The Union filed a bargaining unit integrity grievance alleging that the Employer violated the collective agreement by using fee-for-service Native Inmate Liaison Officers (NILOs) to perform bargaining unit work.
Several Service Providers who employ the NILOs sought intervener status in the arbitration.
The Grievance Settlement Board denied the request, finding that the Service Providers' interest was merely indirect and contingent on their commercial contracts with the Employer.
Because the core dispute concerned whether the work belonged to the bargaining unit, the Service Providers lacked the direct interest in labour or employment law required to justify third-party standing.
