Canadian Labour Reporter

MARCH 17, 2014 6 Canadian HR Reporter, a Thomson Reuters business 2014 employee's spouse. Seniority – recall rights: 2 years. Call-in pay: Minimum 4 hours at regular rate or applicable overtime rate for all hours worked, whichever is greater. Probationary period: 990 hours. Discipline: Sunset clause is 5 years for paid or unpaid suspen- sions and 2 years for all other disciplinary action. Uniforms/clothing: $120 annually effective April 1, 2014. Mileage: 40.15¢ per km Sample rates of pay (current, after 3% increase): LPN01: $39,289 per year LPN02: $46,004 rising in 4 steps to $51,137 RN01: $56,911 RN02: $64,046 rising in 6 steps to $78,099 RN03: $65,718 rising in 6 steps to $79,890 RN04: $67,390 rising in 6 steps to $81,681 RN05: $75,292 rising in 5 steps to $89,318 RN06: $80,680 rising in 5 steps to $95,106 RN08: $72,782 rising in 5 steps to $86,063 RN09: $75,302 rising in 5 steps to $88,766 NP01: $89,391 rising in 6 steps to $108,166 Editor's notes: Standby: $13.50 for each 8-hour standby pe- riod. Increasing to $16.21 effective Oct. 31, 2014. Communica- tion: The employer will provide sufficient numbers of pagers or other communication devices for employees on standby. Time change: The semi-annual time change will not result in employ- ees being paid more or less. The hour difference will be split between employees completing their shift and those starting their shift. Compassionate care: 8 weeks unpaid leave. Arbitration Awards Summaries of recent arbitration awards from federal and provincial arbitration boards. For summaries from past issues, visit www.labour-reporter.com for a searchable online archive. Your paid subscription includes unlimited access to the archive. Continued on page 8 the past 20 years, the note added, he had been in the care of a psychiatrist. The educational assistant then reached out to CUPE and Aspen View, indicating he was seeking reinstatement and subsequent leave. He said, she said What ensued remains a point of contention for both CUPE and the employee. The staffer maintained he asked his union representative to grieve two matters — working conditions at the school and its acceptance of his resignation — but the union's response was that it could not do anything for him. But the union disagreed. The employee's representative could not recall any request to file a grievance. She did, how- ever, seek advice from CUPE's national representative and reported back that nothing further could be done to help the educational assistant's case. That defence had no legs, arbitrator Nancy Schlesinger ruled, as a plea for aid does not necessarily need to be spo- ken in as many words. "The whole point of seeking such advice was to find out if the union could do anything to assist the complainant," her decision reads. "We think it unlikely that (the union repre- sentative) would have sought advice if the complainant had not indicated in some manner that he regretted the loss of his employment and was looking for the union's help." Following that interaction (or lack thereof), the complain- ant sought a meeting with the CUPE national representative, the same person whom he believed to turn down his attempt at reinstatement. However, the union could not see any point in this meet- ing, and said as such. Instead, CUPE suggested a meeting between the complain- ant, employer and union — at the same time making it clear there was nothing more the union could do for the employee under the collective agreement. "Such a meeting would give the complainant the ability to speak his mind on the issue of his resignation and give him a sense of closure on the issue," the union explained. The employee disagreed, arguing the union pre-judged his case by refusing to meet with him prior to any such meeting. Tension at an all-time high, the parties did not meet fur- ther. Superficial review In order to determine whether CUPE failed to fairly represent its worker, Schlesinger said it must not be arbitrary. "In deciding whether or not to pursue a grievance, a union must avoid arbitrary, capricious, discriminatory or wrongful conduct. It must not act in bad faith," she explained, adding that it is arbitrary to give superficial attention to the issue, to make a decision without concern for the employee's needs or interests and, finally, it is arbitrary not to investigate. It was on this basis she concluded the union did not do its job in giving the complainant's case a chance. Instructor teaches union lesson in fairness THE UNION REPRESENTING teachers at a school in Athabasca, Alta., was taught a lesson in fairness after an instructor com- plained it failed to do its duty after he was fired. An educational assistant, whose name was withheld, had been employed at Aspen View Public School since 2009 but resigned in 2011, citing distress about how administration ad- dressed certain issues. His resignation letter — which was highly critical of the school — was not only distributed to his employer, but also to the student body later that day. Perhaps not surprisingly, management accepted the letter. But this was not a satisfying response for the employee. The following day he emailed his Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) representative, indicating he wanted to retract his resignation and instead pursue stress leave. For

• Cover