Website in transition!

On November 1, 2014, the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board (PSLREB) was created. The PSLREB was created when the Public Service Labour Relations Board (PSLRB) and the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (PSST) merged. This PSLRB website is in the process of being phased out in favour of the new PSLREB website. During a period of transition, this PSLRB website will continue to provide archived reports, decisions, and transitional information. Please visit the new PSLREB website for the most recent content.

Bremsak v. Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada et al.

document icon
Full Text

2011 PSLRB 95

Before: Paul Love
Decision Rendered: July 22, 2011
Original Language: English
An application for judicial review before the Federal Court of Appeal has been dismissed (2012 FCA 91) (Court file: A-297-11).

Complaints based on paragraph 190(1)(g) of the Public Service Labour Relations Act (“the Act”) alleging a violation of section 188 – Applications for consent to prosecute – Compliance with Board orders – Enforcement

In an earlier decision (2009 PSLRB 159), the Board had found that a policy of the complainant’s bargaining agent that had been applied to remove her from positions with the bargaining agent violated the Act, had ordered that the policy no longer be applied to her and had ordered that she be reinstated in her positions – the complainant filed four complaints, alleging that the respondents continued to apply the bargaining agent’s policy to her – she also filed five applications for consent to prosecute based on the respondents’ alleged continued application of the bargaining agent’s policy to her – the Board found that, in essence, the complaints and applications were about enforcing orders contained in its earlier decision – the Board found further that its earlier decision had completely disposed of the complainant’s concerns with respect to the application of the bargaining agent’s policy to her – as the Board’s earlier decision had been filed in the Federal Court for enforcement purposes, and as that Court had ordered that a representative of the bargaining agent appear at a contempt hearing, the Board found no legitimate labour relations purpose to decide on the continued application of the bargaining agent’s policy to the complainant and the related applications for consent to prosecute.

Complaints dismissed.

Applications dismissed.