FPSLREB Decisions

Decision Information

Agboton v. Treasury Board (Statistics Canada)

Collection FPSLREB Decisions
Decision Rendered 2025-08-21
Citation 2025 FPSLREB 97
Before Patricia Harewood
Decision Type Labour Relations
Subject Terms Time limit
Keywords Labour relations – Individual grievance – Preliminary objection – Untimely grievance – No application for an extension of time – Employer's refusal to authorize leave – Unauthorized leave – 25-day time limit set out in the collective agreement – Allegation of new facts after an access-to-information request
Original Language French
Note Please note that this decision will be published when it is available in both official languages. If you wish to obtain a copy of the decision in the official language it was written, please communicate with mail.courrier@fpslreb-crtespf.gc.ca.
Summary:

The grievor filed a grievance in December 2023 after receiving information through an access-to-information request. In his grievance, he requested the reimbursement of his leave taken in June 2019 and moral damages for the prejudice that he suffered. The grievance was referred to adjudication in March 2024. The grievor referred several other grievances to adjudication; however, this decision dealt only with the grievance challenging the unauthorized leave. The employer raised a preliminary objection, challenging the Board's jurisdiction to hear the grievance under s. 209 of the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act (S.C. 2003, c. 22, s. 2). The employer found that the grievance was filed four years after the deadline set out in the collective agreement. Based on the additional written submissions, the grievor submitted that he discovered new facts in November 2023 after several access-to-information requests and that he then filed his grievance in December 2023, which was within the 25-day time limit set out in the collective agreement. He did not submit an application for an extension of time under s. 61(b) of the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Regulations (SOR/2005-79). The Board allowed the objection because it determined that the grievance was untimely; therefore, the Board did not have jurisdiction to hear it. The Board found that the grievor was aware of the denial of his leave in 2019 and therefore that he was aware of the action that gave rise to this grievance in 2019, despite the new facts.

Objection allowed.
Grievance denied.

Decision Content

There is no document available for this decision.
 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.