HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-0569.Samsone.03-07-09 Decision
Crown Employees Commission de ~~
Grievance Settlement reglement des griefs
Board des employes de la
Couronne
~-,...
Suite 600 Bureau 600 Ontario
180 Dundas Sl. West 180 rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tel. (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396 Telec. (416) 326-1396
GSB# 0569/02,0969/02
UNION# 02C696 02C697 02A714
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon
(Samsone) Grievor
- and -
The Crown In RIght of Ontano
(Mimstry of PublIc Safety and Secunty) Employer
BEFORE Manlyn Nairn Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Tim Hanmgan
Ryder Wnght Blair & Doyle
BarrIsters and SOlICItorS
FOR THE EMPLOYER Greg GledhIll
Staff RelatIOns Officer
Mimstry of PublIc Safety and Secunty
2
INTERIM AWARD
Further to a decIsIOn dated June 23 2003 I have receIved and revIewed the partIes'
representatIOns regardIng the employer's request for an adJournment of the scheduled days of
heanng.
WhIle the employer's InformatIOn IS not as complete as was dIrected by that award, I am
prepared to accept the employer's representatIOn that It appears that the gnevor wIll be one of
the employees entItled to have hIS posItIOn converted. Although the gnevor asserts that the
matters should not be adJourned unless there IS a guarantee of converSIOn, should hIS posItIOn
be elIgIble for converSIOn, a consIderable aspect of hIS gnevances wIll have been resolved. The
employer has represented ItS vIew that, based on ItS ImtIal assessment, It IS lIkely that the
posItIOn wIll be converted wIthout the need for havIng the matter lItIgated and as a result of
other agreements between the partIes Such IS the preferred course of actIOn. It makes sense
therefore to adJourn the July 10 2003 scheduled date In order to deal wIth that Issue The
employer has IndIcated that It wIll have full InformatIOn regardIng the converSIOn Issue on July
25 2003
With respect to the remaInIng scheduled dates, two factors must be consIdered. FIrst, the fact
that the employer representatIve prevIOusly assIgned to thIS file contInues to work for the
Crown (but In a dIfferent Mimstry) IS InSUfficIent to reqUIre them to contInue carnage of thIS
file TYPIcally these partIes attempt to accommodate each other In the event of unantIcIpated
dIsruptIOns to the lItIgatIOn process In the earlIer telephone conference call the employer
outlIned ItS unsuccessful efforts to find a replacement representatIve avaIlable for the three
dates scheduled In August. Second, when thIS matter was scheduled to contInue the partIes
were advIsed that the July date would be used to attempt to medIate any outstandIng Issues On
the first day of heanng the partIes were successful In resolvIng a thIrd gnevance filed by the
gnevor It does not make sense to proceed to medIatIOn pnor to July 25 2003 as the converSIOn
Issue may well be resolved wIthout that InterventIOn. Nor would three days be reqUIred.
Overall I am satIsfied In the CIrcumstances that It makes sense to adJourn the August dates
However a relatIvely early date should be scheduled for purposes of medIatIOn.
The heanng dates of July 10 August 20 21 and 22,2003 are hereby adJourned. The employer
is directed to advIse umon counsel no later than July 28 2003 of the final results of the
partIes' agreement to convert posItIOns from the WhItby Jail In the meantIme employer and
union counsel are directed to forthwIth contact the Vice-Chair dIrectly regardIng the
schedulIng of one day for medIatIOn of all remaInIng Issues
Dated at Toronto Ontano thIS 9th day of July 2003