The City of Quebec challenges a decision concerning the president of the police union

Quebec City challenges a decision concerning the president of the union of police

SET À DAY

The City of Quebec has decided to go to the Superior Court to challenge a decision of the labor court, in a dispute between it and the president of the Brotherhood of police officers.

Quebec City Police Brotherhood President Martine Fortier explained on her Facebook page that she was shocked to receive the court documents at her personal residence.  

“Words fail me to express what I felt when I had to answer our daughter's many questions, in particular about the contents of this envelope, the identity of the sender, and above all, the reason for which she was delivered to our residence rather than my work,” she wrote.She says she feels incomprehension about this way of doing things. “It is now legitimate to ask ourselves how far will the collateral damage of this relentlessness of the city of Quebec extend?” 

The dispute stems from an intervention made in the spring of 2021 by Ms. Fortier, who spoke to the media to denounce the lack of staff on the ground to prevent overflows during an episode of deconfinement, at Victoria Park. The City had requested an injunction to prevent Ms. Fortier from disclosing “strategic” information to the media. The City had been dismissed and had subsequently instituted a disciplinary investigation against the unionist. She had turned to the Administrative Labor Tribunal (TAT) to file a complaint for reprisals suffered in the context of union activities. 

Winning

Martine Fortier won her case at the TAT. “On June 9, 2022, administrative judge Line Lanseigne of the Administrative Labor Tribunal rendered a decision to the effect that the notice of disciplinary investigation that the city of Quebec had served on me for the same reasons as those having led to the filing of the motion for the issuance of a safeguard, injunction, interlocutory and permanent order, was indeed a measure of reprisal for union activities.” 

This time, the Ville is contesting this judgment and is applying to the Superior Court to have it invalidated or set aside.