Editorial board
Every article on this site is reviewed before publication by a board member with relevant experience, and their name goes on it. Each entry below states current employment, because that is the conflict you would want to know about.
Priya Chandrasekar
Chair · hiring process and assessment
Sixteen years in talent acquisition, most of it in engineering and product hiring at mid-size firms in Toronto and Waterloo. Reviews everything on applicant tracking systems, panels and structured assessment. Currently employed in-house as a recruiting lead; she does not review any article touching an employer she has worked with in the previous two years.
Marie-Ève Lacombe
Employment law and privacy
Practised employment law in Montréal for eleven years, latterly on the employee side, and now teaches part-time. Reviews anything that touches references, human rights grounds, records or termination. She insists on the sentence we put in the footer of every page: this site is guidance, not advice, and provincial differences are real.
Wesley Boughton
Compensation and public sector competitions
Twenty-two years in compensation and classification, split between a provincial ministry and a large hospital network. Reviews pay transparency material and anything about structured or unionised competitions. Retired from full-time work in 2024 and does no consulting, which is why he is the one who reviews the compensation pieces.
Adaeze Nwachukwu
Newcomer and internationally trained professionals
Ten years in settlement services in Calgary, working with internationally educated professionals through credential recognition and first Canadian roles. Reviews anything about foreign qualifications, Canadian experience requirements and the resume conventions that differ from other countries.
Trevor Sandiford
Skilled trades and apprenticeship
Journeyperson electrician, then twelve years as an apprenticeship coordinator in Nova Scotia. Reviews trades content, of which we currently have less than we should — that is a gap we are aware of and are working on rather than pretending otherwise.
What review means here
The reviewer reads the draft before publication and can hold it. They are not merely credited. Where a reviewer disagrees with a claim and the writer cannot support it, the claim comes out — the missing statistic in the ATS piece is an example that survived into the published article as an explicit refusal.