Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-0289.Capstick.09-05-08 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#2008-0289, 2008-0290, 2008-0690, 2008-0691, 2008-0692, 2008-0693 UNION#2008-0108-0077, 2008-0108-0078, 2008-0108-0089, 2008-0108-0090, 2008-0108-0091, 2008-0108-0092 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Capstick) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer BEFOREBarry Stephens Vice-Chair FOR THE UNIONFrank Inglis Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer FOR THE EMPLOYERKaren Martin Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Staff Relations Officer HEARING November 27, 2008. SUBMISSIONS March 2, 2009. 2 Decision [1]The parties have agreed to an Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol. It is not necessary to reproduce the entire Protocol here. Suffice it to say that the parties have agreed to a ?True Mediation-Arbitration? process, wherein each provides the Vice-Chair with submissions, which include the facts and authorities each relies upon. This decision is issued in accordance with the Protocol and with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement, and is without prejudice or precedent. [2]The six grievances can be addressed together. They arose as part of a dispute between the grievor and a manager about the grievor?s attendance. The same issues were also addressed as part of a WDHP complaint. The outcome of the WDHP process can be summarized as follows: 1. The employer confirmed that at this time the grievor is not required to bring a medical certificate to support medical absences. 2. The employer confirmed that the grievor is not suspected of abusing sick leave. 3. The grievor is not required to deal directly with the Staff Services Manager directly with respect to attendance issue, and may do so through his union representative. [3]The grievor accepts the first two points but argued that point 3 should be amended to provide a different manager to whom he would report on attendance issues. 3 After considering the positions of the parties, it is my decision that the grievances should be resolved on the basis of the three points set out above. th Dated at Toronto this 8 day of May 2009. Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair