Archived Content

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.

Foon v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency

document icon
Full Text

166-34-30747 (2001 PSSRB 126)
Foon v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency

Before: J. W. Potter
Appearances: B. Done, for the Grievor; J. Champagne, for the Employer
Decision rendered: December 11, 2001

Subject terms:

Suspension (3 days) – Unauthorized access to taxpayers' information – the grievor was a rulings officer – she accessed acquaintances' tax files to identify possible leads that they had attempted to avoid paying income tax – the functions of her position did not include checking or investigating leads, which is the responsibility of the employer's Audit Section – she reported no leads with regard to those taxpayers – the employer imposed on her a three-day suspension – it argued that it is not up to employees to snoop in taxpayers' files to see if something is wrong and that there is a process for reporting leads to the Audit Section – the grievor responded that her position's duties include identifying and reporting on leads and that she may have been too keen in that regard – she stressed that the employer's process for reporting leads requires accessing taxpayers' files to obtain their social insurance number – the grievor added that she gained nothing personally by accessing those files and that she disclosed no taxpayers' information – the adjudicator found no dispute with regard to the grievor having accessed taxpayers' files – he further found that the grievor had no authority to access those, which were not part of the workload the employer had assigned to her – the adjudicator found that, in the circumstances, a three-day suspension was within an acceptable range.

Grievance denied.

Case cited:Ward (166-2-16121 and 16122).