HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-1910.Stennett.19-08-01 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# 2018-1910
UNION# 2018-5112-0129
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Stennett) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of the Solicitor General) Employer
BEFORE
Gail Misra
Arbitrator
FOR THE UNION
Dan Sidsworth
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER Al J. Quinn
Ministry of the Solicitor General
Senior Employee Transition Advisor
HEARING April 18 and July 19, 2019
-2-
DECISION
[1] Since the spring of 2000 the parties have been meeting regularly to address matters
of mutual interest which have arisen as the result of the Ministry of Community
Safety and Correctional Services as well as the Ministry of Children and Youth
Services restructuring initiatives around the Province. Through the MERC (Ministry
Employment Relations Committee) a subcommittee was established to deal with
issues arising from the transition process. The parties have negotiated a series of
MERC agreements setting out the process for how organizational changes will
unfold for Correctional and Youth Services staff and for non-Correctional and non-
Youth Services staff.
[2] The parties agreed that this Board would remain seized of all issues that arise
through this process and it is this agreement that provides me the jurisdiction to
resolve the outstanding matters.
[3] Over the years as some institutions and/or youth centres decommissioned or
reduced in size others were built or expanded. The parties have made efforts to
identify vacancies and positions and the procedures for the filling of those positions
as they become available.
[4] The parties have also negotiated a number of agreements that provide for the “roll-
over” of fixed term staff to regular (classified) employee status.
[5] Hundreds of grievances have been filed as the result of the many changes that have
taken place at provincial institutions. The transition subcommittee has, with the
assistance of this Board, mediated numerous disputes. Others have come before
this Board for disposition.
[6] It was determined by this Board at the outset that the process for these disputes
would be somewhat more expedient. To that end, grievances are presented by way
of statements of fact and succinct submissions. On occasion, clarification has been
sought from grievors and institutional managers at the request of the Board. This
process has served the parties well. The decisions are without prejudice but attempt
to provide guidance for future disputes.
[7] Abeko Stennett is a Correctional Officer at the Toronto South Detention Centre. He
filed a grievance dated August 7, 2018 claiming that the Employer has breached
various provisions of the collective agreement and that his Continuous Service Date
(“CSD”) in HPRO is incorrect and needs to be adjusted to the correct date.
[8] The grievor was hired as a fixed term Correctional Officer on December 15, 2014.
On March 27, 2017 he was rolled over into permanent status, and his CSD was set
at January 19, 2015. Following a request by the grievor for review of his CSD, by a
letter dated October 24, 2018, the Employer advised Mr. Stennett that his CSD was
January 19, 2015.
-3-
[9] In the course of this hearing, a review of the grievor’s records indicates that while he
was a fixed term employee, Mr. Stennett had worked 5 weeks in which he did not
meet the 40 hours per week requirement in order for those weeks to count towards
his CSD. As such, Mr. Stennett’s CSD has been accurately calculated as January
19, 2015 rather than December 15, 2014 (which would have been five weeks
earlier).
[10] Article 18.1.1 of the collective agreement addresses “Seniority (Length of
Continuous Service). It defines how an employee’s length of continuous service
accumulates. Article 18.1.1 (b) indicates that the accumulation is “from the date
established by adding the actual number of full-time weeks worked by a full-time
fixed-term employee during his or her full-time employment back to the first break in
employment which is greater than thirteen (13) weeks”.
[11] Since the grievor had five weeks during which he worked less than full time hours,
that is, less than 40 hours per week, such weeks cannot count towards the
calculation of his CSD.
[12] Having considered the facts and the submissions of the parties, and for the reason
outlined above, this grievance is denied.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 1st day of August, 2019.
“Gail Misra”
______________________
Gail Misra, Arbitrator