Highland View Regional Hospital v Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), Local 92
Casual Employee, Seniority Provisions, Training, Collective Agreement, Evidence
The Grievor grieves the placement of a casual employee in a posted position for which she had competed. The successful applicant had previous experience in the position on a casual basis and was fully trained. While the Grievor is clearly senior and of similar educational background, she has no experience in the position in question and would require a substantial period of training. The Union argues that as Article 3.05 of the Collective Agreement excludes casual employees from the Agreement, the successful applicant, as a casual employee, had no standing to apply for the position under the Agreement. It further argues, the experience gained as a casual employee ought not to be considered in judging qualifications for permanent jobs, lest the seniority provisions be circumvented. As such, the Union argues Article 13.02 requires the position to go to the Grievor, their skills being "relatively equal" and the Grievor being more senior.
Highland View Regional Hospital v Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), Local 92 (1985), 1985 CanLII 4695 (NSLA) (Arbitrator: Innis Christie).