HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-0698.Thurman.02-05-06 Decision
~M~ om~o EA1PLOYES DE LA COURONNE
_QJ1. i~~i~~~i~T DE L "ONTARIO
COMMISSION DE
REGLEMENT
"IIIl__1I'" BOARD DES GRIEFS
Ontario
180 DUNDAS STREET WEST SUITE 600 TORONTO ON M5G 128 TELEPHONE/TELEPHONE. (416) 326-1388
180 RUE DUNDAS OUEST BUREAU 600 TORONTO (ON) M5G 128 FACSIMILElTELECOPIE. (416) 326-1396
GSB #0698/01
Union #01 B227
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees' Union
(Thurman)
Grievor
-and-
The Crown In Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care)
Employer
BEFORE Janice Johnston Vice-Chair
FOR THE GRIEVOR Tim Hannigan
Counsel
Ryder Wright Blair & Doyle
Barnsters & Solicitors
FOR THE EMPLOYER Len Hatzls
Counsel, Legal Services Branch
Management Board Secretariat
HEARING February 28,2002
2
THE FACTS
This case concerns the denial of one day of special or compassionate leave The
gnevor, Avery Thurman, works as a Registered Nurse at The Whitby Mental Health
Centre She has been employed at that location since 1989 and has worked In a full-
time capacity since 1994 The relevant language In the collective agreement reads as
follows
ARTICLE 48 - BEREAVEMENT LEAVE
48 1 An employee shall be allowed up to three (3) days' leave of
absence with pay In the event of the death of his or her spouse,
mother, father, mother-In-law, father-In-law, son, daughter, stepson,
step-daughter, brother, Sister, son-In-law, daughter-In-law, slster-In-
law, brother-In-law, grandparent, grandchild, ward or guardian
482 An employee who would otherwise have been at work shall be
allowed one (1) day leave of absence with pay In the event of the
death and to attend the funeral of his or her aunt, uncle, niece or
nephew
483 In addition to the foregoing, an employee shall be allowed up
to two (2) days' leave of absence without pay to attend the funeral
of a relative listed In Articles 48 1 and 482 above If the location of
the funeral IS greater than eight hundred kllometres (800 km) from
the employee's residence
ARTICLE 49 - SPECIAL AND COMPASSIONATE LEAVE
49 1 A Deputy Minister or his or her designee may grant an
employee leave of absence with pay for not more than three (3)
days In a year upon special or compassionate grounds
49 2 The granting of leave under thiS article shall not be dependent
upon or charged against accumulated credits
On Monday June 18, 2001, Ms Thurman found out that her COUSin, Joe Farley,
had passed away and that the funeral was to be held on Wednesday June 20, 2001
3
Ms Thurman was scheduled to work on the midnight shift that week, which meant that
she worked from 11 p m to 7 a m
Ms Thurman testified, and It was not disputed by the employer, that she had a
very close relationship with her cousin She spent a great deal of time with him and he
helped her family out on many occasions Her cousin was particularly kind and helpful
when her mother died and again upon the death of her father
Upon learning of the death of her COUSin, the gnevor telephoned In to work and
adVised them that she would not be working her shift which commenced at 11 pm on
Tuesday, June 19, and finished at 7 a.m on Wednesday, June 20 She Indicated that
she needed to take the shift off to sleep, as she could not go to the funeral If she worked
her night shift. However, she did report for and work her scheduled shift which started
on Monday evening and ended on Tuesday morning
On Fnday, June 22, 2001, the gnevor filled out and submitted a Leave of
absence requesUauthonzatlon form which Indicated that she was seeking one day's
discretionary leave for the following reason
I would like to have a discretionary day for Tues June 19/01 as
one of my closest and dearest cousins died and I need that night
off so I could attend his funeral on Wednesday June 20/01 In
Toronto Thanks
The gnevor pOinted out that she requested compassionate leave as pursuant to
the collective agreement she did not qualify for a bereavement leave In her View,
compassionate leave was appropnate as her cousin's death was very upsetting to her
and she wanted to attend the funeral Later the same day, the gnevor's request for
special/compassionate leave was denied by Ron Ballantyne, the Administrator at the
Health Centre Pnor to reaching the decIsion to deny the request, Mr Ballantyne did not
speak to the gnevor or attempt to obtain any Information other than that contained on
4
the form
On a prevIous occasion In 1997, the gnevor requested and was granted special/
compassionate leave when she was delayed In reporting for work because her car had
been broken Into The gnevor also requested and was granted bereavement leave upon
the death of her father Although she could have requested bereavement leave at the
time of an uncle's death, she did not do so
Ron Ballantyne has been the Administrator at the Whitby Mental Health Centre
since 1988 In thiS capacity, It IS he who has the discretion to approve or deny requests
for special/compassionate leaves He deals With about fifty to seventy-five requests per
year The Health Centre has In place a policy entitled Handling Special and
Compassionate Leave Requests, which provides gUidelines to be considered In the
granting of these leaves Mr Ballantyne considered the policy and the gUidelines It
contains In reaching a determination With regard to the gnevor's request for leave The
relevant portions of the policy provide as follows
As a manager, what decIsion rules do you apply In reviewing an
employee's request for special or compassionate leave? You've
probably heard that such leave should only be granted under
extraordinary circumstances But what amounts to extraordinary
circumstances? In thiS Issue of FOCUS we'll provide you With
gUidelines to facIlitate decIsion making and maintain consistency
throughout the hospital Keep In mind, however, that since a
number of vanables may be Involved In any given case, each
request must be weighed on ItS own ments
DecIsion Maklnq GUidelines
Although Article 55 and Section 74(1) give management Wide
discretion In deciding whether to grant special leave, thiS discretion
must be exercised reasonably Intuitively thiS makes sense, but all
the more so since management's decIsion IS open to scrutiny by
the Gnevance Settlement Board (and for management and
excluded employees, the Public Service Gnevance Board)
5
A review of the case law on this subject reveals a number of pnnclples to
apply In reviewing special leave requests
1 The decIsion must be made In good faith, free from arbltranness
and dlscnmlnatlon, Ie, the discretion must be exercised
reasonably While arbitrators are generally reluctant to question
the correctness of management's decIsion, they must ensure that
decIsions are made within certain minimum standards of Justice
2 The decIsion must be a genuine exercise of discretionary power,
as opposed to ngld policy adherence As one arbitrator stated,
"While uniformity and consistency of application of the collective
agreement IS desired, such consideration should not be utilized to
the exclusion of a full and fair consideration of the employee's
particular circumstances"
3 Full consideration must be given to the ments of the Individual
application under review By the same token, however, the
employee bears a commensurate responsibility to make all
pertinent facts known Thus, the employee bears the onus to show
entitlement to special leave
4 Management must make reasonable efforts to gather relevant
facts while rejecting Irrelevant facts With respect to Irrelevant facts,
the availability of other means of taking leave, such as access to
unused vacation credits, should not be a consideration (as per
Article 55)
5 Management must act consistently with the decIsion that was
made In other words, similar cases should be treated alike
Let's now address the question of what amounts to extraordinary
circumstances Here are a few often cited considerations to take Into
account.
1 The needs of the workplace (e g staffing and operational
requirements)
2 The Importance of the request to the employee and the hardship
caused by denial
3 In family matters, the nature of the relationship and the urgency
6
of the call on the employee's services by family obligations
4 Whether the event was a personal emergency/unforeseeable
(this IS not mandatory though)
5 Whether It was possible or appropnate for other arrangements to
be made by the employee
The following are a few examples of circumstances In which special leave
would normallv not be applicable
1 -extension of bereavement leave
2 -adverse weather conditions
3 -car break-downs
4 -medical appointments
5 -legal matters
6 -attending special courses or wntlng examinations
7 -religious holidays
Nonetheless, there may be exceptions In extraordinary circumstances,
management IS obliged to fully consider the ments of each case, thus
avoiding ngld policy adherence
Although the policy provides that In normal circumstances discretionary leave
should not be used to extend bereavement leave, Mr Ballantyne Indicated that thiS IS
not a ngld rule and that In some situations extensions were granted He cited as
examples situations In which an employee had to travel to England to assist when
SUSpICIOUS circumstances surrounded the death, an employee had to travel a long
distance for the funeral, and a case In which an employee needed additional time off to
make nursing home arrangements for the survIving parent.
In determining cases In which an extension to the bereavement leave provIsions
In the collective agreement were sought, Mr Ballantyne Indicated that an assessment of
the Individual facts In every case was cntlcal and that pnor to granting an extension he
looked for special or compelling circumstances or In the words of the policy
7
"extraordinary circumstances" If the situation warranted It, Mr Ballantyne would
consider extending the time of the bereavement leave (I e more than the one or three
days provided In the collective agreement) or the people for which a bereavement leave
could be granted (I e for someone not covered by the collective agreement)
Mr Ballantyne was the Individual who granted the discretionary leave to the
gnevor when her car was broken Into In 1997 He did so In that case for several
reasons He did It because the gnevor was on her way to work when she discovered a
situation which she couldn't have anticipated, was shaken and upset, had to cancel her
credit cards and had deal with the police and her Insurance company
Pnor to approving or rejecting a request for special/compassionate leave, Mr
Ballantyne tnes to ensure that all of the facts relevant to the request and necessary to
enable him to make an Informed decIsion are available to him On occaSion, he has
sought additional Information from the employee making the request, but In thiS case as
he felt Ms Thurman had already provided him With all the Information he needed he did
not speak to her pnor to making his decIsion
In coming to the conclusion that It was not appropnate to grant Ms Thurman
special/compassionate leave In thiS case, Mr Ballantyne considered the shift schedule
Ms Thurman was working and the time between when she was scheduled to work and
the funeral As there was suffiCient time between when she had to work and the funeral
In thiS case, the situation was not "extraordinary" In his view and did not Justify the use
of special/compassionate leave Had there not been a reasonable penod of time
between when she was scheduled to work and the funeral, or had the funeral conflicted
With a time when she was scheduled to be working, Mr Ballantyne would have viewed
the situation differently In thiS case, he felt that she could have worked her shift and
then attended the funeral At a more general level, Mr Ballantyne also considered the
need to maintain appropnate staffing at the Health Centre In light of the fact that It was a
8
twenty-four -hour -a-day operation
On July 6, 2001, the gnevor filed a gnevance questioning management's denial
of her request for special/compassionate leave
DECISION
In reviewing the situations which warrant the granting of compassionate leave by
management, the cases generally articulate that It IS appropnately utilized when an
employee IS In a situation deserving of sympathetic treatment or makes a request In
extraordinary circumstances which ment sympathetic treatment (see In this regard
E/es/e and Mimstry of Health, GSB #24n9 (Swmton) (the "Elesle case") and Sahota and
Mimstry of CorrectIOnal Services, GSB #2454/87 (Venty) (the "Sahota case"))
There IS no doubt that In this case the gnevor lost someone who was very close
to her and that this loss was very upsetting to her The employer did not dispute the fact
that the gnevor had lost one of her closest and dearest cousins Mr Ballantyne was
sympathetic to her loss and never questioned the slncenty of her request. However, the
fact that an employee IS In a situation deserving of sympathetic treatment does not
automatically result In the granting of a compassionate leave request. Although In a
sense It may be a threshold factor, It IS only one of many factors appropnately
considered by management.
The employer accepted and I agree that In exercIsing the discretion found In
article 49 of the collective agreement, It must comply with the cntena which are set out
In ItS policy on handling special/compassionate leave requests In other words, the
employer must make a decIsion In good faith, free from arbltranness and dlscnmlnatlon
The employer must exercise ItS discretion In a reasonable manner having regard to the
9
Individual ments of each case and not simply resort to a ngld application of policy An
effort must be made to obtain all the relevant facts pnor to making a decIsion and
management must endeavour to act consistently In similar cases
In consldenng the decIsion of management, the appropnate standard of review to
be applied by an arbitrator to the decIsion making process IS that of reasonableness
An arbitrator should consider the reasonableness of the process that led up to the
decIsion which was made by management. It IS not my role to substitute my views for
that of management or enter Into an assessment of the correctness of the decIsion even
If I might have come to a different conclusion (see In this regard Young and Mimstry of
Commumty and Social Services (1979), 24 L.A C (2d) 145, O'Bnen and Mimstry of
CorrectIOnal Services, GSB #1157/86 (Gandz), Malyon and Mimstry of Revenue GSB
#1129/88 (Roberts), the Sahota case and the Eles/e case)
In this case, the gnevor IS seeking to utilize special/compassionate leave to deal
with a situation that IS not covered by the bereavement leave provIsions of the collective
agreement, namely the loss of a cousin The Gnevance Settlement Board has dealt with
requests to extend the bereavement leave provIsions In the past. These cases start by
observing that the parties have distinguished between the two types of leaves In their
collective agreement and go on to conclude that because the parties have specifically
turned their minds to and articulated a list of situations In which bereavement leave IS
appropnate, the provIsions of the bereavement leave clause should be extended only In
exceptional or extraordinary circumstances (see In this regard Henry and Mimstry of
Revenue GSB #1116/88 (Emnch), Jackson and Mimstry of CorrectIOnal Services GSB
#146/84 (Kruger) and McNally and Mimstry of Health GSB #2176/91 (Gray))
Although It IS not possible to precisely define the meaning of extraordinary or
10
exceptional circumstances, the employer has put together In Its policy on special and
compassionate leaves a list of often cited considerations which Individual managers
should consider In assessing this type of request. I agree that the list set out on page
four of this decIsion (as a part of the quote) Includes factors appropnately considered by
management In cases of this nature It IS not an exhaustive list nor does management
assert that It IS or should be
In deciding that the gnevor's request for special/compassionate leave should be
denied, Mr Ballantyne carefully assessed the facts specific to this case and determined
that there were no extraordinary or exceptional circumstances present so as to warrant
an extension of the bereavement leave provIsions Mr Ballantyne considered the shift
schedule the gnevor was working and the time between when she was scheduled to
work and the funeral At no time did the gnevor assert that her scheduled hours of work
prevented her from attending the funeral She testified before me that she needed
special/compassionate leave for the shift which commenced at 11 pm on Tuesday,
June 19, and finished at 7 a m on Wednesday, June 20, (the day of the funeral) so that
she could sleep pnor to attending the funeral Mr Ballantyne concluded that
special/compassionate leave was not warranted In the circumstances Given the
situation, that was a reasonable conclusion to have reached
The union took the position that the employer should have Investigated the
circumstances giving nse to the gnevor's request more fully pnor to determining the
appropnateness of It. It was argued that by not seeking elaboration on the exact nature
of the relationship between the gnevor and her COUSin, or further detail on the wntten
request submitted by the gnevor, that management failed to consider all of the relevant
and matenal facts and therefore acted unreasonably In denYing her request. I disagree
with this charactenzatlon of the process There was no dispute on the part of
management with regard to the legitimacy of the gnevor's request or the genuineness of
11
her grief There was therefore no need to garner additional Information on the exact
nature of the relationship between the grlevor and her cousin
In cases of this nature, management must fully consider the merits of each
request and cannot adopt a rigid or rote response There IS no preset formula that says
what constitutes a proper Investigation or exactly how the decIsion must be made Nor
IS there a requirement for the decIsion maker to meet Individually In every case with the
employee making the request for special/compassionate leave I am satisfied that Mr
Ballantyne's decIsion was based on relevant Information and that his decIsion making
process was reasonable
For all of the above reasons, this grievance IS dismissed
Dated at Toronto, this 6th day of May, 2002
Janice Johnston, Vice-Chair