Canada ( Attorney General ) v. Cleary
T-1533-96
Rothstein J.
11/1/99
6 pp.
Judicial review of adjudicator's decision respondent, civilian employee of Department of National Defence, entitled to acting pay at rate of pay for Major in Armed Forces-Respondent, whose occupation classified as level EG-05, performing duties of Major, apart from military duties, on acting basis-Paid at lowest rate of pay for EG-06-Grieved, alleging entitled to rate of pay of Major, but prepared to accept highest rate of pay for EG-06-Adjudicator holding Master Agreement, clause M-27.07 providing entitled to acting pay as if appointed to higher classification level-Apparently relying upon Francoeur v. Canada (Attorney General) (1996), 112 F.T.R. 113 (F.C.T.D.) wherein Richard J. holding clause M-27.07 availing to benefit of employee even when duties employee performed not covered by same bargaining unit-F.C.A. subsequently reversing Richard J. ((1997), 220 N.R. 51) on basis judicial intervention not warranted as adjudicator's decision French version of clause M-27.07 restricted classifications to levels under collective agreement not unreasonable-Whether clause M-27.07 allowing for recognition of higher classification outside hierarchy of classifications of collective agreement applicable to respondent-Standard of review from decision of adjudicator under Public Service Staff Relations Act patent unreasonableness-While F.C.A. apparently of view more restrictive interpretation of clause M-27.07 not unreasonable, not determinative of matter as substance of decision that Trial Division erred in interfering with adjudicator's decision because not unreasonable-Although seems as if classifications should be those recognized by collective agreement only, without more than clause M-27.07 before Court, unable to say Adjudicator's decision patently unreasonable-Application dismissed.