Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-1948.O'Brien.00-12-07 Decision o NTARI 0 EMPLOYES DE LA COL'RONNE CROWN EAIPLOYEES DE L 'ONTARIO GRIEVANCE COMMISSION DE . . SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT BOARD DES GRIEFS 180 DUNDAS STREET WEST SUITE 600 TORONTO ON M5G 128 TELEPHONElTELEPHONE, (416) 326-1388 180 RUE DUNDAS OUEST BUREAU 600 TORONTO (ON) M5G 128 FACSIMILElTELECOPIE. (416) 326-1396 GSB #1948/93 179/94 236/94 OPSEU#93F955 94A574 94A608 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (O'Brien) Gnevor - and - The Crown m RIght of Ontano (Mimsm of the SolIcItor General and CorrectIOnal ServIces) Employer BEFORE Deborah JD LeIghton Vice Chair FOR THE Tim Hadwen, Counsel GRIEVOR OntarIO PublIc ServIce Employees Umon FOR THE Len Mam EMPLOYER Counsel, Legal ServIces Branch Management Board SecretarIat HEARING November 2,2000 ThIS IS the thIrd decIsIOn made pursuant to the Minutes of Settlement, dated March 13,2000, agreed to by the partIes to finahse the outstandmg Issues relatmg to the ImplementatIOn of the Memorandum of Settlement, made on order of the board on August 1, 1995 (the ongmal settlement) As part of the process of finahsmg the outstandmg Issues the partIes agreed to further Minutes of Settlement on October 12,2000 regardmg the Issue of "partIcIpatIOn of women correctIOnal officers m the workplace and the ImplementatIOn of the Employment Systems RevIew (the ESR Report) Task Force Report (1994)" The partIes agreed that a workmg group would be struck to address the remammg Issues regardmg artIcle 22 and 24 of the ongmal settlement, and would begm work the week of November 20,2000 The umon requested productIOn of documents and mformatIOn, whIch It seeks m order to facihtate the workmg group's dIscussIOns The employer produced certam documents and mfonnatIOn as requested and undertook to search agam for certam documents, prevIOusly not found, by November 15,2000 The employer objected to producmg the Mimstry's current work-m-progress of the new "Human Resources Plan" and to a survey of the work force The decIsIOn denymg the Umon's motIon was rendered wIthout reasons on November 14,2000 The followmg are the reasons for that decIsIOn. The UnIOn's Submission The umon requested the work-m-progress on the Human Resources Plan currently bemg developed by the Mimstry Umon counsel argued that m order for the workmg group to engage m meanmgful dIscussIOns on the remammg Issues as IdentIfied m the October 12,2000 mmutes tlns mfonnatIOn was CruCIal The umon submItted that whIle the employer may not be able to agree to produce the current 2 work on the plan, It would be appropnate for thIS board to order It. The Issue of confidentIahty could be addressed m the order of the board. The umon also sought an order from the board reqmnng the employer to survey the Mimstry's work force for mformatIOn on the "desIgnated groups" as IdentIfied m the ESR Report as 1 Persons wIth dIsabihtIes, 2 Abongmal peoples, 3 Francophones, 4 Racial mmontIes and women. The umon receIved the statIstIcal mformatIOn on women from the employer on October 4, 2000 and sought the same kInd of mfonnatIOn regardmg the other groups It seeks a survey of the workforce for mformatIOn on, for example, how many racial mmontIes hold management posItIOns, and how many have bargammg umt posItIOns (OPSEU) It sought specIfic mfonnatIOn for each category as IdentIfIed m the October 4,2000 statIstIcs provIded on gender Counsel submItted that the mfonnatIOn was necessary for the workIng group to fully address the Issue of systemIc change for women m the Mimstry It was Mr Hadwen's submIssIOn that many women are also members of other dIsadvantaged groups In order to achIeve equalIty for women the whole enVIromnent needs to be consIdered. Mr Hadwen submItted that tlns request IS consIstent WIth the Terms of Reference that state that one purpose of the SystematIc Change Programme IS To mamtam an enVIronment whIch IS faIr, eqmtable and free from all forms of dIscnmmatIOn and harassment. In Ins submIssIOn, the request was also consIstent WIth the ongmal settlement that acknowledged the WDHP and specIfic ally agreed to contmue "reasonable efforts to Implement the recommendatIOns of the 1994 ERC Report In the alternatIve 3 counsel for the umon submItted that a survey of women In the Mimstry should be done to IdentIfy If they are members of any dIsadvantaged group The Employer's Submission The employer opposed both the requests for the work-m-progress on the Human Resources Plan and the survey Counsel for the employer, Mr Marvy, argued that the ongInal settlement specIfically addresses women. ArtIcle 22 of the settlement provIdes 22 The Mimstry agrees to work wIth OPSEU In develoPIng and ImplementIng a SystemIc Change Programme whIch shall be desIgnated to ehmInate the barners to full workplace partIcIpatIOn of women correctIOnal officers In the Mimstry generally and In partIcular at the Windsor Jail Further the mInutes of settlement sIgned by the partIes on March 13,2000 was made In the context of finahsIng the ongInal settlement by agreeIng to a method of resolvIng the outstandIng ills putes The outstandIng Issues were IdentIfied as IncludIng the "S 14" Issue - a short form understood by the employer to refer to the Issue of access vs barrIers to work for women. Mr Marvy argued that the essence of the ongInal settlement was to creae SystemIc Change Programme for women In the Mimstry Thus the request for thIS survey InfOrmatIOn goes beyond the ongInal settlement Further, In counsel's submIssIOn the request broadens the scope of the task to Include groups that were not specIfically named In artIcle 22 Counsel submItted that never before had the umon IndIcated that the S 14 Issue Included other desIgnated groups Moreover, In counsel's submIssIOn the request IS InCOnsIstent WIth the March 13,2000 settlement that was workIng towards finahsIng the SystemIc Change Programme 4 Counsel submItted that It would not produce the work-m-progress on the Human Resources Plan for the Mimstry and asked the board not to order Its productIOn. Reasons for the DecIsion I carefully revIewed the ongmal settlement, the recent mmutes of settlement, dated March 13,2000 and October 12,2000, the correspondence m the umon document bnef of June 23, 2000, and the submIssIOns of the partIes and concluded that the survey of desIgnated groups - persons wIth dIsabIhtIes, abongmal people, Francophones and racial mmontIes - requested by the umon IS outsIde the scope of the ongmal settlement ArtIcle 22 clearly states that the SystemIc Change Programme IS to be desIgned to ehmmate bamers to full workplace partIcIpatIOn of women correctIOnal officers m the Mimstry Further, I was persuaded that the partIes have understood the "S 14 Issue to relate to women only In "Notes of a meetmg of the SystemIc Change Steenng CommIttee on December 13, 1999" (Tab 8, Umon Document bnef June 23, 10000) the commIttee hsted Issues where the partIes had reached agreement and those for whIch they dIsagreed. S 14 IS hsted under "Areas of Major DIsagreement" With other Issues as follows 4 GENDER IMBALANCE OPSEU beheves that SectIOn 14 of the OHRC can be used and does not want to remove the Item from the SystemIc Change Table ThIS notatIOn clearly tIes the Idea of gender to the Issue of whether S 14 of the Ontano Human RIghts Code can be used m developmg the SystemIc Change Program An order for survey mfonnatIOn that goes beyond mfonnatIOn on the gender balance Issue IS therefore not supportable 5 The work - In-progress on the Human Resources Plan IS likewIse beyond the scope of the ongInal settlement An order to produce It was not necessary to Implement the ongInal settlement It IS the reasons noted above I hereby dIsmIss the umon's motIon for productIOn. Dated at Toronto, thIS 7th day of December, 2000 D.J D LeIghton, V Ice-ChaIr 6