Advanced Search

Karoulis Newman v. Canada Border Services Agency - 2020 FPSLREB 22 - 2020-02-25

[2] On June 9, 2017, Katherine Karoulis Newman (“the complainant”) filed a complaint alleging abuse of authority in the application of merit and in the choice of process, pursuant to paragraphs 77(1)(a) and (b) of the Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13; “the PSEA”).   [...]  The PSEA requires that persons in the area of recourse be notified of appointments made   [...]  Paragraph 77(1)(b) of the PSEA provides for a direct challenge of the discretionary choice between an advertised and a non-advertised appointment process, on the ground of abuse of authority.

Dubord v. Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada - 2013 PSST 0010 - 2013-03-25

11 On April 24, 2012, the complainant filed a complaint of abuse of authority with the Tribunal under s. 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13 (PSEA).   [...]  37 Section 77(1) of the PSEA states that a person in the area of recourse may make a complaint 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 appointment process.   [...]  Pursuant to s. 77 of the PSEA, the complaint must deal with the fact that the complainant was not appointed to the position in question because of an abuse of authority.

Ayotte v. Deputy Minister of National Defence - 2010 PSST 0016 - 2010-09-29

26 Subsection 81(1) of the PSEA stipulates that the Tribunal may order the deputy head to revoke an appointment.   [...]  38 The wording of the PSEA ensures the Tribunal’s complete adjudicative independence.The Preamble of the PSEA highlights its legislative purpose.   [...]  48 As the Tribunal stated in Ayotte, the actions throughout the appointment process constituted an egregious departure from the staffing values of fairness and transparency found in the Preamble of the PSEA, the requirements of the PSEA and the PSC’s Choice of Appointment Policy.

Tennant v. President of the Canadian International Development Agency et al. - 2007 PSST 0006 - 2007-02-22

8 The Tribunal’s jurisdiction is delineated by its enabling statute, the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13 (the PSEA). Subsection 77(1) of the PSEA stipulates that an appointment must have been made or proposed for a complaint to be filed with the Tribunal.   [...]  Subsection 77(1) 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 Tribunal  [...]  13 The Notice of Consideration was consistent with the requirements of the PSEA. Subsection 48(2) of the PSEA specifies that a waiting period must be fixed between the Notice of Consideration and the Notice of Appointment and no appointment may be made during the waiting period.

Pugh v. Deputy Minister of National Defence et al. - 2007 PSST 0025 - 2007-06-06

1 On October 27, 2006, Mr. Barry Pugh filed a complaint with the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (the Tribunal) under paragraph 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13 (the PSEA).   [...]  3 In accordance with subsection 99(3) of the PSEA, the Tribunal decided this complaint without holding an oral hearing.   [...]  35 The Tribunal’s authority is found in 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

Mousseau Bailey v. Deputy Head (Department of Indigenous Services) - 2024 FPSLREB 52 - 2024-04-11

In the matter of complaints of abuse of authority under paragraphs 77(1)(a) and 77(1)(b) of the Public Service Employment Act Before: Christopher Rootham, a panel of the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board   [...]  There is no preference given to advertised processes over non-advertised ones in the PSEA. Section 33 of the PSEA clearly states that the deputy head, as the PSC’s delegate, has the discretion to choose between these two types of processes.   [...]  [65] Subsection 2(4) of the PSEA states that “abuse of authority” includes bad faith and personal favouritism.

Bonia v. Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police - 2012 PSST 0004 - 2012-02-27

Complaints of abuse of authority pursuant to section 77(1)(a) and 77(1)(b) of the Public Service Employment Act Decision: Complaints are dismissed   [...]  1 Donna Bonia, the complainant, filed three complaints of abuse of authority under s. 77 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12,13 (PSEA).   [...]  5 The legislative provisions relevant to this matter are found in s. 30(1) and s. 77(1)(a) and (b) of the PSEA. They are set out below: 30. (1) Appointments by the Commission to or from within the public service shall be made on the basis of merit and must be free from political influence.

Desaulniers v. Deputy Minister of Environment Canada - 2011 PSST 0018 - 2011-06-30

Complaint of abuse of authority pursuant to section 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act Decision: The complaint is dismissed   [...]  The 2005 process was held under the staffing regime set out in the former PSEA; this regime ceased to exist when the current PSEA came into effect on December 31, 2005.   [...]  26 The complainant filed a complaint under s. 77(1)(a) of the PSEA concerning the appointment of Mr. Wong following the 2008 process.

Ship v. Deputy Minister of National Defence - 2010 PSST 0025 - 2010-12-22

Complaint of abuse of authority under section 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act Decision: Complaint is dismissed   [...]  The complainant submits that nothing prevents him from making a complaint under s. 77 of the PSEA on the ground that the appointment of Mr. Pierce constitutes an abuse of authority, and at the same time asking the PSC to conduct an investigation of alleged fraud concerning that appointment under s. 69 of the PSEA. The   [...]  Making an appointment without the legal authority to do so would most likely constitute an abuse of authority within the meaning of s. 77 of the PSEA. 44 In this case, the complainant refers to the delegation agreement simply to support his argument that staffing values set out in that agreement were not respected in this

Pugh v. Deputy Minister of Justice - 2012 PSST 0031 - 2012-11-12

11 On April 12, 2011, the complainant brought a complaint of abuse of authority to the Tribunal pursuant to s. 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13 (PSEA).   [...]  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 because the PSC or the deputy head abused its authority in the appointment process.   [...]  The Tribunal also wishes to emphasize that the wording of s. 77(1) of the PSEA makes it clear that the complaint must be related to the complainant.

Burt v. Deputy Minister of Veterans Affairs - 2019 FPSLREB 31 - 2019-03-12

7 The complainant filed a complaint of abuse of authority on February 22, 2016, with the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board (PSLREB) under s. 77 of the Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13; PSEA).   [...]  48 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.   [...]  117 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.

Rosenthal v. President of the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario - 2011 PSST 0022 - 2011-08-04

2 The complainant brought a complaint of abuse of authority to the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (the Tribunal) under s. 77(1) (a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13 (the PSEA).   [...]  It addressed its submissions generally to the issues relating to the application of ss. 77(1) and 81(1) of the PSEA. Issues 5 The Tribunal must determine the following issues:   [...]  27 Section 80 of the PSEA states that in determining whether a complaint is substantiated under s. 77, the Tribunal may interpret and apply the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA).

Denny v. Deputy Minister of National Defence et al. - 2009 PSST 0029 - 2009-10-15

7Following notices of appointment, the complainant filed his complaint with the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (the Tribunal) on May 15, 2008 pursuant to paragraph 77(1)(a) of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13 (the PSEA).   [...]  117The 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   [...]  However, the choice and use of the assessment method is subject to the recourse set out in section 77 of the PSEA. Abuse of authority may exist in the choice or the use of an assessment method [...]