HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-1097.Leppan-Triolo.06-10-10 Decision
Commission de
Crown Employees
Grievance Settlement
règlement des griefs
Board
des employés de la
Couronne
Suite 600 Bureau 600
180 Dundas St. West 180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tél. : (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396
GSB# 2003-1097, 2004-3642
UNION# 2003-0530-0056, 2005-0530-0001
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Leppan-Triolo)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFORE Vice-Chair
Barry Stephens
FOR THE UNION Scott Andrews
Grievance Officer
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
FOR THE EMPLOYER Karen Martin & Faith Crocker
Staff Relations Officers
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
HEARING
September 28, 2006.
2
Decision
INTRODUCTION
The parties have agreed to a Med-Arb Protocol, signed February 27, 2006. Although the
Toronto Jail was not specifically covered by that protocol, at the outset of our session on
September 27, 2006, both the union and the employer agr eed to follow the protocol as closely as
possible. It is not necessary to reproduce the entire Protocol here. Suffice it to say that, as part of
the Protocol, the parties have agreed to a ?Tru e Mediation-Arbitration? process, wherein each
provides the vice-chair with s ubmissions, which include the fact s and authorities each relies
upon. The process adopted by the parties provid es for a canvassing of the facts during the
mediation phase under the Protocol. Arbitration decisions are issu ed in accordance with Article
22.16 of the collective agreement, without reasons, and are without prejudice or precedent. The
parties were unable to resolve this matter in mediation. A ccordingly, the matter has been
referred to me as a True Mediation/Arbitration decision under the Protocol.
FACTS
The grievor filed two grievances. In the first gr ievance, she claims 8 hours overtime for a shift
on May 23, 3003. The grievor states that she was available to wo rk the shift but that it was
assigned as overtime to two other employees, both of whom had accumulated more overtime
hours than her at that point. In the second grievance, the grievor seeks compensation for
escorting a fellow officer to a criminal trial deali ng with an incident at the jail, during which the
fellow officer had been assaulted. The grie vor claims 6 hours pay plus travel costs.
3
The employer takes the position that the overtime was properly assigned and that, in the second
incident, the grievor was not assign ed to escort the fellow officer.
DECISION
The employer is ordered to pay the grievor $125.00. I will remain seized to deal with any issues
arising from the implementation of this award.
th
Dated at Toronto, this 10 day of October, 2006.
________________________
Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair