HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-1760.Whyte.07-02-02 Decision
Crown Employees
Grievance Settlement
Board
Suite 600
180 Dundas Sl. West
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396
Commission de
reglement des griefs
des employes de la
Couronne
Nj
~
Ontario
Bureau 600
180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tel. : (416) 326-1388
Telec. : (416) 326-1396
GSB# 2006-1760,2006-1769
UNION# 2006-0368-0116,2006-0368-0125
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
BETWEEN
BEFORE
FOR THE UNION
FOR THE EMPLOYER
HEARING
DEADLINE FOR
WRITTEN
SUBMISSIONS
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Whyte)
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Barry Stephens
Scott Andrews
Grievance Officer
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Karen Martin
Staff Relations Officer
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
December 14, 2006.
January 17,2007.
Union
Employer
Vice-Chair
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-Arbitration" process, wherein each provides the vice-chair with
submissions, which include the facts and authorities each relies upon. The process adopted by
the parties provides for a canvassing of the facts during the mediation phase under the Protocol.
Arbitration decisions are issued 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.
Accordingly, the matter has been referred to me as a True
Mediation/Arbitration decision under the Protocol.
FACTS
The grievor is a motor vehicle operator and grieves that he was denied overtime opportunities on
September 13 and September 19, 2006. The employer states that the shifts in question were
filled by unclassified corrections officers as regular hours, and no overtime opportunity was
created or available to the grievor. The employer asserts that it assigns corrections officers on a
regular basis to perform driving work. The union asserts that the employer was not free to assign
the work in question to corrections officers, as driving is work that should be performed first by
the motor vehicle operators, and other employees should perform such work only when an
operator is not available.
3
DECISION
The grievances are denied.
Dated at Toronto, this 2nd day of February, 2007.