Already involved in a civil lawsuit and in two grievances against Radio-Canada following her stormy departure in the summer of 2021, Pascale Nadeau is also in dispute with her union, learned The Press.
The former head of the antenna Newscast accuses the Syndicat des Travailleurs et Travailles de Radio-Canada (STTRC) of having failed in its duty of “fair representation” by acting “arbitrarily” and “in bad faith”.
The complaint of M.me Nadeau was filed on April 20, 2022 with the Canada Industrial Relations Board, a quasi-judicial tribunal specializing in federal labor relations.
More specifically, the former journalist accuses the union of having given bad advice and of having delayed filing two grievances. One concerns what she considers to be “constructive dismissal”.
The former headliner had made the request on March 16, 2021, July 7 and 8, 2021 as well as August 24, 2021, according to a file of nearly 800 pages that The Press was able to consult.
It was finally on August 25, 2021 that the union amended an existing grievance to include the issue of “constructive dismissal”. However, an arbitration tribunal concluded on January 27, 2022 that this reason should have been the subject of a separate complaint. A second grievance was therefore filed on February 16, 2022, but the 30-day limitation period provided for in the collective agreement had expired.
“Not only did the union fail to communicate [à Pascale Nadeau] the deadlines provided for in the collective agreement to contest a constructive dismissal, but [il] also failed to give him the facts by making him believe that it was not necessary to file a specific allegation concerning the constructive dismissal, ”argues the lawyer for Ms.me Nadeau, Sophie Cloutier, of Poudrier Bradet, in the complaint.
Replica
In its reply, the union affiliated with the CSN acknowledges having made an error in the summer of 2021, but this “is not of such a nature as to entail its liability” under section 37 of the Canada Labor Code, he argues.
According to the complaint of M.me Nadeau, the union not only gave a poorly supported opinion, but it also sought to “hide its error” after the fact, in particular by pressing for the decision of the arbitrator rendered on January 27, 2022 not to be publicized.
In an email exchange dated February 2, 2022, Mr.e Julien Boucher Carrier, lawyer for the union, suggests “strongly” to Mr.me Nadeau for not answering questions from a journalist from The Press. “It would only put the spotlight on uninteresting news, in addition to the risks for arbitration,” he wrote.
Defamation Grievance
A quick reminder of the facts: on February 17, 2021, the headliner of Radio-Canada was suspended for 30 days following an anonymous report for “inappropriate behavior” and an internal investigation. It was this suspension that led to the filing of a first grievance on February 25.
On August 5, 2021, Radio-Canada announced in a press release the “retirement” of its anchor, who had been on sick leave for several months. “The News management team was keen to see it return to the air this fall,” wrote Michel Bissonnette, senior vice-president of Radio-Canada, in a press release. This version is contradicted by Pascale Nadeau, who claims to have been pushed towards the exit.
In addition to her grievance requests for “constructive dismissal”, Pascale Nadeau also asked her union, on August 24, 2021, to file a complaint against her employer for defamation and damage to reputation.
This request targeted the statements of the management of Radio-Canada as well as tweets published on August 19, 2021 which mentioned “several victims and witnesses” linked to his suspension. “Which was in complete contradiction with the conclusions of the investigation report” of the public broadcaster, we read in the complaint.
Mme Nadeau argues that the union took too long to file a grievance against his allegations of reputational damage and defamation. Initially, a CSN adviser had erroneously told the newscaster that only the Superior Court had jurisdiction to decide these questions. These were finally added to the grievance for “constructive dismissal” of February 16, beyond the limitation period.
The union claims that the Woods firm, mandated by Mr.me Nadeau, took more than five months to determine whether the arbitrator had jurisdiction in the matter. The question “is complex enough that the Union cannot be blamed for a contrary opinion that was not questioned by the complainant for several months,” he argues.
It remains to be seen whether the grievance arbitrator will agree to extend the normal time limits provided for in the agreement, which both parties want.
Fees and damages
Pascale Nadeau asks the Canada Industrial Relations Board that the grievance “contesting her constructive dismissal, the defamation and the psychological harassment of which she was the victim” be heard in arbitration with the lawyer of her choice, at the expense of the union.
The former presenter is also claiming damages to be determined “due to the stress, inconvenience and losses resulting from the faults of the union”.
No judgment has yet been rendered.
Both parties declined to comment on the case as the proceedings are still ongoing.
Hearings on the merits of the first grievance, which concerns the suspension, are continuing this winter.