Date: 20021122
Docket: T-1463-00
Neutral Citation: 2002 FCT 1202
BETWEEN:
Kevin Marchessault
Applicant
- and -
Canada Post Corporation
Respondent
[1] In 1992, Mr. Marchessault was working as a postmaster on a temporary basis in Coderre, Saskatchewan, and very much wanted to assume the full time position of postmaster. A federal public service competition for this position was made open for application between December 1 to 18, 1992, however, as the position was classified as "bilingual imperative" and Mr. Marchessault was not bilingual, he could not qualify. Mr. Marchessault's objection to this classification is the basis for the present application.
[2] Early in 1993, Mr. Marchessault first voiced his objection to the Commissioner of Official Languages ("the Commissioner") but, as he did not receive a positive response, did not take the matter further at that time. However, after the passage of some seven years, obviously still not being satisfied with the negative opinion received to his complaint, Mr. Marchessault again objected to the Commissioner but this time on a new argument. By letter dated June 28, 2000, the Commissioner again refused to accept Mr. Marchessault's complaint as valid. It is with respect to this second "decision" of the Commissioner that Mr. Marchessault applies for judicial review in the present case.
[3] In response to the application, counsel for the Respondent argues that, since Mr. Marchessault did not apply for a review of the Commissioner's decision within 60 days of the first decision of the Commissioner as required by s.77(2) of the Official Languages Act (the "Act") R.S.C. 1985 c.31 (4th Supp), and no good cause has been shown for the delay, his application should not proceed. However, I find that the courtesy shown to Mr. Marchessault in the rendering of the June 28, 2000 opinion by the Commissioner does open an opportunity to review the heart of the matter, that is, the 1992 decision made by the Canada Post Corporation ("Canada Post") that only bilingual persons qualify to be postmaster at Coderre. Indeed, it is time to put Mr. Marchessault's complaint to rest.
[4] What was the applicable law that resulted in the 1992 Canada Post decision? I find that, at the time the posting decision was made by Canada Post, being before December 1, 1992, the most important legislative requirement to be met in determining whether a position is bilingual is that of "significant demand" contained within s.22(b) of the Act as follows:
| 22. Every federal institution has the duty to ensure that any member of the public can communicate with and obtain available services from its head or central office in either official language, and has the same duty with respect to any of its other offices or facilities (a) within the National Capital Region; or (b) in Canada or elsewhere, where there is significant demand for communications with and services from that office or facility in that language.
|
|
22. Il incombe aux institutions fédérales de veiller à ce que le public puisse communiquer avec leur siège ou leur administration centrale, et en recevoir les services, dans l'une ou l'autre des langues officielles. Cette obligation vaut également pour leurs bureaux - auxquels sont assimilés, pour l'application de la présente partie, tous autres lieux où ces institutions offrent des services - situés soit dans la région de la capitale nationale, soit là où, au Canada comme à l'étranger, l'emploi de cette langue fait l'objet d'une demande importante. |
|
|
|
|
[5] With respect to reaching a conclusion on "significant demand", s.91 of the Act applies to the 1992 Canada Post decision and is as follows:
| 91. Nothing in Part IV or V authorizes the application of official language requirements to a particular staffing action unless those requirements are objectively required to perform the functions for which the staffing action is undertaken. |
|
91. Les parties IV et V n'ont pour effet d'autoriser la prise en compte des exigences relatives aux langues officielles, lors d'une dotation en personnel, que si elle s'impose objectivement pour l'exercice des fonctions en cause. |
|
|
|
|
Thus, the language requirement cannot be imposed frivolously or arbitrarily (Canada (Attorney General) v. Viola [1991] F.C. 373 (C.A.)) but must be reached on a factual basis (Professional Institute of Public Service v. Canada [1993] 2 F.C. 90).
[6] What factual basis was applied in reaching the 1992 decision? In reaching the decision, Canada Post established its own criteria for determining "significant demand"; if there was a minority official languages population of 500 or 10% of the total population of a given community or area, Canada Post deemed this area to have a "significant demand" requiring bilingual services.
[7] In fact, Canada Post used the 1991 census as its factual basis for reaching its conclusion; by the 1991 census, 33.8 % of the population of Coderre claimed French as their official language and, thus, this was decided to be a "significant demand". In my opinion, this is a most reasonable conclusion reached properly on the legislation cited above.
[8] The question of the applicability of the Official Languages Act Regulations (SOR/92-48) ("the Regulations") has played a prominent part in the arguments presented in the present case. The pertinent sections of the Regulations are as follows:
| 3. "English or French linguistic minority population" means that portion of the population in a province in which an office or facility of a federal institution is located that is the numerically lower official language population in the province, as determined by Statistics Canada under Method I on the basis of
(a) for the purposes of paragraphs 5(1)(a), (b) and (d) to (r), subsection 5(2) and paragraph 7(4)(a),
(i) before the results of the 1991 census of population are published, the 1986 census of population taken pursuant to the Statistics Act, and (ii) after the results of the 1991 census of population are published, the most recent decennial census of population for which results are published; and
...
5. (1) For the purposes of paragraph 22(b) of the Act, there is significant demand for communications with and services from an office or facility of a federal institution in both official languages where
... (l) the office or facility is located outside a CMA and within a CSD that it serves, the CSD has at least 500 persons of the English or French linguistic minority population, the number of those persons is equal to less than 5 per cent of the total population in the CSD and the office or facility is the only office or facility of the institution in the CSD that provides
(i) services related to income security programs of the Department of National Health and Welfare,
(ii) services of a post office,
(iii) services of an employment centre of the Department of Employment and Immigration, (iv) services of an office of the Department of National Revenue (Taxation), (v) services of an office of the Department of the Secretary of State of Canada, (vi) services of a detachment of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or
(vii) services of an office of the Public Service Commission;
...
(p) the office or facility is located outside a CMA and within a CSD that it serves, the CSD has fewer than 200 persons of the English or French linguistic minority population, the number of those persons is equal to at least 30 per cent of the total population in the CSD and the office or facility provides any of the services referred to in subparagraphs (l)(i) to (vii); ...
13. (1) Sections 1 to 4, paragraphs 5(1)(a) to (c), (e) to (j), (l), (m), (o) and (p), subsections 5(2) and (4), paragraphs 6(2)(b) and (c), subsections 7(3) and (4), section 8, paragraphs 9(a) to (c) and sections 10 and 11 shall come into force one year after the date of registration of these Regulations by the Clerk of the Privy Council. |
|
3. « Population de la minorité francophone ou anglophone » s'entend, relativement à la province où est situé un bureau d'une institution fédérale, de la population de l'une des langues officielles qui est minoritaire dans la province selon l'estimation faite par Statistique Canada conformément à la méthode I en fonction :
a) pour l'application des alinéas 5(1)a), b) et d) à r), du paragraphe 5(2) et de l'alinéa 7(4)a) :
(i) avant la publication des données du recensement de la population de 1991, des données du recensement de la population de 1986 fait en vertu de la Loi sur la statistique, (ii) après la publication des données du recensement de la population de 1991, des données du plus récent recensement décennal de la population qui sont publiées; ...
5. (1) Pour l'application de l'article 22 de la Loi, l'emploi des deux langues officielles fait l'objet d'une demande importante à un bureau d'une institution fédérale, en ce qui a trait aux communications et aux services, dans l'une ou l'autre des circonstances suivantes : ...
l) le bureau est situé à l'extérieur d'une région métropolitaine de recensement et à l'intérieur d'une subdivision de recensement qu'il dessert et dont la population de la minorité francophone ou anglophone compte au moins 500 personnes et représente moins de cinq pour cent de l'ensemble de la population de cette subdivision et il est le seul bureau de l'institution fédérale dans la subdivision à offrir l'un ou l'autre des services suivants :
(i) les services reliés aux programmes de la sécurité du revenu qui relèvent du ministère de la Santé nationale et du Bien-être social, (ii) les services d'un bureau de poste, (iii) les services d'un centre d'emploi du ministère de l'Emploi et de l'Immigration, (iv) les services d'un bureau du ministère du Revenu national (Impôt), (v) les services d'un bureau du secrétariat d'État du Canada,
(vi) les services d'un détachement de la Gendarmerie royale du Canada, (vii) les services d'un bureau de la Commission de la fonction publique; ...
p) le bureau est situé à l'extérieur d'une région métropolitaine de recensement et à l'intérieur d'une subdivision de recensement qu'il dessert et dont la population de la minorité francophone ou anglophone compte moins de 200 personnes et représente au moins 30 pour cent de l'ensemble de la population de cette subdivision et il offre l'un ou l'autre des services visés aux sous-alinéas l)(i) à (vii); ...
13. (1) Les articles 1 à 4, les alinéas 5(1)a) à c), e) à j), l), m), o) et p), les paragraphes 5(2) et (4), les alinéas 6(2)b) et c), les paragraphes 7(3) et (4), l'article 8, les alinéas 9 a) à c) et les articles 10 et 11 entrent en vigueur un an après la date d'enregistrement du présent règlement par le greffier du Conseil privé. |
|
|
|
|
[9] Indeed, it appears that the 1991 census figures were applied by Canada Post in a belief that this was required by virtue of the Regulations. Mr. Marchessault argues that, on a correct interpretation of the Regulations, by application of s.3(a)(i), the 1986 rather than the 1991 census figures should have been used, which would have resulted in the postmaster position not being designated as bilingual.
[10] I must dismiss Mr. Marchessault's argument on the applicability of the Regulations since I find that they were not in force at the time the classification decision was made by Canada Post being before December 1, 1992; the Regulations were registered on December 16, 1991 but did not come into effect until December 16, 1992.
[11] Even if the Regulations can be said to apply, on the evidence filed at the hearing of the present case (Exhibit 2), I find that the release date of the language counts of the 1991 census was September 15, 1992. As a result, I find that s.5 (1)(p) of the Regulations is the correct provision to apply. On this basis, I must also dismiss Mr. Marchessault's argument that the 1986 census figures apply.
O R D E R
Accordingly, I find that Canada Post has not failed to comply with the Act in reaching the decision to classify the postmaster position as bilingual. Therefore, I dismiss Mr. Marchessault's application.
I make no order as to costs.
Judge
OTTAWA
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20021122
Docket: T-1463-00
BETWEEN:
Kevin Marchessault
Applicant
- and -
Canada Post Corporation
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-1463-00
STYLE OF CAUSE: Kevin Marchessault
v.
Canada Post Corporation
PLACE OF HEARING: Regina, Saskatchewan
DATE OF HEARING: November 21, 2002
REASONS FOR ORDER
and ORDER : CAMPBELL J.
DATED: November 22, 2002
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Kevin Marchessault The Applicant on his own behalf
Mr. Joel A. Hesje For Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Mr. Kevin Marchessault The Applicant on his own behalf
Box 144
Coderre, Saskatchewan
S0H 0X0
McKercher McKercher & Whitmore For Respondent
Barristers & Solicitors
200-374 3rd Avenue South
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
S7K 1M5