The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2005-0171.Flegg et al.05-12-16 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# 2005-0171 2005-0190 2005-0205 2005-0209 2005-0218 2005-0247 2005-0253 UNION# 2005-0440-0020 2005-0440-0039 2005-0440-0053 2005-0440-0057 2005-0440-0066 2005-0440-0095 2005-0440-0100 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (Flegg et al ) Union - and - The Crown III RIght of Ontano (Mimstry ofCommumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces) Employer BEFORE FelIcIty D Bnggs Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION Scott Andrews Gnevance Officer Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon FOR THE EMPLOYER Lucy Neal Semor Staff RelatIOns Officer Mimstry Commumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces HEARING October 27 2005 2 DeCISIon In September of 1996 the MmIstry of CorrectIOnal ServIces notIfied the Umon and employees at a number of provmcIaI correctIOnal mstItutIOns that theIr facIlItIes would be closed and/or restructured over the next few years On June 6, 2000 and June 29, 2000 the Umon filed pohcy and mdIvIdual gnevances that alleged vanous breaches of the collectIve agreement mcludmg artIcle 6 and artIcle 31 15 as well as gnevances relatmg to the filhng of correctIOnal officer posItIOns In response to these gnevances the partIes entered mto dIscussIOns and ultImately agreed upon two Memoranda of Settlement concernmg the apphcatIOn of the collectIve agreement dunng the "first phase of the MmIstry's transItIOn" One memorandum, dated May 3, 2000 (heremafter referred to as "MERC I" (MmIstry Employment RelatIOns CommIttee)) outhned condItIons for the correctIOnal officers willie the second, dated July 19,2001 (heremafter referred to as "MERC 2") provIded for the non-correctIOnal officer staff Both agreements were subject to ratIficatIOn by respectIve prmcIples and settled all of the gnevances IdentIfied m the related MERC appendIces, filed up to that pomt m tIme The partIes contmued to negotIate and agree upon further condItIons regardmg the transItIOn matters MERC 3 was sIgned by the partIes on February 25, 2002 WhIle It was agreed m each case that the settlements were "wIthout prejUdICe or precedent to posItIOns eIther the umon or the employer may take on the same Issues m future dIscussIOns", the partIes recogmzed that dIsputes mIght anse regardmg the ImplementatIOn of the memoranda. Accordmgly, they agreed, at Part G, paragraph 8 3 The partIes agree that they wIll request that FehcIty Bnggs, VIce Chair of the Gnevance Settlement Board wIll be seIzed wIth resolvmg any dIsputes that anse from the llnplementatIOn of tlllS agreement It IS tlllS agreement that provIdes me wIth the jUnSdIctIOn to resolve the outstandmg matters Both MERC 1 and MERC 2 are lengthy and comprehensIve documents that provIde for the IdentIficatIOn of vacanCIes and posItIOns and the procedure for filhng those posItIOns as they become aVailable throughout varIOUS phases of the restructunng GIven the complexIty and SIze of the task of restnlctunng and decommIssIOmng of mstItutIOns, It IS not surpnsmg that a number of gnevances and dIsputes arose ThIS IS another of the dIsputes that have ansen under the MERC Memorandum of Settlement When I was mItIally mVIted to hear theses transItIOn dIsputes, the partIes agreed that process to be followed for the determmatIOn of these matters would be vIrtually IdentIcal to that found m ArtIcle 22 16.2 whIch 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 / arb 1 trator shall determme the gnevance by arbItratIOn When detennmmg the gnevance by arbItratIOn, the medIator/arbItrator may hmIt the nature and extent of the eVIdence and may Impose such condItIons as he or she consIders appropnate The medIator/arbItrator shall gIve a succmct decIsIOn wItllln five (5) days after completmg proceedmgs, unless the partIes agree otherwIse 4 The transItIOn commIttee has dealt wIth dozens of gnevances and complamts pnor to the mediatIOn/arbItratIOn process There have been many other gnevances and Issues raised before me that I have eIther assIsted the partIes to resolve or arbItrated. However, there are stIll a large number that have yet to be dealt wIth It IS because of the vast numbers of gnevances that I have decIded, m accordance wIth my jUnSdIctIOn to so detennme, that gnevances are to be presented by way of each party presentmg a statement of the facts wIth accompanymg submIssIOns NotwIthstandmg that some gnevors mIght wIsh to attend and provIde oral eVIdence, to date, tlllS process has been efficIent and has allowed the partIes to rem am relatIvely current wIth dIsputes that anse from the contmumg transItIOn process Not surpnsmgly, m a few mstances there has been some confusIOn about the certam facts or sImply msufficIent detail has been provIded. On those occaSIOns I have dIrected the partIes to speak agam wIth theIr prmcIples to ascertam the facts or the ratIOnale belllnd the partIcular outstandmg matter In each case tlllS has been done to my satIsfactIOn It IS essentIal m tlllS process to aVOId accumulatmg a backlog of dIsputes The task of resolvmg these Issues m a tImely fashIOn was, from the outset, a formIdable one WIth ongomg changes m MmIstenal boundanes and other organIzatIonal alteratIOns, the task has lately become larger, not smaller It IS for these reasons that the process I have outlmed IS appropnate m these CIrcumstances A number of mdIvIdual gnevances were filed by vanous CorrectIOnal Officers that were vIrtually IdentIcal The gnevances stated. 5 I gneve that ArtIcle 8 6 1 regardmg temporary assIgned employees, smce RIdeau CorrectIOnal and Treatment Centre staff were temporanly assIgned longer than SIX months to the BrockvIlle Jail, ArtIcle 6 should have apphed By way of remedy the gnevors requested. That the vacanCIes be IdentIfied wItllln St Lawrence Valley CorrectIOnal and Treatment Centre (Phase I) and the BrockvIlle JaIl ArbItrator Ms F Bnggs stated m a prevIOUS document that there were no vacanCIes at the BrockvIlle Jail I want to keep my posItIOn and classIficatIOn at BrockvIlle JaIl The gnevors were CorrectIOnal Officers workmg at the BrockvIlle JaIl Vanous CorrectIOnal Officers at the BrockvIlle JaIl contmued to work m temporary assIgnments beyond SIX months and, for that reasons, It was the gnevor's posItIOn that accordmg to ArtIcle 8 6 1 of the CollectIve Agreement those posItIOns ought to have been posted as provIded at ArtIcle 6 WhIle I understand the fnlstratIOn of the gnevors, I must deny the gnevance Once the decIsIOn was made by the Employer to cancel Phase 2, the partIes' pnmary focus m the ongomg transItIOn process was to negotIate job secunty Issues WIth a VIew to aVOIdmg lay-offs In tlllS regard, the partIes have agreed that the prOVISIOns of the MERC Memorandum of Agreement, dated Febnmry 25, 2002 shall prevail That agreement stated. 11 Upon receIvmg theIr surplus notIce, and where employment opportumtIes eXIst, the employee may be offered an assIgnment by the Employer The assIgnment wIll be mutually agreeable, furthermore, the assIgnment wIll suspend the notIce penod and the lay-off date of the employee If the employee rejects the assIgnment offered, the notIce penod wIll be actIvated The llnplementatIOn commIttee wIll momtor tlllS process 12 The partIes agree that m cases where there IS no mutual agreement on a temporary assIgnment to another worksIte untIl theIr permanent placement occurs, employees who remam at home wIll be consIdered to be on a leave of absence wIthout pay Temporary assIgnments wIll be offered on the basIs of semonty If the Employer does not offer a temporary assIgnment then the Employee wIll not suffer any financial loss 6 Accordmgly, the followmg gnevances are denIed. Donald Cooper 2005-0440-0039 Anthony Monn 2005-0440-0066 Brad Flemmg 2005-0440-0053 John Foreman 2005-0440-0100 Heather Robmson 2005-0440-0095 Nancy Flegg 2005-0440-0020 Stephen Robertson 2005-0440-0057 Dated at Toronto, thIS 16th day of December, 2005 , . .