OPSGB 1997

The grievor filed a grievance regarding a surplus notice, alleging it was issued due to his disability and a failure to accommodate, concurrent with a human rights complaint.

The employer raised a preliminary objection to the Board's jurisdiction, arguing the position was abolished due to restructuring and the disability issue should be handled by the Human Rights Commission.

The Board stayed the grievance proceedings pending the outcome of the human rights complaint.

The grievor brought a preliminary motion arguing that the Public Service Grievance Board has the authority to award punitive and aggravated damages.

The Board ruled that it does not have the jurisdiction to award punitive damages, as its remedial powers are compensatory rather than punitive.

However, the Board held that it does have the jurisdiction to award aggravated damages in appropriate circumstances to compensate for mental distress, subject to specific conditions.

The grievor, a manager, was accused of sexual harassment and harassment by a bargaining unit employee.

The employer investigated the complaints, which were ultimately found to be unsubstantiated and withdrawn.

The grievor filed a grievance alleging the employer breached its duty of fairness in conducting the investigation.

The Public Service Grievance Board found that the employer breached its duty of fairness due to unreasonable delay, failure to provide particulars of the allegations for three months, failure to advise the grievor of his right to representation, and failure to keep him informed.

The Board further found that the employer's mishandling of the investigation caused the grievor severe stress, leading to a prolonged sick leave.

The grievance was granted, and the employer was ordered to compensate the grievor for lost income and benefits during his sick leave.

The Grievor, an Acting Manager of an ambulance service, was dismissed for cause following allegations of ongoing sexual and racial harassment, including inappropriate touching and comments directed at female subordinates.

The Grievor admitted to some inappropriate comments but denied physical contact.

The Public Service Grievance Board found the testimony of the female subordinates credible and concluded that the Grievor engaged in serious misconduct amounting to sexual assault and an abuse of power.

The Board upheld the termination, finding that progressive discipline was not appropriate given the severity of the misconduct.

A dissenting member argued that the penalty was too harsh and that the employer shared blame for tolerating a 'boys club' culture.

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.