HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-3196.Perry.19-06-07 Decision
- 1 -
Crown 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# 2017-3196
UNION# 2017-0468-0016
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Perry) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care) Employer
BEFORE Ken Petryshen Arbitrator
FOR THE UNION John Brewin
Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP
Counsel
FOR THE EMPLOYER Stewart McMahon
Treasury Board Secretariat
Legal Services Branch
Senior Counsel
TELECONFERENCE June 7, 2019
- 2 -
Decision
[1] The grievance before me involves a claim by Ms. C. Perry that she was
improperly denied a direct assignment to a Business Analyst position at Kingston,
Ontario, after she had been laid off from her Analyst position with the Ministry. The
Ministry had determined that she was not entry level qualified for the Business Analyst
position. Ms. Perry is currently employed by Service Ontario. The hearing of her
grievance is scheduled to commence on June 11, 2019.
[2] The Union has requested that it be permitted in the circumstances to have one or
two of its witnesses testify by either videoconference or teleconference. The witnesses
reside at Kingston or in the Kingston area. The Ministry has opposed the Union’s
request. This matter was addressed by a conference call on Friday, June 7, 2019. I
advised counsel that I would attempt to provide the parties with a brief decision on June
7, 2019. I have considered the facts and the submissions of counsel. Having regard to
the usual factors that arbitrators consider when deciding this type of issue, I am satisfied
that the circumstances in this case are not sufficiently compelling or exceptional so as to
warrant the conclusion that it would be appropriate for the Union to have one or two of
its witnesses testify by video or teleconference. The Union’s request is therefore
denied.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 7th day of June, 2019.
“Ken Petryshen”
_____________________
Ken Petryshen, Arbitrator