Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-4076.Reis et al.06-02-03 Decision Crown Employees Commission de Nj 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# 2003-4076 2004-0120 2004-0121 2004-0122,2004-0123 2004-0124 2004-0125 2004-0126 2004-0127 2004-0128 2004-0129 2004-0130 2004-0141 2004-0165 2004-0166 2004-0167 2004-0180 2004-0184 2004-0352,2004-0353 2004-0355 2004-1687 UNION# 2004-0234-0042,2004-0234-0091 2004-0234-0092,2004-0234-0093 2004-0234-0094 2004-0234-0095 2004-0234-0096 2004-0234-0097 2004-0234-0098 2004-0234-0099 2004-0234-0100 2004-0234-0101 2004-0234-0112,2004-0234-0067 2004-0234-0068 2004-0234-0069 2004-0234-0083 2004-0234-0088 2004-0234-0127 2004-0234-0128 2004-0234-0130 2004-0234-0407 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (ReIs et al ) Union - and - The Crown In RIght of Ontano (Mimstry ofCommumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces) Employer BEFORE Barry Stephens Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION Stephen GIles Gnevance Officer Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon FOR THE EMPLOYER Mary-Jo Knappett Staff RelatIOns Officer Mimstry of Commumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces HEARING July 22, 2005 2 DeCISIon The partIes agreed to an ExpedIted MedIatIOn-ArbItratIOn Protocol for the Maplehurst CorrectIOnal Complex. It IS not necessary to reproduce the entIre Protocol here Suffice It to say that the partIes have agreed to an expedIted process whereIn each party provIdes the vIce-chair wIth wntten submIssIOns, whIch Include the facts and authontIes the party Intends to rely upon, one week pnor to the heanng. At the heanng, oral eVIdence IS not called, although the vIce-chair IS permItted to request further InformatIOn or documentatIOn. In addItIOn, If It becomes apparent to the vIce-chair that the Issues Involved In a partIcular case are of a complex or sIgmficant nature, the case may be taken out of the expedIted process and processed through "regular" arbItratIOn. Although IndIVIdual gnevors often wIsh to provIde oral eVIdence at arbItratIOn, the process adopted by the partIes provIdes for a thorough canvaSSIng of the facts pnor to the heanng, and leads to a fair and efficIent adjudIcatIOn process A senes of IndIVIdual and group gnevances have been filed regardIng the calculatIOn of contInUOUS servIce dates (CSD) The gnevances all relate to the tIme when the gnevors were workIng as unclassIfied employees The gnevors assert that they were demed credIt for theIr CSD's as a result of not workIng or beIng gIven credIt for 40 hours In a week, In that the employer had demed, " fair and eqUItable access to hours of work by offenng only 8 10 and 12 hours ShIftS thus resultIng In the InabIlIty to achIeve 40 hours per week" The employer responds that the collectIve agreement IS clear In that an employee's CSD credIt for the penod of unclassIfied employment IS calculated by addIng the number of full-tIme weeks worked by the employee dunng such penod, set out In Art. 18 01(b) as follows 3 1801 An employee s length of continuous service will accumulate upon completion of a probationary period of not more than nine (9) months and shall COlmnence (b) from the date established by adding the actual number of full-time weeks worked by a full-time unclassified employee during his or her full-time employment back to the first break in employment which is greater than thirteen (13) weeks. The employer argues that, SInce the gnevor's could not provIde eVIdence of havIng worked full- tIme weeks, I e 40 hours weeks, for the pen ods referenced In the vanous gnevances, there IS no eVIdence of a breach of the collectIve agreement. The collectIve agreement, and the related junsprudence between the partIes, IS clear on thIS pOInt. The employer has the nght to desIgn appropnate shIft schedules The contracts for unclassIfied CorrectIOnal Officers provIde for up to 40 hours of work per week, but thIS IS not a guarantee that any unclassIfied CO wIll be assIgned to work 40 hours In any partIcular week. A correctIOnal officer's CSD IS calculated based on full 40-hour work weeks, and the Issue raised by these gnevances does not alter that reqUIrement. As a result, the gnevances are dIsmIssed. Dated at Toronto thIS 3rd day of February 2006