Public Service Staffing Tribunal
Symbol of the Government of Canada

Common menu bar links

Website in transition!

On November 1, 2014, the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board (PSLREB) was created. The PSLREB was created when the Public Service Labour Relations Board (PSLRB) and the Public Service Staffing Tribunal (PSST) merged. This PSST website is in the process of being phased out in favour of the new PSLREB website. During a period of transition, this PSST website will continue to provide archived reports, decisions, and transitional information. Please visit the new PSLREB website for the most recent content.

Béland-Falardeau v. Chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board

Link to Full text

Neutral Citation:  

2014 PSST 18


Decision Date:  

2014-10-31



Keywords:

Qualifications; Experience; Candidate’s responsibility; Assessment; Assessment tools.

Summary:

The complainant’s application was screened out on the ground that he did not meet the essential qualification relating to recent work experience in a quasi-judicial or judicial process. The complainant submitted that the respondent committed an abuse of authority by failing to consider his experience as a benefits officer in a PM-02 position at Service Canada as work experience in a quasi-judicial or judicial process.

Decision:

The respondent considered a process to be judicial or quasi-judicial if it included the following four criteria: (1) evidence is taken; (2) arguments are made; (3) there is a decision-maker who hears and decides the matter; and (4) the decision-maker complies with the requirements of impartiality and independence. The Tribunal determined that it was reasonable for the respondent to use these criteria as the basis for the assessment tool. It was the complainant’s responsibility to clearly demonstrate on his job application that he met all the essential qualifications. In addition, the Tribunal concluded that there is no evidence that the assessment tools used by the respondent were inadequate or that the respondent applied these tools incorrectly. The Tribunal therefore concluded that the complainant did not demonstrate that the respondent abused his authority by screening out the complainant’s application on the ground that he does not meet the essential qualification of recent work experience in a quasi-judicial or judicial process.

Complaint dismissed.