Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-1251.Parcey.07-05-09 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# 2006-1251 UNION# 2006-0618-0015 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Parcey) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Children and Youth Services) Employer BEFOREVice-Chair Barry Stephens FOR THE UNION Stephen Giles and Gregg Gray Grievance Officers Ontario Public Service Employees Union FOR THE EMPLOYER Nicholas Sapp and Pauline Barr Employee Relations Advisors Ministry of Children and Youth Services HEARING May 4, 2007 DEADLINE FOR May 8, 2007. WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS 2 Decision INTRODUCTION The parties held a mediation/arbitration session from May 2 to 4, 2007. The process adopted by the parties provided for a canvassing of the facts during the mediation phase. In some cases, where a mediated settlement could not be reached, the parties mutually agreed that arbitration decisions would be issued in accordance with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement, without reasons, and without prejudice or precedent. The parties were unable to resolve this matter in mediation. Accordingly, the matter has been referred to me for a decision. FACTS Steven Parcey is an unclassified YSO. In July 2005 he received a transfer on compassionate grounds from Hamilton-Wentworth Detention Centre (HWDC) to Cecil Facer. In July 2006, the parties entered into a process to ?roll-over? unclassified employees to classified positions. The process was jointly administered at the MERC level, according to jointly agreed terms and conditions. One condition agreed to by the parties was that, in order to be eligible for ?roll- over?, an employee had to be working in the classification at the institution on April 11, 2004, and continuously to the date of the ?roll-over? determination. The grievor would have been eligible had he remained at HWDC. However, the compassionate transfer broke his eligibility, and he did not qualify at Cecil Facer. The grievor was offered a position at HWDC, but he declined the offer. The grievor now argues that, given the compassionate nature of his transfer, it would be improper to disqualify him from eligibility for a classified position. The employer responds that 3 both the Ministry and the union agreed at the MERC level on the rules with respect to the agreed eligibility date, and that the date has been jointly enforced. DECISION The grievance is dismissed. th Dated at Toronto, this 9 day of May, 2007. Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair