Decision made with inappropriate article in collective agreement: Arbitrator
Despite receiving support from colleagues in his department — who were willing to pick up the slack — a University of Moncton professor was turned down when he asked for a reduced workload to complete research.
Louis Corriveau was a professor in the university’s economics department. He was hired in 1997 and he received permanent status in 2002.
In spring 2015, Corriveau was busy at work on a new research paper and he was participating in a new professor selection process. As a result, he delayed visiting his mother in Quebec City. She subsequently died in July and Corriveau said he was upset about not being able to spend more time with her.
In February 2016, Corriveau asked for a reduction in his workload to 80 per cent, between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017. The request was denied on March 31, 2016, by the vice-principal of teaching and research André Samson.
Before submitting the workload request, Corriveau met with Lisa Roy, dean of the faculty of arts and social sciences. She told him to submit a request, but he should expect it to be refused.
“The university is not in a position to accept such a request,” wrote Samson in his decision (translated from French by Google Translate). “Corriveau can certainly carry out his work as part of a normal workload.”
Samson testified the decision was his alone and he was not aware of Corriveau’s personal reasons for the request or that Roy had previously suggested to Corriveau that he needed to become more “productive” in his research duties.
The union, Association des bibliothécaires, professeures et professeurs de l’Université de Moncton (ABPPUM) grieved the result and argued the arbitrary decision was not arrived at fairly or reasonably, as directed in the collective agreement.
ABPPUM also argued Samson did not ask for any supporting information when considering the request.
The university countered and said the application did not include any supporting material, which weakened Corriveau’s case for a reduced workload.
Arbitrator Elizabeth MacPherson upheld the grievance, but it was not “discriminatory or in bad faith. However, the decision was arbitrary as it failed to meet the standards set out above.”
The vice-principal “improperly fettered his discretion” in making the decision, according to MacPherson.
“Having obtained the endorsement of the departmental assembly and the dean, an applicant can have a reasonable expectation that the requested reduced workload will be granted and not arbitrarily dismissed because a vice-principal has unilaterally decided, without justification, that leaves under article 37 will only be granted on an exceptional basis,” said MacPherson. “In cases where both the departmental assembly and the dean support an application made under article 37, the university must provide a cogent and persuasive rationale for refusing the request. That did not happen in this case.”
And the vice-principal relied upon the wrong article in the collective agreement to make the decision, according to the arbitrator.
“Article 37 is clearly distinct from article 24, which contemplates paid leave to conduct research. An employee who is seeking unpaid leave would reasonably expect that his application should be made under article 37, not article 24. During his testimony, Samson admitted that he could envision circumstances in which article 37 could apply to research request. However, it is evident that this was not his opinion at the time he dealt with Corriveau’s request,” said MacPherson.
Since the time had passed to award Corriveau time off, MacPherson ordered “should Corriveau apply for a reduced workload pursuant to article 37 in the future, his application is to be dealt with in accordance with the principles set out in these reasons.”
Reference: University of Moncton and Association des bibliothécaires, professeures et professeurs de l’Université de Moncton. Elizabeth MacPherson — arbitrator. Sylvie Michaud for the employer. Joël Michaud for the employee. May 19, 2017.
