FPSLREB Decisions

Suspension (20 days) - Public criticism of employer - Progressive discipline - the grievor was a grain inspector at the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC) - at the invitation of a grain producer and director of the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB), he attended the Grain World 2000 conference on his own time on February 28 and 29, 2000 - on the first day of the conference, the grievor told an Assistant Commissioner of the CGC that it had lowered the tolerance for ergot and that this would have an adverse financial effect upon grain producers - again on the invitation of the director of the CWB, the grievor attended an informal meeting on the second day of the conference to discuss, among other things, the financial impact of the single grade standard - the grievor took part in the general debate on the financial loss to be experienced by the producers and gave information on the measurement of ergot by weight, on the single grade standard issue and on the unregistered varieties of grain issue - the February 29 meeting had an effect on the CWB and formal board meetings were held on the issues of the single grade standard and the percentage-based evaluation of ergot - the CWB submitted their concerns to the CGC, which responded by letter on March 23, 2000 - the grievor testified that he did not know that he should not attend the conference - he thought that he could give technical points of view and information as a grain inspector and he never associated them with CGC policies in the debate at the February 29, 2000 meeting - he had advised the participants at the February 29 meeting that he was not representing the CGC - the adjudicator found that the grievor could not be disciplined for criticizing the policies of the CGC to the Assistant Commissioner of the CGC on February 28 as no one else heard their conversation - however, the grievor's criticisms of the policies of the CGC at the meeting of February 29 could not be justified - these policies did not jeopardize the life, health or safety of the public servant or others or engage him in illegal acts - the grievor's public disclosure did not embrace a legitimate public concern requiring a public debate - the issues were not of outstanding importance to the public interest - the grievor had previously received a written reprimand and a three-day suspension for similar behaviour - nonetheless, the adjudicator determined that a 20-day suspension was too severe a penalty under the circumstances and reduced it to six days. Grievance allowed in part. Cases cited:Fraser v. Canada, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 455; Haydon v. Canada, [2001] 2 F.C. 82 (F.C.T.D.).