HomeMy WebLinkAboutLiang 02-11-22 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
BETWEEN:
GEORGE BROWN COLLEGE
(Hereinafter referred to as the College)
AND
OPSEU
(Hereinafter referred to as the Union)
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE GRIEVANCE OF TED LIANG (OPSEU FILE 01C370)
BOARD OF ARBITRATION: Gail Brent
R. J. Gallivan, College Nominee
Michael Lyons, Union Nominee
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE COLLEGE: Brenda Bowlby, Counsel
FOR THE UNION: Nelson Roland, Counsel
Hearings held in Toronto, Ontario on December 21, 2001 & November 19, 2002.
DECISION
On September 18, 2002, an interim ruling was issued on a request by the Union for an
adjournment of the heating in this matter which was to continue on September 19, 2002. At that
time, we were presented with little information on the circumstances which had lead to the request
for the adjournment because Union counsel had not been provided with particulars by the grievor.
We have now been provided with further information relating to events which both precede and
follow the telephone conference on September 17, 2002 which lead to the September 18, 2002 ruling.
Based on this further information, we are prepared to reconsider the College's request on September
2
17, 2002 that the grievance be dismissed.
By letter dated September 13% Union counsel requested an adjoumment of the September 19,
2002 and November 19, 2002 hearing dates after he was advised by the Union Vice President that
the grievor had sent an e-mail saying that he would be unable to attend the September 19t~ hearing
date and perhaps the November 19th hearing date. The e-mail indicated that the grievor had taken
employment and it was understood that this employment was outside the country. Mr Roland sent
the grievor an urgent e-mail seeking further information concerning the reasons for his unavailability
in order to assist him in arguing the adjournment request. Mr Roland did not receive a response until
September 18, 2002., the day following the conference call.
The grievor advised Mr Roland that he was employed in China where there was a 12 hour
time difference, that his employment was recent and therefore it would not be suitable to request a
leave, that the cost of travel was $2,000.00 and it would take 2 days to travel to Canada. The grievor
also advised that he was quite certain that he may not be able to attend the November 19, 2002
hearing date.
Following the issuance of the interim ruling Mr Roland sent a copy to the grievor by e-mail
on September 19, 2002. Mr Roland asked the grievor to contact him as soon as he had had the
opportunity to review the ruling.
Mr Roland heard nothing from the grievor, nor did the Union hear from the grievor. Finally,
on November 14, 2002, Mr Roland and the Union Local Vice President touched base with each other
to determine if either had heard from the grievor. When it was determined that neither had, the
Union LOcal Vice President e-mailed the grievor advising him that he had to tell them if he was going
to attend on November 19, 2002 at the next hearing date. On November 15, 2002, the grievor e-
mailed Union counsel, with a copy to the Union Local Vice President, as follows:
Due to the busy work schedule and my physical working location overseas, I will not be able
to attend the hearing on November 19, 2002. Please do what you think is appropriate under
this situation.
It is clear from the foregoing that the grievor is not only failing to attend these long scheduled
hearing dates of which he had been given notice by Mr Roland on March 7, 2002, but is not taking
an active role in the conduct of his case. Nor is there any evidence which supports a reasonable
expectation that this will change so as to allow the grievance arbitration to proceed. The grievor has
given no assurance that he will attend at any future dates which might be set.
Under Article 18.7.6 of the Collective Agreement (Arbitration Board Power) we are given
the power to "dispose of a grievance without further notice to any person who is notified of the
hearing and fails to appear."
In the specific circumstances set out above, we exercise our power under Article 18.7.6 to
dismiss the grievance.
DATED AT LONDON, ONTARIO THIS 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2002.
Gail Brent
I concur' .
R. J. Gallivan, College Nominee
I concur T~ [,.n~OV~ ~
Michael Lyo Union Nominee