HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-1091.Sullivan.08-11-13 Decision
Commission de
Crown Employees
Grievance Settlement
règlement des griefs
Board
des employés de la
Couronne
Suite 600 Bureau 600
180 Dundas St. West 180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tél. : (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396
GSB#2008-1091
UNION#2008-0368-0066
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Sullivan)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFOREVice-Chair
Felicity D. Briggs
FOR THE UNION
Stacey Zafiriadis
Grievance Officer
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Gary Wylie
Staff Relations Officer
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
HEARINGOctober 15, 2008.
2
Decision
[1]The Employer and the Union at the Central East Correctional Centre agreed to participate
in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the negotiated Protocol.
Many of the grievances were settled through that process. However, a few remained
unresolved and therefore require a decision from this Board. The Protocol provides that
decisions will be issued within a relatively short period of time after the actual mediation
sessions and will be without reasons. Further, in accordance with the Protocol, this
decision is to be without prejudice and precedent.
[2]Ms. Karen Sullivan, Correctional Officer, alleged that there had been a breach of a
Memorandum of Agreement that had earlier been signed by these parties. Within that
Memorandum were conditions intended to restrict interactions between Ms. Sullivan and a
particular manager for a set period of time. Ms. Sullivan now asserts that the Employer
has violated that agreement and by way of remedy requested losses resulting from her sick
leave (top-up costs) and damages.
[3]According to the facts provided, the grievor was notified by a co-worker that the manager
was seen in the grievor?s area of work during one of Ms. Sullivan?s regular days off. After
receiving that information she was then absent on sick leave for approximately eight
weeks. The Employer was not, during much of that interim period, told of any allegation
that the Memorandum of Agreement had been breached.
[4]After considering the facts and submissions of the parties I must deny the grievor?s
requests. I do not agree that the Memorandum of Agreement dated June 30, 2008 has been
violated.
th
Dated at Toronto on this 13 day of November, 2008.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice-Chair