Article content material continued
“The result’s that, whereas (Skof) technically remained an worker of the Ottawa Police Service, he was expressly not topic to the collective settlement. He can’t, consequently, invoke the grievance process below the collective settlement to handle his suspension, assuming that he would in any other case have had the correct to take action.”
The enchantment court docket additionally discovered that the character of the dispute is just not one between worker and employer however one which offers with whether or not disciplinary motion should have been taken.
“In any occasion, I don’t agree with (Bordeleau and the police board) that the important character of the declare is expounded to the employment relationship. On the contrary, the important character of the declare pertains to disciplinary motion taken by Bordeleau below his authority as Chief of Police,” Nordheimer wrote.
The “solely treatment for a police officer who asserts that s/he has been topic to a suspension that’s illegal” is to convey the matter to court docket, the court docket discovered.
Labrosse erred find that Skof needed to apply for judicial assessment of the suspension quite than launching a civil motion, in response to the choice.
“(Skof’s) motion is just not merely an motion for judicial assessment. It’s an motion for various heads of reduction together with claims for damages for constitution breaches and for misfeasance in public workplace,” Nordheimer wrote. “Actually, learn generously, the assertion of declare seems to name into query whether or not Bordeleau had authority … to droop (Skof), given his place. Put one other approach, it’s an debatable query whether or not (Skof) is ‘a police officer’.”