HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-2843.Singleton.16-02-26 DecisionCrown 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#2010-2843, 2013-0701, 2013-0702, 2013-0703
UNION#2010-0229-0017, 2013-0229-0006, 2013-0229-0007, 2013-0229-0008
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Singleton) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer
BEFORE Randi H. Abramsky Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Tim Hannigan
Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP
Counsel
FOR THE EMPLOYER George Parris
Treasury Board Secretariat
Legal Services Branch
Counsel
CONFERENCE CALL February 19, 2016
- 2 -
Decision
[1] On May 11, 2015, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Settlement
concerning four grievances brought by the grievor, Ms. Samantha Singleton. The Union
now asserts that the Employer has violated one of the terms of that settlement. A
conference call was held on February 19, 2016 to address that allegation.
[2] The terms of the settlement are confidential and, consequently, I will only refer to
the provision in dispute. Paragraph 6 of the settlement reads as follows:
6. The Parties acknowledge the importance of the posters from Black History
Month, 2013 to the Grievor, and agree that she may keep these posters that are
currently at the facility. The Employer agrees to assist the Grievor in locating the
posters in question. The Parties recognize, however that some of the posters may
no longer be in the Institution’s custody. The Parties also recognize that should an
offender/resident seek to reclaim their personal poster, that the Grievor agrees to
return the particular poster to them.
[3] The Union asserts that no posters for 2013 have been found, and that the grievor
is very upset about this and believes that the Employer misled her into signing the
Memorandum of Settlement, knowing that the posters were not at the Institution and
that the Employer had, in fact, destroyed them.
[4] The Employer asserts that staff, along with the grievor, searched for the posters
for multiple days, and the grievor also did so on her own. They found some posters, but
not the ones she was seeking. The Employer has no knowledge of what happened to
them, and was cautious in the wording of paragraph 6 as it was unsure whether the
posters could be found.
[5] The grievor’s disappointment in the fact that the posters she sought from 2013
were not found is understandable. Those posters were important to her, and a
significant reason that the grievances were filed. When the Memorandum of Settlement
was signed in 2015, it was very uncertain whether the posters from 2013 still existed
within the Institution, but the Employer agreed to search and agreed that she would be
able to keep any that were found. The Employer, as counsel noted, was cautious and
included the sentence: “The Parties recognize, however, that some of the posters may
no longer be in the Institution’s custody.” I agree that there is a difference between
“some” and “none”, but it was unclear, at that time, whether the posters were still there.
The Employer agreed to “assist the Grievor in locating the posters in question.” It did
that, on multiple occasions. Some posters were found, but not the ones that the grievor
wanted. The fact that those posters were not found does not mean that the Employer
breached the Memorandum of Settlement.
[6] In terms of the allegation that the Employer misled the grievor into signing the
Memorandum of Settlement because it knew that the posters had been destroyed, there
would have to be evidence led to establish that. It is quite a serious allegation to make,
- 3 -
and it requires evidence to support it. No such evidence was raised. The grievor’s
belief that she was misled, no matter how sincere that belief is, is not sufficient to
reopen this hearing and void the Memorandum of Settlement.
[7] It is unfortunate, and disappointing, that what the grievor sought through the
Memorandum of Settlement – the retrieval of some of the 2013 posters - did not
materialize. As it was never certain that the posters still existed within the Institution,
however, I cannot conclude that the failure to find any is a breach of the settlement.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 26th day of February 2016.
Randi H. Abramsky, Vice Chair