View cases - Stewart McKelvey

31at the end of May or in the first week of June with Mr. Nashman and Mr. Boechler. Yet the emailseems to suggest that it is Mr. Nashman who had made this decision.[130] The Complainant testified that at this point she was “stressed and very nervous.”She added that she was quickly losing trust. She could not believe that she “was not importantenough that someone could not talk back to her”. On June 23 rd , 2005, the Complainant wroteagain to Mr. Torchia. In this letter she explained both the particular health circumstances of herson and the useful work she had been doing for CN in Jasper. She testified that she was hoping“that this letter would safe her job.” Mr. Torchia did not reply to this letter. He testified that theComplainant had been granted an extension of four (4) months “to get her affairs in order and thatwas as far as we were prepared to go.”2010 CHRT 22 (CanLII)[131] On June 27 th , 2005, the Complainant was informed by a letter from L. Gallegos, ManagerOperations, at CMC, that she must report to Vancouver by July 2 nd , 2005. She was furtheradvised that if she failed to report, her seniority rights would be forfeited and her position withCN terminated. This letter also made reference to a telephone conversation, on June 22 nd , 2005,between the Complainant and Ms. Storms. The Complainant testified that when she got this lettershe cried and “panicked”. She added that she was “shocked and scared”. She could not believethat this was happening.[132] Ms. Storms testified that she did recall the telephone conversation of June 22 nd , but not thespecifics. She said that the Complainant had indicated that she had “child care issues”.Ms. Storms recalls having told her that CN still needed her to report to the shortage in Vancouver.She added that it was her understanding that the Complainant had told her that she could notreport. She doesn’t recall if the Complainant had asked for special arrangements, but, had sheasked, she added that she would have referred her to her supervisor and to her unionrepresentative.[133] On June 30 th , 2005, the Complainant sent a letter to Peter Marshall, Senior Vice-President,Western Region. In this letter, she explained that her understanding was that she had been granted