Gurjit Bran

In an interim decision regarding the admissibility of a statement taken during an internal fraud investigation, the union objected to the employer questioning the investigator about the statement.

The union argued the statement was inadmissible because the maker was denied union representation and Charter rights.

The arbitrator declined to hold a voir dire or rule the statement inadmissible at this stage, instead allowing the employer to question the investigator and enter the statement into evidence, leaving the determination of its weight to the end of the case.

In an arbitration regarding the discharge of a claims adjudicator for alleged fraud, the employer sought to introduce a recorded statement from a co-conspirator without calling the maker as a witness.

The union objected on the grounds of hearsay.

The Grievance Settlement Board ruled the statement inadmissible, finding it was neither necessary, as the maker was available to testify, nor reliable, as it was a repudiated confession from an interested party.