HomeMy WebLinkAboutUnion 02-10-07 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
BETWEEN
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION
(THE "UNION")
AND:
ALGONQUIN COLLEGE
(THE "EMPLOYER")
And in the matter of the grievance concerning the employer's
"on call/standby" practice.
BEFORE: R.O. MacDowell (Sole Arbitrator)
APPEARANCES
For the union: Eric O'Brien (Counsel)
Craig Athrens
For the employer: J. D Sharpe (Counsel)
Diane McCutcheon
Barry Brock
Luc Presseau
A hearing in this matter was held in, Ottawa, Ontario, on November 23,
2001, continuing on October 7, 2002.
INTERIM AWARD
On October 7, 2002, I convened a Mediation / Arbitration Hearing in respect of a
grievance filed by the Union on March 19, 2001, (OPSEU Number 01C233, Local Number
01S04).
The issues in the grievance arise from the College's implementation of an On-
Call / Standby System in the Information Technology Services Department ("I.T.S."). It is the
Union's position that the system was introduced in violation of Article 1, Article 6, Appendix
"E" and a Letter of Understanding of the Collective Agreement. The Employer submits that, as
a matter of interpretation, there has been no violation of any of these provisions and, in addition,
raises issues concerning the "timeliness" of the grievance and the application of the doctrine of
equitable estoppel.
Without making any findings of fact, it appears clear that I.T.S. has distinct and
compelling operational needs for a system of some kind to provide for regular and dependable
after-hours service by I.T.S. employees.
It also appears that both the Union and the Employer have an arguable case.
However, in this interim decision, I make no determinations.
-1-
Having reviewed the materials presented to me and heard the representations of
the parties, I make the following Interim Order:
1. The system will remain in force in its current form and scope, pending the
final determination of these matters at arbitration, subject to the following
clarifications.
1. Any employee who receives a call to return to work, whether working at
home or at the College, will be entitled to a "call-back" under Article 6.4.
Any subsequent call to return to work within a four (4) hour period will
not trigger a second call-back.
2. The Employer continues to have an obligation to attempt to distribute
available overtime work as equitably as practicable, in accordance with
Article 6.2.5. The employees continue to have an obligation to co-operate
in the performance of required overtime, as detailed in Article 6.2.5. This
paragraph does not add to, or subtract from, the provisions of Article
6.2.5.
3. These matters are adjourned sine die.
4. I will remain seized.
-2-
I note that both parties have an interest in achieving a stable, workable system.
Without such a system, the Employer anticipates that it may be obliged to consider significant
changes to the process for scheduling and work distribution.
Of course, regardless of such needs, the Collective Agreement provides for
overtime and call-back, both of which may be a suitable basis on which to jointly develop a
protocol to meet the Employer's legitimate needs.
Finally, considering the nature of these issues, and the College's particular needs
in I.T.S., I note that this may be a matter which is most suitable for collective bargaining, either
at the central table or in local discussions.
These matters will be rescheduled at either parties' request. Should neither party make
such a request within three (3) months of the ratification of the next Collective Agreement, this
Interim Order will terminate and be of no further force or effect.
I will remain seized of the merits of the grievance until it is withdrawn or resolved.
Dated at Toronto this '$ day of October, 2002.
R.O. MacDowell (sole arbitrator)