Postal dispute arbitrator should recuse himself due to bias, says federal court

The arbitrator appointed by the government to settle the labour dispute between postal workers and Canada Post should be recused, says a federal court.

After the government passed the Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act in June, 2011 – the one that prompted a lengthy filibuster by the new opposition New Democrats – Guy Dufort was appointed as the arbitrator in the disagreement.

But then Dufort informed both Canada Post and the postal workers afterward that he had been involved with the Conservative party in 2010, as well as having been the prosecutor for Canada Post during a past pay dispute which lasted from 1998 to 2003.

Given the latter, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) asked that Dufort recuse himself. A federal court has now agreed with them.

“In light of the unique context of labour relations and the special Law, the Court concludes that a reasonable and sensible person might worry that the arbitrator is biased because of these two reasons,” the court concluded.

The court has ordered Dufort to recues himself and for Labour Minister Lisa Raitt to appoint a new arbitrator.

UPDATE 12:10PM

Raitt told iPolitics via email Wednesday that it would “not be appropriate to comment at this time as we are currently reviewing the decision,” but noted that “CUPW provided Mr. Dufort’s name on their short list of potential arbitrators put forth in November 2011.”

“Our government took action and passed a law to restore delivery mail to Canadians,” Raitt said in the email. ” We acted in the best interests of Canadians in doing so. The bill also provided a process to the parties to conclude a collective agreement.”

UPDATE: 12:53PM

CUPW has responded to the ruling in a press release, saying it welcomes the court’s decision.

“This decision shows that we have been right to oppose this flawed process,” CUPW National President, Denis Lemelin said in the release. “The government is not getting it right.”

The union has also written to Raitt, and asked for another mediator to be appointed to “facilitate” the bargaining process “instead of appointing another ‘friend’ to force a winner-takes-all final offer selection on the parties as mandated by the back-to-work legislation.”

Original Article
Source: ipolitics
Author: Colin Horgan