The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003-3774.Union Grievance.04-03-29 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# 2003-3774 UNION# 2004-0999-0002 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (Umon Gnevance) Grievor - and - The Crown In RIght of Ontano (Mimstry ofCommumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces) Employer BEFORE FelIcIty D Bnggs Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION Stephen GIles Gnevance Officer Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon FOR THE EMPLOYER Greg GledhIll Staff RelatIOns Officer Mimstry of Commumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces HEARING March 5 2004 2 DeCISIon From March 13th to May 6th 2002, the Umon and Its members were engaged In a legal stnke Pnor to the begInmng of thIS actIOn the partIes had negotIated a Memorandum of Agreement regardIng the condItIOns of work In the event of a stnke or a lockout (hereInafter referred to as the "CondItIOns Document") In that agreement It was provIded that "all collectIve agreement provIsIOns apply to essentIal and emergency workers wIthout InterruptIOn, save only that AppendIx 9 and AppendIx 18 shall not apply" The CondItIOns Document also expressly provIded the Umon contInued nght under ArtIcle 22 13 of the CollectIve Agreement to file Umon gnevances on behalf of employees who were performIng essentIal and emergency servIces Dunng the course of the stnke approxImately 5000 gnevances were filed by Umon members across the Ontano PublIc ServIce As part of the negotiatIOns that ended the work stoppage, the partIes negotIated a Return to Work Protocol That agreement contemplated vanous provIsIOns IncludIng how contInUOUS servIce, pensIOn, credIts and semonty would be affected as a result of the stnke AddItIOnally the partIes addressed other Issues such as repnsal, dIscIplIne and the mechamcs of the actual return of the bargaInIng umt members to the workplace It was further agreed these "stnke related" gnevances would be treated separately and lItIgated In an efficIent manner To that end, on June 27 2002, OPSEU and the Mimstry of PublIc Safety and Secunty (hereInafter referred to as "MPSS") met to dISCUSS a process In order to resolve the outstandIng stnke related gnevances FolloWIng that meetIng a letter dated October 11 2002, confirmed the agreement that: In order to deal wIth the stnke related gnevances In a proactIve, expedItIOus and effectIve manner the partIes have agreed to the folloWIng . No stage 2 heanngs . No filIng of stnke related gnevances at GSB untIl agreed otherwIse . WaiVIng of tIme lImIts . RespectIvely assIgmng dedIcated resources to deal wIth the volume ApproxImately 4500 gnevances were filed by members employed by the MPSS The partIes agreed to a DIspute ResolutIOn Protocol for MPSS that Included Terms of Reference It IS not 3 necessary to provIde all of that agreement. It IS sufficIent to say that the partIes agreed to an expedIted process whereIn each party provIdes to the Vice Chair wntten submIssIOns whIch Include the facts, provIsIOns of the CollectIve Agreement, the EssentIal ServIces Agreement, legIslatIOn or any other document alleged to have been vIOlated, arguments and requested remedy Oral eVIdence would not be called although It was allowed that I could request further clanficatIOn If necessary In the event of any confusIOn regardIng the facts of the matter or the underlYIng ratIOnale I wIll dIrect the partIes to speak agaIn wIth theIr pnncIples NotwIthstandIng that some gnevors mIght wIsh to attend and provIde oral eVIdence thIS process has been efficIent and has allowed for a thorough canvaSSIng of the facts and arguments wIth respect to the vanous Issues Other procedural Issues were addressed to ensure that gnevances would be dealt wIth In a tImely fashIOn, The Terms of Reference also provIded that I would remaIn seIzed of all outstandIng stnke related gnevances filed by members workIng In MPSS ThIS process was developed In consIderatIOn of ArtIcle 22 16.2 of the collectIve agreement. It 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 maJonty of the 4500 gnevances dealt wIth one of the folloWIng Issues . An allegatIOn of delayed retroactIve payments WIth a request for Interest OWIng; . An allegatIOn of faIlure to pay appropnate holIday pay for Good Fnday and Easter Monday . EntItlement to call back; . On-Call and Standby Issues for emergency workers Those matters were separately lItIgated at the Gnevance Settlement Board and decIsIOns eIther have been Issued or are pendIng, In accordance wIth the agreement of the partIes a number of heanng days were scheduled to hear and determIne the outstandIng stnke related gnevances Many of the gnevances have been resolved through medIatIOn, ThIS IS another decIsIOn dealIng wIth those matters 4 James McBnde IS a Fire ServIces InvestIgator 1 workIng In the Midhurst office found In the south RegIOn, These officers are assIgned under the SOlICItor General to InVestIgate allegatIOns of arson, He filed a gnevance that stated The Office of the FIre Marshal contInuously vIOlated the EssentIal ServIces Agreement of December 11 2001 Dunng the legal stnke of 2002 management and supervIsor(s) conducted a "busIness as usual" approach for the duratIOn of the stnke, contInually performIng and dIrectIng staff to perform mInor non-essentIal tasks ThIS approach created a dIStInCt dIsadvantageous posItIOn for those employees who chose to abIde by the EssentIal ServIces Agreement, speCIfically the gnevors By way of remedy he requested The gnevor to be reImbursed for all lost wages and penSIOn contributIOns, IncludIng Interest, for the entIre stnke penod, In addItIOn, all lost applIcable attendance and vacatIOn credIts to be reInstated, Pnor to the stnke, the partIes agreed that FIre ServIces InvestIgator 2 officers were deemed essentIal whIle the FIre ServIce InvestIgator 1 officers were conSIdered emergency workers The gnevor alleged that there were a number of occaSIOns dunng the course of the stnke whereIn the Employer had the Fire ServIce InvestIgators performIng tasks that were not essentIal WhIle the Employer could not speCIfically deny those assertIOns, It submItted that the gnevance was InarbItrable In my VIew the gnevance must be dIsmIssed, Even If the gnevor could prove each of hIS allegatIOns he would not be awarded hIS requested remedy The gnevor was deemed to be an emergency worker by agreement of the partIes That agreed upon desIgnatIOn was not contIngent upon what happened In the workplace dunng the course of the stnke It IS beyond my JunsdIctIOn to order thIS gnevor to be paid for the penod of the stnke, effectIvely altenng hIS emergency desIgnatIOn retroactIvely Dated In Toronto the 29th day of March, 2004 Vice-Chair