View cases - Stewart McKelvey

14[63] According to the evidence of Ms. Ziemer the shortage was eventually resolved “over aperiod of a couple of years” by CN “hiring the right amount of employees in order to keep aheadof the amount of attrition and the significant growth in the business.” She further explained thatVancouver is a very competitive job market: “Unfortunately the construction industry wasbooming. We also lost a lot of potential candidates to the boom in the oil and gas industry inNorthern Alberta. […], it was very difficult for us to recruit over those two years [2005 and 2006],and it became cyclical. We didn't have enough successful employees through the recruitmentselection process, so we had to readvertise, hold numerous career fairs. We had to advertise overand over again until we had the right amount of employees. And this was cyclical from 2005through to probably mid-2007.”2010 CHRT 22 (CanLII)[64] Employees reporting to cover the shortage at the Vancouver terminal, would be asked toshow up at the Thornton Yard, in Surrey, and from there, since Vancouver has a number of yards,they would be taxied to wherever they were needed. Employees would only be informed whenthey got to Vancouver where they were going to work and what shift they would be working on.[65] Ms. Ziemer also testified as to the housing arrangements for employees reporting to theVancouver shortage. She explained that there were two hotels available in Surrey, B.C. One ofthese hotels was situated several blocks from CN’s yards. This hotel, according to Ms. Ziemer’srecollection, “had large suites with fridges inside and then there was a communal kitchen set upfor CN employees.” The other hotel was closer to the yard and had suites. Ms. Ziemer added“My understanding is that they had kitchen facilities in the suites as well.”[66] She also testified that CN could approve the rental of a house, an apartment or a condo.She referred to a situation which occurred in Vancouver – although she did not say when – whereCN had approved the rental of a property because the price of the rental made more senseeconomically than paying “$90 a night or $100 a night or a hotel for the 20 or 30 days that anemployee would be required to be at the location to protect work