HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-3191.Thibideau.17-03-09 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#2014-3191, 2016-0039
UNION#2014-0290-0027, 2016-0290-0006
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Thibideau) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Children and Youth Services) Employer
BEFORE Felicity D. Briggs Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Gregg Gray
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER Karen Martin
Treasury Board Secretariat
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
CONFERENCE CALL February 10, 2017
- 2 -
Decision
[1] Following a med/arb session held at Roy McMurtry Youth Centre in early
November 2016, this Board issued a without prejudice decision that stated, in
part, the following:
• Vanessa Thibideau is a Youth Service Officer who filed two grievances dated
two years apart both of allege the Employer violated Article 2, Article 3
(disability – duty to accommodate), Article 9 and ASMP policy and all other
articles, legislation, policies and procedures. By way of remedy she requested
to be made whole and for $100,000.
• This med/arb session was the second time that this grievance was scheduled
but did not proceed due to the absence of the grievor. The Employer took
issue with the grievor’s continued failure to appear and particularize her
grievances.
• After hearing arguments from the parties as to how to proceed I order the
parties to exchange all information particular to these matters that would be
relied upon for the disposition of the grievance. This exchange is to take place
no later than January 15, 2017.
• In the event either parties fail to meet this order the Board can be contacted
to hear any request to deal with the matters summarily.
[2] On February 1, 2017, I was contacted by the Employer’s representative who
stated that no particulars had been provided as set out above. I contacted both
parties asking for an update. The Union representative confirmed that the grievor
had received a copy of my original decision within seven days of it being issued.
Further, I was informed by the Union that the grievor indicated that she failed to
comply as the result of an extended sick leave which began shortly after
Christmas.
[3] In a later communication with the parties the Employer confirmed that the grievor
was, in fact, on sick leave but that leave did not begin until January 14, 2017.
The grievor had been at work most of the month of December as scheduled. As
a result, the Employer requested that the grievances be dismissed.
[4] A conference call was held on February 10, 2017 to discuss the Employer’s
motion to dismiss the grievances. I heard submissions from both parties. The
Union urged that the Employer’s motion should be denied.
[5] After consideration of this matter, I am of the view that I must agree with the
Employer’s request to dismiss the grievances. The grievor had three different
- 3 -
opportunities to have these matters heard. She missed two med/arb sessions
and when given a third opportunity she failed to meet the very clear instructions
to provide particulars regarding her grievances. I find that the reason given – that
being sick leave – does not hold up to scrutiny as she had two full months to
comply with the Board’s order. She chose not to do so and she did not ask for an
extension.
[6] For those reasons, I am upholding the Employer’s motion and the grievances are
denied.
[7] This decision is without prejudice.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 9th day of March 2017.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice Chair