D. Costen

The Grievor was appointed by Order-in-Council as a member of the Rent Review Hearings Board for a one-year term.

After her term expired and was not renewed, she filed a grievance alleging improper dismissal.

The Employer raised a preliminary objection that the Grievor was not a public servant under the Public Service Act and therefore the Public Service Grievance Board lacked jurisdiction.

The Board agreed, finding that the Grievor was appointed under the Residential Rent Regulation Act, which explicitly states that members are not public servants.

The grievance was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The Grievor, a Provincial Medical Toxicologist, was declared surplus and her position abolished during a major downsizing initiative by the Ministry of Labour.

She grieved the termination, alleging it was done in bad faith and was a disguised dismissal based on discrimination regarding her previous leaves of absence.

The Public Service Grievance Board found that the Employer made a legitimate business decision to eliminate the position under the Expenditure Control Program.

The Board concluded the Grievor failed to satisfy the onus of proving bad faith, discrimination, or unfairness in the decision-making process, and dismissed the grievance.

The grievor, a medical consultant, was released from her employment with the Ministry of Labour due to budget cuts under the Expenditure Control Plan.

The employer used an assessment process to determine which of the five medical consultants would be retained.

The grievor alleged that the assessment was unfair and inaccurate, leading to her wrongful release.

The Public Service Grievance Board found that the assessment process was fundamentally flawed and lacked procedural fairness, as it was conducted hastily, contained significant errors, and provided no opportunity for the incumbents to be interviewed or review their assessments.

The grievance was granted, and the grievor was awarded compensation equal to seven months of notice.

The grievor, a management employee, exercised her surplus rights to accept a new position classified as management.

Unbeknownst to her, the union had grieved the position's exclusion from the bargaining unit.

The employer later conceded the union's grievance and reclassified the position into the bargaining unit, resulting in the grievor losing management benefits and career opportunities.

The grievor alleged constructive dismissal.

The Public Service Grievance Board held that while constructive dismissal does not apply under the statutory grievance scheme, the employer violated the grievor's working conditions by failing to treat her fairly and equitably when it withheld information about the classification dispute.

The Board ordered the employer to place the grievor in a suitable management position and reimburse her for lost amounts, including union dues.