The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2002-1455.Cox.05-05-05 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# 2002-1455 UNION# 2002-0234-0066 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (Cox) Union - and - The Crown In RIght of Ontano (Mimstry ofCommumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces) Employer BEFORE FelIcIty D Bnggs Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION Scott Andrews Gnevance Officer Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon FOR THE EMPLOYER Greg GledhIll Staff RelatIOns Officer Mimstry of Commumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces HEARING July 31 & August 11 2003 2 DeCISIon In September of 1996 the Mimstry of CorrectIOnal ServIces notIfied the Umon and employees at a number of provIncIal correctIOnal InstItutIOns that theIr facIlItIes would be closed and/or restructured over the next few years On June 6 2000 and June 29 2000 the Umon filed polIcy and IndIVIdual gnevances that alleged vanous breaches of the collectIve agreement IncludIng artIcle 6 and artIcle 31 15 as well as gnevances relatIng to the fillIng of correctIOnal officer posItIOns In response to these gnevances the partIes entered Into dIscussIOns and ultImately agreed upon two Memoranda of Settlement concernIng the applIcatIOn of the collectIve agreement dunng the "first phase of the Mimstry's transItIOn" One memorandum, dated May 3 2000 (hereInafter referred to as "MERC 1" (Mimstry Employment RelatIOns CommIttee)) outlIned condItIOns for the correctIOnal officers whIle the second, dated July 19 2001 (hereInafter referred to as "MERC 2") provIded for the non-correctIOnal officer staff Both agreements were subJect to ratIficatIOn by respectIve pnncIples and settled all of the gnevances IdentIfied In the related MERC appendIces, filed up to that pOInt In tIme WhIle It was agreed In each case that the settlements were "wIthout preJudIce or precedent to posItIOns eIther the umon or the employer may take on the same Issues In future dIscussIOns" the partIes recogmzed that dIsputes mIght anse regardIng the ImplementatIOn of the memoranda. AccordIngly they agreed, at Part G paragraph 8 The partIes agree that they wIll request that FelIcIty Bnggs, Vice Chair of the Gnevance Settlement Board wIll be seIzed wIth resolvIng any dIsputes that anse from the ImplementatIOn of thIS agreement. It IS thIS agreement that provIdes me wIth the JunsdIctIOn to resolve the outstandIng matters Both MERC 1 and MERC 2 are lengthy and comprehensIve documents that provIde for the IdentIficatIOn of vacanCIes and posItIOns and the procedure for fillIng those posItIOns as they become avaIlable throughout vanous phases of the restructunng. GIven the complexIty and SIze of the task of restructunng and decommIssIOmng of InstItutIOns, It IS not surpnSIng that a number of gnevances and dIsputes arose ThIS IS another of the dIsputes that have ansen under the MERC Memorandum of Settlement. 3 When I was ImtIally InvIted to hear theses transItIOn dIsputes, the partIes agreed that process to be followed for the determInatIOn of these matters would be vIrtually IdentIcal to that found In ArtIcle 22 16.2 whIch states The medIator/arbItrator shall endeavour to assIst the partIes to settle the gnevance by medIatIOn. If the partIes are unable to settle the gnevance by medIatIOn, the medIator/arbItrator shall determIne the gnevance by arbItratIOn. When determInIng the gnevance by arbItratIOn, the mediator/arbItrator may lImIt the nature and extent of the eVIdence and may Impose such condItIOns as he or she consIders appropnate The medIator/arbItrator shall gIve a SUCCInct decIsIOn wIthIn five (5) days after completIng proceedIngs, unless the partIes agree otherwIse The transItIOn commIttee has dealt wIth dozens of gnevances and complaInts pnor to the medIatIOn/arbItratIOn process There have been many other gnevances and Issues raised before me that I have eIther assIsted the partIes to resolve or arbItrated. However there are stIll a large number that have yet to be dealt wIth. It IS because of the vast numbers of gnevances that I have decIded, In accordance wIth my JunsdIctIOn to so determIne that gnevances are to be presented by way of each party presentIng a statement of the facts wIth accompanYIng submIssIOns NotwIthstandIng that some gnevors mIght wIsh to attend and provIde oral eVIdence, to date, thIS process has been efficIent and has allowed the partIes to remaIn relatIvely current wIth dIsputes that anse from the contInuIng transItIOn process Not surpnsIngly In a few Instances there has been some confusIOn about the certaIn facts or sImply InSUfficIent detaIl has been provIded. On those occaSIOns I have dIrected the partIes to speak agaIn wIth theIr pnncIples to ascertaIn the facts or the ratIOnale behInd the partIcular outstandIng matter In each case thIS has been done to my satIsfactIOn. It IS essentIal In thIS process to aVOId accumulatIng a backlog of dIsputes The task of resolvIng these Issues In a tImely fashIOn was, from the outset, a formIdable one With ongOIng changes In Mimstenal boundanes and other orgamzatIOnal alteratIOns, the task has lately become larger not smaller It IS for these reasons that the process I have outlIned IS appropnate In these CIrcumstances The gnevor Damel Cox, filed a gnevance allegIng an Improper applIcatIOn of ArtIcle 20 of the CollectIve Agreement. It IS the gnevor's VIew that he was moved pnor to other staff and pnor to all of the Inmates beIng removed from hIS home InstItutIOn. 4 The facts were not In dIspute Mr Cox worked at the Guelph CorrectIOnal Centre In the Industnal Officer 2 classIficatIOn. In accordance wIth the Memorandum of Agreement sIgned on May 3 2001 he receIved nghts under ArtIcle 20 of the CollectIve Agreement. He was surplussed on the common surplus date of November 21 2001 The gnevor exercIsed hIS nght to dIsplace and he receIved an Industnal Officer 2 posItIOn at the TRILCOR laundry In Milton. In February 2002 the GCC's Inmates were moved to other InstItutIOns and Mr Cox moved to TRILCOR In Milton shortly thereafter The TRILCOR shop at the GCC locatIOn remaIned open after the GCC Inmates were moved and operated wIthout the use of any Inmate labour The Guelph Assessment and Treatment Centre ("GATU") remaIned open but ItS Inmates were not used to work at TRILCOR. For that reason, not all Industnal Officers were moved Into theIr new posItIOns It was the gnevor's posItIOn that he should not have been moved pnor to other Industnal Officers Further he alleged that the Employer's decIsIOn to move hIm before other employees was due to antI-umon ammus Mr Cox claimed that hIS order to move out of GCC came Just before an antIcIpated OPSEU stnke He also alleged that local management at Guelph dId not want hIm on the pIcket lIne and therefore ordered hIm to move Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Memorandum of Agreement sIgned on May 3 2001 stated Employees occupYIng the transItIOn cost centre posItIOns wIll be surplus sed on the same date These employees wIll have access to full ArtIcle 20 nghts The employees wIll remaIn at theIr current work sIte untIl the date the InstItutIOn no longer houses any Inmates or another date agreed to by the employer and the employee Upon mutual agreement employees may be temporanly assIgned elsewhere untIl theIr placement occurs In my VIew the Employer has the nght under paragraph 6 above to move employees once the InstItutIOn's Inmates are gone WhIle some Inmates contInued to be housed at the GCC locatIOn, those Inmates were from GATU and therefore the Employer could oblIge the gnevor to move to hIS new posItIOn at TRILCOR In Milton. 5 I have also consIdered the gnevor's claim of antI-umon ammus In order for thIS Board to make such a findIng there must be clear and cogent eVIdence of the dISCnmInatIOn. UnsubstantIated allegatIOns are InSUfficIent. AccordIngly the gnevance IS demed. Dated at Toronto thIS 5th day of May 2005 II ~ ~ I FelIcIty D Bnggs Vice-Chair