HomeMy WebLinkAboutP-2013-1411.Hauth.13-10-18 DecisionPublic Service
Grievance Board
Suite 600
180 Dundas St. West
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396
Commission des
griefs de la fonction
publique
Bureau 600
180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tél. : (416) 326-1388
Téléc. : (416) 326-1396
P-2013-1411
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE PUBLIC SERVICE ACT
Before
THE PUBLIC SERVICE GRIEVANCE BOARD
BETWEEN
John Hauth Complainant
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer
BEFORE Donald D. Carter Chair
FOR THE
COMPLAINANT
John Hauth
FOR THE EMPLOYER Kevin Dorgan
Ministry of Government Services
Legal Services Branch
Counsel
WRITTEN
SUBMISSIONS
August 28, September 30, October 16, 2013
- 2 -
Decision
[1] This decision deals with a preliminary issue raised by the employer. The employer takes
the position that the Public Service Grievance Board (PSGB) has no jurisdiction to deal with this
complaint because the complainant did not file a notice of proposal to file a complaint within the
time limits required by section 8 of Ontario Regulation 378/07, and because he did not
subsequently file a complaint with the Public Service Grievance Board within the time required
by section 10 of that same Regulation. The relevant sections of Ontario Regulation 378/07 are
set out below:
Definitions
1. In this Regulation,
“complainant” means a person who files a complaint with the Public Service Grievance
Board or who gives notice in accordance with section 8 of his or her proposal to file
a complaint;
“complaint about a disciplinary measure” means a complaint described in subsection 3
(1);
“complaint about a working condition or a term of employment” means a complaint
described in subsection 4 (1);
“complaint about dismissal for cause” means a complaint described in subsection 2 (1);
“complaint under Part V of the Act (Political Activity)” means a complaint that may be
filed with the Public Service Grievance Board under subsection 104 (3) of the Act;
“complaint under Part VI of the Act (Disclosing and Investigating Wrongdoing)” means
a complaint that may be filed with the Public Service Grievance Board under
subsection 140 (3) of the Act. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 1.
COMPLAINTS AUTHORIZED BY THIS REGULATION
Complaint about dismissal for cause
2. (1) A person who is aggrieved by his or her dismissal for cause under section 34
of the Act may file a complaint about the dismissal for cause with the Public Service
Grievance Board,
(a) if the person is eligible under sections 5 and 6 to file such a complaint;
(b) if the person gives notice in accordance with section 8 of his or her proposal to
file the complaint; and
(c) if the person complies with the filing requirements set out in section 10. O. Reg.
378/07, s. 2 (1).
- 3 -
(2) Subsection (1) does not affect the right of a person to file a complaint under Part
V of the Act (Political Activity) or a complaint under Part VI of the Act (Disclosing and
Investigating Wrongdoing). O. Reg. 378/07, s. 2 (2).
Complaint about a disciplinary measure
3. (1) A public servant who is aggrieved by the imposition of a disciplinary
measure under section 34 of the Act, other than dismissal for cause, may file a complaint
about the disciplinary measure with the Public Service Grievance Board,
(a) if the public servant is eligible under section 5 to file such a complaint;
(b) if the public servant gives notice in accordance with section 8 of his or her
proposal to file the complaint; and
(c) if the public servant complies with the filing requirements set out in section 10.
O. Reg. 378/07, s. 3 (1).
(2) Subsection (1) does not affect the right of a public servant to file a complaint
under Part V of the Act (Political Activity) or a complaint under Part VI of the Act
(Disclosing and Investigating Wrongdoing). O. Reg. 378/07, s. 3 (2).
Complaint about a working condition or a term of employment
4. (1) Subject to subsection (2), a public servant who is aggrieved about a working
condition or about a term of his or her employment may file a complaint about the working
condition or the term of employment with the Public Service Grievance Board,
(a) if the public servant is eligible under sections 5 and 7 to file such a complaint;
(b) if the public servant gives notice in accordance with section 8 of his or her
proposal to file the complaint; and
(c) if the public servant complies with the filing requirements set out in section 10.
O. Reg. 378/07, s. 4 (1).
(2) The following matters cannot be the subject of a complaint about a working
condition or about a term of employment:
1. The term or duration of the public servant’s appointment to employment by the
Crown.
2. The assignment of the public servant to a particular class of position.
3. A dismissal without cause under subsection 38 (1) of the Act or a matter relating
to such a dismissal.
4. The evaluation of a public servant’s performance or the method of evaluating his
or her performance.
5. The compensation provided or denied to a public servant as a result of the
evaluation of his or her performance. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 4 (2).
(3) Subsections (1) and (2) do not affect the right of a public servant to file a
complaint under Part V of the Act (Political Activity) or a complaint under Part VI of the
Act (Disclosing and Investigating Wrongdoing). O. Reg. 378/07, s. 4 (3).
- 4 -
FILING A COMPLAINT
Notice of proposal to file a complaint
8. (1) A person who proposes to file a complaint shall give notice of the proposal to
the following person or entity:
1. A complainant who, at the material time, worked in a ministry shall give the
notice to his or her deputy minister.
2. A complainant who, at the material time, worked in a Commission public body
shall give the notice to the chair of the Public Service Commission. O. Reg.
378/07, s. 8 (1).
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply with respect to a complaint under Part V of the
Act (Political Activity) or a complaint under Part VI of the Act (Disclosing and
Investigating Wrongdoing). O. Reg. 378/07, s. 8 (2).
(3) The notice must set out the reasons for the complaint. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 8 (3).
(4) The notice must be given within the following period:
1. For a complaint about dismissal for cause, within 14 days after the complainant
receives notice of the dismissal.
2. For a complaint about a disciplinary measure, within 14 days after the
complainant receives notice of the imposition of the disciplinary measure.
3. For a complaint about a working condition or a term of employment, within 14
days after the complainant becomes aware of the working condition or term of
employment giving rise to the complaint. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 8 (4).
Period for dispute resolution
9. (1) A complainant is not entitled to file a complaint with the Public Service
Grievance Board until expiry of the period provided under this section for dispute
resolution. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 9 (1).
(2) Subsection (1) does not affect the right of a public servant or other person to file
a complaint under Part V of the Act (Political Activity) or a complaint under Part VI of the
Act (Disclosing and Investigating Wrongdoing). O. Reg. 378/07, s. 9 (2).
(3) If the complainant was required to give a deputy minister notice of the proposal
to make the complaint, and if the deputy minister or his or her delegate meets with the
complainant within 30 days after the deputy minister receives the notice, the period
provided for dispute resolution expires on the earlier of,
(a) the day that is 30 days after the meeting; or
(b) the day on which the deputy minister gives written notice to the complainant of
his or her decision about the proposed complaint. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 9 (3).
(4) If the complainant was required to give the chair of the Public Service
Commission notice of the proposal to make the complaint, and if the chair or his or her
delegate meets with the complainant within 30 days after the chair receives the notice, the
period provided for dispute resolution expires on the earlier of,
(a) the day that is 30 days after the meeting; or
- 5 -
(b) the day on which the chair gives written notice to the complainant of his or her
decision about the proposed complaint. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 9 (4).
(5) If the deputy minister or chair of the Public Service Commission, as the case
may be, or his or her delegate does not meet with the complainant within 30 days after
receiving the notice, the period provided for dispute resolution expires 30 days after the
notice was given to the deputy minister or chair. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 9 (5).
Filing a complaint
10. (1) Within 14 days after the expiry of the period, if any, provided for dispute
resolution under section 9, the complainant may file the complaint with the Public Service
Grievance Board by delivering it to the chair of the Board. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 10 (1).
(2) The complaint must set out the reasons for the complaint and must include the
notice of the proposal, if any, to make the complaint and such other information and
documents as the Board may specify. O. Reg. 378/07, s. 10 (2).
[2] In three recent cases, the Public Service Grievance Board considered the legal implications
of the requirement imposed by section 8 of Regulation 387/07 to give notice of a complaint to
the Deputy Minister. In Jackson v. Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional
Services) [2011] O.P.S.G.B.A. No. 8 the Board made it clear that notice to the Deputy Minister
was an essential precondition for it to take jurisdiction over a complaint. At paragraph 38 of that
decision, the Board stated:
Furthermore, there was no suggestion that the Board can simply ignore the fact that the
preconditions in sections 8 and 9 were bypassed, or that there is power in the Board to
treat the matter as if those preconditions had been met. Nor am I aware of any authority
to that effect. In the result, it would appear that the complainant was not eligible to file
the grievance under s. 9 because none of the pre-conditions as to notice and allowance of
opportunity for the dispute resolution process occurred. If the complainant was not
eligible to file the grievance, there is no grievance properly before the Board, and it must
be dismissed.
[3] A similar approach was taken by the PSGB in a second case, Muldoon v. Ontario (Ministry
of Community Safety and Correctional Services) [2011] O.P.S.G.B.A. No. 13, where the
complainant had failed to give the required notice in respect of several complaints. The Board
stated in that case:
- 6 -
Given that the required notice was not given by the complainant in respect of any of these
complaints, the legal consequences are that the complainant was not eligible to file these
complaints with the Board so that these complaints are not properly before the Board.
[4] In both of the above cases, there had been a complete failure to give any notice to the
Deputy Minister, and the Board held that the combined effect of sections 4 and sections 8 of
Regulation 378/07 was to make giving notice of a complaint an essential condition of its
jurisdiction. In the third and most recent case, St. Amant v. Ontario (Ministry of Community
Safety and Correctional Services) [2013] O.P.S.G.B.A. No. 2, the Board dealt with the situation
where notice had been given but that notice fell outside the required time limits. The Board
stated in that case:
The Board does not consider that this difference changes the outcome for this complaint.
Given the mandatory language of the 14 day time limit set out in section 8, the Board
must conclude that notice given within that time limit is also just as much a precondition
for it to assume jurisdiction over a matter as the requirement to give the notice.
[5] The complainant did not dispute the employer’s contention that in this case he had received
a ten-day suspension on September 27, 2012, and that his notice of a proposal to file a complaint
was filed on November 21, 2012, with his Deputy Minister. The filing of this notice was clearly
well outside the 14 days stipulated by section 8(4) 2 of Regulation 378/07. As the Board held in
the St. Amant case, notice within that time limit is a precondition for the Board to assume
jurisdiction over a complaint. The late filing of this notice means that the complainant was not
authorized by that Regulation to file a complaint with the result that the Board has no jurisdiction
to deal with it.
[6] The language used to prescribe time limits in the new Regulation 378/07 leaves no doubt as
to its mandatory nature. Given the mandatory nature of these time limits and the lack of any
express statutory authority to relieve against these mandatory time limits, the Board has no
- 7 -
power to alter the jurisdictional consequences of a failure to comply with the time limits set out
in section 8 of that Regulation. It is for this reason that this complaint must be dismissed. This
conclusion is in no way a reflection on the merits of the complaint itself but merely a
determination that the Public Service Grievance Board, as a tribunal created by statutory
enactments, can only stay within the limits of these enactments.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 18th day of October 2013.
Donald D. Carter, Chair