HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-1517.Gregorchuk.09-06-16 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#2008-1517, 2008-1518
UNION#2008-0617-0029, 2008-0617-0030
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Gregorchuk)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFOREBarry Stephens Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNIONAnastasios Zafiriadis, Frank Inglis &
Greg McVeigh
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officers
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Karen Martin & Brian Scott
Staff Relations Officers
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
HEARINGJune 12, 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 grievances in this case relates to the grievor?s claims for overtime shifts in June
2008. The circumstances of both grievances were similar. The grievor was on vacation.
The employer was attempting to fill vacant shifts with staff on overtime. The HPRO
system was exhausted. No one could be found to fill the shifts and the employer used
management staff to cover the work in question. The employer states, once HPRO has
been exhausted, the filling of shifts is a matter of management discretion. Moreover, the
grievor was on vacation, and the employer does not have a practice of calling employees
for overtime work on a vacation day. The grievor responds that his vacation only covers
a regularly scheduled shift and that he should have been called for shifts outside of the
hours of his normal rotation.
[3]After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, it is my
conclusion that the grievance should be dismissed.
th
Dated at Toronto this 16 day of June 2009.
Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair