FPSLREB Decisions
Decision Information
The complainant made a complaint under ss. 77(1)(a) and (b) of the PSEA, alleging that the respondent abused its authority in the application of merit and its choice of process during an internal appointment process. The complainant was screened out of the appointment process because she did not meet two essential qualifications listed in the job opportunity advertisement. She alleged that there was a lack of transparency in the assessment method and tools that rose to the level of an abuse of authority. The respondent denied abusing its authority in the appointment process. The Board found that the complainant did not establish an abuse of authority. The Board determined that first, the complainant did not meet the screening definition for the university degree equivalent, which included a college diploma in a field related to the work to be performed, combined with several years of managing a budget in the federal government. The complainant did not have a college diploma. Second, she did not demonstrate that she met the respondent’s threshold for the experience criterion of managing a budget. She demonstrated that she had experience managing a budget, but her experience did not rise to the breadth and depth that the respondent required for the position.
Complaint dismissed.