Former Radio-Canada anchor Pascale Nadeau was not forced to retire, nor was she the victim of a “constructive dismissal” from her former employer, ruled the arbitration tribunal in a recent decision.
“The evidence does not support a continuity of management maneuvers aimed at bringing Mme Nadeau to decide to quit his job. On the contrary, the evidence presented shows that the employer wants Ms.me Nadeau to continue his employment after his suspension, ”reads the document dated January 27, of which The duty got a copy.
On August 5, Radio-Canada announced the departure of Mr.me Nadeau, stating that she had “recently informed the news department of her intention to retire [à l’automne 2021] “. The former host of Téléjournal weekend had indicated later, in an open letter published in The sunthat she had been the target of a “disciplinary drift” following an “anonymous” complaint.
It turns out that M.me Nadeau was suspended for one month without pay on February 17 following an investigation triggered by an anonymous complaint for “inappropriate behavior”. The journalist went on disability leave in the wake of this disciplinary measure and never returned to the airwaves until the announcement of her departure.
The Union of Radio-Canada Workers filed a grievance on February 25, 2021 regarding this disciplinary suspension, described by Mr.me Nadeau of “retaliatory measures”, “abuse of rights” and attack on his “integrity”.
Six months later, on August 25, the union requested a grievance amendment to add that Ms.me Nadeau had “been the victim of a constructive dismissal” and to claim his reinstatement.
different dispute
It was this request for amendment that the court rejected last week. Based on the evidence provided, the arbitrator found that Ms.me Nadeau had decided to retire prematurely voluntarily, without being pushed to do so by her ex-employer. He adds that the dispute in question is different from that opened by the initial grievance and should have been the subject of a second grievance within 30 days of the allegation of “constructive dismissal”. However, this deadline was not respected, and “no reasonable explanation or justification was provided to override [ce délai] provided for in the collective agreement.
Voluntary retirement
According to the evidence, Mr.me Nadeau announced his intention to retire from Radio-Canada’s human resources department as well as Ginette Viens, first director of the information network, on June 28, 2021. Ms.me Viens offered to discuss it, but the ex-host replied that this decision “belongs to her”.
“She adds that she did not plan to leave this year and especially not in this way after 38 years of career. She concludes that what she has been subjected to since day one of this “senseless investigation” in addition to attacking her “integrity” does not “allow her other alternatives”, “we can read.
Mme Nadeau reiterates his decision to retire in another email sent to Mr.me Come on July 8, 2021, specifying this time to do it “against his will” and says he is the victim of “a constructive dismissal” for the first time.
French Services Chief Information Officer Luce Julien responded on July 9. In this email, we understand that management expected Ms.me Nadeau regains her place as anchor of Téléjournal weekend, after her suspension. She adds that it “is in no way a constructive dismissal”.
“A dismissal, even ‘disguised’, remains the fault of the employer. It cannot arise from the voluntary actions of the employee. Nor can it be caused by the otherwise legitimate decisions of the employer, such as to carry out an investigation which is imposed on it by the Law and its internal policies”, indicates the arbitrator in his decision.
reactions
“It’s an important decision. The arbitrator confirms what Radio-Canada said last summer: Ms. Nadeau was not constructively dismissed, […] she voluntarily quit her job, ”said public broadcaster spokesperson Marc Pichette.
“This decision is limited to refusing to have the scope of the grievance broadened,” reacted Pierre Tousignant, president of the Radio-Canada Workers’ Union.
He recalls that the case is far from over, since the hearings continue on March 25th. The suspension of the ex-host will this time be at the heart of the debate before the same referee.