Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats. Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving.
166-2-29678 (2001 PSSRB 101)
Fortin v. Treasury Board (Citizenship and Immigration Canada)
Before: L.-P. Guindon
Appearances: R. Bell, for the Grievor; R. Turgeon, for the Employer
Decision rendered: October 5, 2001
Termination – Workforce adjustment – Surplus employee – Early departure incentive – Resignation – Was it a disguised dismissal – Jurisdiction – as a result of a workforce adjustment, the employer declared the grievor surplus by applying the principle of reverse order of merit – a former supervisor of the grievor, with whom he had had disputes, was involved in assessing the reverse order of merit – the grievor resigned in order to receive an early departure incentive – before doing so, he did not take advantage of the information services offered by the employer or those offered by his bargaining agent – he filed a complaint with the Public Service Commission alleging that his former supervisor was biased against him – the complaint was dismissed – the employer objected to the adjudicator's jurisdiction – it alleged that the grievor had been declared surplus through the application of the process of reverse order of merit– the grievor argued that he had been the object of disguised disciplinary action – he claimed that his former supervisor had acted against him – he claimed that the employer did not offer him any other position although several were available - he added that he was misinformed by the employer about the options available to surplus employees – the employer responded that the grievor submitted his resignation under the workforce adjustment process – it added that no evidence of animosity by the former supervisor toward the grievor was presented and that the Public Service Commission had dismissed a complaint to that effect – it argued that the grievor had decided to resign without trying to find out his options – the employer claimed that, while other positions were available, they did not meet the definition of a reasonable job offer under the WorkForce Adjustment Directive – the adjudicator found that the grievor had not established bad faith on the part of the employer because of his former supervisor's involvement in the evaluation committee deciding on the reverse order of merit – the adjudicator also found that the information that the grievor had received from the employer was accurate and that he had not sought further information from the employer or his bargaining agent – the adjudicator found that the other positions mentioned by the grievor did not meet the requirements of a reasonable job offer – the adjudicator found that, in these circumstances, he did not have jurisdiction to hear the grievance.
|Case cited:||Canada (Treasury Board) v. Rinaldi (Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division T-761-96),  F.C.A. no 225 (Quicklaw).|