HomeMy WebLinkAboutP-2017-0813.Morris.18-05-03 Decision
Public Service
Grievance Board
Suite 600
180 Dundas St. West
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396
Commission des
griefs de la fonction
publique
Bureau 600
180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tél. : (416) 326-1388
Téléc. : (416) 326-1396
PSGB# P-2017-0813
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE PUBLIC SERVICE OF ONTARIO ACT
Before
THE PUBLIC SERVICE GRIEVANCE BOARD
BETWEEN
Morris Complainant
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer
BEFORE Marilyn Nairn Vice-Chair
FOR THE
COMPLAINANT
John Hasted
FOR THE EMPLOYER Daria Vodova
Treasury Board Secretariat
Legal Services Branch
Counsel
- 2 -
D E C I S I O N
[1] This complaint asserts that the complainant, a Sergeant at Elgin-Middlesex
Detention Centre, was subject to excessive and unwarranted discipline imposed by the
Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (“CSCS” or the “Employer”).
The Employer’s Form 2 response to the complaint includes a preliminary objection to
the Board’s jurisdiction to hear the complaint on the basis that the filing of the complaint
was untimely under the terms of Regulation 378/07 of the Public Service Act of Ontario,
2006, S.O. 2006, c. 35, Sched. A.
[2] In its Form 2 response, the Employer asked that the Board make a determination
with respect to the timeliness issue prior to the conduct of the mediation scheduled for
May 14, 2018. It included the facts and documentary material on which it seeks to rely
in that regard.
[3] On April 18, 2018 the Board directed the complainant’s representative to advise
the Board in writing by no later than April 27, 2018 as to the complainant’s position in
response to the Employer’s submission that the complaint be dismissed prior to
mediation for non-compliance with the timelines.
[4] No response was received to that direction. However, it appears that on May 2,
2018 the complainant emailed Employer counsel asking that the “meeting” scheduled
for May 14, 2018 be rescheduled as his representative was “out of the workplace, due
to medical reasons”. The Employer objects to this request to reschedule in light of the
complainant’s failure to comply with the Board’s direction. The Employer asks that the
complaint be dismissed on the basis of its submissions. In the alternative, the Employer
asks the Board to order the complainant to respond in writing as to the reasons why a
response has not been provided and why the Board’s deadline of April 27, 2018 was not
met.
[5] In reviewing the materials, I note that the Board’s email of April 18, 2018 was
sent to the complainant’s representative but was not copied to the complainant as was
requested by this Vice-Chair. This was an oversight on the Board’s part. At the same
time, the complainant has indicated that his representative is unavailable for medical
reasons. The Board is aware that the representative is a Sergeant who has previously
assisted colleagues in matters before the Board.
[6] In the circumstances, it is not apparent to the Board that the complainant was
aware of the Board’s direction of April 18, 2018. However, it is also the case that the
Board’s proceedings ought not to be unduly delayed by the inability of a representative
to respond on a complainant's behalf. It may be that the complainant will find it
necessary to seek other representation if his current representative is unavailable.
- 3 -
[7] In the circumstances, the Board hereby directs as follows:
1. The mediation scheduled for May 14, 2018 is hereby adjourned.
2. The complainant is hereby directed to respond in full and in writing to the
Employer’s position, set out in its Form 2 response, that the Board has no
jurisdiction to entertain this complaint and that this complaint ought therefore to
be dismissed on the basis that the complainant failed to meet the timelines for
filing the complaint.
3. The complainant’s written response is to be filed with the Board with a copy to
the Employer by no later than Friday, June 22, 2018. That allows ample
opportunity for the complainant to consider and respond to the position taken by
the Employer, including obtaining other representation if necessary.
4. This matter will not be re-scheduled pending receipt of the complainant’s written
response to the Employer’s timeliness objection. Should the complainant fail to
respond by June 22, 2018, the Board will make a determination with respect to
the Employer’s timeliness objection based on the material then before the Board.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 3rd day of May, 2018.
“Marilyn Nairn”
_______________________
Marilyn Nairn, Vice-Chair