House of Assembly
Newfoundland and Labrador
REPORT OF THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE
ARMING POLICY
OF THE
ROYAL NEWFOUNDLAND CONSTABULARY
31 March, 1998
Disclaimer
The printed version of the document stands as the official record. The Committee assumes
no responsibility
for any discrepancies that may have been transmitted with the electronic version.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPENDIX I
Order of ReferenceAPPENDIX II
WitnessesAPPENDIX III
CorrespondenceAPPENDIX IV - Not available in electronic format
Picher ArbitrationAPPENDIX V - Not available in electronic format
Labour Relations Board
(Anthony) Decision
The Select Committee was appointed on December 2, 1997 to enquire into the arming policy of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary (RNC) and report its findings to the House of Assembly by March 31, 1998.
The Committee gave notice through the print media and radio announcements that it would be holding public hearings in communities served by the RNC. Hearings were then held in Corner Brook, Conception Bay South, Mount Pearl and St. John's. The Committee did not travel to Labrador West as it had planned to do because nobody showed an interest in making a presentation except representatives of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. As they were appearing in the other venues it was agreed that the Labrador trip be cancelled.
The Committee thanks the witnesses who appeared especially the members of the general public. It is important that citizens make their opinions known to their legislators when opportunities to do so are afforded them.
The Committee had the opportunity to view the training practices, equipment and facilities of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. It also considered a decision of the Labour Relations Board on an application brought by an RNC officer:
"In the matter of the Occupational Health and Safety Act and an application pursuant to Section 51 of the Act affecting Constable Sheldon Anthony and Edward J. Coady, Chief of Police, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary."
The Committee carefully considered all the submissions made. It is its opinion that the decision reached and recommendations made are in the best interests of the police officers who must often face dangerous situations in the course of their work and in the interests of the citizens of the Province whom they are sworn to protect and serve.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Committee members for their non-partisan approach to the issue and for their comprehensive review of the procedural arming policy of the RNC.
Respectfully submitted,
Ralph Wiseman, MHA (Topsail)
Chairman
March 31, 1998
Committee Members
John Ottenheimer, MHA, (St. John's East)
Vice Chairman
Perry Canning, MHA (Labrador West)
Harvey Hodder, MHA ( Waterford Valley)
Robert Mercer, MHA (Humber East)
The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary was established on March 5, 1872 when the Bill entitled An Act To Organize And Maintain An Efficient Constabulary Force And For The Appointment Of Special Constables In This Colony received Royal Assent although the new police force is considered to have come into being the previous year with the appointment of Thomas Foley, of the Royal Irish Constabulary, as Inspector of Police. The Constabulary has served the people of Newfoundland and Labrador with distinction through some very turbulent times.
The RNC operates under the authority of the Minister of Justice (S. 4, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Act) while the Chief of Police carries out the duties associated with the day to day control and management of the force (S. 7, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Act). The arming policy of the RNC is a matter above and beyond the ordinary operational decisions which are the domain of the Chief of Police and Management of the Force. This policy has serious implications for the RNC and for those for whom the Force exists, the citizens of the Province. For this reason the House of Assembly has asked this Committee to solicit the views of the general public whose safety and protection are the raison d'être of the Constabulary.
Evolution of Policy
While the RNC has always had access to firearms when required it was not until 1969 when the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association was formed that health and safety issues and the related question of arming became a focus of members of the Force. In 1979 the jurisdiction of the RNC expanded and it moved into its new headquarters at Fort Townshend. These facilities included an in-house firearms range. From that time on regular training in the use of firearms was available. Previously training had taken place on a less regular basis at a privately-owned facility through the good offices of the owner.
In the same year an Emergency Tactical Unit (ETU) was established. This unit, capable of carrying weaponry, was placed on routine patrol. The ETU was found to be ineffective for a number of reasons: the vehicle had to be manned at all times; it was usually assigned to a central area and it could not be used as a routine back-up unit.
In 1983 the Tactics and Rescue (TRU) Team was established in response to an increasing number of violent crimes against persons and armed robberies.
In 1991 a new policy was introduced as the result of an arbitration, the Picher arbitration, in which the arbitrator recommended that firearms be carried in the trunks of police vehicles. Every member of the Force in the operational area has since been issued a firearm which he/she is trained to use. The firearm is kept in a locker at the station and locked in a safe compartment in the trunk of the patrol vehicle when the officer starts his/her shift. The RNC thus became an armed force in 1991 and is now an armed force. On December 29, 1995 the Minister of Justice , Edward Roberts, QC had this to say about the arming status of the RNC:
"The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary is an armed police force. Its members are highly trained in the use of firearms and are authorized to carry them in appropriate situations"
The only question to be answered by this Committee therefore is whether the policy respecting access to firearms is appropriate or should be changed.
In some communities the question is moot since they are already served by an armed force, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). Before the RCMP came to the Province in 1950 the Newfoundland Ranger Force, which was armed, had served the same communities since 1935. There are many communities outside the Capital City region, therefore, which have been served by an armed Force for as long as most residents can remember.
RNC members are the only police officers of equivalent jurisdiction in North America who do not wear sidearms as part of their uniform. They contend that this puts them at a disadvantage vis à vis the criminal and represents a danger to their clients, the general public.
The police are proud of their history and record but believe that changing times demand changed methods and equipment. The current Chief of Police, Leonard Power, pointed out in his presentation that when he joined the Force an armed robbery was an extraordinary occurrence. In the last twenty years however there have been many armed robberies, assaults with a dangerous weapon, hostage-takings and murders and countless domestic disturbances requiring police intervention.
The Chief of Police and Management of the Force support the view of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association members who have, for some years, maintained that a change in policy was necessary. At the hearing held on February 4 Chief of Police Leonard Power stated:
"That decision (the Anthony decision), from the perspective of management, reduced our options to refuse a member's request in any situation to access a firearm. It was, I believe, that decision, at least from my perspective, because I was in management, I was a commissioned officer... at that time - that was the beginning, at least in my own personal view, that we had evolved in policy development with respect to accessibility that was not working. We had a situation that in my view was just not acceptable.
"I was aware of the total rejection of our policy by the rank-and-file members, and I was aware that a considerable number of commissioned officers and management of the force were also of the view that the policy needed to be changed, that we had reached a point where there was no returning to a period in the >60s, and that the next logical step was for members to carry firearms...
"It was ...in 1994 I believe, that I first recommended...that we move toward total accessibility for firearms for members operating in the field...
I am here today and the change, I guess, this time around with respect to this whole issue of whether or not the Constabulary should wear firearms is that since the arguments were raised by police officers in the force to have this policy changed, for the most part it has been raised by the front-line rank-and-file members of the force.
"Management responded, as I indicated, to their concerns by granting more and more accessibility. In some situations it was an independent decision of management, and in the situation, as I referred to, some results are from arbitration, the Picher arbitration, but we have acknowledged since the beginning the legitimate concerns of the front-line members for the safety of the public and for their own safety and protection and we have acknowledged their legitimate concerns by responding in the manner which I have just described.
"We have now come to what I believe is a turning point. The policy is not working. Without exception, this policy is opposed by members of the force for sound, legitimate reasons. They have time and again submitted reasonable concerns about the inadequacies of the policies. I recognized that personally, as I indicated, in 1994, and recommended that it be changed." (Hansard, Proceedings of the Select Committee, February 5, 1998 at page 5)
The procedure police officers must follow entails seeking permission from the Divisional Commander or his/her designate, exiting the vehicle, unlocking two locks, buckling on a holster and inserting ammunition into the chamber of the revolver. In cold weather the speed loading process can be compromised. Quite often the officer will have had to drive the police vehicle some distance away from the location of an incident in order to go through the arming procedure in safety. Several of the incident reports which police officers related to the Committee illustrate some of the problems with the present policy:
- Two officers were despatched to a break and entry in progress. There was no indication that weapons were involved. As the officers approached the scene of the incident a shotgun blast was heard inside the building. The Emergency Response Unit and TRU Team were called. When they arrived fifteen minutes had elapsed. By then the gunman had taken his own life and two occupants of the house were found hiding in a closet. In these circumstances, the police pointed out, the officers responding originally to the call were powerless to help.
- The police were despatched to investigate a possible impaired driving offence. While the officers were searching for the suspect, an armed robbery was committed. The armed robber was the same person involved in the first incident. At that point the police were not carrying their sidearms. When they found and subdued the suspects one was carrying a loaded 9 mm. handgun.
- A police officer was despatched to the scene of a fatal snowmobile accident in Labrador. When the police officer reached the scene, approximately 55 km. from Labrador City/Wabush, he discovered that one of the snowmobile operators had broken into a nearby cabin and was armed with a shotgun.
- In another Labrador example a police vehicle was attacked by a rabid wolf during the period when the firearms were being carried in the trunk. The police officer had to drive a safe distance from where the wolf was to retrieve his gun. In the meantime the animal was free to wander through the community until the police returned and destroyed it.
These incidents illustrate the unpredictability inherent in their work which police officers maintain is one of its main dangers. While the statistics may indicate a decline in violent crime the reality is that guns in the hands of criminals put police officers at risk in the line of duty.
On another occasion an officer was called to a domestic dispute. The alleged offender, a juvenile, had attacked another person with a knife which was wrested away from him. The suspect was very violent and aggressive and continued to use a variety of blunt objects to attack and threaten those around him. When the police officer requested permission to arm, his supervisor refused. The officer, Constable Anthony, then refused to respond to the call and the matter went to arbitration. The decision supported the officer.
Public Opinion
Members of the general public were given the opportunity to make representation to the Committee either orally at a public hearing or in writing. Some came forward at the hearings. Others wrote or called their MHA. However there was not a great deal of opposition expressed to a policy change regarding the use of firearms. One witness suggested that potential witnesses were intimidated by the hearing process or for some other reason. However when the people of Corner Brook were given the opportunity to make representation in a less structured setting they did not avail of the opportunity.
It has also been suggested that the lack of response by the general public could be interpreted as an indication that for them the matter is a "non-issue". Many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are familiar with armed police as noted above. There have been no formal complaints of improper use of firearms by the members of the RNC. It appears therefore that the public have confidence in the ability of the RNC to adjust to a change in policy.
Training
The RNC is a highly trained and professional force. Recruits receive the same training at the nationally accredited Atlantic Police Academy as their colleagues in other jurisdictions. They undergo intensive psychological tests which permit their instructors to discern their suitability for police work.
Personnel are also trained at the Canadian Police College in Ottawa, at the Ontario Provincial Police facility and at the RCMP training depot in Regina. The firearms training standards of the RNC are the same as those of the RCMP.
The training which all police officers undergo includes a one week of Use-of-Force component. This segment of the training stresses a continuum of methods of responding to a subject's resistant action ranging from techniques of verbal suasion through empty hand techniques, soft impact control, the use of aerosol spray and various batons to the use of firearms as a last resort. Members of the Force must requalify each year in the use of firearms. If an officer does not meet the RNC's standard when requalifying he or she will be required to take the test until he/she does meet the standard. The Deputy Chief of Police stated that if an officer failed to qualify for firearms use the Force would have to consider placing him/her in a non-operational assignment.
Police officers receive training in retention techniques to prevent assailants from gaining control of their firearms. Holsters are designed to make it extremely difficult for an assailant to remove the firearm.
The Tactics and Rescue Unit Team members go through more intensive training than other members of the Force including psychological tests and train for requalification every two months.
Inconsistency
The RCMP is armed. The territory it patrols is often adjacent to areas patrolled by the RNC. One force wears sidearms the other in identical circumstances does not. They are equally well trained. Both forces report to the Minister of Justice and are governed by standard procedures and policies except in respect of the use of firearms.
The commercial security companies which transport money are armed in this jurisdiction as a matter of policy although their training is less comprehensive than that of the RNC.
In Western Labrador during the winter months RNC officers are permitted to wear sidearms since the extreme weather conditions make it impossible for them to arm themselves safely from the trunks of their vehicles. The residents of Wabush/Labrador City and Churchill Falls have not indicated that they object to their police officers being armed.
RNC officers, as noted above, must keep their sidearms locked in the trunks of their vehicles. However if the alarm systems on those vehicles malfunction the officers are permitted to wear their sidearms.
Unmarked vehicles are not equipped with alarm systems and locked boxes for the storage of firearms. When taking part in patrols in these vehicles the RNC officers are armed.
Members of the Criminal Investigation Division (CID) may be wearing sidearms for the duration of an investigation which could extend over a period of several months.
The RNC is responsible for enforcing federal statutes and regulations governing firearms offences while its members are not permitted to carry firearms on a routine basis, at least theoretically.
In 1996 of the 848 requests to wear sidearms made by officers in the St. John's region all were approved. No problems were reported in that year nor have any there been any problems associated with the wearing or use of firearms since the Anthony decision of 1993.
Accountability
At Common Law the use of excessive force is prohibited.
Section 26 of the Criminal Code of Canada prohibits the use of excessive force by anyone who is authorized to use force. If a police officer caused injury or death through the irresponsible use of force he or she would be criminally responsible:
26. Everyone who is authorized by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess thereof according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.
Whenever a police officer receives permission to use a firearm he or she must fill out a request form supplying details of the incident. The use of a firearm is not considered an inconsequential matter.
The RNC has signed a memorandum of understanding with the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) with respect to the investigation of any serious incidents relating to the actions of a member of the Force. If such an incident occurred the Chief of Police would request that an investigation be carried out by the OPP. Such agreements are standard among police forces in Canada to ensure unbiased scrutiny of any questionable actions on the part of their members.
The Police Complaints Commission is another restraint. A citizen who believed that a police officer had used a firearm unlawfully or irresponsibly would be able to have such a complaint heard and adjudicated by an impartial arbiter pursuant to Part III of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Act.
Effect of Arming
Opponents of a change in policy maintain that routine arming of the police will result in more firearms finding their way into the hands of criminals. However no statistical evidence was produced to support this contention. It is the position of the RNC that the police arm to respond to the criminal element rather than the contrary.
Until 1986 when the RNC expanded to that city Corner Brook had been served by the RCMP for thirty-six years. The police report that there was no change in the character of the criminal activity in the area as a result. Similarly, in Carbonear, a community served by the RCMP, there is no evidence of a higher violent crime rate nor is there a change in criminal activity patterns in Western Labrador in response to the change in arming policy in the winter months.
The British Experience
Those who prefer an unarmed police force cite the London "Bobby" as an example that Newfoundland should emulate. It is true that the Bobby on the beat carries only a baton. However many United Kingdom police officers are armed. There are many armed specialty units in Britain as well and there is a now a move toward increased accessibility. The popular notion of the unarmed British police officer is somewhat fanciful.
A number of unarmed police officers in the United Kingdom have been shot and killed by criminals and the Superintendent of the London Metropolitan Police recently made a statement intimating that arming may have to be considered. The Chief Constable of the Dorset Police made a similar statement in a 1993 report.
Tradition
There is a popular notion that the RNC is similar to the British police force on which it was modelled. It is also the opinion of some citizens of the Province that we are too ready to reject our traditions and heritage in favour of novelties from other places especially the United States and Mainland Canada. They maintain that Newfoundlanders are generally peaceable and that we do not need to adopt practices which are foreign to our way of life, which advance the erosion of our traditions and which are not necessary.
The citizens served by the RNC have a good relationship with the police. To some extent this is based on the ability of the police to interact with the public in a non-threatening manner. It has been suggested that the presence of a gun on a police officer's person intimidates, elicits a negative response and creates a barrier between police and public.
The Crime Rate
Some witnesses cited the crime rate in Newfoundland, which is one of the lowest in the country, in support of the status quo. They say that while there have been violent crimes the police have managed well without resort to routine arming. If the RNC were to follow the lead of its counterparts in the rest of the country, it has been suggested, criminals would arm in response. It is the fear of some who prefer the present policy that a change would lead to a concomitant change in crime patterns in the Province.
It has been suggested on the other hand by those who believe that the present arming policy is not working that the desire to maintain the status quo is based more on nostalgia or emotion than on the reality of police work in today's world.
Sober Second Thought
The present arming procedure imposes a delay on police officers who must exit their vehicle, unlock two locks, strap on and insert ammunition into their firearms. In a paradoxical way however the imposed delay militates against sober second thought or any thought as the officer is inclined to speed up his/her action to compensate for the imposed delay. The delay then becomes a negative factor. The RNC Association maintains that the increase in stress on the officer trying to arm as quickly as possible increases the likelihood he/she will make a mistake.
Time is lost when time is of the essence. In one incident described by a witness an armed robber escaped, never to be apprehended, because the police had to go through the arming procedure.
The interest in a change in policy is not a new initiative on the part of the police. The health and safety concerns which have prompted their quest for this change have existed for a number of years. It is their position that the supervisor having to judge whether a police officer at the scene of potential crime should be allowed to arm is in an unenviable if not an untenable position. The police officer on the spot, they maintain, is the only one in possession of the information on which such a decision can be made with any degree of competence.
The members of the Committee have considered the evidence of the witnesses at the hearings and the letters and telephone calls from those who could not appear. They respect the sincerely-held convictions of everyone who expressed an opinion either at the hearings or through the media. They are mindful of the need to keep the safety of the public and of the police uppermost in their minds. It is the opinion of the Committee that public safety and the safety of police officers are interdependent.
Some of the witnesses at the hearings and correspondents who have who have written to Committee members or to the papers have expressed their fear that the police are seeking the right to wear sidearms for the wrong reasons and that if the policy were changed an escalation of violence would follow.
The police believe that they need to have better access to their firearms in order to counter the access to firearms of the criminal element which they encounter. It is their contention that the environment in which they work is very different from that of even twenty years ago. For better or worse we are part of the global village. We are subject to the same influences as the rest of the country and must recognize that crime knows no borders.
The RNC has stated that it does not wish to be armed but that sidearms are necessary. While police work by its nature is inherently dangerous, there are imminent dangers to which no one should be subjected without adequate protection. To protect themselves against these dangers, of which they do not always have notice, the police maintain that they require sidearms.
The Committee notes that the RNC has been an armed force since 1991 and that since 1993 requests to arm have been routinely approved. The decision in the Anthony case lends credence to the police contention that the policy, as it stands, represents a risk to their health and safety. Supervisors are understandably reluctant to deny requests to arm. It is the opinion of the police that a supervisor not at the scene which confronts an officer who makes the request to arm is not in a position to make an accurate assessment of that officer's circumstances. These decisions may put an officer at risk and could become the subject of litigation It does not make sense for the police to be subjected to the cumbersome procedure they must now follow especially when it has become a pro forma exercise.
The policy which the police are seeking to have implemented throughout the Province is working well in Labrador West and appears to be acceptable to the people of the area. Before the matter was raised again recently most residents of the Province were probably unaware that members of the RNC wear their sidearms routinely for approximately half the year in Labrador West. Nor is there any evident opposition to the presence of the armed federal force in the many communities they police.
The police have acknowledged that statistics suggest a decline in violent criminal activity although they have also pointed out that the lower rate could be a function of fewer apprehensions and less reporting of crime in a period of fiscal restraint. Regardless of the current crime rate the more important factor, as far as police safety is concerned, is the element of unpredictability which is always present in police work. The police maintain, and the Committee agrees, that they need to be ready to respond immediately to whatever circumstances they may have to confront. To continue the current policy is to give the upper hand, in certain areas of the Province, to violent law breakers or troubled persons who are dangerous when armed and sometimes are.
Committee members are of the view that the status quo is not reasonable and find support for this view in the ruling of the arbitrator in the Anthony case.
The Committee is confident that the training that members of RNC undergo equips them to handle firearms in a skilled and responsible manner. There has never been an occurrence of improper firearm use when the Force has had ready access to firearms. The Use-of-Force component of the training which officers receive emphasizes exhausting other means of subduing an aggressor before an officer resorts to firearms.
There are several levels of accountability in place now and the Chief of Police, Leonard Power, assured the Committee that police officers would be prohibited from carrying firearms if there were indications that they were unfit to do so either because of failure to meet the training requirements or because of psychological problems. The Committee is satisfied that the Chief of Police will monitor the members of the Force and respect this undertaking.
a) the Chief of Police have discretion in the administration of the policy including discretion in assigning officers to operational duty and that in exercising this discretion the Chief of Police take into account the wishes of members of the Force who prefer not to be armed;
b) police officers' sidearms be stored in a secure locker at the station when they are not on duty;
c) a firearms audit acceptable to the Minister of Justice be performed annually and submitted to the House of Assembly and that
d) the arming policy be reviewed at the end of five years by a Select Committee of the House of Assembly.
ORDER OF REFERENCE
Moved by the Honourable the Government House Leader :
Mr. Speaker, I move
THAT a Select Committee of this House be constituted to enquire into and report upon the arming policy of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and that this Select Committee comprise the Member for Topsail, the Member for St. John's East, the Member for Labrador West, the Member for Humber East, and the Member for Conception Bay South; *
THAT this Committee be authorized to send for persons and papers, to sit in session and out, and to sit from place to place throughout Newfoundland and Labrador
AND THAT this Committee report to the House by March 31, 1998.
December 2, 1997
* The Member for Waterford Valley replaced the Member for Conception Bay South as a member of the Committee on January 14, 1998.
WITNESSES
Ralph Alcock, LLB, Solicitor, Department of Justice
Mr. Ernest Boone
Mr. John Brooks
William Cadigan, LLB, Legal Counsel to the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association
Staff Sergeant Melvin Cake, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary
Mr. John A. Carter
Constable Terry Corbin, President, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association
Norman Crane, Secretary, Newfoundland Ranger Force Association
Mr. Leo Crockwell
Mr. Joseph Downey
Ms. Alison Dyer
Constable Sean Ennis, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association
Mr. James Forward
Robert French, MHA, Conception Bay South
Sergeant Robert Garland, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary
Cyril J. Goodyear, LLB
Constable Rex Graham, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association
Constable Neville Greeley, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary
Sergeant Angus Head, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary
Sergeant John House, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association
William Hogan, member, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Veterans' Association
James Lynch, First Vice President, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Veterans' Association
Constable Hubert Marrie, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association
Mr. Louis Murphy
Mr. Noel O'Dea
Chesley Oliver, Deputy Chief of Police, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary
Constable Shawn O'Reilly, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association
Mr. Chesley Parsons, Newfoundland Ranger Force Association
Mr. James Lynch, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Veterans' Association
Ms. Helen Porter
Leonard P. Power, Chief of Police, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary
Mr. Donald Rixmann
Inspector Barry Pike, Divisional Commander, Corner Brook, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary
Mr. James Prendergast
Constable Frederick Roche, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary
Ms. Mona Rossiter
Mr. Kenneth Rowe
Mr. Keith Sheppard
Ronald Smith, Mayor, Town of Conception Bay South
Inspector Constance Snow, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary
Mr. Philip Snow
Lynn Spracklin, QC, Deputy Minister, Department of Justice
Constable David Squires, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association
Mr. Scott Strong
Mr. Howard Sturge
Constable Michael Summers, Second Vice President, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Association
Mr. Christopher Walsh
Mr. James Wiest
CORRESPONDENCE
Mr. David Benson
Mrs. Pamela Bruce
Darryl Brenton, Mayor, Town of Labrador City
Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police
Canadian Police Association
Chesley Dowden, FIIC, CCIB
Mr. Edmund Grant
Colleen Hanrahan, MSW, LLB
Margaret Hitchens, M.H.Sc.
Mr. Steve Kent
L. Keiley
Ms. Jenny Long
Donald Luther, Mayor, City of Corner Brook
Ms. Gail Malone
Mr. Hayward Pardy
Edward J. Shortall, BA, LLB
Ms. Carol Smith
Mr. Douglas Sullivan
Town of Labrador City
Andy Wells, Mayor, City of St. John's
APPENDIX IV
PICHER ARBITRATION
Not available in electronic format
APPENDIX V
LABOUR RELATIONS BOARD
(ANTHONY) DECISION
Not available in electronic format