Gordon L. Fitzgerald

In a grievance regarding the discharge of an employee for alleged improper use of an air miles program, the union challenged the admissibility of videotape evidence captured by workplace security cameras.

The union argued that using the security footage for disciplinary purposes constituted an unreasonable intrusion into the employee's privacy.

The Grievance Settlement Board held that while employees have a marginal expectation of privacy in a public retail setting, this expectation is outweighed by the employer's interest in protecting the safety and security of the store.

The Board found the video surveillance was a reasonable intrusion and, because the tapes were relevant to the disciplinary issues, ruled the evidence admissible.

The appellant appealed an order striking his statement of claim.

The Court of Appeal held that the appellant could not enforce rights from a protocol after a collective agreement commenced, rendering his claim for a declaration for that period hypothetical.

However, the Court found that any individual contractual rights existing prior to the collective agreement were not erased.

The appeal was dismissed, but the appellant was granted leave to amend his statement of claim to confine it to the period before the collective agreement commenced.