Henry Maeots

The grievor, a non-engineer who had historically been paid the same salary as professional engineers, filed a grievance after a new collective agreement for engineers resulted in a significant pay disparity.

The employer brought preliminary motions to dismiss the grievance for lack of jurisdiction and untimeliness.

The Board dismissed the employer's motions, finding that it had jurisdiction to hear allegations of a breach of a working condition or term of employment.

The Board also extended the time limits for filing the grievance, noting the delay was bona fide, the grievance had significant ongoing monetary implications, and the employer was not prejudiced.

The grievor, a former intern, filed a grievance alleging that his termination notice was invalid under the Employment Standards Act because it was delivered by intergovernmental mail rather than personally or by registered mail.

The employer brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the grievance for being filed outside the 14-day time limit under the Public Service Act.

The Board extended the time limits, finding the delay was short and caused no prejudice.

On the merits, the Board found a technical violation of the ESA's delivery requirements but declined to award damages, as the grievor received actual notice and suffered no prejudice.

The grievor filed a grievance regarding a job competition for a non-bargaining unit position.

The employer raised a preliminary objection regarding the jurisdiction of the Public Service Grievance Board, arguing that the issues arose when the grievor was a bargaining unit member.

The Board agreed, finding that the grievance related to a process commenced when the grievor was excluded from recourse under the Public Service Act.

The grievance was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The grievor challenged an unsuccessful job competition for a temporary assignment.

At the hearing, the grievor moved to exclude the employer's advisor as a potential witness, which the Board denied.

The employer abandoned its preliminary objection to grievability and moved for an order for disclosure.

The Board ordered the grievor to provide full particulars of the allegations, including specific acts, dates, and individuals involved, to enable the employer to prepare its response.