Union of Canadian Correctional Officers - (UCCO-SACC-CSN) v. Treasury Board (Solicitor General Canada - Correctional Service)

Full Text

161-2-1263 (2004 PSSRB 71)
Union of Canadian Correctional Officers-Syndicat des agents correctionnels du Canada - CSN v. Treasury Board (Solicitor General Canada-Correctional Services)

Before:  J.-P. Tessier
Appearances: M. Laplante, for the Complainant; J. Champagne, for the Respondent
Decision rendered:  June 21, 2004

Unfair labour practice - Complaint pursuant to paragraph 23(1)(a) of the Public Service Staff Relations Act (PSSRA), alleging a violation of section 8 - Direct communication with employees - Discrimination - Union activity - the parties were engaged in negotiations - the complaint concerns two issues - first, the bargaining agent complains that the employer communicated directly with certain employees regarding negotiations in order to embarrass the bargaining agent and interfere with the bargaining agent's ability to represent its members - it also complains that the employer used threats, reprisals and abused its rights towards employees, more particularly employees who are also members of the institutional emergency response teams - at the bargaining table, the bargaining agent made it clear that improvements to the pension plan were an issue of importance - the employer maintained that improvements to the pension plan could not be negotiated at the bargaining table - through persistence, a member of the bargaining unit obtained an opinion from Treasury Board that the pension plan was not an issue that could be bargained at the table - he disseminated this opinion to many other members of the bargaining unit - the bargaining agent complains that the employer has threatened to discipline employees who are sympathetic to the union who use the employer's e-mail but has ignored employees' use of the e-mail system where these are opposed to the union - each penal institution maintains an emergency response team to deal with recalcitrant inmates, fires and training on the use of firearms and other defensive weapons - each team is comprised of volunteers - during negotiations, and in response to a request from the bargaining agent, 90% of the members of these teams resigned - the employer advised employees in the bargaining unit that in the event that the teams were required, the employer would order a former member of the team to respond and that in the face of repeated refusals to comply, employees would be susceptible to discipline and even discharge - the Board found that with regard to the e-mail correspondence with the employee in the bargaining unit, management had no intention of interfering in the affairs of the bargaining agent - the employee in question was a contributor to the pension plan and therefore a "client" of the pension plan and it was a normal reaction to respond directly to a query without necessarily wanting to interfere in the union - further, once the employer became aware of the situation, it took steps to ensure that the same thing did not occur again during negotiations - there was no evidence before the Board to indicate that the employer treated employees who were favourable to the union differently from employees who were not favourable with respect to their use of the employer's computer system - with respect to the use of former members of the emergency response teams in cases of recalcitrant inmates and fires, the Board held that the employer acted properly as recourse to such employees was justified on the basis of urgency and internal safety - however, these criteria did not apply to the situation of the employer forcing former firearms instructors to lead training courses and the employer should have looked at alternatives such as regional or outside instructors - the employer was entitled to ask employees to participate in training courses but not to threaten employees with discipline unless they ignored their union's request - to do so constituted interference in the union.

Complaint allowed in part.

Cases cited: Ager, PSSRB File No. 161-2-167 (1978) (QL); Public Service Alliance of Canada, PSSRB File No. 161-2-791 (1996)(QL); Jackson, PSSRB File No. 161-2-399 (1988) (QL); Public Service Alliance of Canada, PSSRB File No. 461-HC-10 to 12; Public Service Alliance of Canada v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, 2001 PSSRB 105.