Grievance Case Summary - G-317

The Grievor presented a grievance on June 29, 2002 because the Division coordinator of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Program shared with the Grievor's officer in charge certain information about him that was obtained from employees during a workplace consensus-building process. The Grievor submitted that the Respondent infringed his rights by breaching confidentiality and asserted that the allegations are unfounded and untrue.

On January 13, 2003, the Level I adjudicator rendered an interlocutory decision. He concluded that it was premature to decide whether the Grievor was entitled to act. He ordered the disclosure of certain documents and deemed that other documents requested were not relevant and would accordingly not have to be disclosed to the Grievor. On June 5, 2003, the Level I adjudicator rendered a second decision, elaborating on the issue of what the Respondent was required to disclose to the Grievor.

On July 3, 2003, the Respondent sent the Staff Relations Office a copy of all the documents requested by the member since he filed his grievance. These documents were forwarded to the Grievor. On September 12, 2003, the Grievor presented a new series of questions to the Respondent. On October 28, 2003, the Level I adjudicator ruled that the Grievor had received all the relevant documents and that it was time for him to present his argument in support of his grievance. He also concluded that the Respondent was in no way required to answer the Grievor's questions.

The Grievor requested that the decision be reviewed at Level II. The grievance reviewer in this case informed the Grievor by telephone that the Level I adjudicator had to rule on the merits of the grievance before the matter could be presented to the Level II adjudicator. The Grievor nevertheless insisted that his grievance be presented at Level II, which it was.

The grievance was presented prematurely at Level II since the Level I adjudicator had still not ruled on the merits of the grievance when the Grievor decided to present his grievance at Level II.

The Commissioner should state that it is beyond his jurisdiction to rule on the merits of this grievance.

The Commissioner accepted the findings and recommendation of the Committee. The Commissioner stated that it is beyond his jurisdiction to rule on the merits of the grievance and he returned it to Level I so that a decision on the merits can be taken.