HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-0662.Manna et al.18-04-16 DecisionCrown Employees Grievance Settlement
Board
Suite 600
180 Dundas St. West
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396
Commission de
règlement des griefs
des employés de la
Couronne
Bureau 600
180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tél. : (416) 326-1388
Téléc. : (416) 326-1396
GSB#2017-0662
UNION# 2017-5112-0134
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Manna et al) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer
BEFORE
Diane Gee
Arbitrator
FOR THE UNION
Ed Holmes
Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP
Counsel
FOR THE EMPLOYER Jonathan Rabinovitch
Treasury Board Secretariat
Legal Services Branch
Counsel
HEARING December 18, 2017 (last submissions
received on March 30, 2018)
-2-
DECISION
[1] This matter is a grievance in which it is alleged that the Employer violated the
Collective Agreement and the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy
Act (“FIPPA”) as a result of having inadvertently posted personal information
pertaining to employees working out of the Toronto South Detention Centre
(TDSC) on the “P”(public) drive of the institution’s computer network. The Union
seeks monetary damages for each of the individuals in respect of whom
information was posted.
[2] At paragraph 15 of the Union’s Statement of Fact it is indicated that three
individuals were removed from the group grievance. At paragraph 10 of the
Employer’s Statement of Fact it is indicated that five individuals were removed
from the group grievance. I leave it to the parties to resolve this discrepancy.
[3] This matter is being dealt with pursuant to Article 22.16.2 of the Collective
Agreement and, pursuant to Article 22.16.7, this decision is without precedential
value. Further, it is impossible to describe the nature of the information posted
and the names of any of the grievors without risking further distribution of the
information in question. Accordingly, this decision is deliberately brief in nature.
[4] There is no dispute the information in question was inadvertently posted on the P
drive for a relatively short period of time. The facts of this matter are closest to
the facts in issue in Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Myciak et al) v. the
Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community and Safety and Correction
Services) GSB # 2010-2318, involving an inadvertent breach by the Employer
and scant evidence of harm. In Myciak, the Grievance Settlement Board ordered
the payment of $3000.00 to the Union for distribution to 53 grievors.
[5] In this case, there was some variation in the information posted as it relates to
the individual grievors. I do not fully accept the basis on which either party has
proposed the grievors be grouped for the purposes of damage allocation and
therefore direct that all grievors receive an equal amount of damages.
[6] The information in issue was posted for a shorter period of time and in respect of
a fewer number of grievors than was the case in Myciak. I order the Employer to
pay the sum of $2000.00 directly to the Union for distribution to the grievors who
form the group covered by this grievance.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 16th day of April, 2018.
“Diane Gee”
___________________
Diane Gee, Arbitrator