FPSLREB Decisions

The respondent ran a non-advertised selection process and considered two individuals: the complainant, and the eventual appointee. An interview was part of the selection process. Three people were chosen to be on the selection board, including the future supervisor of the role being staffed. The respondent included a fourth person in the interview, as a resource (“the resource person”) but not as a selection board member. It was known that the complainant had interpersonal issues with the resource person. The respondent’s witnesses provided different reasons for his presence; however, it claimed that he had no part in selecting the eventual appointee. The interview notes stated that the complainant became nervous and had trouble performing during the interview. The complainant alleged that it was due to the presence of the resource person. Before the interview, the complainant had raised the issue of the resource person’s potential involvement in the interview. The respondent’s labour relations advisors advised that information be compartmentalized, to prevent any issues. The Board found that it was a serious error to include the resource person, even though there was no reasonable apprehension of bias. As to the future supervisor of the position being staffed, the Board found that his role on the selection board did not constitute a serious error, despite the interpersonal problems between him and the complainant. The Board found that it was reasonable for the future supervisor of a position to be present on a selection board. The Board declared there was an abuse of authority in the application of merit but decided not to revoke the appointment, as neither the appointee’s assessment nor qualifications had been challenged.

Complaint allowed.