HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-1479.Policy Grievance and Lysiak.03-07-10 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#1479/02
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
ProfessIOnal EngIneers, Government of Ontano
(PolIcy Gnevance & LysIak) Grievor
- and -
The Crown In RIght of Ontano
(Mimstry of MumcIpal MfaIrs and HOUSIng) Employer
BEFORE Manlyn A. Nairn Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Larry RobbIns
Labour Consultant
FOR THE EMPLOYER DavId Strang
Counsel
Management Board Secretanat
HEARING May 27 & 28 2003
2
AWARD
Further to an Intenm award Issued on February 11 2003 these matters reconvened.
That Intenm award had concluded that the employer was subJect to the reasonable efforts
oblIgatIOn set out In paragraph 1 of AppendIx "A" to the collectIve agreement between the
ProfessIOnal EngIneers, Government of Ontano ("PEGO") and the Crown (the "employer")
FIve members of PEGO were employed across the proVInce In posItIOns related to socIal
hOUSIng. Three members of PEGO receIved surplus notIces and remedIes are beIng sought on
behalf of two of those IndIVIduals These engIneers were employed at the Mimstry of
MumcIpal Affairs and HOUSIng, performIng work for the benefit of the former Ontano HOUSIng
CorporatIOn. Mr LysIak was employed by the Mimstry as a MechamcallElectncal EngIneer
for the Ontano HOUSIng CorporatIOn Support Branch. Mr Levesque was employed as a
Mechamcal EngIneer In the Mimstry's Toronto RegIOnal Office They receIved surplus notIces
on June 27 2002
The gnevances arose from the employer's decIsIOn to dIvest Itself of socIal hOUSIng
functIOns and to transfer those functIOns to mumcIpalItIes and regIOnal local governments
across Ontano The PEGO members were not offered employment wIth a new employer and
the umon asserts that the employer faIled In ItS oblIgatIOn to make reasonable efforts to ensure
contInuIng employment. The relevant provIsIOn of the collectIve agreement provIdes
APPENDIX A. EMPLOYMENT STABILITY
The Government of Ontario is aware that its restructuring initiatives over the next three years could
have a significant effect on employees, some of whom have served for a lengthy period.
Accordingly the Employer undertakes the following:
I The Employer will make reasonable efforts to ensure that, where there is a disposition or
any other transfer of bargaining unit functions or jobs to the private or broader public
sector, employees in the bargaining unit are offered positions with the new employer on
terms and conditions that are as close as possible to the then existing terms and
conditions of employment of the employees in the bargaining unit, and, where less than
the full complement of employees is offered positions, to ensure that offers are made on
the basis of seniority
The employer filed two volumes of documents concernIng ItS reasonable efforts to whIch
the umon dId not obJect. The dIvestment of socIal hOUSIng functIOns dId not take place
pursuant to a request for proposal or tender process The transfer occurred by operatIOn of law
3
pursuant to the provIsIOns of the Social Housing Reform Act, 2000 SO 2000 c.27 whIch
statute was enacted In December 2000 The statute was drafted specIfically to deal wIth the
magmtude of Issues ansIng from the complex transfer from the Ontano HOUSIng CorporatIOn
and the Crown, (includIng as represented by the Mimster of MumcIpal MfaIrs and the Mimster
of HOUSIng) to vanous local authontIes, of the real estate and other assets and the lIabIlItIes and
other responsIbIlItIes assocIated wIth provIdIng and maIntaInIng socIal hOUSIng. SectIOn 34(1)
of the legIslatIOn provIdes authonty to the LIeutenant Governor In CouncIl to make "transfer
orders" "transferrIng employees of a local hOUSIng authonty" to a new employer referred to
In the legIslatIOn as a "servIce manager" There were forty-seven servIce managers created as a
result of the overall provIncial transfer of socIal hOUSIng functIOns ApproxImately thIrty
percent of the total volume of the socIal hOUSIng portfolIo devolved to the CIty of Toronto as
the largest servIce manager
The SocIal HOUSIng ServIces CorporatIOn ("SHSC") was also created by regulatIOn under
the Social Housing Reform Act, 2000 as a non-share capItal corporatIOn. Its role IS to provIde
centralIzed servIces to the servIce managers That regulatIOn was pnnted In the Ontano Gazette
on February 9 2002
Ms LIsa Alfien testIfied on behalf of the employer Ms Alfien was the Labour
RelatIOns/Human Resources SpecIalIst assIgned to deal wIth the reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn
for the Central Ontano and MetropolItan Toronto RegIOns She also had responsIbIlIty for
Head Office functIOns whIch Included the OHC Support Branch where Mr LysIak was
employed. Overall Ms Alfien was responsIble for approxImately 45 Mimstry employees
affected by the transfer of socIal hOUSIng functIOns These Included members of OPSEU and
AMAPCEO as well as the small percentage of PEGO members Five regIOns In the proVInce
had a Labour RelatIOns/Human Resources SpecIalIst assIgned to deal wIth the reasonable
efforts oblIgatIOn. Both gnevors fell wIthIn Ms Alfien' s areas of responsIbIlIty
Ms Alfien was hIred In the summer of 2000 and began meetIng wIth servIce managers In
the fall of 2000 The government made ItS announcement about the transfer of socIal hOUSIng
In October 2000 and the legIslatIOn passed In December 2000 The Area TransItIOn Team
Included Ms Alfien and three others The team began meetIng wIth each servIce manager
dunng whIch Ms Alfien outlIned her role, the Mimstry's oblIgatIOns In respect of the
4
reasonable efforts commItment, and what she was lookIng for In a JOInt local transfer plan
("JL TP") wIth respect to the transItIOn of employees and Job offers A JL TP was reqUIred by
the legIslatIOn to be sIgned by both partIes In order to effect the transfer of socIal hOUSIng. The
plan was to demonstrate the servIce manager's capacIty to receIve and conduct the busIness
The reasonable efforts component was a part of the plan, as were other human resource Issues
Ms Alfien provIded copIes of all collectIve agreements, related benefit InformatIOn and
matenals, penSIOn reqUIrements, and Job descnptIOns of all affected employees, IncludIng
PEGO members, to the vanous servIce managers She outlIned what would constItute a good
offer and what the employer was lookIng for ThIS InfOrmatIOn was dIsclosed dunng the
planmng stages In the hope that the servIce managers would have a better understandIng of the
functIOns performed at the Mimstry and the skIlls avaIlable
Once the servIce managers had IdentIfied how they planned to orgamze and operate the
transferred busIness and had created orgamzatIOnal charts, Ms Alfien receIved those
orgamzatIOnal charts and any Job descnptIOns for planned posItIOns In order to attempt to
match them to any Job descnptIOn of the affected employees, IncludIng the PEGO members
Some orgamzatIOns, partIcularly the CIty of Toronto had pre-exIstIng structures and were
seekIng to absorb the work Into those operatIOns InformatIOn was sought from managers
regardIng Job dutIes and a reVIew of Mimstry Job descnptIOns was conducted to ensure that
they accurately and adequately reflected the work beIng performed by affected employees
It IS fair to say that of the Job offers receIved that reflected work performed by Mimstry
employees, few If any reflected terms and condItIOns of employment outlIned by the cntena In
paragraph 1 of AppendIx A. That provIsIOn eXIsts In sImIlar If not IdentIcal terms In the
OPSEU and AMAPCEO collectIve agreements Offers were lImIted In dIfferent ways, for
example, In theIr recogmtIOn of semonty level of wages, and reqUIrements for IntervIews
and/or probatIOnary penods If there was no match of Job functIOns, the team contInued to meet
wIth servIce managers and Ms Alfien outlIned the expenence and qualIficatIOns of the persons
affected and attempted to persuade the servIce managers to make use of that expenence
Throughout thIS process, Ms Alfien offered dIfferent Ideas and InCentIves In an attempt
to enhance offers or the feasIbIlIty of makIng offers to employees, IncludIng shanng of
personnel wIth other servIce managers or creatIng part-tIme opportumtIes In that transfers
5
were staggered she offered that the Mimstry would provIde secondments of Mimstry personnel
to servIce managers untIl the busIness transferred In order that the servIce manager could gaIn
the benefit of theIr expenence, arguIng that the longer the servIce managers waited to use that
expenence, the less lIkely It was to be avaIlable Whether attemptIng to pursue Job offers or
seekIng to enhance offers made, the employer offered financIal InCentIves In amounts equal to
enhanced severance payments Amounts were IdentIfied to the servIce managers reflectIng the
entItlements of the affected employees
In each case where no Job offers were made there was a careful reVIew of Job
descnptIOns and specIficatIOns to ensure that there was sufficIent staff capacIty for the servIce
manager to perform the busIness In addItIOn the Area TransItIOn Team sought agreement from
servIce managers to contInue negotIatIOns regardIng Job offers up to the pOInt of the transfer of
the busIness In order not to prematurely foreclose the opportumty for negotIatIOns The
transItIOn teams tned to meet WIth each servIce manager approxImately once a month. The CIty
of Toronto delayed a number of theIr meetIngs wIth the team for reasons to do wIth ItS
workload.
At a MERC meetIng on Apnl 27 2001 PEGO was provIded wIth an update of the
reasonable efforts process and was asked to provIde feedback wIth respect to the protocol for
the reasonable efforts Job offer process Mr LysIak was the umon's representatIve on that
commIttee No eVIdence about any feedback was tendered. Other than that the partIes are
agreed that PEGO was not consulted about the reasonable efforts process or advIsed of ItS
progress Ms Alfien had no dIrect role In meetIng wIth PEGO She was asked for updates
whIch she belIeved were beIng passed on to umon representatIves on a regular basIs
Reference was made by the employer to other transItIOn actIvItIes or programs In
addItIOn to ItS reasonable efforts actIvIty Although that Included certaIn transItIOn supports
such as a hotlIne for employees to call wIth questIOns regardIng the busIness change, that
actIvIty IS separate and apart from the reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn under paragraph 1 of
AppendIx A of the collectIve agreement.
Very early In the process, Ms Alfien was told by servIce managers that there was not
enough engIneenng work to JustIfy the creatIOn of a full-tIme engIneenng posItIOn.
6
AlternatIvely she was told that the servIce manager had eXIstIng maIntenance and/or techmcal
staffwho could absorb any addItIOnal work normally performed by PEGO members, or that the
servIce manager tYPIcally contracted out engIneenng work on an as-needed basIs There was
nothIng the employer could do to dIssuade the smaller servIce managers from thIS VIew
regardless of InCentIves They were sImply not Interested. The only two areas In the proVInce
where there was any real prospect of work for engIneers were wIth the CIty of Toronto or the
SHSC
It was antIcIpated that many of the functIOns beIng performed by the OHC Support
Branch where Mr LysIak was employed would be phased out. Any employees remaInIng In
the Support Branch as of December 31 2001 were gOIng to be surplused. The employer was
aware of the possIbIlIty that certaIn resIdual functIOns mIght be transferred to the SHSC It
however had not yet been created, never mInd IdentIfied ItS needs Two employees were
transferred In the hope that they could be later matched to a SHSC Job One was an
AMAPCEO member The other was Mr LysIak. GIven the possIbIlIty of an opportumty for
further negotIatIOns, Mr LysIak was transferred to the SocIal HOUSIng Branch of the Mimstry
Mr LysIak receIved notIce of that change In reportIng structure by letter dated December 18
2001
It IS perhaps clearer to then reVIew the Mimstry' s efforts wIth each of the CIty of Toronto
(the "CIty") and the SHSC
In May 2001 the JLTP for the CIty was completed. The IntroductIOn to that plan makes It
clear that the CIty was not welcomIng the responsIbIlIty for addItIOnal socIal hOUSIng functIOns
and that It felt that InSUfficIent funds were avaIlable to meet the program needs The CIty'S
ImtIal and contInuIng posItIOn regardIng recruItment was that ItS hmng polIcIes must take
precedence for both bargaInIng umt and non-bargaInIng umt posItIOns WhIle It acknowledged
that the Mimstry had a reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn It asserted ItS oblIgatIOns under ItS own
collectIve agreements and polIcIes
As of May 2001 the CIty provIded what was referred to as a "functIOnal" orgamzatIOnal
chart. The actual transfer was not due to occur untIl May 2002 As of May 2001 It had not yet
created posItIOn descnptIOns although It had determIned the number of antIcIpated staff and the
7
broad areas of functIOn. In response to reCeIVIng the CIty'S JLTP Ms Alfien wrote to the
ProJect Manager representIng the CIty on May 18 2001 reIteratIng the Mimstry's posItIOn that
It Intended to pursue Job offers for ItS employees and that It appeared that 19 posItIOns were
beIng created by the CIty as a result of the transfer of socIal hOUSIng. The partIes met on May
23 2001 Ms Alfien's goal was to pursue Job offers for the 19 IdentIfied posItIOns The CIty'S
posItIOn at that tIme and throughout was that It Intended to use ItS Internal postIng provIsIOns to
fill both umon and non-umon posItIOns
At vanous meetIngs the Mimstry representatIves requested Job descnptIOns and other
documents to reVIew the CIty'S plans They requested and dId meet wIth the CIty'S human
resources staff In order to better understand the CIty'S polICIes and collectIve agreement
oblIgatIOns As of June 2001 the Mimstry had not receIved any Job offers from the CIty A
Memorandum of UnderstandIng was sIgned by the CIty and the Mimstry on June 25 2001
whereIn the partIes agreed to contInue the reasonable efforts negotIatIOns untIl June 30 2002
It references and Includes the Mimstry's oblIgatIOn to affected employees, IncludIng PEGO
members It does lIttle else other than to cIte the partIes' respectIve goals The Mimstry's goal
was to obtaIn Job offers for ItS employees It IS apparent that the CIty'S goal was to staff the
addItIOnal work pursuant to ItS Internal, eXIstIng oblIgatIOns
A proposed agenda created by Ms Alfien and dated September 25 2001 sets out the
dIfficultIes the Mimstry was havIng In aChIeVIng any success In ItS reasonable efforts
negotIatIOns WIth the CIty and outlInes suggested negotIatIng strategIes for attemptIng to
achIeve Job offers The CIty cancelled meetIngs scheduled for both September and October
In mId-October 2001 the Mimstry receIved a copy of a Job specIficatIOn for the SocIal
HOUSIng Consultant posItIOn The CIty sImultaneously proceeded wIth ItS Internal postIng
process In order to fill the vacanCIes It represented 8 of the proposed 19 avaIlable posItIOns at
the CIty It also agreed to meet wIth the Mimstry to dISCUSS a protocol were the posItIOns not all
filled Internally
The partIes met agaIn on October 23 2001 In order to attempt to obtaIn Job offers the
Mimstry agaIn offered the possIbIlIty of USIng enhanced severance The Mimstry argued that
the posItIOn matched ItS eXIstIng HOUSIng AdmInIstrator posItIOn (an AMAPCEO posItIOn) and
8
that the CIty could make good use of the skIlls of the Mimstry's employees The CIty noted
that due to the mumcIpal amalgamatIOn and resultIng harmomzatIOn Issues, It would take
longer before It could respond to the Mimstry reassertIng Its posItIOn that ItS Internal process
was to proceed first. That process Included a second tIer In whIch applIcants from the CIty'S
"specIal purpose bodIes" were consIdered. The CIty maIntaIned ItS posItIOn that Job offers
would not be made untIl an external postIng process had been conducted.
Eventually the Mimstry was able to persuade the CIty to consIder Mimstry employees at
the same stage as employees from "specIal purpose bodIes" effectIvely treatIng Mimstry
candIdates as second tIer CIty employees for purposes of Job competItIOn. At no tIme was the
CIty prepared to make Job offers dIrectly to Mimstry employees regardless of skIlls or Job
descnptIOn. The postIng process for the SocIal HOUSIng Consultant posItIOn was conducted In
November 2001 The Mimstry agaIn made offers of enhanced severance dunng that process
The same process occurred In respect of the posItIOn of SupervIsor TraInIng and Commumty
LiaISOn and a FInanCIal Systems Analyst posItIOn.
Dunng thIS penod the Mimstry contInued to pursue meetIngs wIth the CIty The next
meetIng was January 22, 2002 The CIty was stIll evaluatIng ItS needs wIth respect to techmcal
servIces There had been no suggestIOn that the CIty was contemplatIng any kInd of
engIneenng posItIOn.
By February 2002 the techmcal posItIOn had been IdentIfied to the extent of describIng It
as a Human Resources posItIOn, to manage staff and oversee Requests for Proposals ("RFPs")
In Apnl 2002 that posItIOn was IdentIfied as "Asset Management Consultant, SocIal HOUSIng"
Ms Alfien had the posItIOn descnptIOn revIewed. Mr Horn, Techmcal ServIces Manager
Metro RegIOnal Office, responded on Apnl 22, 2002 adVISIng that he dId not belIeve the Job to
be subJect to reasonable efforts as It dId not reflect any eXIstIng Mimstry posItIOn Some of the
dutIes were outsIde the scope of regIOnal techmcal staff and It Included sIgmficant other dutIes
such as managenal/supervIsory dutIes and proJect management servIces However he descnbed
It as a "good opportumty" and recommended that the posItIOn be brought to the attentIOn of
techmcal staff when It was to be posted Ms Alfien testIfied that In her VIew reasonable efforts
was not separate from the total effort to provIde opportumtIes to qualIfied staff where opemngs
were thought relevant to theIr backgrounds On Apnl 22, 2002 she recommended to Mr
9
Johnson, her supervIsor that when the CIty'S postIng was ready It should be shared wIth "the
techIes" Ms Alfien moved to a dIfferent posItIOn on May 18 2002 and left her role on the
Area TransItIOn Team.
On May 22, 2002, the Mimstry was notIfied of the postIng. On May 24 2002 Mr
Johnson asked Mr Horn If he could say that the Asset Management Consultant posItIOn more
accurately reflected the Mimstry's MaIntenance/ConstructIOn Inspector's posItIOn (an OPSEU
posItIOn) than any other posItIOn at HOUSIng. He specIfically IdentIfied engIneenng. Ms Alfien
testIfied that Mr Horn concluded that the Job was closer to the MaIntenance/ConstructIOn
Inspector'sJob However a reVIew ofMr Horn's response to Mr Johnson does not specIfically
draw that conclusIOn. Mr Horn's response was "I don't have a sImple answer" He revIewed
dIfferent tasks and noted that the engIneenng qualIficatIOn had been removed from the Job
specIficatIOn but drew no conclusIOn. He summanzed that the CIty Job encompassed an
"exceptIOnally broad rangIng Job scope"
On May 22, 2002 a memo from Mr Horn had been sent to those members of hIS staff
who would fall wIthIn a descnptIOn of techmcal staff, adVISIng them of the opportumty to
apply for the Asset Management Consultant posItIOn. Although a draft posItIOn descnptIOn had
Included a reference to a professIOnal engIneenng qualIficatIOn, the final posItIOn descnptIOn
dId not. However Mr Horn saw fit to Include Mr Levesque as a recIpIent of that memo Mr
LysIak was not sent that memo as he was not employed by that office OPSEU was also
advIsed of the opportumty PEGO was not. Mr LysIak dId not otherwIse learn of the
opportumty
The Mimstry began dIscussIOns wIth the SHSC In or around March 2002 Pnor to that
tIme some planmng was done based on antIcIpated movement of resIdual functIOns and tryIng
to match those wIth eXIstIng Mimstry Job specIficatIOns Ms Alfien and her team approached
the negotIatIOns WIth the SHSC as wIth the servIce managers She provIded the SHSC wIth
copIes of relevant documentatIOn IncludIng Job descnptIOns of affected Mimstry employees
UnlIke the CIty the SHSC was more open to the Idea of consIdenng Mimstry personnel At a
meetIng on March 11 2002 Ms Alfien was able to confirm the agreement of the SHSC's
spokesperson (subJect to Board approval) to look at all vulnerable Mimstry staff, reasonable
efforts oblIgatIOn or not, pnor to proceedIng to any competItIve process to fill posItIOns She
10
also receIved an orgamzatIOnal chart and five proposed Job descnptIOns Ms Alfien had those
Job descnptIOns revIewed In companson to Mimstry work beIng performed by affected
employees
Most of those Job descnptIOns dId not reflect a Job beIng performed by Mimstry
employees As a result no Job match was found except for a Board AdmInIstrator posItIOn.
However the Mimstry IdentIfied SIX employees who performed vanous IdentIfied dutIes of the
FInanCIal Analyst posItIOn, IncludIng Mr LysIak who had been engaged In bulk natural gas
purchasIng. Ms Alfien was also told that of those employees It appeared that Mr LysIak was
the only employee who was subJect to a reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn.
In response to her InqUIres as to whether or not the Job descnptIOns accurately reflected
the manner In whIch SHSC Intended to perform the dutIes and specIfically whether ItS Job
descnptIOns properly captured those dutIes, Ms Alfien receIved three revIsed Job descnptIOns
from the SHSC In May 2002, IncludIng the FInanCIal Analyst Job descnptIOn. She asked Mr
Farley a DIrector to further reVIew the posItIOn descnptIOns In order to determIne whether
anyone performed any of the functIOns descnbed even If not Included In that person's Mimstry
Job descnptIOn. She was lookIng for any overlap In functIOn. She also requested that If more
than one person performed a functIOn to IdentIfy who performed the greater percentage He
responded and IdentIfied that no sIngle IndIVIdual performed all the dutIes outlIned In the
FInanCIal Analyst Job specIficatIOn. He referred to five of the SIX persons IdentIfied earlIer He
commented on Mr LysIak's role In bulk gas purchasIng. He noted that two other employees
had no accountIng or budgetIng skIlls and that a number of the IdentIfied functIOns were not
beIng performed by any of these employees The employer concluded that the bulk purchasIng
component of the FInanCIal Analyst posItIOn was a small component of the Job and that the
core work of the Job related to financIal analysIs of program delIvery Insurance analysIs,
financIal management systems and the lIke areas In whIch Mr LysIak was belIeved to have no
expenence or expertIse
In late May 2002 Mr Johnson commumcated wIth an OPSEU representatIve regardIng
the Board AdmInIstrator posItIOn and the FinancIal Analyst posItIOn. OPSEU took the posItIOn
that both posItIOns represented opportumtIes rather than offers The Board AdmInIstrator
posItIOn was matched to an eXIstIng Mimstry posItIOn but the terms of the offer lImIted any
11
recogmtIOn of semonty or servIce and It was not a permanent posItIOn. OPSEU treated the
FInanCIal Analyst opemng as an opportumty rather than a Job offer because vanous dutIes of
the posItIOn overlapped wIth functIOns found In dIfferent eXIstIng Mimstry posItIOns and
because It too was not a permanent placement. OPSEU suggested that the FInanCIal Analyst
posItIOn be posted on the Mimstry' s e-cruIter system
On June 3 2002 Mr Johnson commumcated wIth the SHSC to advIse them of
OPSEU's posItIOn that It would be fairer to post the FInanCIal Analyst posItIOn on the e-cruIter
In order that anyone who was Interested could apply He further requested that the SHSC not
staff the posItIOn pendIng the opportumty to post It and determIne If there was any response to
the opportumty Mr Johnson asked the SHSC to confirm that It was not Interested In takIng
advantage of financIal InCentIves Mr LysIak dId not receIve notIce of the posItIOn through the
e-cruIter system PEGO was not Informed of the opportumty Although Mr Johnson apparently
made further Inqumes to the SHSC regardIng the postIng of the FInanCIal Analyst posItIOn on
June 13 2002, there was no eVIdence as to any response to that InqUIry
WithIn a few weeks of the effectIve transfer to the SHSC the SHSC was oblIged to hIre
a full-tIme employee responsIble for bulk gas purchasIng and to embark upon a tender process
for a new gas broker and to reVIew the program and IdentIfy opportumtIes for Improved servIce
and cost-recovery ThIS reflects work that Mr LysIak had performed. However the opportumty
came after the transfer of the busIness and only as a result of lOSIng brokerage servIces whIch
had been provIded by a SubsIdIary of Enron. The collapse of the brokerage servIces was
unexpected and was unknown pnor to or at the tIme of the transfer of the busIness
* * *
The umon recogmzed that the employer has more abIlIty to procure Job offers for
affected employees where the transfer anses through a tender or RFP process However the
umon argued that the employer faIled to make sufficIent efforts to have the CIty bUY-In to the
reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn, that It faIled to make appropnate use of financIal InCentIves, that
It should have gone beyond enhanced severance amounts It suggested that the Interests of the
PEGO members were not gIven adequate attentIOn as they compnsed only a small portIOn of
the employees affected and that the employer faIled to make sufficIent efforts to have the new
employers create engIneenng posItIOns The umon argued that there was a need for a gas
12
purchaser at the SHSC and that the employer faIled to use the FinancIal Analyst posItIOn
descnptIOn as an opemng to find aJob for a PEGO member Nor was Mr LysIak advIsed of the
FInanCIal Analyst posItIOn. SImIlarly WIth respect to the Asset Management Consultant
posItIOn, the umon argued that managers were advIsed of the posItIOn WIth the understandIng
that employees would be told, yet Mr LysIak was not. The umon also argued that the
reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn went beyond the date of the transfer of the busIness
The employer posed the questIOn as, on a balance of probabIlItIes was there somethIng
that the employer ought reasonably to have done that would have generated a Job offer for a
PEGO member?
The employer argued that It attempted to achIeve sIgmficant conceSSIOns by negotIatIng
as a group for all employees In the three affected bargaInIng umts The umon dId not suggest
that It was Inappropnate for the employer to have a JOInt team It argued that wIthIn that team,
one needed to make efforts specIfic to the members of thIS bargaInIng umt. The employer
argued that thIS case was not about tryIng to Improve aJob It argued that thIS was a case where
the employer dId not achIeve Job offers because engIneenng Jobs dId not eXIst In the new
emploYIng entItIes The employer argued that the offer of financIal InCentIves dId not motIvate
the new employers to create a Job It was not reCeIVIng Job offers to whIch It could assIgn a
PEGO member The employer argued that It could not dIctate how the new employers were to
conduct busIness The employer noted that the appropnate level of financIal InCentIves was In
the order of 'avOIded costs' In thIS case enhanced severance amounts The employer noted
that If Mr LysIak's functIOn at the tIme of the transfers was bulk gas purchasIng that would
remove the mumcIpalItIes from the equatIOn as they were not performIng that functIOn.
The employer argued that the reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn ends at the tIme of transfer
because other entItlements flow from what remaInS once those efforts have concluded. The
employer acknowledged that there may be an argument that It should pursue changes should It
become aware of them pnor to the transfer but noted the need for finalIty and fairness to those
who have made decIsIOns based on then current InfOrmatIOn as to theIr optIOns
* * *
13
The approach to determInIng whether or not the employer has met the reasonable
efforts oblIgatIOn has been reIterated In a number of decIsIOns It IS an obJectIve test. It does not
mean "all efforts" or "efforts to the pOInt of undue hardshIp" It IS not "every effort" Efforts
whIch could not reasonably be expected to advance the obJects contemplated by paragraph 1
are not 'reasonable efforts' that the employer IS oblIged to make What IS reasonable wIll
depend on all of the CIrcumstances of each case
The cases I was referred to InvolvIng transfers anSIng from a Request for Proposal or
tender process are of assIstance only In respect of theIr general pnncIples That form of transfer
ObvIOusly provIdes sIgmficantly greater control to the employer to ensure that employees enJoy
consIderable employment secunty notwIthstandIng the transfer So In the Ministry of
Transportation v OPSEU case (Kaplan, June 9 1997) when the employer revIewed the bIds
and gave no credIt for a commItment to hIre employees, faIled to fully utIlIze saVIngs on
enhanced severance costs, and restncted Itself from attemptIng to negotIate WIth the successful
bIdder It was found to have faIled to make reasonable efforts
In the absence of such a process the reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn remaInS sIgmficant
and proactIve However results wIll also very much depend on the Interests and posItIOn of the
transferee
In the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations v OP SEU case (Roberts, May
26 1998) It was determIned that the employer fell short of ItS reasonable efforts oblIgatIOns In
that It faIled to pursue negotIatIOns regardIng semonty protectIOn. The employer accepted the
Alcohol & GamIng Control CommIssIOn's posItIOn that semonty would only be recogmzed for
vacatIOn and benefits and dId not attempt to pursue It further Thus the scope of the
negotIatIOns was found wantIng. As well, the degree of effort In the negotIatIOns was also
found lackIng as It related to semonty and attempts to achIeve 100% salary No financIal
InCentIves had been offered and the Vice-Chair noted that both entItIes were creatures of the
Crown. The case stands for the proposItIOn that the employer has an oblIgatIOn to contInue to
attempt to bargaIn even In the face of obstacles
In terms of competIng posItIOns of the Mimstry and the new employers thIS case more
closely resembles the CIrcumstances In the MinistlY of Community and Social Services V
14
OPSEU case (Brown, August 4 1998) As the Vice-Chair there noted, "other than regulatory
Instruments, persuaSIOn and financIal InCentIves are the only mechamsms avaIlable to the
Mimstry" (page 14) That decIsIOn notes that reasonable efforts do not guarantee that equally
favourable results wIll be achIeved for all employees
I start from the premIse that the employer had no abIlIty to dIrect a new employer as to
how to conduct ItS busIness These were arms-length transfers and, apart from satIsfYIng the
reqUIrement that they be able to perform the busIness, there were few If any staffing
restnctIOns on how that was to be accomplIshed. The umon suggested that the Mimster could
have wIthheld approval of the JLTP If the new employer faIled to provIde Job offers or
otherwIse reflect employment secunty for the affected employees Although the Mimster has
the authonty to set cntena for a JL TP under the legIslatIOn the Mimster's recourse If that plan
falls to meet the cntena IS to find a replacement servIce manager CertaInly as It related to the
CIty of Toronto the downloadIng of socIal hOUSIng was not somethIng sought or desIred by the
CIty Nor was the Mimster lIkely to be able to find a replacement servIce manager should the
CIty not meet certaIn cntena Imposed by the Mimster In the result It was unlIkely that the
Mimster was In any posItIOn to Impose oblIgatIOns on the CIty absent further legIslatIve
InterventIOn. WhIle the legIslatIOn provIded for the makIng of transfer orders In relatIOn to
employees of the Ontano HOUSIng CorporatIOn affected by the transfers, no such provIsIOn
eXIsts In the legIslatIOn to deal wIth affected Mimstry employees
In thIS case the employer put a team In place to deal wIth transItIOn Issues That
Included Human Resources/Labour RelatIOns SpecIalIsts whose responsIbly It was to focus on
the employer's reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn. The employer provIded the new employers wIth
InformatIOn concermng the affected posItIOns and the terms and condItIOns of that
employment. It acted to obtaIn orgamzatIOnal charts of the new employers to examIne them
and to obtaIn Job specIficatIOns for the posItIOns represented In the orgamzatIOnal charts It
examIned those Job specIficatIOns and fully revIewed the Job functIOns Involved In order to
attempt to ensure that they reflected a capacIty on the part of the new employer to perform the
busIness and to fulfill the dutIes contemplated. Throughout the process, whether seekIng to
obtaIn Job offers or to enhance offers, It offered InCentIves, IncludIng part-tIme and/or shared
servIce optIOns, financIal InCentIves, and secondment opportumtIes It dId not lImIt ItS
opportumty to negotIate prematurely and transferred two employees, IncludIng one of the
15
gnevors, In the hope that subsequent negotIatIOns would produce a favourable outcome Even
assumIng that enhanced severance payments dId not represent the aVOIded costs, on the
eVIdence, there IS nothIng to suggest that the employer should have offered greater financIal
InCentIves The new employers were not Interested.
There was lIttle the employer could do In response to the smaller servIce managers
who not surpnsIngly In the cIrcumstances, were sImply unable and unwIllIng to even consIder
the creatIOn of an engIneenng posItIOn. It dId focus ItS efforts where It thought there was some
lIkelIhood of success In ItS negotIatIOns WIth the CIty the employer was faced wIth solId
resIstance to any prospect of Job offers It was not Interested In InCentIves It was concerned
about ensunng that ItS Internal oblIgatIOns and polIcIes were met. The employer dId manage to
negotIate the opportumty for Mimstry employees to be consIdered as second-tIer Internal
candIdates WhIle not eVIdencIng a hIgh degree of success, the employer made dogged efforts
to attempt to secure offers or opportumtIes for affected employees, IncludIng PEGO members
Of relevance to PEGO members was the CIty'S posItIOn of Asset Management
Consultant, SocIal HOUSIng. NotwIthstandIng Ms Alfien's recommendatIOn that the techmcal
staff be notIfied of the opportumty and Mr Horn's memo dIrected to specIfic employees,
IncludIng Mr Levesque, Mr Johnson dId not notIfy PEGO or Mr LysIak of that opportumty
although OPSEU was notIfied.
In negotIatIOns WIth the SHSC Ms Alfien pursued the same course as wIth the servIce
managers and was agaIn dogged In her efforts to attempt to match the Job offers to the work of
affected employees and to offer InCentIves
Of Interest to PEGO members was the FInanCIal Analyst posItIOn The employer argued
that the Job reflected functIOns and qualIficatIOns other than engIneenng. It represented a wIde
cOmbInatIOn of functIOns The umon acknowledged that It was dIfficult to dIscern the bulk
purchasIng component of the Job from readIng the Job specIficatIOn. However the employer dId
elIcIt that InformatIOn. The employer was aware of SIX employees, IncludIng Mr LysIak, who
performed some of the functIOns descnbed by the posItIOn.
16
Mr Johnson saw fit to share the Job offer wIth OPSEU and understood that OPSEU
treated the posItIOn as an opportumty In that It dId not match wIth an eXIstIng Mimstry Job
descnptIOn. The employer advanced OPSEU's suggestIOn to the SHSC that the posItIOn not be
filled pendIng ItS postIng on the Mimstry e-crUIter system He also advIsed OPSEU that If
anyone from the bargaInIng umt decIded to apply he antIcIpated further dIscussIOns between
the Mimstry and SHSC at that tIme He dId not commumcate wIth PEGO concermng thIS
opportumty
I am not persuaded that the employer's reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn contInued after the
transfer date so as to reqUIre It to respond to the hmng of a full-tIme gas purchaser a few weeks
later There IS a need for finalIty and one would be hard-pressed to descnbe under what
authonty the employer would have been able to affect the operatIOn of an arms-length entIty
once It had transferred that operatIOn. However the employer dId suggest there would be
further dIscussIOns wIth the SHSC should affected employees respond to the FInanCIal Analyst
postIng. That Interest does not appear to have been commumcated to the SHSC These events
occurred on the eve of the transfer and I have no eVIdence as to any outcome
The employer posed the questIOn as, was there somethIng It ought reasonably to have
done that would have generated a Job offer for a PEGO member It may be that the lIkelIhood
of generatIng a Job offer for a PEGO member for eIther the Asset Management Consultant
posItIOn or the FInanCIal Analyst posItIOn was slIm. At the CIty there was to be a competItIve
process and It was not Interested In utIlIzIng financIal InCentIves Yet the employer saw fit to
notIfy at least one PEGO member of the opportumty at the CIty and to notIfy OPSEU The
employer also saw fit to consult wIth OPSEU regardIng the postIng of the SHSC FinancIal
Analyst posItIOn. Other employees appear to have been no more partIcularly qualIfied for the
FInanCIal Analyst posItIOn than Mr LysIak. The employer was aware that at least one PEGO
member had skIlls and expenence reflected In the posItIOn descnptIOn, was also aware that of
those wIth relevant expenence, hIS posItIOn was the only one lIkely to be surplus ed, and was
unaware of whether other more qualIfied Mimstry employees mIght respond. There was no
eVIdence from whIch to draw a conclusIOn that Mr LysIak ought not to have had the
opportumty to reVIew and respond to thIS opportumty
17
Whether or not the employer has an oblIgatIOn to consult wIth the umon per se
(compare Ministry of Transportation v OPSEU (Gray May 8 1997) and Ministry of
Community and Social Services v OPSEU (Kaplan, June 2, 1997) ) It dId engage a process
whereIn It contacted OPSEU for Input on Jobs that It knew could affect Its members and, more
to the pOInt, In the case of both posItIOns relevant to PEGO advIsed OPSEU of opportumtIes
that mIght be of Interest to ItS members It dId not do the same for PEGO although It was aware
of affected PEGO members who mIght be sImIlarly Interested. The employer treated that
advIce to OPSEU as part of ItS reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn. In the CIrcumstances I find that
the employer faIled In ItS reasonable efforts oblIgatIOn and vIOlated the terms of paragraph 1 of
AppendIx A of the collectIve agreement WIth PEGO by faIlIng to sImIlarly provIde that advIce
to PEGO
ThIS matter IS remItted to the partIes on the Issue of remedy I wIll remaIn seIzed should
the partIes be unable to finally resolve thIS matter
Dated at Toronto Ontano thIS 10th day of July 2003