HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-0729.Smith.93-07-19 ~,,,. ,'i~.'.-;· ,,.,'. .' . .ONTARtO EMPLOY£$DELACOURONNE
'~ :'": ii.. ".":'?:J: ': :;' CROWN EMPLOYEES DEL'ONTARIO
BOARD DES GRIEFS
~80 DUNDAS STREET WEST, SUITE 2~00, TORONTO, ONTAR~, MSG ;Z8 TELEPHONE/T£L£PHONE: (476) 326-
180, RUE DUNDAS OUEST, BUREAU 2;00, TORONTO (ONTARIO). MSG ~Z8 FACSIM~E/~CO~E ,' (416) 326-~396
729/91
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
BETWEEN
OPSEU (Smith)
Grievor
_ - and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Health.)
Employer
BEFORE M, Watters Vice-Chairperson
· E, Seymour Member
R, Scott Member
FOR THE J. Monger
~RIEVOR Counsel
Gowling, Strathy & Henderson
Barristers &
FOR THE D, Costen
RESPONDENT Counsel
Legal Services Branch
Management Board of Cabinet
H~RiNG June 29, 1992
February 1, 1993
March 26, 1993
This pr'oceed'~n9 arises from Che ~tr',ev~r~ce oi: 'Mr. Gary Smi'btn
d~bed Al..~r~l 1, 199i, the mat, eria~ part o-F ~',~ich reads'
STATEMFNT OF GRIEVANCE
L;ari,~J';ig c:er L'~;,'~ ampl~),;,~ ""r'o:~ !'.~ ~,:,~}ir)y~e lounge
SFTTi_~N~t,~T
Tk~'. tie ~'m,p]r:.yer make reasonable prov~sions for
the e:ni~loy~-.,: i.',~;nge aL tiaa 'f'ieek
Thp ,','~evc::r iq ;~ Ambuq~anc'e A'l-.l=r~(.:f~"l~ employed by t. he
Mtn'fsf. ry of Hea1~.h Bhrough ~he .DtCawa-C;xrleton Reg4onal Ambulance-
Service. ~'e has v,ot-ked ¢'or th~ ~n~st. ry ~n th~s capacity ~or
appro,~-'.~a~v...,... . n~'~t:~.~-_ ...,. , tla't.,~ yeaFs. Gene, at ;v,, ~e ~s re.,u~,~, 'red
,_~mbJ~ar~,~ ~r"~ ~n exFed~t,~ous c~nd safe
Ti'..~ t.,Fese~t Fi~=et. Centre, which i>~ ¢;peraLed by k. he Ministry
of Nea~bh~ opened in the Spr~n~ of 1991. it is located at 2280
f'ormaF'ty hOL. Ised in older pr-emi~,es lock, Led plsewher-e. The Fleet
Cerlt. r-e is ma,~r:,~e~} i.'~y IdF. HarTz 'rerz~)l:~,~'lo~. He has a ~o'hal of
· [-'o~r ~4) mec, hanis~ IJtld~]l" his direc~ ion, The mechanics, who work
between t?'P hours o'F 7:~5 a.m. arid 3:45 p.m,, are respomsibta for
the servicing ~Fld repair of ambulances opeFabing in.the Otbawa-
qtt, I~,:.~;~ region and ~n ~.h~ t'.':road~r gengr-aph~:ca] ~rea. The
in '~(~[:.~1, bl~e Fl~t Cen'~re services ~nd ~'ep~-[r'8 a t.n~al
b,~t~,.,ee:~ s xt.y (60) arid ei'ght;y (~0) ve~,,icles. Tl',e 3oard was t. old
that ~:~ Ottsa~,~a-CamIeton Regfona~ grn[:ulance Service opeca'Be8
('~sn) Arrbula,-~ce Atfl~ndan~s are e;..'i-.4,c~,~r~ I-,) t. he vehicles ~h~c~ are
(a) -~:~,na~ ~ach week duc-ina i:.he x'int, er mon-'h'a, He est. ima'~ed Lhat.
e~ch v~s~U las2s approx~ma2e~y one-he'll (~) hour, alChougt~ on
fx:c~xio~ t.!~e e'iay could be of ;onger d~;rabion. ~f the required
work i~ proiected to take longec t, han one-hail (~) hour, ~he
Amb~lanc~ Abt. endant;,s may be given 8n aiLernat.e vehicle. The
g'r~-vc~," ~ba'(~d that. t. her'e ~.o~i~d be~-.,ek.,~..-n' ' a~ six (6) and e~ght (8)
'-lmb~ia~;es ~n 1..i-~e F~eel.. Cenb,"a ,~h any given time. He advfised
'k. hab ~t. wou~d no", be unusual to t~ave l:wo (2) crews, each
cempr'ised r,f' t~r) (2~ AtLendan'hs, wafi'bing at. 1;he Oentre for ~he
compleflion of' repa'irs ~;o t, he~r veh~cles. Fie fur'~t~er' acknowledged
hhat., from Lim~ ~o l~ime, 'the number' of persons ~a~ting could
~c~d four (4). The time sl-~en~ by 1;he gr'~evr~r' ak khe Fleet
O~nt, te is cnn~dered ~o be ~ori.;, rat, her ~han rest,
Amhul:~nc.e Atl_endanb8, whi-'le at t. he Fleet. Centre, are not
permi1',t, ed t.o wait, in khe empleyea lounge. This area is also
r~'Fer re~t 1,n :~ the mechanic~' iur~ot~ r'(~om. Tr~'tead, a separate
~[~,'if';r:ai ;),, bhe Employer has ~ed ~,-Ff' ~ '~en foot (i0') by
lt.~e~va ?de~. (12') area w~t,h ple-,[-~jlass wail d~v~der's. These
d~v~ders, vd~ ;e bo'~t, ed t.~gether, ~r'e '[-'fee ~t. arldin9. They are
between s~x +'eet (6') and.seven feet (7') fin height. ~s a
,,ons!.ruct. ed around the waiti~]g ar~a. TI'e hl. JbiFlg i8 approximately
' ..... '~"~ and is anchored into 13he
i.hrae 'inch~.q ~,,:, ) by Bbree finch~=~ ~,-- .
garage ?~oor with six inch (6") concrei-.e ho'its. The bottom and
l.op rails are positioned at. bum[>er '~eve~ so as t.o cushion any
contact with a reversing vehicle, This r'ai]'ing was apparently
r '- ,-', ~ ~ evance The
wa~tfing area, or "the bubble" as ~b was cef'eFred t.o, does no~
have a ce~ng. ~. ~s open at. ?.he fop tn the gacage ca~ I~ng,
Addi'Lionai]y, fit does no~ have ~'bs own d~stincL hea~ng or
ven'Ll'iakion systems. The wa~ng area is furnished w~h two (2)
co~ches a cha~t, a coff'ee-~able ~,~ Q an end-table ~ copy of' a
n~nt. ograpt~ of' the ~rea (e~t~ib~'~. 7~b)') 'is appe~ded to th~s Award.
Mechanics working at., t. he F'Ieet Ce~ltre take their lunch
bebween 12:00 noon and 12:30 p.m. Ti~ey a/so are entiL]ed bo an
unspecified number of co. ffee breaks during ~he day. A8 $~a~ed
alcove, the mechanics have a sep~r'a te 't unch- room that 'they may use
3
f¢~r L}~ei? ,~e~,t and coffee break~. Tt,e l,~nc.t]roo~ i$ loeat, ecJ away
from the mechanics' bay~. ~l'. is a ten ~'oot (10') by sixteen foot
is in close pr'n~miLy t.o ki~. Ter'zc':pt~,J'l~s' ql-'f~ce. ~'b ~s equipped
,,,~i~t, ;-; t. ab~e a.~ ~x (6'~ c, hairs t'.wo fo) nui~ .r ~c)~L chairs a
The grievor in his-evidence raised a number of health and
s~.~Fe'r.y con~erns ,~ith respecl;, to 't,i~e ;tt. endant, s' ~afft~ng area.
t. he ~_,hrus'k of i~s ev~de~'~c:e %b. at suci~ concer-ns cio not~ ex~sb
,,"is ?.he mechanics' lunch-torito. The 9cievor's assertions
regard were answered by kit. T~,rznpnuIcs anti by Mr. George
one of t. he mechanics at the F~eet Cen~,re. The lat.'Let
genL~eman a~so serves as the C, eqk. ra's elected Hea~th and Safety
R al..,, r e se n t,r~ i-. ~ ye.
The g~i.~vor st. ated that the. A'h'Eendant.q~ ,,.,,ai'[.~i~g area is
equipF~ed w'ii;i-~ inadequate lighting to t;i~e e×tenE t-.hat he is unable
t,o read wh~ le there, Mr. Terzopoulos cont~ested this asset%ion.
in his judgment, bhe quality of 'bhe li9htin~ does no~ differ
mate/i a 1 1 y bebween t. he two (2) areas i n issue.
4
The grievor stated that the waiting area Is coyered by dust,
a for Q¢ dus't ~-, t.t'~a ~,.~nr~ h..ay~. ~= ~u~jge~:.ted th;s would be the
r.n-~¢-.¢r~ed 'l-h~ l~h~hoO~ l'haf- 'bhe~-e is qess dust
rQom. Np fmphasi xed; however, ?,h&t both nocaf, ions are cleaned
a daily basis.
¥~e orievof c,,.mlp 't *. i ned about; L.i~e lack .;~ a ~eparate heating
~nur'ce for the waiting area. He expressed the opinion 'that the
%he garage door opens to a~ow for Lhe en'?,r), or ex~ of
~pver'r~] minu'k.e:, ab a time and 'i:hat d~rr'ir'~g s~]ch per'iod Lhe
fills up wit, h c:~ld air. Ne st:atad %hal iL ~-akes a while for
chid air 'ho clear. Fr'ofi~ his pecspecLive, si'L-bing ~n 8he
bubhl~ is akin tc~ be'lng in "an ice-box". We were told that -this
of temperature change occurs on a frequent, basis,
Ter'-,opout~s agreed thaL t, empecat, t~res in the waiting area
T~r'.'o]~Ot.~jos [Iqr'iic;at. ed 'hha!5 the hlasJ':~ r-,.f' ~',eh "1ir ~'~'3r11 the h~ater8
c),l 'f.he e~l-. rand we~st:. ,,,.,'all.q ~er,/e ~e rC'.~nteFart' Phc cold air
c:~m~mg ir~ tl. lrnugh 'Y, he oj3~r~ deOF. H~ h~v~r'~'k~le~q~ agre~ct ~,ha't.
f'?~,c i'~r-~h~r-,g '~',~r,~[~ec,s.L.(.~re~ "aq parc of' tn{s jr]~."
..' . . .,,-~ -, fluqd
get 'hracked inBo -bhe waiting area. ~e ind~c~'hed 'FUrbher Bhat,
~4rql'~k~ t~'e meoh~n~cs' bay¢, 'I7. h¢ f'leor }r~ hhe area is not "ant. i-
.~'1 'ii)" Hr'. ler~',,-¢uios,(..~ ~ agreed hha'~,. "~ 1quids e'F various, type8
fr'equer]t]y spill onto the garage floor. He advised %hat all
sp'ii]s are immed'fabe]y absorbed and removed. He also asserted
,.h,~h an't,i-~ir'} na';r~b iR fnur]d within L.~e wa4ting area MY'. Daly
confirmed t ~;.,uP :* all spills ar'e cleaned up immediately.
Th~. 9rievor testified %hat ~t ~s ,ext. rerne~}, ~{o]sy ~ t.h~
~aiking area as a result o~~ Bhe work being perfor'med by ~he
rr:echanics. Reference was made, ~nter alia, t.o their ~se of
hammers, compressed air tools, cub-[-,4r~g koois end grinders, ali
of which crea!;e a subs15an'bia] volume of noise, i'b was the
gr¢~vor's evidence hhmt; the noise level makes it impossible for
6
him to communicate with others without yelling. He stated that
he has experienced "a humming" in his head when leaving the area.
Mr. Terzopoulos readily acknowledged'that the noise in the garage
area can be loud, even "uncomfortably" so. He stated, however,
that Fleet Centre staff have learned to live with it. He
informed us that no other Attendant or mechanic has approached
him to complain about excessive noise. Hr. Terzopoulos conceded
that conditions are more quiet in the lunch-room. Mr. Daly
stated that the sound level does not, in his estimation, pose a
risk. He, nonetheless, agreed that it was possible the noise
could lead to ear damage. He noted that new types of pneumatic
tools serve to suppress the noise resulting from impact. It was
his belief that noise im a garage "comes with the territory."
The grievor testified that it 18 normal to have items such
as boxes, pallets or ladders leaning against the bubble. He
expressed a fear that these items could be pushed through the
p]exi-g]ass partition if bit by a vehicle. Mr. Terzopou]os
agreed that equipment is frequent]y stored in front and to the
side of the waiting area. He staled that, while other Attendants
had not raised this concern, he would be prepared to advise
staff through the placement of an appropriate sign %hat articles
should not be ]eft next to the area. Mr. Terzopou]os was
prepared to concede the obvious fact that the lunch-room is safer
than the bubble w~th respect, to the possibility of
]]n ~. sirni'la¢ vein, t. he fr'ievor ~ugg¢~Eed bhat the operation
o.F vehiotes in gear while
Te~zopoulos agreed that, ~"¢oli] Li,~l~' !'.(~ time, mechanics d,~ ¢~e¢ci 1-,o
noted that thare are safe'by dev4ces on fha hoists to prevent.
,.,¢~-ic]es from co~ing ~f%'. Mr. Da'fy advi';ed that t,e ¢ee~s safe
wot'king t4nderneath the hoists. He sLat. ed that no one has been
injtJred by a moving veh4c~e whi~e ~e has been at the F~eet
The grievor e×pressed the opinion that, on occasion, the
m~chanicq operate the vehicles af-. arq excessive rate of speed
with'in t. he garage area. N'e a}so stat. ed that they do nos a~ways
reverse the ~mbulances 5n a sa~e 'Fashion, The grievor believed
P.i~af. '[hes~ pract{ces const{tt~te a ~;~¢et.y riff, for ~hose per'sons
~,~,~'~ might be Ri'L-.'k. in9 ~n the waiting area.
The grievor was concerned that, the waiting area does not
have a distinct ventilation sy.~tem, TE was his evidence that the
ventilation is worse i'n that area than in tile rest of the garage
~s "hhe air is not free to move around." He ,~uggested that there
~.~ a high level of airborne dusb and that i;here -is "a 8tench" in
Khe bubble emanating frnm t, he gas, oi'l, brake fluid, varsol and
(,;~aning ~F-I~.~rt~ used by the mechanfic-,~. The grievor testified
w~ efiv'ig~d that. ~fter waiting in l:.he area, P,e ~xperiences a dry
khrnmt.~ a f-~l~]aaefl no~e c~nd a congested fee~ng in t, he ches~. He
,.,~'.i~ r~p~<.k kn :~r- n~ai~ty w-it.h~n t. he Fleet. Centre, T~sl~ng wa8
~niL~ally c.~md~oted on-F~bruary 18, t~99 b>' the Fmployee Health
a~ Safe~'y Services Branch nf t:he M~n~sl:ry of Government,
==r,~'~r. es Ti~is ~ ..... Ling focused on carbon mc. noon'de, carbon
fi ~ ox -i rte , tempera't.~]re and re]e't:.ive humid~t.y at. various locations
witi~n the CanE. re. The carbon monc)~ide measurement~s were well
below f. he indoor air quality guidelines a'nd industrial standard.
The ~ame wa~ ~r'l..]e for carbon dioxide. The report. (exhibit.
~k~l'.~$ a't' ?.a~e 6' "The result, s of this ~iJrvey w~t.h respec'b -bo
~;, ind~oa~e t. hat the fresh air supply ~s sufficient to main'ba~n
c~nnppr.~b~ ~evei~ of vent flat,on for 'bhe garage ~rea under
s.i~i'~;~r v~hic'l~ ~nad ennUi'Lions." Tempera~,l~e reading~ ranged
bet. w~n t~.~ and 25.~ degrees Celsius. The reporb nobes
l'.i~e~e l-.~mpPra'h~res "n~oseiy approximate" t.h~ re,event guideline
m~r~g~ for t. he ~int, er ~eason.
Th~ ahove-menhi~r]ed repr~rt, also cr)mrnqnl',s on a build-up of
par-t.~c:~late ah 'Lh~ frash air duct cmnnact,,ion joints, I'b notes
~'l',at r'~r~'ic~lal:e ~oiled a white towel posi'bioned at ~he fresh air
v~n?~. Th~ inve~!.igat, lon suggested t. haf. par'ticulate was being
"Pn'~rained" al:. the roof top fresh air ~ntakes. Earlier
ohqpr'va%~ons had showl~ that parbiculahe/dust-, being released from
l'.~p s'~ (~} exha~sC vents w~s entrained ~n nne (i) of t. he two (2)
f'r'aSh air intakes. The report, recommends that ventilation
e,i'~nr!~r-~g fhe h¢icjht of 1tie exhaust rants af~ r'oof level or1
ol~,~r'W~qe rcr-S~c;ing or ~'~rninalz. ir~g thc re~nl:,rodtict, ion Of exhaiJs%
i~} -ih~ fr'esh a'ir imhake~ " (page 7').
CorDnra?ion <~n Ai)r'i] 2~; 1992 ~it, h r'esper:t, to carbon monoxid~ and
nS-I-,rog~n dioxide levels writ, bin the Fleet Cent. re. The report
(~xh~hit 6) conc'$ddes that "~:oncentr~t. ions did not exceed the
iegi -'at. ed~, maw 4~T,l~ln, '14m;t.¢, for either gss during this time." The
Tah}e atchac:hed to 'Lhe r'eport disc'~oses that. carbon monoxide
l'..h¢ llJnr:h-F¢IQm. The repor-'b f'LirN]er' ind~ca'bes tha'b 9arage
ar.t-'{vitv may have been "~Jnchanacterisl:~cal]y Iow" on the day of
khe t. es'b~ng. ~r'. TerxopmJ]o¢ could no~ say ~heN~er- further
10
Mr, Terzr~poulos indiaated that, i-;e spends approximately fifty
perc~.nf. (50%) of hi'~ tiaa in the off'ice and lunch-room area wi'th
t.P,~ balance of ~is tim~ heine3 spent in I'.hm garage, it was his
r)Dinjn~ that, while -[-.h~re may ba mere ~rnai) in t. hm gar-age anea~
I~ .air qn~I~t.S f'nur~d t..h~r-e does nob L~i'Ff'er mat. eriallx from that
ex iF;t.i;'~9 in i-,ha l~nch-roem, iqr. T~/7Or}o[Jl~$ elsa emphasized that
L~,ere are carbon ,nonox]de se~sur~ ior+'~.ed t. hr-oughoub the garage.
The sensors activate an alarm if' lev~s go beyond an acceptable
t.n p'.*!]et t.~,e f'lm]e~,. Additional]y, it cau:~es both garage doors to
(~ppn. ~dr'. Terznpouios~shate~ t.t~at, o'ki'~er M]tendants have not
compir~ned mboub bt~e smell nr air quality of 'the wa~bing area.
lqr. Terzepoulos Bestir'led that he ks still concerned about
hhe pr'es~mc:e o~' part. ic;~late ma'bt, er. He -informed us that he does
net kno~ the prec~e nat.~re of ~h~ mater~a], ~e d~d indicate,
however, ~hat, ~n h~8 v~ew ~1: ~8 net ashest, os, Mr. Terzopoulos
st. atari that a l~qtJ~d ptope~3an'k ~s u~ed t.o prevenL brake dus~
Ernm d~ssem~na~ng, ~c, Da]y a~so agreed ~hat a safe me~hod ~s
~ed ho conl-.a~n ashest, es, He stat, ed !-.hat h~ d~ not have any
cencernR with respect, to 'l;t~e level of asbes'hos within the garage.
l{r. Terzopo~os asserted khat he Wanbs to address and correch any
problem which might exist in terms of conbaminates. In this
regard, he advised that a tender has been 8ecuFed to extend the
exhaust stacks on the roof of 'bhe building.
11
his evJd~rnnr~, ~,Lat, ed '~hat he does not bel]~v~
indicated t. haL i'B i~ ~!iffic.:tlt~ for t, he
hr~ral'.hJncj r~st. t, hrr~.~m off hv
'I-,hat. t, hiL~, in a'il t~ke'iihond~ is "probably had
~n,.~ ar i~vnr~ te,q*";-f'~ed .... ~h~i. he r,a~ ?een bhe mechanics smoking
ri~ng~r-r~u~ prac'B~c.e g~ven Bt~e pol;en~'ial *'or fire and/or explos'ion
a'l t,h~ s~te. Hel note~ ~,h~b the F~eet. fien'tre ~8 qupposed t,o be a
polic;:r', ~qr. TerzopoL~]o~ indicat.~d 'Bhat Bhere are presently no
~mr)~r'~ a~- fha Cen~-e. ~r~vin~:~:!},, ,~mnker~ ~,~ere '.asked %o smol~e
(~y.t,h~ ¢~t, or ~'e',B'l:. doo¢s. They ~ere nol: rer1~.~i¢ed %o open these
"~ ~rl4 ~'r~C:V ."
The gr-ievor st~ggest, edt. hat. t, he 'l~mch-room v~ou'td be t. he sat'er'
lc, cat. ion fin t. he event, of a fire given t. ha% inflammable materials
are ne'i%her st. orer. t no~ used t;here~n. He expressed t. he opinion
t. hat. '~.he cement, b?ock wa t'ts wou'td serve as a beb~.er mea~s oF
12
protecLion than the partitions used ~ud~d the bubbie.
Additionally, he advised that there is r~ fire exit, close to the
lunch-room area, He would not., ther~fore, b~ required bo return
t. hrou'gh 'the bays t.o escape a fire. ~r. Ter'Z~pOtJlOS agreed hha~'
the garage was ~ h~gt-,er fire risk in r. orr, p~rison I;o t. he lunch-
room. Fr)r hi~ park, Mr. Paly would ,u.,t. a?r~e bhat. t. he ~unch-room
wo~,id t',~ ~a~'er iq the evenh of a 'F~r~. Me suggested '~hat. a
person ~t.t, ing in the wa~t.~ng area r~ould teadily s~e a fire
devp~op'i~ a~ff r.',~'i(i q~okl¥ depart frnm t.he bu~ Idin9 by way o'F
%he ~ar~ g~rage dnors. Conversely, h~ ;~s~er't. ed thaL someone in
t,i~ i~:nch-r~)om might no-E. be aware of ~n on-go~ng fire in the
gr~rage area and that, onoe ~hey became .;aware, they would have ~o
'leave the bu~]d~ng through a sma.'ller sized door. I~!r. Da]y
testified t. ha~ there have hOC been any f~res s~nc~ he started
work ab t.~,e Fi ee~ Centre,
In the final analysis, Mr'. Terzopoulos was not prepared to
ao~ree that. ~he waitin9 area poses an ,.:nreasnnable health and
safety r'isk 'ko the Attendants. He stat, ed that there are no
doc:urn~nt.~d ca~a hO support "a fear" !:.h:at. t. he ge. rage is u~safe.
Nr. ~aly expressed tt~e same op~nio~.
As ~t.~Led earlier, it was the gr'ievor's assessment %hat the
above-listed i~ea't~h and safe~y concerns could be addressed by
gran~in9 ~he A~%endan~s access ~o the ~unch-room. He
such access had been permi~bed a~ the ~ormer location, He
12
objected t.o t. he f'act~ tt~at he has been den'i~d 1;he same entittemeni$
alt f.h~ n~w hu~ Iding, The ~r'~vot t. eb'l'.~fi~d he h~ heart Lold on
several occasions by management perspnneI i',ha'h he is no~ to use
".he !,,,~ch-roorrl. He .-k.~..ea Ll~t. he has bee~t finst:ruc~ed, 'instead,
Lo ~a'i~ Cnt. he bubb'le. From &he 9rievor'~3 l)erspe~ive 'bhis
¢~lt. r i(.l'.~nn i~ 1;ar~%~.~rl~ou~t I-.o a workplace r'u-le. He be]~e,.,ed hhat.
he ~Quld bG cuhject t-.o disc~p'line ~ere he t.o ~gnore khe
Fmp]oy~r's ~i-[recl:~ve, Pit, Terzopo~]o~ ~h~l:.an~iaIIy conf"irmed
· hi~ validit, y o'~' k. iqis belief, alt. hough he ~as uncerbain 'if he had
i'.t-~6 ~erl~¢'~i't+¢ a~tt;horit, y to irrpose d'isc'pl~ne in such a case, The
~n~tan'h grievance was laufqched on t. he same day that the gcievoc
~,¢as f'jr~'l:, e~cluded from '~he meOhal~ics~ lunci'~ r-oom,
It, 4s clear from the evidence r~ha'b Attendants are permitted
I:o obi, a in a co-Flee from 't, he ]tjnoh-roorn, They are expec%ed,
however, %o ]eave %he room once %hey have prepared their coffee.
Tn t.r,e ~¢in%er mont. hs, %hey are requ4red %o return %o t. he
area. ~n Lhe summer months, many of %he At.%endan%s e~ec~ ~o wai~
o,~lcs~de !'.he garage a% a picnic Cab]e, wealsher perm~&t~ng. ~
de~. area ¢~Qm 'l:.~me 'bo b~me. The 9¢ievor st. ated %ha% he does
t~ave bo wa1% in %he bubble on ~he 3:00 p.m ~o 11:00 p.m.
xhi'i¢ t. he mechanics ace off du%y. Zb ~as t, het, hrus5 of
grievor"s evidence %ha~ %he lunch-room could accomoda%e bhe needs
of bot. h t, he mechanics and ~he At. bendan%s. He sbaCed
subjecb %o tshe mechanics using ~he room for 'kheir breaks,
1,1
~re~ ~S l~r'gely unused. He did 'not. i~¢=v~ ~,n;., personal knowledge
Mr-. Ter'Zopnulos did not. F:o¢]t.~,qf kl-;¢, assert:~on t!~at the
criticism of the mechanic's work on their ambu]anc8.
AddiLionai I?, he s~st. ed (hat t.r.e Ahbend~nts took coffee wiLhout
paying for' srxme ,~nd %l-lr~-i; t, he'~ left the I~OOIT1 in a dirty condition.
s~rnewha~ .Target- than ~he one ourren~ly ~n use.
Mr. T~.r'zopoLalos !:,esbified thab t~he lunch-xoora is used twice
per weeP,., on Wednesdays and Fridays, foe meeti~gs ~h
Oucpose as his adjacent office w]l'i nob aocomodate mote thaa two
(2) ~ecsnns, He fuchhec advised Lhat the mechanics have access
to his office in ocdec to obta]m veh~c'~e f~]es and to use the
computer and the Lelephone. In addition to regular meetings, ~r.
Terzopou'ios meets with suppliers on an unscheduled basis, He
st-.abed Chat, Chis occurs daily and t, hab t, he meetings routinely
t5
'i a.¢t' betwee~ bh'i rty (30) mi nut, es and one ( 1 ) hour. He suggested
t..hat the attendants' use of' tt~e lunch-room could interfere with
l.~ese meetings. Nr. Terzopouios ais(} indica.'bed ~t',at. Lhe lunch-
~'oom is ~sed for si:afl' meetings every two (2) weeks and,
nt.herwi~e, on an as-needed basis. He further acknowledged t. hat
ir is inf'r'equent'~y, used' as a waiting room by family and friends
(~f' [',he mechanics.
Mr', TeFTopOUlOS stated t, hab the ~-~mal ter ~unch room at the
~ew C~,nt, re could not accomodate more 'khan five (5) or s4x (6)
persons. He suggested ~hat it, could not: serve ~he volume of
A'l¥1E. endani~ ~4ng the facilit, y t.o have their vehicles repaired or
serv4ced. He noted that the grievor has access t,o kitchen
facilities at, his own base. klr. Oaly concurred wit'h this
assessmenL. He test, ified that i-he lunch-room is "very tight"
w-it.r~ just. t, he five (5) Fleet. Centre employees using it,. The gist
of his evidence was that the room is too small to 'let, others use
i'b a~ a wail,'ing room, He 'Furl. her objected to the Attendants
having ac<_;ess to the lunch-room at times the mechanics were
elsewhere. He repeat, ed 'khe acc;usai:,ir)t~ L,i~;~i:,~ in 'l-.he past., t. he
Ambulance ALkendants have ~ai led to properly clean ~he ~unch-room
after its use.
Mr. Terzopoulos disagreed with the grievor's assertion that
bhe lur~ch-room is empty for "a, fa'ir port, ion o-F the day." From
his perspective, 'bhe room is occupied for a significant portion
I6
of each day. He test-.ified bhm,., no other room at the Centre could
b~ ~J~efl for m~eLing purpose~. H. sha!.~d that hhe board/'tra~ning
ro~m in the administrative section o2' bhe building is not.: used by
operat, ior~s ~CaF'F. We were Lold bh~,t bb,~ .~[',~r~s,~id room
appro~'imaCety one hundr'ed (100) yards Fr'um i~is r~f"r'ioo. Iflr'.
(:an ensily be ~ooated there once 'bh~ re~air~; have been completed.
Ut%imabely, it was the opinion of Mr, Terzopoulos trial thie
oper-a~;ion oF t. he Fleet Cenbre would be render'ed less effective
the Al3tendant. s wet(; permitted to use the i )rchroom.
kit. Te;"zopou]os slated there have been several occasions in
khe past where Ambulance Attendants have walked in&o ~he main
garage area without first having 'followed tt]e required
d~(3Oll~;~iflir~a~¢O[~ ~3r'oocec~ur~s. MOF(¢ s!:,eciric:a!fy, he referred to an
ino~cient. 8pproxirnat:eiy one (1) year ago w~ere an At'benday)t,
actual ly entered Cite lunch-room prior I;o 'bPi[3 co~ple'bion Of these
proced~res, it was his evidence t:,t~a'b t;his Form of conduct, could
lead to the spread of infecbion. ~lr. Daly expressed an identical
concern. He outlined two (2) incidents in which Attendants
appFoached mechanics prior bo going b},r'ough bhe decontamination
17
pr~o,:;~:~..s, Or~¢~ f,'~) of~ the~e inc~denl-.", ~>,'.~:~r'~d ouLs'ide a~
[~i~c .~a.?,]e; ~,~ ot,~er ~a~ on ~'~w~ ~'~ Floo~-. Mr. Oa]y
I-~rc~:~r~y ¢,'kqr~lr, clged their rleit, he¢ ca~e involved 'the ]unch-r'oom,
nr:~;~r-r-epr, e ~- a ieg4t,~rn.ete cof~o¢~fq. He was no% aware, however,
For ail of hha above reasons, the Employer dec~ded to
rO~:i'r)(.[., L!:e~ wa~Lir~g .'}r~a~ as de,sea',bed abQve, in the ma-in
garage are~. ~r'. Te~*zopo~.~os s~ated that, the .act, ua~ ~ocat~on ~s
?.he ~ur-ti'~est spot From-t;he work s~'hes ~nd ~s c~ose to the doors.
H~ also ~-t. ressect that iL is out of' tha ~.~ay from the traf'fic flow,
~r] hi~ judgrneni-., t. he bubb'le provides a safe location for a short
term stay. He advised that this assessme¢~'b was consistent with
the oonolt4~fion o'~' L-~ Safety Consu'!taa! in the Ministry
Government Services who had obser.ved the area f~rst, hand. Ttqe
Cor~sult. ant, a He. A,C. TroY,o, concluded thal-, the bubble, as an
anc~llar'y use, d~d not vi'o~a%e e',-istSng safety ~egis~ab~on.
Ar't{r. le i~..! r,',~' the. r:o]'iective agreement ¢eads:
The Employer' shall continue t.o make reasonab'/e
prov~rw~ for ~'.he sa~;:ety and i~ea~t~ of ~'ts employees
during the t~ours o¢ their ernp]r'}ymen'b. Zt is agreed
1-.hr~t both t. he Emp'ioye,- and hi~e I.h'~ion sha~ co-operate
%o t~e fullest extent possible in the preventior~ of
a~.cidenl'.s :*r~d in the rerasonahle ¢~,-omotion o'F safety and
hea'tt, h r')f ~'i] employees.
It; '~as Lhe primary posJt, lon of t.~e Union 'ti'.;~b t, he Employer
has fei ~,ed to make reas~nab]e pr'ov~s~ons f'or t. he grJc4vor's hea~th
~nd sr~f~ty ~'t, L'tmes when he ~s requir;ed I-.o v~t. ~t, the Fleet;
,.o,l'tre for' bhe completiorl of Fei}airs 1/)i,i:; vrqhicle. Counsel
:4uUmiLi:,ed i'.h~t 'the Bo~r-d shnu'ld ado!~l;. ,~ ['.~o (2) >~Lep approach
this '~n:sbe, nce. F'ir'stiy, we should der. er'mine 'i-F bhe facts
d~sclose the ex~sL, ence of' some real risk Lo the grievor, in this
r'egard, it, was argued ~hab the risk. does nob have to be
suf-F~(:]ent, to demonstr'ate a rrospecl-,'iv~ risk. Pe 'Fu~*ther'
¢~bm~f-.t.~d that We might take no~ce of ~nheren~ risks. Second}y,
it, was a,nser'ted 'bha% once a Pisk is e~t. ab~ished, ~t ~s incumbent
on bha Frnp]oyer t.n show ~hat ~t act. ed ~n accordanoe w~h the
nh!igaL~ons 'imposed by art, icle 18.1. Hot-e part.~c~larly, counsel
% ~ ~ !.ed the-~rltp i nye¢ wot] I d then need 'ho eo'._.,..~,,- ,- '~ ish tine
reasonableness and necessity for having the grievoc incur the
, ~:...i:, .... H~ descr 4bed t. hfis pr'ocess as r~_ b.~]ar~cing of int. eres .... t..s.
Counsel for the Union at-gued the facts support, the 9r~evor"s
as.~er'l-~o,~ that et number o'F pobent.~a~ health .'-~nd
ex~st, w-;th respect 'bo the use of the thubble. He referred, ~nter
,_~'l';a, ',-.o the f'o~]owSng condils~ons: (i) ~nadequate ]~gb'ting; (~)
the presence of dust and d'irt ~n t.i~e..a~r; (~} exposure
h~-r;,pera't:.ure f~ucisuat-ic;ns; (~v) co]l'ision concerns; (v) nofise
concerns; (vi') smok'ing ~t,h~n the garage area; (v~) the presence
oF f-umes and ~nadequate venL;tat~on; (rifle) ~,ack of protection ~n
19
t, he evenL, o-F Fire or exp'tosion~ ('ix) ,~iip t~a-,ard; and (x) the
presence o~' air'borne par'ticulaf, es. Z~ was submitt, ed ~ha~ %hese
concerns were largely conf'irme~ hv [he evide~ce of the 'two (2)
ma~ag~menu w~Lnes~e.s Counsel noted t. hatt. he gr-ievor l:es~if'ied
'to ~Oac~f'~c ha~!t,h cor~sequance~ a~, a ras~l'[~ of silting in the
I~uhble ~a en[)has[,. ~d, i~owevar
r;orx,~rned ~v~t.t~ ti. he potenti~q hazards t.[:~[', co~id be completely
~v~'iri,~d ~ the gr'~evor ~as perm~t,t, ed ho w~t. ~n t. he iunch-r'ooJi/
rat'~.~r '.r~r i~ ~.i~e t)~Jbbte. Counsel a~.,ser't-.ed [,[~aL, or~ balance,
[h~s use ~ould no'[ be d~srup~ve ~o the ope;-'atJon of the Fleeb
Cen~ce. The gr~evor~s reque81:, was descr-lbed ~s a no--cos~
soXution" ~o -bhe pr-oblem. Counsel acknowledged tha-B it m~ght,
prove nacessary ~o r)lace oectaip ]~rait, s on t.~e $%'Bendants' use
'Bhe luncla-room. For example, t~e suggest, ed ~hab ~t, might not be
feas~bXe Bo grant them access %o t. he room during %he mechanics'
fixed lunchbreak. It ~as submit, ted, however, t, ha~ a tot. al bar
from tthe lunch-room was "comp!et. el'/ unreasonable.
As an alternate argumen'k, 'it, was 'bhe posi'tion of the Ltnion
hhat. t.he Bnard could review l-.he r~Jle !)ro!';~b'if~{ng access %o t. he
lunch-room on the 9r'ounds of reasonableness. Counsel robed that
breach of the rule could lead 'bo discipline. Zt was argued that
the prohibition was discriminatory ¢:nd that it was not premised
on a !egitimabe business purpose,
20
The Ur]ion fei'led on the folio,ming awards: ~atl]s/Kfin.q, 1367,
i365/90 (~:ap]an); Huc'iev~_/Meszaros, 1t70, 1189/88 (Dissanayake);
tJn'~on GrieYance, 69, 70/84 (Samuels),; union Grievance, 1252/85
(jo]iff'e); St'oc:k~el], !764/87 ('~'¢'ilson); G'iibert., 313, ~67, 476/$9
( '¢t i '1 s n n ) .
Tn response, ib was the position of Lhe Employer, briefly
st. ahed, i.h.~t, il; had made reasonable provision f~r tt~e grievor's
~aIt. h .'~r~d s~af'et, y. Cnunsei emphasized bha'b Lhe cotlecbive
agreement does not. ob] ig~te bhe Emp'!oyer t.o guarantee an
employee's safely agai~st every possible ~isk n0 ma'~l;er' how
r'efr~o%e. He reviefed a% ~eng%h t. he concerns expressed by
grievor. Z~ ~as ~he ~hrus% o¢ h~s argumen~ ~ha~ ~he Union had
fai'ied !-.o esba. b]'ish -l;ha'b the grievor ~as placed a% rfsk bhrough
the requfrement, tqe ~a~k in khe bubble. Counse~ referred
steps k. aken by %he Emp~oyen Lo aiiev-ia'ke any risk. He described
%he grievor's concerns as conjec~ur'e and suppose%ion. Z~ ~his
regard, ~e ,~,ere urged %o find t. ha% %here t..¢as insuff-icien%
evidence bo ~ink bhe bubble %o %he 9r~evot's med~ca~
Tnd~ed, i% ~'as ~t~e posiL~on o¢ 'bhe Empioyec 'bhaL %he 9rlevance
was dr{yen not. by hea]%h and s~.fet, y colqcer'rls f)t~ by bhe grievor's
annoyance a'b being exc'luded 'F¢orn &he ]uncle-room, A]~ernat. ive]y,
it was s~¢bm4tt, edt. hat if a risk exists i't is a~ a "very low
level", end t. hat it would not be el 'i mi nated through a 9rant of
access to the lunch-room.
21
TI-. ,,;a~ the s~hm~ss'ior'~ of the. FmptrLv~r "l,,'~h l'.~e rule
que~LiOrl does i']n'B contrav~n~ art~cle A.1 :~F'i.i-,e ~.o]l~ctive
agreemer~l,. Tha~. l~rcvision pr-ohibi'Ls wer',.j~l,~,e} d'~cr;mit~.'~l~ior']
c'~hizen~i~;~;~, creed, s~':<, se),uai orienL~[: iun, age, m~r-'ta~l
i',hal'., in V',~ absence of a vio'iation of' ar!.ic'}es A.i or ~8.1 of
Refer e,~:e wa~ madp t.o ~<c'~'i on iF ( i ') of i ha CF'own Fmp: oyee~
C¢~i leu1., vP Rar-u~.,i,,i¢~o ACt_., wr~":ch~ reads'
i.q ( 1 ) Fver-v c~1 'i ect. i ve ...,...~ -. be deemed
provide that, it, is 'k,!~e exctu~i,.,e f"~r~c1-~on of
(a e~qn'loymenk, appointment, complement, or-ganizat, ion,
e~=~ignment., discip~i¢~¢, dismiCqa'i ~ ....
work methods mhd pFocedurem, t,<ind~ an¢ locations
of equipment a~d clammificetio~ of positions;
and such mat~ers will not be the subject of
collective b~rgainin9 nor come wit,[~in the
Cu~r'~:~el asserted t.i~at., in the c.irct~mst, anc. es of th~ case, the
r'ule v~s a v~s the 'lunchroom ~as validly pr-om~¢~ga'bed pursuant
1'..he Employer's management, rights, as enshrined in the above-cited
~,o apply a "free standing test. of rea~onabier~ess." ~n any evenC,
it; w;~s suggesbed hy c(-)unset Lhat, 'Li~e Fmp![~yer was motivated in
thi~ inst.;~nce by proper bux'ines8 consider'~Lions.
22
The Employer relied on the following authorities in support
of its position: Warden, 1152/87 (Dissanayake); Bott/Prosser,
1525/89 (Oissanayake); Sisters of St. Joseph v. Service Employees
Union. Local 210 (1992), unreported (Ont. Div. Ct.).
The Board after considering all of the evidence and argument
has been persuaded that health and safety risks exist with
respect to the following concerns raised by the grievor:
temperature fluctuations; (ii) items leaning against the bubble;
(iii) particulate matter; and (iv) smoking in the garage area,
The Board accepts the grievor's evidence that there are
significant temperature fluctuations in the winter months when
the garage door .is opened and closed. We are satisfied that the
overhead heater may be incapable of completely counteracting the
influx of cold air from outside the garage. While this condition
may be viewed as a matter of comfort, we think that exposure of
Attendants to frequent temperature fluctuations should be
addressed. This con~ern is one that can be remedied at little
effort and expense by the simple placement of a small heater
within the confines of the bubble. The Board orders that this
steD be taken.
Both parties were in agreement that items are often stored
in front, and at the side, of the waiting area. On occasion,
items such as ladders are left leaning against the railing which
23 ,
ha,~ bean P.r~.cl-.ed around the bubble. The Board t+inds bhat injury
could re.e~,,]t, 4f t. hese objects were pt,shed through %he piexig!as~
by a force s**ch as a reversing VaPlic:le. As a consequence, we
~.>,~er th:al.', rr',alz, er~ai not. be p!~c¢.d a¢o~nrt hl'e wa'it, ing ~rea and
that, ~ wpil,hen notica be post. ad hnt. ha~ effar, t.
prc~b]em ex4,q'.~q wi'r,t~ r-espent, t.o pr:r't-.ic;l~iat, e mai'bet re-e;~l.ering r. he
this t-.ime, it. is clear t~o us, however, ~hab this condition poses
a pot. en'bial heal'bh hazard for.ail employees ~n the garage,
including those person~ waibin9 in Bhe bubbte. As stated
earl-i~r, l'.he Employer' has !:.aker~ acbion "in an at, tempt, 't.o correct
hhe ~ibtJation. .We direct that the necessary work be proceeded
w¢!-.h ~n an e~pediE~o{J~ fas!q-ion. We remair~ ~eized in the event
such erforts do not. remedy 'hhe concern expressed.
Lastly, we accept t..~,at smok lng Sn the 9arage could pose a
taealth and safe-t-,y risk to all persnns working or waiting therein.
G-iven Lhe ~e and F~tr:,ra~e of lnf~ar, mab~e ~ub~t:.a~c:es, ~t -~s s'[mp~y
nnt. prudent to al'tow smoking a~, or in c'lose prc)ximity to the work
area. The Employer is, therefore, ordered to enforce its no-
smoking rule already in place in respect, of bhis facilit, y.
The Board has not been persuaded that health and safety
risks, sufficient to merik, our il~ber-venEfion, exi$% wit, t~ respect
t;o 'bhe balance of' the grievoF's comp'laint~ involving ~nadequa-be
AedimanL; st iD hazard; the noise 'l~vei; fir~ safely; and air
t.t,ese corloer-n~'
t-~ql;~nce nf pr'obrah']l ~hies tha~ :~uci~ ;~ [~rr?)'lem exists;
a v~t~inle runninc~ nfl the hoi:.'~-~ is remote, The hoists are
g¢~vf'~r. We noh¢ fur't, her t. ha~ t.i~e wai~:ing area ~s located
~way 'Fr~*rr, t.!~e flow of' traffic wit, hiri (.he ~ara9e,
Addi'bir nally, Ir,here-ls insufficient evide~)ce of the
Mlieg~l:.~or~ t,h~t ~ec~anic¢ opeF~.e hhe vehicles in an
~mproper r)~ negligent, fashion within the Fleet Centre, The
Board 'is Cat,slUed t.t~at the r'ailing wil~ cushion any minor
collisions that might occur;
i-;i)Preser~ce of duCt., d~rt. and ~ed4ment - the Board notes
the wait-i~g ~rea ~. cleaned (u~n a daily basis. Wt~"ile dust'oF
sediment may continue bo a~ccum~lat, e ~n %he area, we have
been convinced 1:.hat the $ibuat. ion amounts t.o c~
health and safety concern;
ff,¢'l, S~{[]. Hazar~ - there 'is, no evidenc¢~, h"~'n~., .... us %o cnnfirm ~'hat
this is a rea! problem. As A'btendr~nt.s do not nor~'~ally enter
· Yhm hmy area~: there should be li't. tiet. raokins of oit er
gr-e,~se into the bubble. We th{nk it uF~lii<e?y Chat me~h;~/~ics
wn(;ld t. rack such liquid inbo 'b~le waibin9 area,
evidence present, ed suggests that spilt~ on the garage floor
(v) Nr~ism t. evel - ~he Roard accepts bhaf. if. Slay be r:(}is), {¢]
garage, Indeed, such a condition would be normal for
g-arage deL. tings, we nor)sider ih si9nificanb ~k, at. the
washing area is somewhab removed from the mechanics work
area. ~n view ()-F I'~=e l irn~bed amo~nt, of t;irne Lhe 9rievor
spends in t.i]e bubb'}e, we are unable t.o cmr~c:'lt~de ttla't the
~oise nonst, il-,~Jt, es a real health and safety risk. This i.s an
area in wt~ioh some expert evidence nligt]'b have assisted the
Boa rd;
25
(vi'1 Fir'¢ Safrr. y - We have not i:ee.n p~r~-:,,r, de~t l'.hat 'the waitin9
area ).q t~nsaf'e in the event of a ¢ir~. Shrn]'ld a fire occur,
ih iq l'ikely 'l'.h.~t'. 1-.h~ Af.'l'.e,~riz-~ni~ ~,r.,xlH ~¢e it. early
They wot~id t.~e~ tae ira an ideal Dn~i'i'irm i.o exi'h ~he building
by way ~¢ 1:.h¢ g~rage door. The Board ~'.~ beer~ convinced
(;ha'[. e,f.r;!:~v~ m~a~Jr'es are u'hi]iz¢~ ah t;he F'lee'l-. Centre Lo
(vi i)~4r Qt~aiii.y - The Board accept~ 'l'.h~ rer4ulbs of the tes'[.s
referred to ear,imf in this A~ard. Trl ()tlr' .judgmemt the
cornplaint.¢ may be t{nked 'Lc c:ondihi,,~>, it'~ the waihiq9 area.
~'ubSbar~'t. ixq rer'-~od of t.~me ~r~ t~-:e buhb'ie. H~ t. est~f~ed Bhat he
at. te~lcis ai:. t. he Fleet Centre four (4) tim~s per week in Lhe win'bet
..... (),_[-. ODC~ ~,~r week {f~ il. he stirrer.eft. Ot] ~,,erage, ~ar,?-] v-;s41-
~asts approximately one-half (~) hour, :bix qrequency 'of'
,-1...I-"e,,(~ ...... ~x,,t e wot~iiJ araour'~t !-.o, .... .B.t. .,.,.~,,I , ~. wo (2) hr:~r s Der wee
in t. he wai'hfing area. Zn ali 'ii~e'iihood, t.i~e 'b~me spenb in bhe
b[~bhle wou]~ be less 60¢ a ndmber of neaRr~ns Firs'blv the
afor'emenhion~d est, im,~"~ e does not '[.ake i n't,c), ar':r:ount, the grievor's_
~'0o F~ m l'o i i 'OD m n~ ~h'~f't,q D~,r'i~ ~';"al: r,~riod he is not
req~ir'ed tn wait in the bubb'le. Mor-p import:,nbly, I:he mechanics
the griever"s exposu¢e to no{se, d{r'b and t. he o'N:e~ alleged
ha;",rr¢.~ ~o~ld be m~oh reduced. Seco~]dly, ~t tis clear that
wea'Pher permi-tting, the Attendants are more inclined bo wait.
out~*ide durin9 1',he summer months. ~inally, ~h is apparent, thab
t. he At. bendanbs frequenBly wait by the ffFOnt:, desk away fFOttl the
bubble. As suggested, these factors reduce the time spent rn the
waiting area and serve 'to limit the exposure to the risks
complained of. It is our ultimate judgment that none of the
complaints, either singul'arly or in conjunction, justify an order
thab the bubble not be used at any time as a waiting aFea. Mr.
Daly, in his evidence, acknowledged tiaa existence of gertain
undes-~rab'ie, working conditioms vis 8. vis his work a9 a'full-time
mechanic. The Board has noC been satisfied that these conditions
impact, to the ,same e.~temt o¢: those wY~o use the bubble for short-
'term .. y~
If the Urqion had been successful in establishing a number of
hea'lth and safety risks, this Board would still not have been
inclined, at first instance, to grant the remedy requested by the
gr'Jevofl. Had we found the existence of such risks, we would have
been more inclined to make a declaration to that effect and then
remit the matter back to the Employer so that it might correct
t, he identified problem/s. We think that an order grant, lng the
gr~evor immediate access to the lunch-room would amount to a
c~surpat.~on of managememt rights contrary to section t8(1 ) of the
Cro~vn Employees Collective Bar,qaininq Act. The possibility
exists that the Employer, in exercising these rights, might
choose to relocate the waiting area to an entirely different
location w4th~n the Fleet Centre foF legitimate operational
reasons. If such action did not, resolve the matter, the Board on
the basis of the evidence before it could subsequently order
27
a(;c~s~ 'ho t,h~.- lunch-tooth as one of sever~~ pos.~ible remedies.
have not been convinced, hownvnr: th~h ~such a remedy should be
n~uan(;e Rag. her, w~: L~ink tl, hat. t. he Employer
~houid be af-f'or~ded the cq}por'tun~by ~') rectify g~e matLer ~n
accordance wilch khe needs of its operat, ion subject, Lo a Board
~--emaillin9 seized should s~ck ef'f'orLs pr~v~ u~successfl~ of
un~ccept, abie.
The awards o~ I~,he Grievance Se"st,~m,~,;'~L Fao~r,i in G~lbert and
in Bot"c~ProsseF con-~'~ct on ~he q~e. sL~,}--~ as to xheYher the aoaPd
can assess an Employer generated rule agains'b the standard of
r'ea~onableness. We find iL unnecassa~:y in' this case ~o resolve
this conflict as we are sabisfied that t. he Ernp-ioyer ac'bed
reasc)nably and f:or legitimate operat~),~:~l r-ea~qn~as.
As stated in the evidence, there ar'e a substantial number of
Ambulance Abbendants who bring their vehic!es to the Fleet Centre
for servicing and repair. Whi]a we were not given a precise
breakdowrl of %~-ie~r number as between M{nistry ernp]oyees and
ernpioyees of private opera'bors, we ac:cain% 'bhak, t. he lunch-room
wou~d nob aocornodals, e bobh the mechanics and 'the At, tendant, s given
~'cs relat~ivety small s~ze. We bend ko agree tha-k such a combined
use would ]~kely resu]~ ~n overcrowding. In a con,est for Space,
~he Board concludes ~ha~ priority should be accorded ~o ~he FIee~
Centre s~af'f. !n this regard, we consider ~t reqevan~ that
9r'ievor has lunch-room fac~t4'k'~es back a~, his base.
Add itiona~ !},, Lt]e Board f'inds tt~a't, the Fmp'lnyer's use of the
iur,.ci]-roo~l~ f'~,r rn.?eLings wi't.h ~.,~-;:f an~] d'is'!',r,t)u'kots cou'td be
disrt~lPLeci if' ht~e room elas op~i~ to a .]argo n~md~ar' of 4t, l-.endan~s.
:o~ ~-~] 1 ef the re,'_~sn~,$ p;p~-e.~.sp i above, Lhe ~oa~'~ is not
, ; ,, ,, , , a;e mah;-H~ ~ri (iv) smoking
.... re~s~O ,'~s d {t
'L.~,e garage a~-ea :'~ add .... "' , 'e~.,hed above. The Board
~-eta~n jur'~d~ction t.o dea~ ~,~'{~h those iss~e,~ should the need
ar'~se The ~a~an~.e ()f' t, he ,-~.';~'~.~ +>
Dated ab W~ndsor, OnCar'io hhis tg~:h day nf July ,t99.q.
H.V, ¥tat. ters~ Vice-Chairperson
Re/mc)~r, Ur~i,)n Hember
R. Scot~, Employer Mealber