HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-0974.Braun.06-10-12 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# 2005-0974
UNION# 2005-0248-0053
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Braun)
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 Mary-Jo Knappett
Staff Relations Officer
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
HEARING
May 24, 2006
SUBMISSIONS
September 1, 2006.
2
Decision
INTRODUCTION
The parties have agreed to a Med-Arb Protocol, signed February 27, 2006. 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 ?True Mediation-Arbi tration? process, wherein each provides the vice-chair with
submissions, which include the facts and author ities each relies upon. The process adopted by
the parties provides for a canvassing of the fact s during the mediation ph ase under the Protocol.
Arbitration decisions are issued in accordance with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement,
without reasons, and are without prejudice or preceden t. The parties were unable to resolve this
matter in mediation. Accordingly, the matte r has been referred to me as a True
Mediation/Arbitration deci sion under the Protocol.
At the beginning of the session on May 24, 2006, it was determined that the union had not
provided the employer with full or appropriate Ap pendix B?s, as required under the Protocol, and
as a result, the employer had been unable to prepare appropriate Appendix C?s. I met with the
representatives of the parties, and it was agreed the three-day mediati on session would proceed.
In order to assist the parties, I advised that the union would be expected to prepare appropriate
Appendix B?s prior to the discussion of any speci fic case. This they did, and, in the process,
numerous grievances were withdrawn by the uni on. The employer then reviewed each grievance,
and mediation was attempted. There were a number of grievances referred to arbitration, and the
employer was provided with a full opportunity to submit formal Appendix C?s after the session.
3
FACTS
The grievor was involved in a work refusal under the Occupational Health and Safety Act in
February 2002. The Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) initially ruled against the
employees, but ultimately ruled in 2005 th at the work refusal was legitimate.
In the Appendix B submitted during the mediation session, the grievor alleges that, during the
pay period in question, she should have been paid 76 straight-time hours, plus 4 overtime hours.
Her pay stubs indicated she was paid only 76 st raight-time hours, leaving her 4 overtime hours
short on her original pay. In addition, after the initial OLRB decision, the employer deducted 16
hours pay from the grievor. After the second OLRB decision, the employer repaid 10 hours,
leaving the grievor 6 straight-time hours short. She claims repayment of the 4 overtime hours,
plus the 6 straight-time hours.
The employer?s Appendix C indicates that it is in agreement with the Appendix B, but this is
presumably the original Appendix B submitted by the union, since it offered to pay only 6 hours
of regular pay less normal and statutory deducti ons, but not the four hours of overtime. The
documents submitted by the employer indicate that the employer took the position that the four
overtime hours were not owed to the grievor since, although scheduled, they were not worked.
Decision
The employer is ordered to pay the grievor 4 hour s overtime, plus 6 hours straight time at the
applicable rates for the time period in question, le ss appropriate deductions. The grievor is also
entitled to any credits associated with this adjust ment. I remain seized to deal with any issues
arising from the implementation of this award.
4
th
Dated at Toronto, this 12 day of October , 2006.
________________________
Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair