Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-2801.Hoskins et al.06-03-15 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# 2004-2801 2004-2804 2004-2805 2004-2806 2004-2807 UNION# 2004-0234-0614 2004-0234-0617 2004-0234-0618 2004-0234-0619 2004-0234-0620 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (HoskIns 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 Rena Khan Staff RelatIOns Officer Mimstry of Commumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces HEARING December 13 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 ArbItratIOn decIsIOns are Issued In accordance wIth artIcle 22 16 of the collectIve agreement and, therefore, are wIthout precedent. The gnevances relate to the gnevors' contInUOUS servIce dates The umon adduced eVIdence at the heanng that reasonable efforts had been made to contact the gnevors, but they have not responded. 3 After reVIeWIng the submIssIOns of the partIes and the collectIve agreement, It IS my conclusIOn that the gnevances should be dIsmIssed. Dated at Toronto thIS 15th day of March, 2006