HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-0904.Cusack.16-04-25 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#2013-0904, 2013-0905, 2013-0906, 2013-1183
UNION#2013-0616-0013, 2013-0616-0014, 2013-0616-0015, 2013-0616-0021
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Cusack) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer
BEFORE Ken Petryshen Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Christopher Bryden
Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP
Counsel
FOR THE EMPLOYER Cathy Phan
Treasury Board Secretariat
Legal Services Branch
Counsel
CONFERENCE CALL April 22, 2016
- 2 -
Decision
[1] At the outset of this proceeding, I had before me four grievances dated April
16, 2013, filed by Ms. B. Cusack and the issue of whether Ms. Cusack had voluntarily
resigned her employment on April 12, 2013. Ms. Cusack had been employed as a
Registered Nurse at the North Bay Jail. The parties agreed to proceed first with the
dispute about whether Ms. Cusack’s resignation was voluntary. In a decision dated
January 6, 2016, I determined that Ms. Cusack had voluntarily resigned her
employment at the North Bay Jail on April 12, 2013. Subsequent to the release of the
decision, the Union requested that a hearing be scheduled to deal with Ms. Cusack’s
four grievances and the parties agreed to continue this proceeding on April 26, 2016.
The Union now requests that the hearing scheduled for April 26, 2016, be adjourned. I
entertained submissions on the Union’s adjournment request during a conference call at
5:00 p.m. on April 22, 2016.
[2] Union counsel advised that there were two reasons for the Union’s request to
adjourn the April 26 hearing. One of the reasons was that Ms. Cusack did not have the
necessary funds to finance travel to Toronto for the hearing. Ms. Cusack is employed
as a Registered Nurse in Manitoba. When Union counsel sought the Employer’s
consent to adjourn the hearing, he was aware only of the financial reason for the
adjournment when he spoke to Employer counsel. The Employer did not consent to an
adjournment. After further discussion with Ms. Cusack on the day of the conference
call, Union counsel indicated that he became aware of another reason for the
adjournment request, namely that Ms. Cusack had recently injured herself during a fall
and therefore was not medically fit to travel to a hearing in Toronto. Union counsel had
attempted to inform Employer counsel about this additional reason for the adjournment,
but he was unable to contact her so she heard about this reason for the first time during
the conference call. Union counsel indicated that Ms. Cusack was taking pain
medication for her injuries and that the medication made her drowsy.
[3] After hearing what counsel had to say about the Union’s request to adjourn the
hearing, I advised counsel that I would grant the Union’s adjournment request. It would
- 3 -
have been preferable if Ms. Cusack had advised Union counsel earlier about her
reasons for not being able to attend the hearing. However, I was satisfied in the
circumstances that the medical reason justified the adjournment of the hearing. It was
unnecessary to decide whether the financial reason by itself would have justified an
adjournment. Accordingly, the hearing scheduled for Tuesday, April 26, 2016, is hereby
adjourned. The hearing of Ms. Cusack’s grievances will continue on a date that is
mutually agreeable to the parties.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 25th day of April 2016.
Ken Petryshen, Vice Chair