Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-2277.Prisor et al.21-01-01 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# 2017-2277; 2019-1568; 2019-1569; 2019-1570; 2019-1571; 2019-2068; 2019-2069; 2019-2070; 2019-2445 UNION# 2017-0546-0025; 2019-0546-0009; 2019-0546-0010; 2019-0546-0011; 2019-0546-0012; 2019-0546-0018; 2019-0546-0019; 2019-0546-0020; 2019-0546-0022 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Prisor et al) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of the Attorney General) Employer BEFORE Nimal Dissanayake Arbitrator FOR THE UNION Christopher Bryden Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP Counsel FOR THE EMPLOYER Regina Wong Treasury Board Secretariat Legal Services Branch Counsel HEARING January 22, 2021 - 2 - Decision [1] The instant group grievances came before me for mediation-arbitration under article 22.16 of the collective agreement. The parties advised the Board that the issue raised in the grievance is a recurring one, which is likely to arise on an on-going basis in the future. Neither party was interested in settling the grievance through compromise. Instead, they jointly requested that the Board hear evidence and submissions, and issue a decision that would provide guidance to the parties. I agreed. To facilitate that I provide the following order on the process to be followed by the parties. [2] I grievances before me out of the Special Investigations Unit (“SIU”) in the Ministry of Attorney General are as follows: • A Group Grievance dated October 12, 2017 (GSB #2017-2277; OPSEU #2017-0546-0025); • A Group Grievance dated May 27, 2019 (GSB #2019-1568; OPSEU #2019-0546-0009); • A Group Grievance dated June 27, 2019 (GSB #2019-1569; OPSEU # 2019-0546-0010); • A Group Grievance dated July 27, 2019 (GSB # 2019-1570; OPSEU # 2019-0546-0011); • A Group Grievance dated August 27, 2019 (GSB #2019-1571; OPSEU # 2019-0546-0012); • A Group Grievance dated September 30, 2019 (GSB # 2019-2068; OPSEU # 2019-0546-0018); • A Group Grievance dated October 31, 2019 (GSB # 2019-2069; OPSEU # 2019-0546-0019); • A Group Grievance dated November 25, 2019 (GSB # 2019-2070; OPSEU # 2019-0546-0020) and; - 3 - • A Group Grievance dated December 16, 2019 (GSB #2019-2445; OPSEU #2019-0546-0022). [3] Most of the grievors are fixed-term or full-time investigators at the SIU. The Grievances are for the most part identical, and assert that the employer’s treatment of work time spent travelling to and from assigned Headquarters to employer workplaces for the purpose of approved administrative work, mandatory meetings and training for SIU investigators violates the Collective Agreement. The grievances have been signed by more than thirty (30) Grievors. [4] The Union has provided particulars to the Employer. The Employer has raised objections on the basis of estoppel, timeliness and the sufficiency of particulars. The employer has provided the Union with particulars with respect to its estoppel argument. [5] In order to be able to provide meaningful guidance to the parties, I make the following order: 1. The Union will provide willsays for up to three representative grievors by June 30, 2021. The Union may provide willsays for additional witnesses if agreed to by the Employer or by an order of the Board, subject to the usual rules of procedural fairness. The willsays will include specifics including the who, what, when, where that the representative grievors claim the employer breached the collective agreement. The employer will have a right of cross- examination and the union will have a right of re-direct. 2. The Employer will provide willsays including the who, what, when, where in support of its arguments of its intended witnesses by January 14, 2022; the union will have a right of cross-examination and the employer will have a right of re-direct. 3. Following arguments, I will issue a decision on the merits, estoppel, and timeliness objections. 4. The parties are directed to review my final decision once issued, and determine what issues can be resolved without litigation. If there are outstanding issues that cannot be resolved, I remain seized. [6] The parties may revise any of the above timelines by mutual agreement or order of the Board. Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 1st day of February, 2021. “Nimal Dissanayake” ________________________ Nimal Dissanayake, Arbitrator