Advanced Search

Syntax: "", OR, AND, EXACT(), /p, /s, /n
(YYYY or YYYY-MM or YYYY-MM-DD)
English or French
Sort by: Relevance Date

567 result(s)

  • 126.

    Brown v. Commissioner of Correctional Service of Canada - 2011 PSST 0015 - 2011-05-16

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    10 Section 80 of the PSEA provides that in determining whether a complaint is substantiated under s. 77, the Tribunal may interpret and apply the CHRA.   [...]  The Tribunal notes that if the complainant believed the respondent was using such a scheme to shield those acting appointments from recourse, he should have brought an appeal under s. 21 of the former PSEA, or a complaint under s. 77 of the current PSEA against those acting appointments.   [...]  71 That is not to say, however, that EE matters are not relevant in complaints made under s. 77 of the PSEA. Section 77(1)(a) gives the Tribunal the authority to determine whether the deputy head abused its authority in the exercise of its authority under s. 30(2).

  • 127.

    Parsons and Carey v. Deputy Head of Service Canada et al. - 2006 PSST 0004 - 2006-08-23

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    1 On July 12, 2006, Phyllis Parsons and Marilyn Carey filed complaints with the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (the Tribunal) pursuant to subsection 77(1) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, s. 12, 13 (the PSEA) concerning acting appointments made following an advertised developmental opportunity as   [...]   PSER), the four acting appointments made in this case were for a period of less than four months, and therefore, are excluded from the application of sections 30 (merit) and 77 (recourse) of the PSEA. In support, the deputy head’s representative filed with the Tribunal four documents entitled “Subject - Initial Acting”.   [...]  11 Section 14 of the PSER specifically excludes acting appointments of less than four months from the application of section 77 of the PSEA, the section which sets out the right to complain to the Tribunal.

  • 128.

    Beyak v. Deputy Minister of Natural Resources Canada et al. - 2009 PSST 0034 - 2009-12-18

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    190 The Tribunal has broad corrective powers under subsection 81(1) and section 82 of the PSEA when it finds that a complaint under section 77 is substantiated. The Tribunal may order the respondent to revoke the appointment or not make the proposed appointment.   [...]  Subsection 81(1) and section 82 of the PSEA read as follows: 81. (1) If the Tribunal finds a complaint under section 77 to be substantiated, the Tribunal may order the Commission or the deputy head to revoke the appointment or not to make the appointment, as the case may be, and to take any corrective action that the   [...]  196 Mr. Hynes has testified that he had limited training in the PSEA and relied on the advice of Human Resource Advisors. At a minimum, he should receive training that is appropriate for someone delegated to exercise staffing authority under the PSEA. The Tribunal recommends that, unless such training is completed and an

  • 129.

    Tran v. Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police - 2012 PSST 0033 - 2012-12-04

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    11 The Tribunal's mandate is found in s. 88(2) of the PSEA: "The mandate of the Tribunal is to consider and dispose of complaints made under subsection 65(1) and sections 74, 77 and 83."   [...]  The majority of the decisions issued to date by the Tribunal concern complaints made under s. 77 of the PSEA, regarding internal appointment processes where an appointment has been made or proposed.   [...]  There is nothing in the PSEA to suggest that abuse of authority under s. 65(1) should be interpreted any differently than in relation to complaints made under s. 77 of the PSEA. The Tribunal has considered what constitutes abuse of authority within the meaning of the PSEA in numerous decisions, beginning with Tibbs v.

  • 130.

    Abi-Mansour v. Deputy Head of Employment and Social Development - 2020 FPSLREB 36 - 2020-04-06

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints
    Abuse of authority
    Discrimination

    [80] The Board is an administrative tribunal that affords the parties to a complaint under s. 77 of the PSEA a de novo hearing. It receives evidence and weighs it on the balance of probabilities.   [...]  [84] Section 77(1)(a) of the PSEA accords a person in the area of selection the right to make a complaint that he or she was not appointed or proposed for appointment by reason of an abuse of authority, as follows:   [...]  [272] Under s. 80 of the PSEA, the Board may interpret and apply the CHRA in its analysis of a complaint of abuse of authority under s. 77.

  • 131.

    Maclean v. Secretary of the Treasury Board of Canada - 2012 PSST 0021 - 2012-08-22

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    The PSC also submits that abuse of authority must be given the same meaning under s. 65 of the PSEA as it is given under s. 77 of the PSEA. Moreover, notwithstanding the Tribunal's considerable case law and recent Federal Court of Appeal jurisprudence, the PSC continues to assert that the Tribunal must find that a manager   [...]  The lay-off provisions in the PSEA and the Public Service Employment Regulations, SOR/2005-334 (PSER) 12 The Tribunal's mandate is found in s. 88(2) of the PSEA: “The mandate of the Tribunal is to consider and dispose of complaints made under subsection 65(1) and sections 74, 77 and 83.”   [...]  93 Accordingly, the Tribunal agrees with the PSC to the extent that abuse of authority has the same meaning in relation to complaints made under s. 65(1) of the PSEA as it does for those made under s. 77 of the PSEA. 94 The Tribunal's first decision on abuse of authority was Tibbs v. Deputy Minister of National Defence,

  • 132.

    Soo-Markell v. Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada - 2016 PSLREB 86 - 2016-09-15

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    1 On February 5, 2015, the complainant, Penny Soo-Markell, filed a complaint pursuant to s. 77(1)(b) of the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) in response to an internal non-advertised appointment process that was used to fill an acting site financial analyst position at the FI-01 group and level from September 15, 2014,   [...]  In subsection 77(1) of the PSEA, the words “a complaint to the Tribunal that he or she was not appointed or proposed for appointment”, clearly stipulates that a complaint must be personal to the complainant.   [...]  16 In Evans v. Deputy Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development,2007 PSST 4, the Tribunal considered a complaint that was filed under s. 77 concerning a non-advertised appointment, and held as follows: “The Tribunal finds that a complainant’s right to file a complaint pursuant to section 77 of the PSEA is subject

  • 133.

    Lavigne v. Deputy Minister of Justice et al. - 2010 PSST 0007 - 2010-07-05

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    On May 28, 2007, the complainant filed six complaints of abuse of authority with the Tribunal pursuant to paragraph 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13 (the PSEA) against those appointments (files 2007‑0241, 2007‑0242, 2007‑0274, 2007‑0314, 2007‑0400 and 2008‑0384).   [...]  Subsection 14(1) of the Public Service Employment Regulations, SOR/2005‑334, stipulates that such appointments are excluded from the recourse provided for in section 77 of the PSEA (Lavigne v. Deputy Minister of Justice et al., 2007 PSST 0045).   [...]  22Paragraph 77(1)(a) of the PSEA provides that a person in the area of recourse may make a complaint to the Tribunal that he or she was not appointed or proposed for appointment by reason of an abuse of authority by the PSC or the deputy head in the exercise of its or his or her authority.

  • 134.

    Abi-Mansour v. President of the Public Service Commission - 2016 PSLREB 53 - 2016-06-21

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    3 The PSC, by virtue of s. 79 of the Public Service Employment Act(S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13;PSEA), is entitled to be heard in all staffing complaints filed with the Board under s. 77 of the PSEA. In this case, the PSC is the respondent.   [...]  14 In his submissions, the complainant argued that the Board’s jurisdiction was in fact much larger than that stated at s. 77 of the PSEA, under which it may hear a complaint of abuse of authority in an appointment process.   [...]  71 Under s. 80 of the PSEA, the Board may interpret and apply the CHRA in its analysis of a complaint of an abuse of authority under s. 77.

  • 135.

    Visca v. Deputy Minister of Justice et al. - 2006 PSST 0016 - 2006-11-30

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    Under subsection 77(1) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13 (the PSEA), a person can complain that he or she was not appointed.   [...]  23 Paragraph 77 (1)(a) of the PSEA reads as follows: 77. (1) When the Commission has made or proposed an appointment in an internal appointment process, a person in the area of recourse referred to in subsection (2) may – in the manner and within the period provided by the Tribunal’s regulations – make a complaint to the   [...]  24 In subsection 77(1) of the PSEA, the words “a complaint to the Tribunal that he or she was not appointed or proposed for appointment,” clearly stipulatesthat a complaint must be personal to the complainant.

  • 136.

    Martin v. Deputy Minister of National Defence - 2010 PSST 0019 - 2010-11-09

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    6 The complainant filed a complaint of abuse of authority with the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (the Tribunal) on January 16, 2008 pursuant to s. 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13 (the PSEA).   [...]  45 This complaint was made pursuant to s. 77(1)(a) of the PSEA. 77. (1) When the Commission has made or proposed an appointment in an internal appointment process, a person in the area of recourse referred to in subsection (2) may – in the manner and within the period provided by the Tribunal’s regulations – make a   [...]  77 The complainant has the burden of proof, on the balance of probabilities, in complaints of abuse of authority under the PSEA. (See Tibbs at paras. 50, 53 and 55).

  • 137.

    Chartrand v. Deputy Minister of Public Works and Government Services - 2013 PSST 31 - 2013-11-21

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    21 Section 77(1) of the PSEA provides that a person in the area of recourse may make a complaint to the Tribunal that he or she was not appointed or proposed for appointment by reason of an abuse of authority by the PSC or the deputy head in the exercise of their respective authorities under s. 30(2) of the PSEA.   [...]  36 Accordingly, the Tribunal finds that the complainants had the right to complain, pursuant to s. 77 of the PSEA, that they were not appointed by reason of an abuse of authority.   [...]  47 Section 88(2) of the PSEA specifies that the Tribunal's mandate is limited to considering and disposing of complaints relating to layoffs (s. 65), revocations of appointments (s. 74), appointments or proposals of appointment (s. 77), and the implementation of corrective action (s. 83).

  • 138.

    Ammirante v. Deputy Minister of Citizenship and Immigration - 2010 PSST 0003 - 2010-06-10

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    9The complainant filed his complaint with the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (the Tribunal) on November 6, 2008 pursuant to paragraph 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13 (the PSEA).   [...]  The respondent submits that the complainant has not proven abuse of authority under section 77 of the PSEA and requests that the complaint be dismissed. C) Public Service Commission’s Arguments   [...]  90This complaint was filed under paragraph 77(1)(a) of the PSEA: 77. (1) When the Commission has made or proposed an appointment in an internal appointment process, a person in the area of recourse referred to in subsection (2) may — in the manner and within the period provided by the Tribunal’s regulations — make a

  • 139.

    Santawirya v. Deputy Head (Canada Border Services Agency) - 2017 FPSLREB 10 - 2017-07-18

    FPSLREB Decisions - Labour Relations
    Discrimination
    Jurisdiction
    People with disabilities
    Time limit

    202 Section 77 of the PSEA prescribes an administrative procedure for redress for individuals who take part in staffing processes.   [...]   the appointment process has no right to complain under s. 77 of the PSEA. In light of the respondent having withdrawn its objection that an administrative recourse was open to the grievor that could have included filing a s. 77 complaint under the PSEA, I will not include the bargaining agent’s submissions on this issue.   [...]  Even if she could not have pursued a s. 77 complaint under the PSEA, other recourses were available, which might have included the CHRC, for example.

  • 140.

    Magee v. Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada - 2011 PSST 0012 - 2011-04-13

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    12 Section 30 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c.22, ss. 12 and 13 (the PSEA) sets merit as the cornerstone of public service staffing. Section 30 of the PSEA reads as follows:   [...]  14. (1) An acting appointment of less than four months, provided it does not extend the cumulative period of the acting appointment of a person in a position to four months or more, is excluded from the application of sections 30 and 77 of the Act. 19 As noted above, s. 30 of the PSEA requires appointments to be made on the  [...]  Section 87 of the PSEA specifies that a complaint cannot be brought under s. 77 in respect of certain types of appointment, including appointments made under regulations established pursuant to s. 22(2)(a).

  • 141.

    Séguin and Boucher-Legault v. Deputy Minister of National Defence et al. - 2007 PSST 0043 - 2007-11-21

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    1 On November 7, 2006, Joël Séguin filed a complaint with the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (the Tribunal) pursuant to paragraph 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13 (the PSEA).   [...]  37 The complaints were made pursuant to paragraph 77(1)(a) of the PSEA, which reads as follows: 77. (1) When the Commission has made or proposed an appointment in an internal appointment process, a person in the area of recourse referred to in subsection (2) may — in the manner and within the period provided by the   [...]  48 The Tribunal was created pursuant to the PSEA, and its mandate is stated in subsection 88(2): “The mandate of the Tribunal is to consider and dispose of complaints made under subsection 65(1) and sections 74, 77 and 83.”

  • 142.

    Hay and Harrison v. Deputy Head (Correctional Service of Canada) - 2022 FPSLREB 106 - 2022-12-28

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    [1] The complainants, Timothy Hay and Tara Harrison, made complaints to the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board (“the Board”) under s. 77(1)(b) of the Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13; “PSEA”).   [...]  [26] Section 77(1)(b) of the PSEA provides as follows: 77 (1) When the Commission has made or proposed an appointment in an internal appointment process, a person in the area of recourse referred to in subsection (2) may — in the manner and within the period provided by the Board’s regulations — make a complaint to the   [...]  At s. 2(4), the PSEA provides that abuse of authority includes bad faith and personal favouritism.

  • 143.

    Ayotte et al. v. Deputy Minister of National Defence et al. - 2009 PSST 0021 - 2009-07-03

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    Following this announcement, the complainants each filed another complaint on June 27, 2007, pursuant to paragraphs 77(1)(a) and (b) of the PSEA. Issues 10The Tribunal must determine the following issues:   [...]  106The complaints were also made under paragraph 77(1)(a) of the PSEA, alleging abuse of authority by the respondent in the application of merit.   [...]  However, this discretion is not absolute and a complaint may be filed with the Tribunal for abuse of authority with respect to the choice of process under paragraph 77(1)(b) of the PSEA. These sections read as follows: 33. In making an appointment, the Commission may use an advertised or non-advertised appointment process.

  • 144.

    Dhalla v. Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada - 2018 FPSLREB 12 - 2018-02-08

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    10 The complainant filed a complaint of abuse of authority on June 15, 2015, with the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board under s. 77 of the Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13; PSEA).   [...]  13 Section 77(1) of the PSEA provides that a person in the area of recourse may make a complaint to the Board that he or she was not appointed or proposed for appointment because of abuse of authority.   [...]  43 Section 77(1)(b) of the PSEA provides that a complaint may be made that the respondent abused its authority in choosing between an advertised and a non-advertised appointment process.

  • 145.

    Alexander and Rave v. Deputy Minister of Health Canada et al. - 2008 PSST 0032 - 2008-12-19

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    4 The complainants filed their complaints under paragraph 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13 (the PSEA).   [...]  81 In light of the above, the respondent submits that the complainants clearly failed to meet their burden under subsection 77(1) of the PSEA. 82 The respondent requests that both complaints be dismissed.   [...]  87 These complaints were filed under paragraph 77(1)(a) of the PSEA, which refers to the criteria for making an appointment on the basis of merit pursuant to subsection 30(2) of the PSEA. These provisions should be read together, and are as follows:

  • 146.

    Costello v. Deputy Minister of Fisheries and Oceans et al. - 2009 PSST 0032 - 2009-12-09

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    6The complainant filed his complaint with the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (the Tribunal) on January 15, 2009 pursuant to paragraph 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13 (the PSEA).   [...]  56The complaint was filed under paragraph 77(1)(a) of the PSEA: 77. (1) When the Commission has made or proposed an appointment in an internal appointment process, a person in the area of recourse referred to in subsection (2) may — in the manner and within the period provided by the Tribunal’s regulations — make a   [...]  66 Section 36 of the PSEA gives deputy heads broad discretion in the selection and use of assessment methods.

  • 147.

    Patton v. Deputy Minister of National Defence - 2011 PSST 0008 - 2011-02-17

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    Complaint of abuse of authority pursuant to sections 77(1)(a) and 77(1)(b) of the Public Service Employment Act Decision: Complaint is substantiated   [...]  However, the discretion to use a non-advertised appointment process is not absolute and s. 77(1)(b) of the PSEA provides for a direct challenge to it on the ground of abuse of authority (see, for example, Kane v. Attorney General of Canada and Public Service Commission, 2011 FCA 19 at para. 3).   [...]  The PSEA provides for notice in s. 48 and the right to complain in s. 77. However, there is no provision in the PSEA or the Public Service Employment Regulations, SOR/2005‑334, to establish a right of access to a position that is the subject of a non‑advertised appointment.

  • 148.

    Morgenstern v. Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada - 2010 PSST 0018 - 2010-10-15

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    On March 24, 2009, the complainant filed a complaint of abuse of authority pursuant to s. 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13 (the PSEA).   [...]  27The complaint was filed under s. 77(1)(a) of the PSEA which refers to s. 30(2) of the PSEA. These provisions appear below:   [...]  43 The PSEA sets out the corrective action that may be ordered by the Tribunal in s. 81(1), which provides that:

  • 149.

    Hansen v. Deputy Head (Department of Justice) - 2022 FPSLREB 9 - 2022-02-16

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints
    Discrimination

    [1] The complainant, Ronda Hansen, made two complaints under ss. 77(1)(a) and (b) of the Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13; “PSEA”) concerning appointment process 16-JUS-PRO-IA-102776 (“the appointment process”).   [...]  [9] On September 28, 2017, the complainant made a complaint of abuse of authority under s. 77 of the PSEA against the indeterminate appointment. III. Summary of the evidence   [...]  [68] Section 80 of the PSEA provides that in considering whether a complaint under s.77 is substantiated, the Board may interpret and apply the Canadian Human Rights Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6; “CHRA”).

  • 150.

    Zankl v. Chief Statistician of Canada of Statistics Canada et al. - 2010 PSST 0001 - 2010-01-18

    FPSLREB Decisions - Staffing Complaints

    On the same day, the complainant filed a complaint pursuant to paragraph77(1)(a) of the PSEA. Issues 7The Tribunal must determine the following issues:   [...]  59This complaint is made under subsection 77(1) of the PSEA: 77. (1) When the Commission has made or proposed an appointment in an internal appointment process, a person in the area of recourse referred to in subsection (2) may — in the manner and within the period provided by the Tribunal’s regulations — make a complaint   [...]  62Subsection 30(2) of the PSEA sets out the legislative authority for establishing qualifications.