During the digital transformation project at Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ), external consultants were unexpectedly charging the public body a much higher hourly rate without their knowledge. The hourly rate surged from $82 to $350 per hour, despite the consultants carrying out the same tasks as before.
This revelation came to light at the Gallant Commission hearing held on Thursday, aiming to investigate the SAAQclic controversy.
The investigation by three commission staff members focused on the fluctuation in hourly rates among consultants engaged by the LGS-IBM-SAP consortium. They interviewed around 20 individuals as part of their inquiry.
Initially hired in 2017 as “technology specialists” with a billing rate of $82 per hour, these consultants saw their compensation skyrocket to $350 per hour in 2018, attributed to their newfound “cutting-edge expertise.” However, some consultants disputed this claim during their testimonies to the Gallant Commission team.
A few consultants mentioned that they had not been involved in the major update touted by the consortium and did not consider themselves as top-tier experts, contradicting the supplier’s justification for the rate increase.
One consultant even described themselves as “basic,” a sentiment echoed by their employer who acknowledged that this consultant did not possess expert-level skills and was billed at the higher rate only due to the billing changes by the consortium.
Despite the rate alteration, some consultants stated that it had no impact on their work and was merely a routine upgrade.
The investigation also revealed that none of the external consultants were informed about the rate hike, and they did not receive any financial benefits from it.
Laroche, one of the investigators, highlighted the lack of communication regarding the rate change, emphasizing that the consultants were unaware of the billing adjustments made by LGS to the SAAQ.
Moreover, the investigation flagged a noticeable increase in the utilization of the hourly rate for “advanced expertise,” exceeding the anticipated hours set in the contract and resulting in a substantial financial discrepancy.
Laroche criticized the absence of clear guidelines governing the use of the peak expertise hourly rate, suggesting that the consortium had unchecked discretion over the allocation of these hours.
