HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-0994.Chernowonogrodzky et al.03-03-31 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# 0994/02 0995/02 1328/02 2973/02
UNION# 02A737 02A738 02F038 2003-0230-0001
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon
(Cherwonogrodzky et al ) Grievor
- and -
The Crown In RIght of Ontano
(Mimstry of FInance) Employer
BEFORE Owen V Gray Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION GavIn Leeb
Barnster and SOlICItor
FOR THE EMPLOYER Fateh SalIm
Counsel
Management Board Secretanat
HEARING March 28 2003
2
ORDER
[1] The partIes have agreed to Jom a number of recent gnevances wIth the above styled
gnevances for hearmg together before me, on the basIs that the decIsIOn m these
proceedmgs shall have "precedentIal value" wIthm the meamng of ArtIcle 22 16 7 of theIr
collectIve agreement. The partIes are to consult wIth the admmIstratIve staff of the GSB to
ascertam the GSB FIle number of each of the gnevances to be mcluded m these proceedmgs,
and provIde me wIth a lIst m electromc form settmg out the gnevor's name, OPSEU
gnevance number and GSB file number for each such gnevance
[2] To the extent ItS counsel has not already done so at the hearmg of March 28, 2003 or
m pnor wntten correspondence wIth counsel for the employer, the umon IS hereby ordered
to provIde the employer wIth partIculars of the facts on whIch It relIes m support of ItS
allegatIOns m these proceedmgs, mcludmg, wIthout lImItmg the foregomg, any partIculars
not already provIded m answer to paragraphs numbered 1, 3 and 7 through 11 of employer
counsel's letter of March 14, 2003
[3] As to the umon's allegatIOn that the employer benefits from the gnevors' possessmg a
current professIOnal desIgnatIOn, any prevIOusly undIsclosed partIculars of the facts relIed
upon m support of that allegatIOn shall be provIded as soon as possible, and m any event
pnor to Thursday, Apnl 3, 2003
[4] As to the umon's allegatIOn that m the applIcatIOn to the gnevors of ItS polIcy on
reImbursement of professIOnal dues the employer has acted m an arbItrary, dIscnmmatory
or bad faIth manner, any prevIOusly undIsclosed partIculars of facts relIed upon m support of
that allegatIOn shall be provIded as soon as possible, and m any event pnor to Thursday,
Apnl 10, 2003
[5] The umon asked for partIculars of the names and posItIOns of mdIvIduals for whom
the MmIstry and/or the Employer provIdes reImbursement for mamtenance of the
professIOnal desIgnatIOns m Issue, namely CA, CMA and CGA. The response of employer
3
counsel IS that the MmIstry does not provIde reImbursement to anyone for the mamtenance
of any of those desIgnatIOns, except when It was necessary for the employee to have that
desIgnatIOn m order to take courses the MmIstry wIshed them to take or havmg the
desIgnatIOn was otherwIse a condItIon of employment The umon asserts that m a document
currently avmlable on ItS mtranet settmg out "Frequently Asked QuestIOns" about taxable
benefits (the "Taxable Benefits FAQ"), the employer mcludes the followmg QuestIOn and
Answer
The mmIstry pays my fees to belong to the CertIfied General Accountants AssocIatIOn of
Ontario. Is thIS a taxable benefit?
Yes Smce membershIp IS not a conchtlOn of employment thIs IS a taxable benefit
On the face of It, thIS appears to mdIcate that the fees reqUIred to mamtam membershIp m
at least one of the deSIgnatIOns m Issue are bemg reImbursed or have m the recent past been
reImbursed by a mmIstry or mmIstnes for employees for whom such membershIp IS not or
was not a condItIon of employment, m numbers sufficIent for thIS questIOn to have been
"frequently asked" by such employees
[6] At the hearmg of March 28, 2003 m thIS matter, the umon has asked that the
employer (l.e , the Crown m RIght of OntarIO) be dIrected to produce all documents m ItS
possessIOn eVIdencmg the posmg of questIOns that led to the aforementIOned entry m the
Taxable Benefits FAQ (mcludmg, to the extent that the questIOns posed reveal them, the
names, mmIstnes and CIrcumstances of the questIOners) I so dIrected orally at that hearmg
In VIew of the lateness of the umon's request, however, I noted that thIS dIrectIOn reqUIred
only that the employer make reasonable efforts to locate and produce the subJect documents
I hereby confirm that dIrectIOn and observatIOn. If those documents are not prOVIded pnor to
the close of the umon's case, the lateness of the umon's request and the reasonableness of
the employer's efforts up to that pomt to locate the documents WIll be factors to be
conSIdered If the umon requests and the employer opposes an adJournment of the hearmg
pendmg productIOn of those documents
4
[7] The deadlmes specIfied m thIS order may be vaned by wntten agreement of the umon
and employer A party who falls to produce a document or to provIde partIculars of an
allegatIOn m accordance wIth thIS order may be precluded from mtroducmg that document
or presentmg eVIdence about that allegatIOn m these proceedmgs
Dated at Toronto thIS 31"t day of March, 2003
~V
VIce ChaIr