HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-1572.Holita.19-06-21 Decision
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# 2016-1572; 2016-1573; 2018-1881; 2018-1882; 2018-1883; 2018-1884; 2018-2469; 2018-
2470; 2018-2471
UNION# 2016-0230-0017; 2016-0230-0018; 2018-0230-0003; 2018-0230-0004; 2018-0230-0005;
2018-0230-0006; 2018-0230-0008; 2018-0230-0009; 2018-0230-0010
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Holita) Union
- and –
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of the Attorney General) Employer
BEFORE Tatiana Wacyk Arbitrator
FOR THE UNION Jane Letton
Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP
Counsel
FOR THE EMPLOYER Peter Dailleboust
Treasury Board Secretariat
Legal Services Branch
Senior Counsel
HEARING June 7, 2019
- 2 -
Decision
[1] The Employer requests an order from the Board requiring the Union to set out
written particulars of the allegations being advanced by the Grievor concerning
discrimination, harassment and the failure to accommodate her disability.
Specifically, the Employer seeks the “Who, What, When and Where” of each
allegation being advanced.
[2] Further to the submissions of counsel, the Union is directed to set out written
particulars for each of the Grievor’s allegations, as follows:
- what is alleged to have been done or not done;
- when; where; by what means and by whom; and
- identifying by name any individual whose actions are being attributed to an
organization.
[3] For greater clarity, as stated by Vice-Chair Gray at paragraph 5 of his decision in
OPSEU (Morgan) and the Ministry of the Attorney General, (December 3, 2010):
[5] …. Conclusory statements based on unparticularized allegations of fact
are not sufficient and do not constitute particulars for purposes of this order.
For example, it is not sufficient or appropriate for particulars to allege that
“A harassed B” without also describing with particularity the acts or
omissions of “B” relied on and any circumstances or characteristics of “A”
that are pertinent to the allegation that those acts or omissions of “B” amount
to “harassment” of “A” in the circumstances.
[4] The Union is directed to provide the above particulars by no later than 30 days
prior to the next hearing date.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 21st day of June, 2019.
“Tatiana Wacyk”
Tatiana Wacyk, Arbitrator