FPSLREB Decisions

Decision Information

Moreau v. Treasury Board (Canada Border Services Agency

Collection FPSLREB Decisions
Decision Rendered 2009-09-16
Citation 2009 PSLRB 112
File Number 166-02-37480
Before Georges Nadeau
Decision Type Labour Relations
Subject Terms Abandonment of grievance
Original Language French
Summary:

No summary has been written for this decision. Please refer to the full text.

Decision Content



Public Service 
Staff Relations Act

Coat of Arms - Armoiries
  • Date:  2009-09-16
  • File:  166-02-37480
  • Citation:  2009 PSLRB 112

Before an adjudicator

BETWEEN

JOSIANNE MOREAU

Grievor

and

TREASURY BOARD
(Canada Border Services Agency)

Employer

Indexed as
Moreau v. Treasury Board (Canada Border Services Agency

In the matter of a grievance referred to adjudication pursuant to section 92 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act

REASONS FOR DECISION

Before:
Georges Nadeau, adjudicator

For the Grievor:
Herself

For the Employer:
Nadine Perron, counsel

Heard at Montreal, Quebec,
September 8, 2009.
(PSLRB Translation)

Grievance referred to adjudication

1 On March 23, 2005, Josianne Moreau, the grievor, grieved the termination of her employment as a customs inspector at the Canada Border Services Agency (“the employer”). The grievance was referred to adjudication on March 1, 2007, under the provisions of the Public Service Staff Relations Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-35 that permit a grievance about disciplinary action resulting in termination to be referred to adjudication.

2 On August 26, 2009, the employer contested the adjudicator’s jurisdiction to hear this grievance by indicating that Ms. Moreau was not terminated for disciplinary reasons but rather that she was rejected on probation. The Public Service Labour Relations Board (“the Board”) forwarded the objection to Ms. Moreau to allow her to respond. Ms. Moreau did not respond to the Board. All attempts to reach her by mail or by telephone failed. On the morning of September 8, 2009, the date set for the first day of the hearing, Ms. Moreau did not show up, and an attempt to reach her also failed. In addition, the employer advised me that attempts to reach Ms. Moreau in the days before the hearing had also been unsuccessful.

3 Ms. Moreau obviously does not intend to pursue the adjudication of her grievance. Because she did not inform the Board, the employer and the Board were subjected not only to the inconvenience of her absence but also to the costs of the hearing.

4 Ms. Moreau’s lack of courtesy is deplorable.

5 For all of the above reasons, I make the following order:

Order

6 The grievance is dismissed.

September 16, 2009.

PSLRB Translation

Georges Nadeau,
adjudicator

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.