FPSLREB Decisions

In 2020, the grievor and the respondent entered into a settlement agreement, to deal with several grievances and a complaint. The grievor did not refer the grievances or complaint to the Board. In 2024, the grievor alleged that the respondent breached the settlement agreement. He filed an application for judicial review in Federal Court, to enforce the agreement. His application was dismissed. He then filed a grievance, alleging that the respondent breached the settlement agreement, which it denied. After he referred this grievance to adjudication, the respondent asked the Board to dismiss it due to having no jurisdiction to hear it. The Board found that it lacked the jurisdiction to hear the grievance. The Board determined that it did not satisfy both conditions in Kennedy to assume jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement. Although the grievor was a party to the initial proceedings and settlement, the proceedings that were settled in 2020 were not commenced under a provision of the Act granting the Board jurisdiction to hear the dispute. The Board found that it did not have the implied jurisdiction to adjudicate this case. None of the grievances that were settled could have been referred to adjudication under s. 209 of the Act. Section 209 attributes jurisdiction to the Board to hear some but not all grievances. Its jurisdiction to resolve cases about breaches of settlement agreements derives from s. 12 of the Act. Thus, the power to hear a dispute over the implementation of a settlement of a grievance filed under s. 208, but not s. 209, would be inconsistent with the broader context of the Act.

Grievance denied.
Settlement agreement ordered sealed in part.