Grievance Case Summary - G-053

FACTS - JOB language requirements. ISSUES - Standing; personal vs policy grievance; "minimum bilingual complement"; bilingual vs Francophone or Anglophone; delays. Job Opportunity Bulletin requires BBB/BBB Priority 1 to meet Unit Bilingual Complement. Member grieves on basis of Force policy, preamble and s. 91 of Official Languages Act. Claims bilingualism discriminates against Anglophones; that language requirements over-rated: previous incumbent was unilingual. Wants bilingual requirements of Unit and all UBC's in Division cancelled, changing language requirements to 50% bilingual and 50% English essential.

OnOctober 18, 1991, the ERC issued its findings and recommendations. Member no standing re all UBC's: has not shown how aggrieved by all UBC's, and s. 31 RCMP Act not allowing "policy" grievances, only grievances involving personal injury. Supervisors only part of unit therefore 100% bilingual supervisors not same as 100% bilingual unit. Bilingualism not discrimination against one language group: both groups can learn second official language. Delays in referring grievance to ERC excessive. Recommended denying the grievance.

On January 29, 1992, the Commissioner rendered his decision. RCMP must comply with Official Languages Act. Unilingual members who choose to remain in bilingual regions will not be as competitive. RCMP policy was followed, member did not establish prejudice caused by all UBC's in Division: grievance denied on that point. Duties of supervisors reviewed, must be bilingual; grievance denied.