Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-1469AFANTE97_06_13 ONTARIO EMPLOYES DE LA COURONNE CROWN EMPLOYEES DE L'O/'ffARIO -- 1111 GRIEVANCE COMMISSION DE SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT BOARD DES GRIEFS 180 DUNDAS STREET WEST, SUITE 2100, TORONTO ON M5G 1Z8 TELEPHONEITELEPHONE (416) 326-1388 180, RUE DUNDAS OUEST, BUREAU 2100, TORONTO (ON) M5G 1Z8 FACSIMILEITELECOPIE (41fJ) 326-1396 GSB # 1469/96 OPSEU # 96D959-60 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN OPSEU (Afante) Grievor - and - the Crown in Right of ontario (Management Board Secretariat) Employer BEFORE B Fisher Vice-Chair FOR THE N Luczay GRIEVOR Grievance Officer Ontario Public Service Employees Union FOR THE P Toop EMPLOYER Corporate Staff Relations Officer Management Board Secretariat HEARING May 30, 1997 - ~ ~ - 2 - This interim award will only deal with a preliminary objection by the Employer The essence of this grievance is that the Grievor alleges that, having been surplused from her position at the Ontario Realty Corporation, she should have been placed in a vacant position at the Ontario Insurance Corporation pursuant to Article 24 6 3 of the previous Collective Agreement (January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1993) The Employer did not place her in that position because they allege that she was not qualified to perform the work. Instead she displaced an employee at the Ontario Realty Corporation and obtained a new position at the same rate of pay pursuant to Article 2491 The Employer's preliminary objection is based on the principle that even if the Employer was wrong in not placing the Grievor in the position at the Ontario Insurance Corporation, she has not suffered any damages because she retained a position at the same rate of pay as before she was surplused Since the Grievance Settlement Board should not be spending its time on issues of no real consequence to the parties, the Grievor should be dismissed The Grievor's position is that there is a real and substantial difference between working at the Ontario Realty Corporation as compared to the Ontario Insurance Corporation, in that the job security at the Ontario Realty Corporation is less than at the Ontario Insurance Corporation - ~ - 3 - I accept that in the present economic climate, a difference in job security "" prospects between jobs is a legitimate and reasonable reason to prefer one position to another Therefore, if in fact there is an objective difference between the relative job security levels between working at the Ontario Realty Corporation as compared to working at the Ontario Insurance Corporation, then I would find that the Grievor is entitled to proceed and have this case decided on its merits The evidence that I considered in this case consisted entirely of reviewing government publications, reports, memos, letters and news releases In other words, I did not consider the personal view of the Grievor, as I believe the proper test of whether one job is more secure than another is an objective one and not a subjective one ~ It is not necessary to recite all the evidence that I reviewed Suffice it to say that the evidence revealed the following' . The Ontario Realty Corporation is being changed into a "publicly owned but operationally independent service agency of the government" This change is expected to occur in April 1998 In that new format the employees of the Ontario Realty Corporation would not be in the bargaining unit covered by this Collective Agreement, and for that matter could well be non-unionized --~ ~ - 4 - . The Ontario Insurance Corporation is being merged with two other agencies within the Ministry of Finance to form the Financial Services Commission There will be job losses as a result of this merger, however the remaining employees will remain in the existing bargaining unit and under the OPSEU umbrella. In my opinion, these facts reveal a real and substantial difference in the relative levels of job security between working at the Ontario Realty Corporation as compared to the Ontario Insurance Corporation A reasonable person concerned about their job security would tend to prefer the relative security of remaining in the existing bargaining unit under the existing Collective Agreement as opposed to working in what might possibly be a non-union working environment. The Grievor, therefore, has a real and substantial interest in the outcome of this grievance The preliminary objection is therefore dismissed The Registrar of the Grievance Settlement Board is hereby directed to arrange for further hearing dates Dated at Toronto this 13TH day of June, 1997 / / (:1:1 ;;/ ~/ / 1/ Barry B Fisher, Vice Chairperson / ------ (