HomeMy WebLinkAboutUnion 06-06-31
RUG-29-2006 16:43 From:RWBH
4163409250
To:07054743571--154100 P.2/4
G.r-~ ~oS -ols,'] lo-OO~ 0
iN THE MATTER OF AN ARBTTRA TTON brought pursuant to the Ontario LabolJr
Relations Act, 1995
(Policy grievance re benefits)
RRTWEEN:
NORTHEAST MENT AT, HEALTH CENTRE
(the "employer")
- and ~
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION
(the "union")
AWARD
Sole Arhitrator:
Marilyn A. Nairn
Hearing held:
July 27, 2006
(North Ba.y, Ontario)
APPEARANCES
For the union:
David R. Wright
For the employer:
Roy C. Filion
AUG-29-2006 16:43 From:RWBH
4163409250
To:07054743571--154100 P.3/4
AW~Q
The parties are agreed that I have the jurisdiction to hear and determine this policy
grievance dated December 22, 2005. They are also agreed that 1 issue a summary decision
without reasons. The hearing in this matler convened in North Bay on July 27, 2006.
The grievance involve~ the interpretation of a transfer agreement dated September 2,
2005 which, further to the parties' voluntary recognition agreement datcd September 27,
2005, sets out the terms and conditions of employment for employees represented by
OPSEU followi~g the divestment of the operations of the North Bay Psychiatric Hospital
From the Crown to thc Northeast Mental Health Centre. The parties are currently in
negotiations for their first. collective agreement. The specific issues raised by the grievance
relate to Article 7-1 (short term disability coverage) and Article 8-1 (Worl...l'lacc Insw'ance
"top-up") of Schedule B of the transfer agreement.. In relation to Anicle 7-1, the union
sought to point to specific ftlatures of HOODr.p (the qualifying period required under
HOODIP for a fourth and ~ubsequent absence in n calendar year. and to the maximum
nwnber of days of short tCITTl coverage) and to the failure to allow for employee top-up, to
asserl that HOODIP was not equivalent to the short term plan which had been available to
employees at the North Bny Psychiatric Hospital. Tn relation to Article R-I the union
asserted that a proper interpretation of the transfer agreement would require the employer to
pay top-up in certain circumstances of workplace injury in accordance with an asserted pre-
existing practice at North Bay Psychiatric Hospital.
Having rega.rd to the evidence and representations of the parties, I am satistied that
there has been no violation of the provisions of the transfer agreement. This grievance is
thcrcfore dismissed.
This finding is without prejudice to the union's right to assen in an individual
grievance that HOODIP's requirement of a qualifying period of two days of absence in a
fourth and subsequent period of total disability in a calendar year is in violation of thc
RUG-29-2006 16:43 From:RWBH
4163409250
To:07054743571--154100 P.4/4
2
transfer agreement's prohibition on discrimination by reason of any ground set out in !:he
Ontario Human Righ'.~' Code, specifically, disability.
Dated at Toronto, Onta.rio this 3111 day of J uty, 2006.
_*J~-::J~
MarilY~itrator_