A custodian terminated by Bruce-Grey Catholic District School Board has been granted a final opportunity to explain why he failed to attend his scheduled arbitration hearing, despite explicit warnings about the consequences of non-attendance.
The arbitrator issued the decision after the worker did not appear at the hearing convened to address his termination grievance filed by CUPE Local 3447.
The worker was terminated on Jan. 8, 2025. The union filed a grievance on Jan. 15, 2025, alleging the termination was without just cause.
Worker absent from scheduled hearing
When the hearing convened on Dec. 3, 2025, the worker did not attend. The union advised it could not proceed without him, stating his knowledge of the events was critical to its case.
The union representative had met virtually with the worker on Nov. 20, 2025, to prepare for the hearing. During that meeting, the representative confirmed the worker had access to a computer to attend virtually and explained the importance of his attendance and potential consequences of not attending.
The worker told the union he wanted to attend the hearing with his own lawyer. The representative explained this was not permitted. At some point during the meeting, the worker abruptly left.
Union explains contact attempts
Between Oct. 27 and Nov. 14, 2025, there were ongoing settlement discussions involving the worker. The union representative emailed the worker on Nov. 17, 2025, confirming the Dec. 3 hearing date. The worker responded on Nov. 18, stating he was just learning about the hearing date.
Following the Nov. 20 meeting, the worker communicated with union administration support and an assistant regional director. Both confirmed the hearing date and importance of attendance. The worker continued to raise concerns about his representation, wanting his own lawyer to present his grievance and requesting copies of his case file. The union’s carriage rights were explained to him.
The representative emailed the worker the meeting link on Dec. 1 and Dec. 3, 2025. When the worker did not attend at 10:00 a.m., the representative emailed again requesting he attend before 10:30 a.m. The parties waited until 11:00 a.m. before making submissions.
Parties present opposing positions
The employer asked that the grievance be dismissed without a future hearing. The board argued the worker was fully aware of the hearing date, participated in settlement discussions and prepared for arbitration but ultimately decided not to pursue the grievance.
The union argued something outside the worker’s control might have prevented attendance and that he might not understand the potential consequences, despite multiple explanations. The union stated the worker wanted to pursue his grievance but was having difficulty understanding the grievance arbitration process and rules governing it. The union requested the worker be given an opportunity to provide an explanation.
The employer argued that if the worker is given an opportunity to provide an explanation and fails to do so, the grievance should be automatically dismissed.
Arbitrator grants conditional opportunity
The arbitrator noted it was not clear whether the worker continues to have an interest in addressing his grievance. The arbitrator found the worker’s conduct concerning, noting it caused excess costs and wasted valuable hearing time that could have been used for other matters.
However, the arbitrator determined that without affording the worker an opportunity to explain himself, it remained unclear why he failed to participate and whether he still wants to pursue his grievance.
The arbitrator directed that if the worker is interested in pursuing his grievance, he must contact his union immediately to explain his reasons for not attending the December 3 hearing.
The union must provide that explanation and any supporting documents to the arbitrator and employer counsel by Dec. 17, 2025. If the worker does not respond within the time allowed, his grievance will be automatically dismissed without further notice.
If the union provides the explanation within the allowed time, the employer will have until Dec. 24, 2025, to advise whether it accepts the explanation and agrees to reschedule the hearing.
If the employer takes the position that the explanation is insufficient and the grievance should be dismissed without a hearing on the merits, a case conference will be held to determine next steps.
The arbitrator remains seized in the event of any resulting disagreement between the parties as to whether the matter should be relisted for hearing.
For more information, see Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3447 v Bruce-Grey Catholic District School Board, 2025 CanLII 125423 (ON LA).
