Boucher v. Canada ( Attorney General )
T-2425-97
McKeown J.
2/11/98
11 pp.
Judicial review of Public Service Commission Appeal Board's dismissal of applicants' allegations with respect to selections for appointment by Selection Board in closed competition for position of Immigration Settlement Counsellor-Factors assessed in competition weighted as follows by Selection Board: Knowledge-10%; Ability-40%; Personal suitability60%-Selection Board determining two of ability qualifications, and all those listed under personal suitability critical-Accordingly candidates had to achieve minimum score in these areas to qualify in competition-Department placing significance on ability, personal suitability because position involving dealing with very sensitive, high profile issues in community; poor decisions or inappropriate interactions by incumbent with clients, agencies could result in damaged relationships, negative media coverage-Knowledge only weighted at 10% of overall score because could easily be learned on job-Applicant Boucher found not to have met two of critical personal suitability qualifications; applicant McBride failed to meet one of critical personal suitability qualifications-Applicants alleging, in ranking for appointment three candidates who failed knowledge component of selection process, Selection Board effectively failing to test for knowledge, thus violating merit principle-Also alleging merit principle violated in weighting knowledge factor at 10%-Application dismissed-Knowledge not ignored-Score for knowledge included in overall scores of all candidates-Moreover Selection Board deciding in advance not to require minimum score in this area-MacKintosh v. Canada (Public Service Commission Appeal Board), [1990] F.C.J. No. 834 (C.A.) (QL) not reported, wherein question eliminated from test already administered, effectively enabling candidate to remain eligible despite having failed on question, distinguished-In Laberge v. Canada (Attorney General), [1988] 2 F.C. 137 (C.A.), Pratte J.A. noting merit principle requiring selection of candidate who, at time of competition best able to perform all duties specified in competition notice; not meaning candidate cannot undergo normal training period to become familiar with new duties-This exception applicable herein as Selection Board noting necessary knowledge could be acquired on job, and with reference to detailed manual-Minimum requirements, established in advance of selection process, applied equally to all candidates, and non-critical qualification of knowledge factored into global assessment of all candidates-Inclusion of knowledge scores in overall ranking sufficient under circumstances, consistent with merit principle-As to weighting, Selection Board to determine relative importance assigned to departmental qualifications-Appeal Board correctly holding no error by Selection Board in making global assessment, and success in other areas can overcome relative lack of knowledge exhibited by successful candidates-As same standard applied to all candidates, no violation of merit principle.