HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-0534.Union.88-12-13 ' · '" ' ' =~ ,'~ ' ONTARIO EMPLO¥~:S DE LA COURONNE
,' CROWN EMPLOYEE$ DE L'ONTARJO
GRIEVANCE C,OMMiSSION DE
SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT
BOARD DES GRIEFS
180 DUNDAS STREEt' WEST, TORONTO, ONTARtO. MSG 7Z$. ~OlrE 2700 TE£EI~HONE/T~L~PNONE
~80. RUE D[JNDAS OUEST, TORONTO, (ONTARIOJ M5G IZ8- BUREAU 2100 (416) $~8-0688
0534/88
IN THE HATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
· . , THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
Between:
OPSEU (Union Grievance)
· ; Grievor
and
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Correctional Services)
Employer
Before: M.W. Wright Vice-Chairperson
~ F.E. Collom Member
:': A.S. Merrit~ Member.
For the Grievor: M. Ruby
Counsel
· Gowling & Henderson
· Barristers and Solicitors
J. Albrecht
Guelph Correctional Centre,
Ministry of Correctional Services
For the Employer: J.F. Benedict
:. .. Manager Staff Relations & Compensation
Ministry of Correctional Services
Hearing: November l, 1988
D E C I S I O~N
This is a Union Grievance brought by O.P.S.E.U. The Grievance
ils dated June 6, 198B and reads as follows:
"STATEMENT OF. GRIEVANCE
Several CO 3 positions at the Guel'ph Correctional
Centre have been vacant for extended periods
of time. Competitions have not been held to
fil 1 them.
SETTLEMENT DESIRED
That all vacant CO 3 positions at Guelph
Correctional Centre be identified and com-
petitions be held to fill them."
T'he Union's case r~evolves around Article 4. I of the Collective
' Agreement which reads as fol lows:
"4.1 When a vacancy occurs in the Classified
~' Service for a Bargaining unit position or a
]~' new classified position lis created in the bar-
· ~. gaining unit, it shall be advertised for at
~m~m~ least ten (10) working days prior to the esta-
: 'blished closing date when advertised within
..~. a ministry, or it' shall be advertised for at
'~' least fift~eeh (15) working days prior to the
m m ~ $~ establ i shed cl osi ng date when advert i sed
servi ce-wi de..."
(Underlining added)
The Union's complaint is that between June 1987 and June 1988
three Correctional Officers-3 retired at the. Guelph Correctional
Centre and a fourth C0-3 position became vacant. The Union complains
that since the 'four C0-3 positions have become vacant the Employer
has not taken any steps to fill the vacancies by adverti.sing and
taking the .necessary steps to fill 'them as required by IArticle
4 of the Collective Agreement. What is most unsettling to them
Union is that ever since the vacancies occurred the work previously
· ~, performed b~ CO-3's has been carried out, on an acting basis, by
~? CO-2's, a fact which is admitted by. the Employer. In other words,
the work previously done by CO-3's is now being 'done by acting
CO-2's and the Union has no idea how long this state' of affairs
will be continued by the Employer.
On April ?, 1988 the Senior Assistant Superintendent at the
Guelph Centre sent a memorandum to all Correctional Officers-2
in which he advised them that "for the present time we will continue
to~ be placing Correctional Officers-2 into the position of Acting
Correctional Officers-3'." CO-2's who were interested in becoming
acting 'CO-3's were invited to signify their interest to the Senior
Assistant Superintendent.
On July 20, 1988 the Regional Personnel Administrator of the
Ministry of Correctional Services wrote a letter to the Staff
Representative of O.P.S.E.U. at Guelph in which he confirmed that
there were then four vacancies at the Correctional Officer-3 level.
He then went on to state the following:'
"The assignment into these positions has been
rotated on a developmental basis to those staff
who have expressed an interest' over the past
twelve months. As stated at the meeting, we
are presently reviewing our manpower structure
at the Guelph Correctional Centre and as a.
'result have chosen not 'to fill some existing
_ b3 _
vacancies until this review is finalized.
To this end, I would point out that Section
18, Subsection (1), SUbsection (al of'the Crown
Employees Collective Bargaining Act clearly
gives management the right in determining com-
plement and organizational structure."
We note in passing that at the hearing Mr. Benedict did not
press or argue the "developmental" aspect referred to in the fore-
going letter.
There .was also filed with us a copy of ~ letter wri.tten by
...~ MK. R. M. McDonald, Deputy Minister of ~Correctional Services. to
"Superintendents'~ by which we assume, is' meant the Superintendents
of all of the Correctional Centres in Ontario. In this letter,
-i the Deputy Minister points out, among other =mattersj that "the
Ministry will over a period of time, cease to utilize the Correct-
"2
ional Officer-3 (gO-3) category."
.~ ~ Mr. Benedict has advised us that the three C0-3 posi~tions whose
,j prior incumbents .retired have been eliminated from the manpower
i. stru~:ture since September 1988 and that only one C0-3 position
sti 11 remains vacant.
Counsel ~for the Union recognizes that events have overtaken
him as ~egards the three positions which have been eliminated and
he asks, therefore, merely for a declaratory statement from this
8oard that the Employer should have applied Article 4 by proceeUing
.. to fill the vacancies when they occurred. He also'asks this Board
to direct the Employer to fill the vacancy which still remains
open in. accordance with the'provisiOns of 'Article 4 of the Collective
Agreement.
Counsel for the Union complains about the protracted period
of uncertainty which has been imposed by the Employer-upon the
C0-2's at the Guelph Centre. Pointing to Article 4.1 oflthe Collect-
,. live Agreement he argues that the procedure which the ~mployer .'must
follow "when a vacancy occurs" is very clear namely "it (the vacancy)
shall be. advertised..." and filled as provided for in Article 4.
Anticipating the .argument by Counsel for the Employer founded on
Sec., 18(1) of the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act Union
"' Counsel points to. Sec. 7 of the same Act which vests collective
bargaining authority in a Union which has been granted representation
rights by the Ontario Public Service Labour Relations Tribunal
Sec. 7 gives-the ~Union laUthority to bargain concerning "promotion"
from C0-2 to CO-3 and that the method of giving effect to the promo-
tion is set out in Article 4 of the Collective Agreement. Strong
objection, is raised to having the C0-2's held in a state of
suspension for an indefinite period of time while the Employer
makes up his mind at the same time disregarding entirely the
-. provisions of Article 4 of the Collective Agreement.
Counsel for the Ministry argued that no vacancy has occurred
and he advanced three arguments in support of that proposition:
His first argument was that Article 4 of the Collective Agreement
is silent on the question as to how much time an Employer may
take before deciding to fill a position. Until such time as
the Employer makes a decision to fill a position no vacancy
exists and it is beyond the Board's jurisdiction 'to impose time
limits on the Employer. The secondl argument is that management
has acted reasonably in that it would not make sense to fill
positions while a process-is under way' to change the manpower
structure by eliminating .the CD-3 positions.~ We can deal with
both of these arguments at the same time. This Board does not
seek to impose any time con'straints on the Employer nor should
this matter be determined on the basis as to whether or not
the management decision is a reasonable one or whether it is
being applied in ~, a reasonable manner. This 8oard looks tO. the
Collective Agreement to see whether or not t~he agreement has
been complied with. When a C0~3 retires and his work is being
performed by another person -- in this case a C0-2 -- it is
apparent that a vacancy has 'occurred. If, in the future, manage-
merit should decide to discontinue the position then it becomes
part of the exclusive function of the Employer to take such
effective steps as management considers necessary by determining
ithe complement of the organization' and there are l~)roc~duresI
available for management to. give effect to its managerial
decisions when they are finally formulated. Until such time,
however as management reaches a final decision the provisions
'of the Collective Agreement apply and must be complied with.
Mr. Benedict's third argun~nt, which is rather convoluted,
leads him to the conclusion that·this Board is without jurisdiction.
After reminding us about the distinction between civil servants
(employed in the classified 'service) and public servants (employed
in the unclassified service) he makes the point that the mere fact
that the Employer chooses to have the work continued after the
retirement of a civil servant does not necessarily mean that there
is a vacancy. A. vacancy is not created, ·he argued, by the mere
fact that 'the same work is being continued.- He.argued that whether-
or not there is a vacancy will depend on who the Employer decides
will do the work, 'that is to say whether by a civil servant or
by a public servant and not by the nature of the work involved.
If the ultimate decision should be made that the work will be done
by a public servant ('unclassified service) then, .by reason of the
provisions of Article 3.1 of the Collective Agreement, Article
4 thereof will have no relevance. Until· that decision is made
· no vacancy exists and, it is argued, this Board'is without juris-
.d~ction to deal with t. he matter. Mr. Benedict's argument falls
in~ediately to the ground since the Employer already made the
decision on who will do the work -- CO-2's working as acting CO-3's..
The Employees who have been doing the work previously performed
by CO-3's are Correctional Officer-2 Employees. They are civil
servants (employed in classified service). Dn the basis of Mr..
Benedict's own argument, therefore, a vacancy obviously has occurred
and Article 4 of the Collective Agreement ~applies. ~'
In the result, this Board determines as follows:-
... l. We declare that vacancies occurred when prior incumbents of
the C0-3 positions retired and the Employer should have complied
· ? -with Article 4 in. posting and. filling of those vacancies; and
2. A vacancy now exists in the .classified service for a C0-3
position and we hereby direct .the Employer to proceed forthwith
to post and fill the Vacancy in accordance with the provisions
of Article 4 of the Collective Agreement.
To the extent indicated above, the Grievance is allowed.
DATED AT OTTAWA this 13th day of December, 19g~.