PUBLIC SERVICE |
Selection Process |
Competitions |
Brookman v. Canada (Attorney General)
T-920-99
Tremblay-Lamer J.
25/5/00
12 pp.
Judicial review of Public Service Commission Appeal Board's dismissal of appeal from Selection Board's decision screening applicant out of competition--Competition poster requiring document explaining in detail how applicant meeting experience criteria, along with résumé; indicating such document used as "part of" screening process--Applicant submitting covering letter, to which attached document entitled "Further to Footnote", résumé--Screened out on basis not meeting experience requirement--Selection Board relying only on "Further to Footnote" document, not referring to résumé to screen for experience although aware containing information supplementing "Further to Footnote"--Appeal Board concluding candidates not misled by competition poster; Selection Board not obliged to look further than requested experience summary in assessment of candidates' experience--Public Service Employment Act, s. 10 embodying merit principle, requiring best persons possible be selected for appointment--S. 21(1) providing for right to appeal against appointments--Application allowed--Purpose of right of appeal as mechanism for ensuring merit principle observed to prevent appointment contrary to merit principle, not to protect appellant's rights--Appeal Board's function to expose, correct errors in application of standards, methods of assessment having effect of undermining principle of selection according to merit--Administrative convenience of Selection Board in requiring potential candidates to highlight individual work history in relation to experience criteria for position not relieving it of statutory duty to ensure assessment of potential candidate's qualifications in accordance with merit--Applying rigid, mechanical method of screening candidate's experience may result in excluding qualified candidates from competitions--Appeal Board adopting same rigid, formalistic approach to assessment of potential candidate's qualifications as Selection Board--Case law reflecting notion Selection Board's imposition of "formality" to screening process should not have adverse effect of screening out potential successful candidates--Selection methodology employed inconsistent with merit principle, therefore patently unreasonable--Appeal Board making erroneous finding of fact when held competition poster not misleading--Candidate not aware of "internal administrative decision" to ignore résumé, normally principal document highlighting work history--Competition poster not reflecting idea experience summary sole document used in assessing potential candidate's experience--Reference in competition poster to résumé and experience summary as part of screening process would reasonably lead one to conclude candidate's experience to be assessed in light of both documents--Public Service Employment Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. P-33, ss. 10 (as am. by S.C. 1992, c. 54, s. 10), 21 (as am. idem, s. 16; 1996, c. 18, s. 15).