Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-1336.Butler et al.13-03-08 Decision2012 - OPSEU (Butler et al) and Ministry of Government Services, GSB#2012-1336, (Nairn) Crown Employees Grievance Settlement Board Suite 600 180 Dundas St. West Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Fax (416) 326-1396 Commission de règlement des griefs des employés de la Couronne Bureau 600 180, rue Dundas Ouest Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tél. : (416) 326-1388 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396 GSB#2012-1336 UNION#2012-0230-0024 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Butler et al.) Union -and -The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Government Services) Employer BEFORE Marilyn Nairn Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION Archana Mathew Ontario Public Service Employee Union Grievance Officer FOR THE EMPLOYER Felix Lau Ministry of Government Services Labour Practice Group Counsel HEARING March 7, 2013. -2 -Decision [1] This decision flows from an expedited med/arb process held on March 7, 2013. That process contemplates that the parties would attempt to resolve matters through mediation, failing which, they agreed that the Vice-Chair would determine the matter without formal proceedings. The parties agreed that any decision issued in this process does not constitute a precedent and is without prejudice to the positions of the parties in any other matter. They also agreed that any decision was to provide only brief reasons, if any. In doing so, the parties agreed to a process that will also expedite the release of any decision. The issues involved were not of a complex nature, and the parties agreed that ‘regular’ arbitration was not required. [2] The grievors are all employed in a Customer Service Representative 2 (”CSR2”) classification. They work at Service Ontario and their home location is the Weber Street office in Kitchener. On occasion, and with little or no notice, they have been asked to work at the Duke Street office, also in Kitchener. This was to cover staff shortages in that office. During the tenure of a previous manager, the grievors felt that they did not have an option to decline this request. Current management takes the view that it is a request, not a requirement. If employees decline the request, the employer has more recently advised the Duke Street office that it cannot provide staffing support. Even more recently, staffing levels appear to have been modified such that these requests may become even less frequent. No Weber Street CSR2 has ever been disciplined for declining a request to attend work at Duke Street. [3] The grievance claims that the employer must provide 120 hours notice of this change to their work location, failing which, the first shift must be paid at an overtime rate. The grievors rely on Article UN5.1 of the collective agreement. That provision speaks to changes in the posted shift schedule. That is a reference to hours of work, that is, time, not location of the work. The hours of work of any employee asked to work at Duke Street are not altered. That interpretation is supported by the language in Article UN4.1, which refers to a scheduled shift by reference to when the shift commences and ends, a reference to time, not place. [4] I find therefore that Article UN5.1 has no application in the circumstance of a change of work location. This grievance is therefore dismissed. Dated at Toronto this 8th day of March 2013. Marilyn Nairn, Vice-Chair - 2 - Decision [1] This decision flows from an expedited med/arb process held on March 7, 2013. That process contemplates that the parties would attempt to resolve matters through mediation, failing which, they agreed that the Vice-Chair would determine the matter without formal proceedings. The parties agreed that any decision issued in this process does not constitute a precedent and is without prejudice to the positions of the parties in any other matter. They also agreed that any decision was to provide only brief reasons, if any. In doing so, the parties agreed to a process that will also expedite the release of any decision. The issues involved were not of a complex nature, and the parties agreed that ‘regular’ arbitration was not required. [2] The grievors are all employed in a Customer Service Representative 2 (”CSR2”) classification. They work at Service Ontario and their home location is the Weber Street office in Kitchener. On occasion, and with little or no notice, they have been asked to work at the Duke Street office, also in Kitchener. This was to cover staff shortages in that office. During the tenure of a previous manager, the grievors felt that they did not have an option to decline this request. Current management takes the view that it is a request, not a requirement. If employees decline the request, the employer has more recently advised the Duke Street office that it cannot provide staffing support. Even more recently, staffing levels appear to have been modified such that these requests may become even less frequent. No Weber Street CSR2 has ever been disciplined for declining a request to attend work at Duke Street. [3] The grievance claims that the employer must provide 120 hours notice of this change to their work location, failing which, the first shift must be paid at an overtime rate. The grievors rely on Article UN5.1 of the collective agreement. That provision speaks to changes in the posted shift schedule. That is a reference to hours of work, that is, time, not location of the work. The hours of work of any employee asked to work at Duke Street are not altered. That interpretation is supported by the language in Article UN4.1, which refers to a scheduled shift by reference to when the shift commences and ends, a reference to time, not place. [4] I find therefore that Article UN5.1 has no application in the circumstance of a change of work location. This grievance is therefore dismissed. Dated at Toronto this 8th day of March 2013. Marilyn Nairn, Vice-Chair