Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-2281.Klonowski.90-09-05BETWEEN BEFORE: 2281/B 7, 22%2/87 IN TEE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under FOR~TIiE GRIEVOR TBE CROWN EEIPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before TBE GRIEVANCE SETTLERENT BOARD FOR THE EMPLOYER BEARING: OPSEU (Klonowski) Grievor - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Correctional Services) - and - Employer B. Fisher Vice-Chairperson G. Majesky~ Member H. Roberts Member L. Rothstein Counsel Gowling, Strathy & Henderson Barristers & Solicitors W. Thornton Counsel Mathews, Dinsdale & Clark Barristers & Solicitors June 25, 1990 July 25, 1990 This case came up before the Board on June 25, 1990, and at that time the Union asked for an adjournment which was resisted by the employer. In oral reasons given that day the adjournment was granted on specific terms, however, the Board feels it is necessary to provide written reasons for the guidance of the parties regarding requests for adjournments in similar fact situations. This grievance involves an allegation by the employee that the employer was discriminatory in allocating temporary work assignments to specific employees and asked as a remedy that the grievor be provided with a temporary work assignment and that a fair rotational system be implemented. The grievances were first sent to the Grievance Settlement Board on January 15, 1988. At the first day of hearing, May 9, 1989, the matter was adjourned because Union counsel was ill. At that time the case was scheduled to proceed on August 28 and 29,1989. When the August 28 date was reached there were settlement discussions going on and the parties mutually agreed to have the matter adjourned to December 29, 1989. On December 29, 1989, the Union was unable to proceed because the grievor was on long term disability and at the request of the Union, and without objection from the employer, the matter was adjourned to June 25, 1990. The grievor then returned to work and instructed Union counsel to send a letter to the Grievance Settlement Board dated March 25, 1990, indicating the dates which he would be available for attending on this grievance, In that letter the grievor stated that he was available for June 25 and 26, 1990. On April 27, 1990, the grievor sent a memo to the Superintendent at the institution which he worked asking to take a number of lieu days and included in the list of dates that he wished to have off were June 25 and 26,199O. It should be noted that at this time the Board had not scheduled the hearing dates. The Union was notified on or about May 18, 1990, that the Board had scheduled this hearing for June 25 and 26.1990, and Union counsel immediately notified the grievor. The grievor then indicated to his counsel that he was unavailable on those dates as he planned to be vacationing at his Florida condominium. The Union, on May 28, 1990, wrote to the employer asking for -2- an adjournment and the employer responded on June 14,1990, saying that they would not consent to such an adjournment. By this date of June 14, 1990, the grievor had apparently already left for Florida. The only excuse, therefore, that the grievor has for not showing up is the fact that he is unavailable because he chose to make himself unavailable by going to Florida for his vacation. The Board is extremely upset at the actions of the grievor in that he previously notified his solicitor that he was available for certain dates and then without notifying his solicitor again that he was taking those dates away, made himself unavailable for dates that he had previously told the Board he was available. If this were not the first request by the grievor for an adjournment, this Board would simply have denied the adjournment and permitted the matter to proceed. However, although there have been three previous adjournments, this is the first one specifically requested by the grievor, for reasons other than illness and we are therefore loathe to dispense with the merits of this matter on the basis of the failure of the grievor to attend at his own hearing. Therefore, notwithstanding the inexcusable reason for the grievor’s failure to attend at the hearing, the Board agreed to adjourn this matter to another date on the specific grounds that it be preemptory to the grievor personally and therefore save and except a medical emergency, the matter will be heard on July 5, 1990. It is the union’s responsibility to communicate this decision to the grievor and it will not be a sufficient reason for the grievor’s non-attendance on July 5, 1990, to say that the union was unable to get hold of him because having left on his vacation when hk knew this matter had not been ruled upon, it is incumbent on the grievor to advise the Union of where he is spending his vacation. Furthermore, if this date falls within the grievor’s vacation, then it is expected that he will come back to Toronto to attend the hearing and any expense incurred, of course, would be ott his OWI account. Union counsel also indicated that it was not necessary for him to present this case and therefore it will not be open to the Union to be asking for an adjournment on the basis of inability to engage counsel. -3- In order to speed this matter up and to get an early date, this panel is not seized of the merits of the grievance. DATEDatTorontothis 51:hdayof Seprenber 1QQo. / G. Majeskyu Member H. Roberts, Member -