Information to Committee

The employee grieved the departmental-manager's refusal to provide information requested pursuant to Treasury Board Directive 2-20. The employee requested that the information be provided and that all consequences of management's actions which have adversely affected his ability to discharge his duties as a JOSH Committee member be corrected to his satisfaction.

On September 23, 1998, during a Safety and Health Committee meeting, the grievor requested that management provide him with a copy of the cleaning and snow removal contract in accordance with the relevant NJC Directive. On October 14, 1998, three employee representatives on the JOSH Committee, including the grievor made their request in writing to the Director.

On November 6, 1998, the Director denied the request on the basis that the monitoring of the performance of the cleaning and snow removal contract rests with the Finance and Administration Division. On November 11, 1998, the grievor filed the subject grievance.

The Bargaining Agent representative stated that the union's position is that the Employer, by refusing to provide the requested document, violated several sections of Directive 2-20. These include sections 17(6), 17(7), 17(10), 17(11) and 17(13). She asked the Committee to pay special attention to section 17(10), which stated:

"...The Committee may request from a Department such information as either party of the Committee considers necessary to identify existing or potential hazards with respect to materials, processes or equipment in the work place.

In considering the above, she stated that it stands to reason that as a member of the JOSH Committee representing the bargaining agent, that the grievor was entitled to the requested document.

The representative stated that in the opinion of the bargaining agent's legal section, if a request is made in good faith and/or there is a prima facie basis for it, and if there is a lack of consensus at the safety and health Committee, there is a violation of article 17(10) if the Safety and Health Committee does not act on the request regardless of the lack of consensus. The lack of consensus should not give a veto power to the other side of the Committee.

The representative stated that it is the duty of the OSH Committee to monitor measures and procedures related to the safety and health of employees and it is also their duty to receive, consider and dispose of complaints relating to the safety and Health of the employees.

In keeping with this, when examining the local committee's annual report, it confirmed that a large number of the complaints that the OSH Committee was involved in, dealt with snow removal and cleaning. It therefore can be argued that in order to help them deal with these complaints and in order to do effective workplace inspections, the Committee has to know what the obligations of the contractor are.

The Directive stated that the Committee should develop, establish and maintain programs, measures and procedures. The Committee may also provide advice in planning and implementing changes in the work place where occupational safety and health may be a factor, including work processes and procedures.

The representative submitted that the Committee should not only receive a copy of these contracts but should even be consulted and participates in the drafting of the Request for Proposal (RFP) before the tenders are offered. Based on the complaints they receive related to the maintenance of the parking area and the maintenance of the building, the Committee would certainly have preventive measures to recommend.

In conclusion, the representative noted that it was not the grievor's intention to deal directly with the contractors. Rather, as a Committee member making recommendation to the Employer, he had to know if a certain procedure or practice was already in the contract but not being applied or if he should make a recommendation that it be part of the contract in the future. His request was reasonable and made in good faith.

The Departmental representative was of the opinion that the Employer has no obligation to provide a copy of the cleaning and snow removal contract for several reasons.

Firstly, with regard to Committee powers, the Department agreed that under section 17(10) the local JOSH Committee has the right to request information, as either party considers necessary. However, the Department also felt that the manager, in this instance, exercised his management discretion by denying the request, given that the monitoring of the cleaning and snow removal contract was a management responsibility.

In his reply to the union JOSH members, the Director explained the reasons why he did not give them a copy of the cleaning and snow removal contract. He stated the responsibility for the cleaning and maintenance of the Departmental premises rests with PWGSC, the current owners of the building. He also explained that the responsibility for the monitoring of the performance of the contractors rests with management and staff of the Finance and Administration Division.

The representative noted that in his letter, the Director stated that he was not aware of any specific ongoing deficiencies with the cleanliness of the premises. In fact the Director gave the Union JOSH members an opportunity to explain why they thought they needed the contract. However these members never informed the Director of any deficiencies that would justify access to the contract. Rather, they chose to grieve the decision.

The representative stated that it is significant to note that section 17(10) states that a safety and health Committee "...may request from a department such information as either party of the Committee considers necessary to identify existing or potential hazards with respect to materials, processes or equipment in the work place." In this instance, it was not demonstrated that the information contained in the cleaning and snow removal contract was necessary to identify such hazards. The contract is almost 100 pages in size and contains information on costs, terms of payment, general instructions, staffing, etc. Management strongly believed that the JOSH Committee members do not need information of this nature.

The representative submitted that the NJC had previously clarified the intent of section 17(10) in a decision rendered in NJC file #20.4.152. The fifth paragraph of that decision reads as follows:

"... Either party can request information of the Department which established the Committee, however the process should be part of the rules of procedure established by the Committee and requests should be made through the Committee..."

The terms of reference of the Committee in question did not specify any process or rules of procedure that indicated which information the JOSH Committee should have access to and how this information was to be requested.

In a more recent decision, the NJC Executive Committee denied a request by several employees for a report on the OSH operating matters and Committee structures noting that the grievors were treated within the intent of the Directive, given that the report in question did not contain information identifying existing or potential hazards with respect to materials, processes or equipment in the workplace.

The Department was of the opinion that the denial of the union JOSH Committee members' request did not adversely affect their ability to perform their duties as JOSH Committee members. Management JOSH Committee members were more than willing to address ail health and safety issues in the workplace, including any relevant information contained in the cleaning and snow removal contract. However, management did not believe that the one hundred page document which contained information on costs, terms of payment, general instructions and staffing was a prerequisite to being able to discharge his or her duties as a JOSH Committee member.

In conclusion, the representative reiterated that the grievance should be denied for the following reasons:

• Section 17 (10) states that information can be requested, not that it should necessarily be given (management discretion);
• By denying the request for a copy of the said contract, the Director was exercising management discretion;
• The terms of reference of the Committee do not indicate that the role of the JOSH Committee is to monitor the cleaning and snow removal contract;
• The contract does not contain information identifying existing or potential hazards with respect to materials, processes or equipment in the workplace.

He stated that management, however, continued to listen to the comments and suggestions of the JOSH union members. The local snow removal Committee, which included a union member of the JOSH Committee, was an example of management's commitment to work with the union representatives to create a healthy and safe work environment.

The Executive Committee considered and agreed that the grievor was treated within the intent of the Committees and Representatives Directive, given that the cleaning and snow removal contract he requested did not contain information identifying existing or potential hazards with respect to materials, processes or equipment in the workplace. However, the Committee agreed that as a general rule any requested information should be provided unless it is proprietary or protected. As such, in this case, the information requested could have been made available to the employee as a member of the JOSH Committee.

The grievance was denied.