HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-0030.Tattersall et al.16-12-20 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#2016-0030
UNION#2016-5112-0026
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Tattersall et al) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer
BEFORE Felicity D. Briggs Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Dan Sidsworth
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER James Cheng
Treasury Board Secretariat
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
HEARING December 6, 2016
- 2 -
Decision
[1] The Employer and the Union at the Toronto South Detention Centre agreed to
participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the
negotiated Protocol. A number of the grievances were settled through that process.
However, this grievance remained unresolved requiring a decision from this Board. The
Protocol provides that decisions will be issued within a relatively short period of time
after the actual mediation sessions and will be without reasons. Further, the decision is
to be without prejudice and precedent.
[2] Mr. Blain Tattersall and twenty-one other Fixed Term Correctional Officers filed a
group grievance alleging that the Employer violated the Collective Agreement when it
changed the “work schedule after posting without verbally confirming with the
employee”. The work schedule at issue encompassed the Christmas and New Year’s
period of 2015. By way of remedy the grievors requested “all hours worked during the
affected period to be paid at twice the rate the employee would otherwise be entitled”;
credited with one sick credit; and any other remedy the Board deems appropriate.
[3] On October 7, 2015 the Fixed Term COs were asked to submit their preferences
for time off over the upcoming holiday season. The schedule for the holiday period was
issued on November 19, 2015.
[4] On December 10, 2015 one of the Fixed Term Correctional Officers wrote an email
to numerous Correctional Officers suggesting they “double check your Christmas
schedule most of our have changed due to the group grievance that was submitted”.
[5] The following day Fixed Term Correctional Officers received an email from The
Sergeant of the Scheduling Department stating that adjustments were to be made for
the week of Christmas due to operational needs and requirements. All were advised to
check HPRO for the changes. It was further set out that each would be contacted
personally with the changes. According to Mr. Tattersall, none of the Fixed Term
- 3 -
Correctional Officers covered by the instant grievance were contacted personally with
the changes made.
[6] The Union noted that according to COR 5 “Fixed term employees will be pre-
scheduled two (2) weeks in advance with all known shifts being scheduled. Any change
to the pre-scheduled shifts must be verbally confirmed.” It was urged that as a result of
the collective agreement breach, the requested remedy should be awarded.
[7] The Employer did not dispute the Union’s allegation of lack of personal contact
regarding the schedule change. However, it was submitted that no compensation such
as requested by the Union should be awarded.
[8] After consideration of the facts and submissions of the parties I find that the
Employer did not comply with its obligations found at COR 5.6 of the Collective
Agreement regarding the schedule changes for the grievors. However, other than this
declaration, I order no further remedy.
[9] There are instances where the parties put their minds to the payment of a penalty
for scheduling violations such as is found at Article COR 5.1 and 5.2. The parties did not
set out a compensatory penalty for a violation of Article COR 5.6 and therefore I decline
the Union’s invitation to order one be paid.
[10] To that extent, the grievance is upheld.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 20th day of December 2016.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice Chair