Debates of October 13, 2005 (day 9)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are certain times in one’s life that a person looks forward to, such as the birth of a child, a wedding day, graduation, or the first day of retirement. Mr. Speaker, my statement today is about retirement and how some of my constituents, former GNWT employees, are being denied their quality of life and the enjoyment that retirement should bring.

The two cases I would like to highlight for my colleagues on the other side of the House today are eerily similar. Both persons submitted letters of intent to retire from the GNWT. One gives five months' notice, the other four months. Both of these individuals repeatedly -- and I have all the correspondence to back it up, Mr. Speaker -- on as many as 13 separate occasions contact was made with Corporate Human Resource Services in FMBS to try and pin down a date and a time that they could get together to go over the paperwork to conclude their careers with the GNWT.

In instance number one, Mr. Speaker, my constituent waited, tried, and waited some more for a meeting. With the help of the UNW they finally got one, four days prior to their retirement. The FMBS office that met with them came to the meeting, Mr. Speaker, with all of the paperwork pre-dated and pre-signed. The reason for termination was deemed resignation and not retirement. This individual retired on August the 12th and was promised the first pension cheque on September 30th. September 30th comes and goes, no cheque, no word. The person had to take it upon themselves to call the superannuation office in Shediac, New Brunswick, to find out what exactly the disposition of their file was, because there was definitely no way they could get a straight answer out of corporate human resource services. To their surprise, New Brunswick let them know that FMBS had failed on two separate occasions to send in two required forms.

In the second case, my constituent did not sign the paperwork until one full week after the retirement date. The story here is about exactly the same as the first. The same forms missing, 13 requested meetings, New Brunswick not having the forms, no pension cheque, and a major, major blunder on severance having to require a grievance being laid.

I have been supportive of the centralization of the HR function in this government…

Mr. Ramsay, time for your Member’s statement has expired.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

The Member is seeking unanimous consent to conclude his statement. Are there any nays? There are no nays. You may conclude your statement, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have been a supporter of the centralized HR function for this government, and I can appreciate the fact that there will be some growing pains. However, what the government has to understand and take note of is that these are people’s lives that we’re dealing with and both of these individuals have 30-plus years of service with the GNWT, and for them to be treated as unfairly as they have been is a disaster. I certainly will have some questions for the Minister at the appropriate time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause