HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-0678.Toner et al.04-09-27 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#2003-0678 2003-0912,2003-2934 2003-2935 2003-2936 2003-2937 2003-2938
UNION#2003-0204-0008 2003-0270-0004 2003-0204-0010 2003-0204-0011 2003-0204-0012,
2003-0270-0008 2003-0270-0009
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon
(Toner et al ) Grievor
- and -
The Crown In RIght of Ontano
(Mimstry of TransportatIOn) Employer
BEFORE Owen V Gray Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION GavIn Leeb
Bamster and SOlICItor
FOR THE EMPLOYER Lucy McSweeney
Counsel
Management Board Secretanat
HEARING September 2, 2004
2
Order
[1] ThIs order confirms the outcome of requests for compelled productIOn
entertamed at the hearmg of September 2, 2004 m these matters
[2] The documents of whIch the umon requested productIOn from the employer were
described m SIX numbered paragraphs of ItS counsel's letter to employer counsel of
August 24, 2004
1 Mr Docherty's entIre mvestIgatIOn file mcludmg but not hmlted to all wItness
statements and all correspondence wIth the Mimstry
2. All documentatIOn the posseSSIOn of the Equal OpportumtIes Program Office m
relatIOn to complamts about the Wmona work sIte mcludmg but not hmlted to the
"reVIew" that was conducted by the office as referenced m Mr Hougham's letter of
November 10 2002 to Gerry Foreman.
'3 CopIes of all e-maIl" and other documentatIOn from Mike North to Mr. Fulford, Mr Ah or
other Mimstry employees that mvolves or relates to eIther aneVor both of the gnevors.
4. CopIes of all e-maIls and other documentatIon exchanged between Mr. Fulford, Mr Ah,
Mr Hougham ancVor other MinIstry employees that relates to Mr North' behavIOur aneVor
hIS treatment of one or both of the gnevors or other MinIStry employees mcluelmg
themselves.
5. Mr. Fulford's accommoelatlon request and the accommodatIon plan that was subsequently
approved.
G. CopIes of all documentatIOn that relates to eIther or both of the gnevors' absences from
work smce May 1, 200:3 mcluelmg but not lmnted to J,) the meehcal notes that were provIded to
the Mimstry ~ whether the MinIStry consIdered senclmg the gnevors for an mdependent
meehcal exammatIOn and nJ,) whether consIderatIOn was gIven to accommodatmg the gnevors
m some manner so as facilitate theIr return to work.
[3] WIth respect to paragraph 1 of the umon's request, the employer takes the
posItIOn that Mr Docherty was engaged as a concIlIator on the basIs that hIS prIvate
mtervlews of mdlvlduals mvolved would remam confidentIal from the employer, and
that the employer does not have the legal power to reqUIre that Mr Docherty delIver to
It copIes of hIS entIre file Havmg already provIded a copy of the report that Mr
Docherty delIvered to It, the employer has agreed to provIde copIes of all
correspondence between It and Mr Docherty concermng ItS engagement of hIm to
mtervene m the subJect workplace, mcludmg documentatIOn reflectmg the terms of the
engagement, as well as any notes made by members of management wIth respect to
theIr oral commumcatIOns wIth Mr Docherty concermng thIS engagement or ItS
outcome Counsel agreed that consIderatIOn of the request that the employer be
3
dIrected to produce Mr Docherty's file would be deferred untIl umon counsel has an
opportumty to consIder the documentatIOn wIth respect to the nature to Mr Docherty's
retamer
[4] WIth respect to paragraph 2 of the umon's request, umon counsel clanfied that
the request IS WIth respect to any complamts filed between February 2001 and May
2003 The employer has agreed to produce the report referenced m Mr Hougham's
letter to Mr Foreman of November 10, 2002, as well as any complamt filed by eIther of
these gnevors In so far as the umon seeks documentatIOn wIth respect to any
"complamt" by anyone other than the gnevors, the request IS deferred untIl umon
counsel has an opportumty to consIder whether the umon takes the posItIOn that any
and all mformatIOn provIded by an employee to the Equal OpportumtIes Program Office
IS mformatIOn that that office IS oblIged to provIde to management or IS mformatIOn to
whIch management has access
[5] WIth respect to paragraph 3 of the umon's request, umon counsel clanfied that
the reference to "other Mmlstry employees" means other members of the Mmlstry's
management, and that the tIme frame IS between February 2001 and May 1, 2003 I
confirm my oral dIrectIOn that the employer shall produce to the umon copIes of all e
maIls and other documents sent or provIded by MIke North to Mr Fulford, to Mr All or
to any other member of the Mmlstry's management m the perIOd between February
2001 and May 1, 2003 that mvolves or relates to eIther or both of the gnevors
[6] WIth respect to paragraph 4 of the umon's request, as clanfied by umon counsel,
I confirm my oral dIrectIOn that the employer shall produce to the umon copIes of all e
maIls and other documents exchanged between Mr Fulford, Mr All, Mr Hougham
and/or other members of the Mmlstry's management m the penod February 2001 and
May 1, 2003 that relate to Mr North's behavIOur and/or hIS treatment of one or both of
the gnevors or hIS treatment of other Mmlstry employees at the Wmona sIte
[7] Umon counsel wIthdrew the request m paragraph numbered 5 of the letter of
August 24, 2004
[8] WIth respect to paragraph 6 of the umon's request, I note that employer counsel
agreed to provIde copIes of medIcal notes submItted by the gnevors m the perIOd smce
4
May 1, 2003 I confirm my oral dIrectIOn that the employer shall produce any
documents reflectmg Mmlstry consIderatIOn of whether to send the gnevors for an
mdependent medIcal exammatIOn or of accommodatmg the gnevors m some manner so
as facIlItate theIr return to work, other than documents for whIch solIcItor-clIent
pnvIlege or settlement dIscuSSIOn pnvIlege IS claImed.
[9] Counsel for the employer requested productIOn of the complete medIcal files of
each doctor who has treated eIther gnevor smce February 2001, other than doctors who
only treated condItIons that the umon does not claIm a) were caused or aggravated by
alleged workplace harm or b) prevented the subJect gnevor from returmng to hIS pre
May 1, 2003 work sItuatIOn. Umon counsel undertook to obtam a copy of each such file
and reVIew It, and advIse employer counsel whether m hIS VIew there are personal
matters that should be blacked out before copIes are produced to the employer, and
agreed that If employer counsel belIeves that the mformatIOn that umon counsel
proposes to black out IS relevant that Issue may be addressed m a further hearmg by
teleconference or otherwIse
[10] By way of clanficatIOn, where the word "document" IS used m thIS order, It
encompasses mformatIOn recorded m any form, and mcluded any electromc record
whether or not a paper verSIOn of that record eXIsts or ever eXIsted
[11] I note that m addItIon to the dates prevIOusly scheduled - January 18 and 19,
2005 - at the hearmg of September 2, 2004 the partIes agreed on the followmg addItIon
hearmg dates m 2005 Apn113, 14, May 18, 25, June 21,28
Dated at Toronto thIS 27th day of September, 2004
~V