HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-4613.Hamilton.16-11-15 Decision
Crown 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#2014-4613
UNION#2014-0290-0033
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Hamilton) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Children and Youth Services) Employer
BEFORE Felicity D. Briggs Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Dan Sidsworth
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER Karen Martin
Treasury Board Secretariat
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
HEARING November 4, 2016
- 2 -
Decision
[1] In a June 11, 2013 Memorandum of Agreement the parties agreed to continue
the practice of local med/arb sessions throughout the Ministry of Child and Youth
Services. In accordance with this Memorandum of Agreement, the parties held a
med/arb session at Roy McMurtry Youth Centre in Brampton Ontario. A number
of grievances were addressed from this and other Child and Youth facilities.
Some of the outstanding grievances were resolved but a few including this matter
remained in dispute and therefore require a short decision which is without
prejudice or precedent.
[2] Kristina Hamilton is a Youth Services Officer who filed a grievance alleging that
she was discriminated against in the scheduling of work as the result of being
pregnant. Ms. Hamilton was a fixed term YSO at the time with accommodation
limitations as the result of her pregnancy and frequently had her scheduled shifts
cancelled.
[3] The grievor contended that the other five officers who were also pregnant at the
same time did not have their scheduled shifts cancelled despite their
accommodation needs.
[4] By way of remedy she requested 157 hours of compensation and seniority.
[5] According to the documentation provided by the Employer the other four
pregnant officers needing accommodation at the salient time were classified
officers. Further, the level of accommodation needed for the grievor was more
extensive than that needed by the other officers.
[6] After reviewing the facts and submissions of the parties, I am of the view that
there has been no violation of the Collective Agreement.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 15th day of November 2016.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice Chair