Lee v. Canadian Food Inspection Agency

document icon
Full Text
2008 PSLRB 5
Before: Dan Butler
Decision Rendered: January 18, 2008
Original Language: English
Pay – Effective implementation date of new classification standard – Preliminary objection – Jurisdiction – Alternation of grounds – Issue of discipline not raised during grievance process

The grievor is an excluded employee whose position was reclassified to a newly-created IM classification – he filed a grievance concerning the effective date of the implementation of the new classification standard and compensation for duties performed before the implementation date – he first referred his grievance to the Public Service Labour Relations Board (“the Board”) under paragraph 209(1)(a) of the Public Service Labour Relations Act (“the Act”) as being related to the interpretation or application of a provision of a collective agreement – the Board advised the grievor in writing that he could only refer such a grievance to adjudication if he was represented by a bargaining agent that indicated its willingness to represent him in the adjudication proceedings – he then referred the same grievance to the Board under paragraph 209(1)(b) of the Act, stating that the refusal to pay him back pay for services rendered was a disciplinary measure resulting in a financial penalty – the employer objected, arguing that an adjudicator did not have jurisdiction – it stated that the grievance concerned the implementation date of a new classification standard, that discipline was not involved and that the grievor never raised the issue of discipline during the grievance process – the adjudicator held that the grievor did not raise the issue of discipline during the grievance process, that it constituted a bar to adjudication and that the principle enunciated by the Federal Court of Appeal in Burchill v. Attorney General of Canada, [1981] 1 F.C. 109 (F.C.A.), applied – while an adjudicator could appropriately exercise some discretion or flexibility in determining jurisdiction in analyzing how a grievance is worded or how a grievor argued his or her case during the grievance process to determine the nature of the claim being made, there are nonetheless very real limits to that discretion – the adjudicator held that the circumstances of this case did not provide him with discretion – the employer’s objection was upheld.

Grievance denied.