open Secondary menu

Survey of Election Officers Following the 42nd Federal General Election

5. Preparation for The Election

This section presents findings related to the level of preparedness of election officers. This focuses on an evaluation of the training session, the number of hours that were spent training at home, and the use of training resources.

Level of Preparedness

The overall level of preparedness of election officers has increased from eighty-nine percent (TOP2: 89%) in 2011 to ninety-six percent (TOP2: 96%) in 2015. By region, the level of preparedness shows limited variance, with Ontario having reported the highest level of preparedness and the Territories and Alberta having reported the lowest level of preparedness.

Chart 7: Level of preparedness, by region

Chart 7 : Level of preparedness, by region
Text Description of "Chart 7 : Level of preparedness, by region"

*Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Much like 2011, in 2015 information officers were significantly more likely to feel prepared than other positions (TOP2: 98%, compared with 93% in 2011). In addition, information officers were slightly more likely to feel prepared compared with the overall population (TOP2: 96%). When looking at the type of polling locations, officers who worked at a mobile poll were significantly more likely to feel "somewhat well prepared" (46%) compared with other positions. Further, officers who worked both advance and ordinary polls were significantly more likely to feel "very well prepared" (74%) compared with the other poll types and the overall population as well.

Table 31: Level of preparedness, by type of poll and staffing position
Q44: Generally speaking, how well prepared would you say you were to undertake your tasks during the last federal election? Type of Poll Staffing Position
Adv.
(n=232)
Ord. (n=2997) Adv. + ord. (n=224) Mobile (n=49)* DRO
(n=1261)
IO
(n=421)
CPS (n=245) RegO (n=315) PC (n=1261) Overall (n=3503)
%
TOP2 92 96 96 96 96 98 95 94 95 96
BTM2 6 4 4 5 4 2 5 5 4 4
Very well prepared 67+ 62 74+ 49- 66 67+ 66 63 57- 63
Somewhat well prepared 26- 34 22- 46+ 30 32 29 32 38 33
Not very well prepared 5 3 4 4 4 2 5 4 4 4
Not at all prepared 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
DK/Refused 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Evaluation of the Training Session

Four-fifths (TOP2: 84%) of election officers were very or fairly satisfied with the training session, which is similar to 2011 (TOP2: 83%) and 2008 (TOP2: 86%). Satisfaction in Manitoba and British Columbia experienced the greatest decrease from 2011 to 2015, at nine (9%) and ten points (10%) respectively. Satisfaction in the Territories increased twenty-one percentage points from 2011 (TOP2: 55%) to 2015 (TOP2: 76%).

Information officers were significantly more likely to be satisfied, with eighty-eight percent (TOP2: 88%) indicating they were very or fairly satisfied, while central poll supervisors were significantly less likely to indicate being very or fairly satisfied (TOP2: 75%). Those who worked at ordinary polls were significantly more likely to report being very or fairly satisfied (TOP2: 85%).

Chart 8: Satisfaction with training session, by regionFootnote 10

Chart 8 : Satisfaction with training session, by region
Text Description of "Chart 8 : Satisfaction with training session, by region"

* TOP2 (Very satisfied + fairly satisfied)

Of those who indicated they were not very or not at all satisfied with the training (n=537), four in ten (41%) indicated a wish for better or more training to improve the training they received. Other suggestions include more time for training, emphasis on details, provision of more information, ensuring that training staff is appropriately trained, and provision of more hands-on training.

Table 32: Training improvements, top five reasons
Q46: What do you think should be done to improve the training you received? Overall (n=537)
%
Better / more training Footnote 11 41
Needed more time / it was rushed Footnote 12 23
Need more information / Answer questions 20
Staff / trainers weren't trained well / weren't knowledgeable 19
Dislike the videos / More hands-on or practical training 17

Central poll supervisors (54%) and officers who worked at advance polls (50%) and both advance and ordinary polls (49%) were more likely to indicate better or more training is required to improve the training they received. Similar proportions of poll clerks (30%) and those who worked at the mobile (33%) and advance (30%) polls were more likely to indicate a desire for more time for training since it felt rushed compared with the overall population of election officers.

Table 33: Training improvements, top five, by type of poll and staffing position
Q46: What do you think should be done to improve the training you received? Type of Poll Staffing Position  
Adv.
(n=50)*
Ord. (n=430) Adv. + ord. (n=44)* Mobile (n=13)* DRO
(n=216)
IO
(n=41)*
CPS (n=58) RegO (n=43)* PC (n=180) Overall (n=537)
%
Better / more training 50 40 49 26 40 34- 54+ 47 39 41
Needed more time / it was rushed 30 23 11 33 24 16- 7- 18- 30+ 23
Need more information / Answer questions 20 20 21 24+ 18 8- 20 32+ 22 20
Staff / trainers weren't trained well / weren't knowledgeable 20 19 29+ 12 22 29+ 22 21 12- 19
Dislike the videos / More hands-on or practical training 13 17 22 13 14 14 24+ 8- 21 17

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Overall, eighty-two percent (TOP2: 82%) of election officers reported that training on accessibility and sensitivity towards people with disabilities was very or somewhat useful. Officers in Manitoba were significantly more likely to report that training was useful (TOP2: 91%), while officers in Quebec were significantly more likely than all other regions to report that the training was not useful (BTM2: 14%).

Table 34: Training on the topic of accessibility and sensitivity towards people with disabilities, by region
Q47: How useful was the training on the topic of accessibility and sensitivity towards people with disabilities? Region
ATL (n=346) QC (n=924) ON (n=1385) MAN (n=154) SASK (n=115) AB (n=39)* BC (n=423) TER (n=115) Overall (n=3503)
%
TOP2 87 71- 87 91+ 80 88 84 70- 82
BTM2 6 14+ 6 3- 1 3 7 5 8
Very useful 60 32 63 56 51 59 50 45 51
Somewhat useful 27 39 25 34 30 29 34 25 31
Not very useful 3 10 4 1 1 2 6 3 5
Not at all useful 3 4 2 2 0 1 2 3 3
Did not have to deal with people with disabilities 7 13 6 4 14 8 7 16 8
DK/Refused 1 2 1 3 5 1 3 9 2

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

When focusing on polling stations, officers at seniors' homes (TOP2: 89%) were significantly more likely to find the accessibility training very or somewhat useful compared with "other" polling station types and the overall population (TOP2: 82%, each).

Table 35: Training on topic of accessibility and sensitivity towards people with disabilities, by polling station
Q47: How useful was the training on the topic of accessibility and sensitivity towards people with disabilities? Polling Station
Abo. Reserve (n=282) Sen. / LT Care (n=797) Stud. Res. (n=466) Other (n=1958) Overall (n=3503)
%
TOP2 88 89 85 82 82
BTM2 4 7 8 8 8
Very useful 67+ 52 56 51 51
Somewhat useful 21- 36 29 31 31
Not very useful 2- 6 7 5 5
Not at all useful 2 2 1 3 3
Did not have to deal with people with disabilities 5 2 4 9 8
DK/Refused 3 2 2 2 2

Election officers in mobile polls (TOP2: 87%) were significantly more likely than those in ordinary polls (TOP2: 81%) to report that the training on the topic of accessibility and sensitivity was useful.

Information officers were significantly more likely to find the accessibility training very or somewhat useful (TOP2: 88%) compared with officers in other staff positions, except central poll supervisors.

Table 36: Training on topic of accessibility and sensitivity towards people with disabilities, by type of poll and staffing position
Q47: How useful was the training on the topic of accessibility and sensitivity towards people with disabilities? Type of Poll Staffing Position  
Adv.
(n=232)
Ord. (n=2997) Adv. + ord. (n=224) Mobile (n=49)* DRO
(n=1261)
IO
(n=421)
CPS (n=245) RegO (n=315) PC (n=1261) Overall (n=3503)
%
TOP2 84 81 87 87 79 88 83 86 81 82
BTM2 7 8 8 6 8 7 11 4 8 8
Very useful 50 51 54 56 49- 59+ 61+ 54 49 51
Somewhat useful 34 30 33 31 30 30 22- 32 33 31
Not very useful 3 6 6 5 6 4 6 3 6 5
Not at all useful 4 2 3 1 3 3 5 1 2 3
Did not have to deal with people with disabilities 6 9 3 5 10 3 7 9 9 8
DK/Refused 4 2 2 2 3 2 0 1 2 2

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Training at Home

Three-quarters (74%) of election officers did training study at home. Officers in Saskatchewan (83%) were more likely to do training study at home, while officers in Quebec (61%) were least likely to do so.

Table 37: Training study at home, by region
Q48: Did you do any training study at home? Region
ATL (n=346) QC (n=924) ON (n=1385) MAN (n=154) SASK (n=115) AB (n=39)* BC (n=423) TER (n=115) Overall (n=3503)
%
Yes 78 61- 81+ 70 83+ 70 82+ 65- 74
No 22 39+ 19- 29 17- 30 18- 35+ 26
DK/Refused 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

By polling station, election officers who worked in Aboriginal reserves were less likely to do training at home than officers who worked at other polling stations, except those who worked at a student residence polling station. Further, officers who worked at a polling station at a seniors' home (78%) were significantly more likely to do training study at home than the other polling station groups.

Table 38: Training study at home, by polling station
Q48: Did you do any training study at home? Polling Station
Abo. Reserve (n=282) Sen. / LT Care (n=797) Stud. Res. (n=466) Other (n=1958) Overall (n=3503)
%
Yes 67- 78+ 72 74 74
No 33+ 22- 27 26 26
DK/Refused 0 0 0 0 0

Officers at both advance and ordinary polls were significantly more likely to do training at home than those who worked in advance polls. By staffing position, information officers (39%) were significantly more likely to not do training at home than other staffing positions.

Table 39: Training study at home, by type of poll and staffing position
Q48: Did you do any training study at home? Type of Poll Staffing Position  
Adv.
(n=232)
Ord. (n=2997) Adv. + ord. (n=224) Mobile (n=49)* DRO
(n=1261)
IO
(n=421)
CPS (n=245) RegO (n=315) PC (n=1261) Overall (n=3503)
%
Yes 69- 75 78+ 71 79 61- 79 74 74 74
No 31+ 25 22 29 21 39+ 20 26 26 26
DK/Refused 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Officers who indicated they did training at home spent an average of 3.2 hours on this activity. The number of hours spent is similar across regions.

Officers in Atlantic Provinces spent an average of 3.8 hours on training. Similar to 2011, Quebec officers spent the same amount of time doing training at home (2.9 hours). In 2015, officers in Manitoba, Alberta, and the Territories also spent an average of 2.9 hours on training.

Chart 9 : Average hours spent on training, by region

Chart 9 : Average hours spent on training, by region
Text Description of "Chart 9 : Average hours spent on training, by region"

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Officers who worked in both advance and ordinary polls spent the most time on training at home (5.1 hours), while those who worked in the ordinary polls spent an average of 3 hours on training at home. Central poll supervisors were significantly more likely to spend time watching training videos than other staffing positions, spending an average of 3.9 hours.

Three in ten (29%) of election officers who did training at home watched the training videos online. Officers in Alberta (39%) had the highest reporting of watching the training videos online, while officers in Saskatchewan (21%) and Quebec (20%) had the lowest.

Chart 10 : Training videos, by region

Chart 10 : Training videos, by region
Text Description of "Chart 10 : Training videos, by region"

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Base: those who did training study at home

Officers who worked at Aboriginal reserve polling stations were more likely to report watching training videos at home (39%) than officers who worked in other types of polling stations, except student residences.

Registration officers were significantly more likely to watch the training videos at home (35%) than poll clerks (26%). Compared with the overall population, registration officers have the highest reporting of watching training videos online.

Almost all (TOP2: 95%) officers who did training at home and watched the training videos (N=745) found the videos to be very or somewhat useful. By region, officers in British Columbia (BTM2: 9%) were less likely to find the training videos useful than officers in other regions.

Table 40: Usefulness of training videos, by region
Q51: How useful were these training videos? Region
ATL (n=88) QC (n=110) ON (n=335) MAN (n=34)* SASK (n=20)* AB (n=11)* BC (n=125) TER (n=23)* Overall (n=745)
%
TOP2 94 96 97 95 100 97 91 86 95
BTM2 4 4 3 6 0 4 9 14 5
Very useful 52 49 59+ 46 23- 40- 38- 43- 51
Somewhat useful 43 47 38- 48 77+ 56+ 54+ 43 44
Not very useful 4 4 3 6 0 4 9 14+ 5
Not at all useful 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DK/Refused 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Base: those who watched training videos online

By polling station, officers at Aboriginal reserves were significantly more likely to find the training videos "very useful" (69%) than the other polling station groups.

Table 41: Usefulness of training videos, by polling station
Q51: How useful were these training videos? Polling Station
Abo. Reserve (n=73) Sen. / LT Care (n=183) Stud. Res. (n=108) Other (n=414) Overall (n=778)
%
TOP2 95 93 97 95 95
BTM2 5 6 3 5 5
Very useful 69+ 46- 56 51 51
Somewhat useful 26- 47 40 45 44
Not very useful 5 6 3 5 5
Not at all useful 0 0 1 0 0
DK/Refused 0 0 0 0 0

Base: those who watched training videos online

Officers who worked in both advance and ordinary polls were significantly more likely to find the training videos very or somewhat useful than other types of polls. Deputy returning officers were significantly more likely to find the training videos not very or not at all useful.

Table 42: Usefulness of training videos, by type of poll and staffing position
Q51: How useful were these training videos? Type of Poll Staffing Position  
Adv.
(n=54)
Ord. (n=630) Adv. + ord. (n=52) Mobile (n=9)* DRO
(n=276)
IO
(n=84)
CPS (n=65) RegO (n=81) PC (n=240) Overall (n=745)
%
TOP2 97 95 100 94 92 100 98 98 96 95
BTM2 3 5 0 6 8 0 2 0 4 5
Very useful 42- 52 43- 54 49 69+ 42- 49 50 51
Somewhat useful 55+ 43 58+ 40 43 31- 56+ 49 46 44
Not very useful 3 5 0 6 8+ 0 2 0 4 5
Not at all useful 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DK/Refused 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Base: those who watched training videos online


Footnote 10 N values: ATL (n=346); QC (n=924); ONT (n=1385); MAN (n=154); SASK (n=115); AB (n=39); BC (n=423); TER (n=115)

Footnote 11 "Better / more training" refers to quality of training.

Footnote 12 "Needed more time / it was rushed" refers to quantity/length of training.