Advanced Search

Public Service Alliance of Canada v. Treasury Board - 2000 PSSRB 56 - 2000-06-21

Furthermore, the employer is to make every reasonable effort to obtain any Forms 13 that have been so distributed.

Treasury Board of Canada v. Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers - 2000 PSSRB 38 - 2000-04-20

[1] On February 25, 2000 the Treasury Board (TB) filed an application under section 21 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act (PSSRA) alleging the Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers (PAFSO) had failed to bargain collectively in good faith and to make every reasonable effort to conclude a collective   [...]  REASONS FOR DECISION [27] Good faith bargaining lies at the heart of the collective bargaining process enshrined in the PSSRA. Allegations that this very important duty has been breached are very serious and cannot be take lightly.

Jones v. Frontec Corporation - 2000 PSSRB 27 - 2000-04-04

these services - grievor was one such employee - he commenced working for Frontec on June 1, 1998 - his employment was terminated by Frontec for disciplinary reasons on January 11, 1999 - on January 15, the grievor completed a grievance form alleging that the employer's action in terminating his employment was unjustified

Ouellet v. Treasury Board (Human Resources Development Canada) - 2020 FPSLREB 15 - 2000-02-24

It is, therefore, the notion of “normal and reasonable public transportation” that should be applied, and Mr. Ouellet is entitled to a travel allowance.   [...]  [21] Mr. Ouellet’s representative argued that the concept of “normal and reasonable public transportation” in section 7.1.1 of the Travel Directive (Exhibit E-3) had to apply and that it was not “normal and reasonable” to expect an employee to use a public transportation system to return home after 12 to 14 hours of work.   [...]  [22] Under the circumstances, I do not deem it necessary, contrary to Ms. Charette’s argument, to examine whether the concept of “normal and reasonable public transportation services" applies.

Vaughan and Treasury Board - 1999-12-21

although the adjudicator made no error in arriving at the first decision, there was no authority to make the payment he had ordered - the Board found that the reasons given by the employer not to make the payment ordered by the adjudicator were arguments that should have been raised at the hearing leading to the first

Johnson-Paquette and Treasury Board (Human Resources Development Canada) - 1999-12-08

Reasons for Decision The legislative provisions relevant to this decision are found at subsection 84(1) of the Regulations and subparagraph 92(1)(b)(i) of the Act. Subsection 84(1) of the Regulations states that 84.   [...]  For these reasons, I find that, on the basis of the records before me and of the written arguments submitted by the parties, Mrs. Johnson-Paquette's first, second, third and fourth grievances do not fall within that category of grievances covered by subparagraph 92(1)(b)(i) of the Act and cannot by referred to adjudication.

Latham and Treasury Board (Solicitor General Canada - Correctional Service) - 1999-11-30

Keeping in mind that without counsel, I wish to take all reasonable steps to ensure that the Grievor has an opportunity to instruct and retain counsel and to consider the the Employer seeks to admit and to fully prepare his case.   [...]  3 5. In the event that extraordinary reason, unable next hearing, then his counsel must attend.

Thomas and Treasury Board (Revenue Canada - Customs, Excise and Taxation) - 1999-11-05

She felt that his reasons for mistreating her did not excuse his lack of professionalism towards her.   [...]  Moreover, if he did the actions, was it just and reasonable to impose discipline on him?   [...]  I find no reason to allow these grievances. I hereby dismiss all three grievances for the reasons herein contained.

Coughtry v. Treasury Board (Fisheries and Oceans) - 1999-10-25

Mr. Jewitt referred me to pages 122 to 124 where classic reasoning is found as to why a mistake should not render void a collective agreement.   [...]  In the event of termination of employment for reasons other than death or lay-off, the Employer shall recover the advance from any monies owed the officer.   [...]  The officer will make very reasonable attempt to mitigate any loss incurred and will provide proof of such action to the Employer.

Sallenback and Treasury Board (Solicitor General Canada - Correctional Service) - 1999-09-15

She concluded there is no valid reason before me for the lateness of the grievance.   [...]  Whether the delay was one week, one month or one year, the reasons given to me for the delay are simply not sufficient to warrant an extension of time.   [...]  The bargaining agent simply did not seek to rectify the situation within a reasonable period of time after it became aware of it.

Parisien and Treasury Board (Public Works and Government Services Canada) - 1999-08-20

The reason there is no record of it is that it came to him personally.   [...]  Reasons for Decision The grievor submitted travel claims for mileage for his personal vehicle which he says he used for various reasons to return to the same locations he had earlier travelled to and returned from in a government vehicle on the same day.   [...]  Accordingly, for all these reasons, the grievance is denied. Rosemary Vondette Simpson, Board Member

King and Treasury Board (Revenue Canada - Customs and Excise) - 1999-08-19

It is agreed that the implementation of any such variation in hours shall not result in any additional expenditure or cost by reason only of such variation.   [...]  Article 105 of the V.S.S.A. provides that this agreement may be terminated by either party giving 30 days notice following consultation on the reasons for termination.   [...]  ... It is agreed that the implementation of any such variation in hours shall not result in any additional expenditure or cost by reason only of such variation.

Canada Council of Teamsters and Canadian Food Inspection Agency and Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada - 1999-08-09

The test in such cases lies in determining whether there exists in any given situation, a reasonable expectation of return to work within a reasonable period of time.   [...]  Finally, as a general rule of thumb, subject to the exigencies of individual cases, return to work within one year can be viewed as reasonable.