HomeMy WebLinkAboutUnion et al 18-09-04IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION brought pursuant to the Ontario Labour Relations Act,
1995, as amended,
Re Grievances #2014-0475-0013 (Union); #2017-0475-0024 (Bechaalani); #2017-0475-0025
(Melesky); #2017-0475-0031(Coenraad); and #2018-0475-0030 (Belanger)
BETWEEN:
EASTERN ONTARIO REGIONAL LABORATORY ASSOCIATION
(the "Employer")
- and -
ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES' UNION, on behalf of its Local 475
(the "Union")
AWARD
Sole Arbitrator: Marilyn A. Nairn
Hearing: June 21, 2018
Written representations received July 30, 2018
APPEARANCES
For the Union: Lori Davis
For the Employer: Vicky Satta
1. The parties convened an expedited process whereby they agreed that I would attempt to
mediate outstanding grievances. In the absence of a resolution of those grievances, the parties
further agreed that I had the jurisdiction to hear and determine the grievances, based on the
material provided and submissions received. The parties also agreed that, while any decision may
subsequently be relied upon, it need only provide brief reasons.
2. The first issue raised by the grievances is the appropriate call back payment when a part-
time employee is called back to work on a holiday. It is the Union's position that the minimum
four-hour call back should be paid at double time. The second issue involves the appropriate
payment when a full-time employee is called back to work on a holiday. It is the Union's position
that, in addition to call back pay and the day's pay for the holiday, the full-time employee is
entitled to a paid lieu day off. It is the position of the Employer that in both cases the employees
were paid appropriately and that further compensation of any kind would constitute prohibited
pyramiding. The following circumstances provide the relevant factual context.
3. In the first scenario, a part-time employee was on stand-by for a shift that started the
evening before the holiday and ended on the holiday. During that stand-by shift, the part-time
employee was called back and worked 30 minutes on the holiday (12:15-12:45am). She received
4 hours pay at 1.5 times the regular rate of pay. The part-time employee also then worked a 7.5
hour evening shift on the holiday. She was paid 1.5 times the regular rate. No lieu day was given
as the parties agree that it is captured by the percentage in lieu payment for part-time employees
(pursuant to Article 19.02(b) of the collective agreement). Work on that evening shift was
extended by 30 minutes. The part-time employee received double time for 30 minutes of
overtime on the holiday pursuant to Article 19.03 of the collective agreement. She also received
the applicable shift premiums for that shift and the extension.
4. In the second scenario, full time lab employees were assigned to be on standby for the
holiday. The lab is closed on holidays but employees may be required to perform work in certain
circumstances. Full time lab employees were called back and worked 1.5 hours on the holiday.
They were paid 4 hours at 1.5 times the regular rate of pay for that call-back. They also received
7.5 hours of straight time pay for the holiday. In total they received 13.5 hours pay.
5. The relevant provision of the collective agreement provides:
18.08 No Pvramidina
Premium payment (including both overtime and holiday premium payment) shall be
calculated and paid under one provision of this Agreement only, even though hours
worked may be premium payment hours under more than one provision. In such
circumstances the highest premium will be applied. The provision of this clause will not
negate any entitlement to shift premium, call-back, stand-by, or weekend premium.
6. The following authorities were reviewed: Brown & Beatty, Canadian Labour Arbitration,
Chapters 8:2140 (pyramiding) and 8:3130 (Performing work on a holiday); United Steel, Local
2
2020 v Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Institute, 2017 CanLll 15841 (ON LA) (Nyman); Re Humber
Memorial Hospital Association and COPE, Local 1080, (1982] O.L.A.A. No. 61 (Kennedy); South
Bruce Grey Health Centre and ONA, 2008 CarswellOnt 10656 (Barton); Hotel Dieu Hospital and
OPSEU, Local 474, 1994 CarswellOnt 6451 (Brault); Calgary Regional Health Authority v. United
Nurses of Alberta, (2001) 100 L.A.C. (411) 1(Sims); and Quinte Healthcare Corp. and OPSEU, Local
480, 2004 CarswellOnt 10417 (Davie).
7. Article 18 of the collective agreement identifies certain premiums available under the
collective agreement, including call back. Article 18.08 prohibits the pyramiding of premiums and
expressly includes overtime and holiday pay premiums in that prohibition. While the language is
arguably ambiguous, I am satisfied that, fundamentally, Article 18.08 directs that the highest
premium is to be paid.
8. Applying that direction to the circumstances at hand, the part-time employee is not
entitled to double time for the four hours of call back. The employee was called in and worked
30 minutes on a holiday. She was entitled to holiday pay at 1.5 times her regular rate for 30
minutes (.75 hours pay) (plus a night shift premium of $1.10 for 30 minutes), or, the minimum
call back premium of four hours at 1.5 times her regular rate (6 hours pay). As among the
premiums applicable to the time worked, the highest premium was applied. Also, in accordance
with the last sentence of Article 18.08, her entitlement to call back was not negated. It prevailed.
However, applying both the holiday pay premium and the call back premium would constitute
prohibited pyramiding. There is therefore no entitlement for call back to be paid at double time
in the circumstances.
9. The full-time employees worked 1.5 hours on the holiday. Under Article 19.02(a) of the
collective agreement, they would be entitled to holiday pay for 1.5 hours at 1.5 times their
regular rate (2.25 hours pay) plus a paid 7.5 hour lieu day for a total of 9.75 hours pay. They
would not be entitled to 7.5 hours pay for the holiday, as they would receive the paid lieu day
instead, in addition to receiving premium rates for hours worked on the holiday. These
employees received holiday pay at their straight time rate (7.5 hours) and the minimum call back
pay of four hours at 1.5 times their regular rate (6 hours pay) for the 1.5 hours they were required
to work, for a total of 13.5 hours pay. They were paid the higher entitlement. The Union's position
would require payment of an additional 7.5 hours, effectively paying the holiday pay twice. There
is no such entitlement in the collective agreement. There is therefore no entitlement to a paid
lieu day in the circumstances.
10. Having regard to the above, these grievances are hereby dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 4th day of September, 2018.
/I" a-A'C' a
Marilyn A. wn, Arbitrator.