The Name Game: B.C. Court Of Appeal Rejects Union's Argument For Grievor And Witness Anonymity

In the recent decision of United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 1518 v. Sunrise Poultry Processors Ltd., 2015 BCCA 354, the B.C. Court of Appeal confirmed that labour arbitrators are allowed to publish personal information of grievors and witnesses in arbitration awards.

The Court squarely rejected the argument of the United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 1518 that the personal information of grievors or witnesses could only be disclosed in an arbitration award with the prior consent of the affected individuals. The Court engaged in a detailed review of the applicable legislation and determined that arbitrators can collect, use and disclose personal information without obtaining prior consent.

Background

This case arose out of the termination of employment of a unionized truck driver, who was discharged for improperly signing company invoices when delivering the employer's goods.

The union grieved the discharge and argued, among other things, that "the names of the Grievor and witnesses should remain confidential in the publication of any award, unless those persons gave their consent to the publication of their names". The union expressed concern about the increased online availability and accessibility of arbitration awards and the potential for misuse of personal information.

The union argued that the Personal Information Protection Act, S.B.C. 2003, c. 63 ("PIPA") requires arbitrators to obtain consent prior to publishing the names of grievors and witnesses. The union also argued that labour arbitration is a private dispute resolution process and not subject to the open court principle.

The employer responded by saying that parties impliedly consent to the disclosure of their personal information by engaging in the arbitration process. Arbitration was not, according to the employer, a private process because it was statutorily mandated under the Labour Relations Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 244 (the "Code").

Arbitration award

Arbitrator Stan Lanyon, Q.C. rejected the union's argument. He did so on four alternate grounds, including on the basis that the open court principle applied.

Decision on appeal

The B.C. Court of Appeal ultimately reached the same conclusion as Arbitrator Lanyon and, in a unanimous decision, dismissed the union's appeal.

The Court declined to rule on the issue of whether labour arbitration is subject to the open court principle. It determined, however, that a labour arbitrator falls within the definition...