of the province’s majority population is presented first.

In exceptional circumstances, federal institutions can use just one official language

In very rare situations, a federal institution can use just one official language to communicate with a linguistic minority group in order to support its development. For example, if an institution wants to congratulate Nova Scotia’s Acadian community for a successful anniversary event, it could publish the message only in French in a French-language publication because it is the best way to reach this audience.

The language rights complaint must be one of the reasons for the action taken

The language rights complaint does not have to be the only reason for the alleged reprisal. It can simply be a factor that contributed to the action’s being taken or the severity of the action.

Here’s an example:

A federal employee files a complaint with the Office of the Commissioner, alleging that he has been passed over for promotion because he is English-speaking. One week later, his supervisor takes disciplinary action (a note in his file) because he was late for work four times in the past month. The employee believes that the note is a reprisal to punish him for filing a language rights complaint.

In determining whether this is a reprisal, the Office of the Commissioner may ask the following questions:

• Is the employee’s language rights complaint one of the reasons for the disciplinary action?
• Would the supervisor have taken the disciplinary action had the employee been late four times but not filed a complaint with the Office of the Commissioner?
• Is the disciplinary action a logical consequence for lateness?
• Does the federal institution have policies on disciplinary action that explain when and how it is applied? If the federal institution does not have a policy, is it common practice to punish lateness with a note in the employee’s file?
• Does the level of punishment (a note in the employee’s file) match the level of the offence (being late four times)?

Are you involved in an investigation?

You are protected against reprisal if:

• you have filed a complaint or intend to do so; or
• you have participated in an investigation or intend to do so—for example, by sending information to the Office of the Commissioner.

Do you feel threatened, intimidated or discriminated against?

You are experiencing reprisal if, as the result of a complaint, a federal employee does or says something to you that makes you feel threatened, intimidated or discriminated against.

Reprisals can happen verbally, in writing or through actions. Here are some examples:

• You are a member of the public, and a federal institution refuses to provide you with services because you filed a complaint with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
• You are an employee of a federal institution, and you get an e-mail from a superior threatening you with disciplinary action if you file a complaint with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
• You are an employee of a federal institution, and you are passed over for promotion as punishment for filing a complaint with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages.

If you believe you are the victim of reprisal, you can file a complaint

When a reprisal complaint is filed, the Office of the Commissioner may decide to investigate, taking into account all circumstances, actions and words (written or spoken) in order to decide whether you could have reasonably believed them to be threats, intimidation or discrimination.

To learn more, read our bulletin on Investigation into Reprisal.

In case of obstruction, the Office of the Commissioner can launch its own investigation

If the Office of the Commissioner believes that its work is being obstructed, it can launch an investigation on its own initiative.

Employment

Federal institutions must give equal opportunities for employment to English-speaking and French‑speaking candidates. For example, they must:

• publish job postings in English and French and provide the same information in both languages regarding employment opportunities;
• ensure that information about the job is available in both official languages;
• enable candidates to write exams and interview for the job in either official language; and
• communicate with candidates in the official language of their choice (chosen during the hiring process).

Promotions and advancement

Federal institutions must give equal opportunities for promotion and advancement to English-speaking and French-speaking employees. For example, they must:

• provide training in both official languages; and
• offer the opportunity to interview for a new position in either official language.

In all federal institutions and in certain organizations (Air Canada or VIA Rail, for example), you have the right to use the official language of your choice throughout the hiring or promotion process. Contact us to find out whether an organization is required to meet this obligation.

No discrimination or harassment

The Official Languages Act protects you against language-based discrimination or harassment when you are applying for a job or a promotion in a federal institution.

You can file a complaint with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages if you think you have been discriminated against or harassed based on your official language preference during a federal institution’s hiring or promotion process.

Location

A federal institution’s location may affect the composition of its staff in terms of official languages.

For example, a federal institution whose head or central office is in Quebec often has a higher proportion of French-speaking employees.

Clientele

The first official language of the public it serves also may affect the composition of a federal institution’s workforce.

For example, members of First Nations of Canada generally speak English as their first official language; therefore, offices of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada usually have a higher proportion of English speaking employees.

Mandate

A federal institution’s mandate and the nature of its work may affect:

• the language requirements of positions and
• the working language within the institution.

For example, the proportion of French-speaking employees is generally higher than English-speaking employees at Public Services and Procurement Canada’s Translation Bureau because most federal government translations are from English to French, which means that more employees are needed with French-language expertise.