Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats. Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving.
Creamer and Treasury Board (Health Canada)
Before: B. Turner
Appearances: D. Dagger, for the Grievor; R. Lafrenière, for the Employer
Decision rendered: July 16, 1997
Grievance procedure – Timeliness – Discretionary leave – Harassment – Duty to accommodate – the employer objected to the grievance on the basis that it was not timely – the employer added that, until the presentation of the grievance, it had never received a request for discretionary leave from the grievor – the grievor responded that the grievance was timely, as it was filed when he found out that he would no longer receive a government pay cheque – the adjudicator reserved his decision on the preliminary objection and heard the evidence on the merits – the grievor had been the victim of harassment from his immediate supervisor – this resulted in the grievor developing medical problems and being on sick leave on different occasions, the last of which lasted over one year – during that period, the grievor complied with the employer's request that he be examined by a Health Canada doctor, who concluded that the grievor could return to the full duties of his position with the restriction that his worksite not be located in Manitoba – eventually, the grievor accepted a deployment to Ontario – the grievor requested that the employer grant him discretionary leave, from the time the Health Canada doctor issued his conclusion until he accepted the offer of deployment to Ontario (seven months) – the grievor argued that the employer had recognized that he had been the victim of harassment – the grievor alleged that his absences from work were for reasons beyond his control and that he should not have had to use his leave credits to cover them – the grievor added that the employer had a duty to accommodate him – the employer argued that the leave sought by the grievor was discretionary and that there was no evidence that the employer had acted arbitrarily, or in a discriminatory or patently unreasonable way – the employer submitted that it had never admitted that the grievor's medical condition was a result of the harassment of which he had been a victim – the adjudicator decided that the grievance was not timely – the adjudicator added that the conduct of the employer had not been arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable and that it had not been in bad faith.
Case cited: Creamer (166-2-23231).