FPSLREB Decisions

The complainant made a complaint under s. 190(1)(g) of the Act, alleging that the respondent breached its duty of fair representation, as set out in s. 187, in its overall handling of his grievance. He also made motions to recuse, to admit new evidence, and to present reply evidence. The Board found that the recusal motion was based on suspicions and was unsupported by evidence. It stated that Board members have a duty to act impartially when exercising their powers and performing their duties and functions. They are presumed to be impartial, which the complainant failed to rebut. The Board found that the evidence that he sought to admit was either available before the hearing, irrelevant to the complaint, or outside the scope of reply evidence. On the merits, the evidence established that the respondent agreed to represent the complainant at all three levels of the grievance process, despite its assessment that the grievance had little or no chance of success. After the employer denied the grievance at the final level, the respondent conducted a comprehensive assessment before deciding not to refer it to adjudication. The Board considered the allegations as part of a cumulative pattern of representation and concluded that the complainant’s dissatisfaction with how the respondent handled his grievance did not constitute a breach of the duty of fair representation under s. 187.

Complaint dismissed.