HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-1514.Nunes.10-09-23 Decision
Commission de
Crown Employees
Grievance
règlement des griefs
Settlement 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#2009-1514
UNION#2009-0378-0022
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Nunes)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Liquor Control Board of Ontario)
Employer
BEFOREVice-Chair
Gerry Lee
FOR THE UNION
Jean Chaykowsky
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Neil Lenihan
Liquor Control Board of Ontario
Human Resources Services Manager
HEARING
September 2, 2010.
- 2 -
Decision
[1]The parties referred the above captioned grievance to mediation/arbitration in accordance
with Article 22.11 and Appendix 2 of the Collective Agreement. This decision is with
respect to the grievance of Mr. Luis Nunes who is employed as an Operator in the
Control Room at the LCBO?s Whitby warehouse location. The Grievor claims that he
should have been asked in to perform overtime on the dayshift on February 25, 2010.
[2] The Employer?s position in this matter is that the Grievor was scheduled to work the 3:30
to 11:30pm afternoon shift on February 25, 2010. The Employer stated that two dayshift
operators had been scheduled to attend a Safety Training course on that day. The
Employer stated that they used a Warehouse Worker 4 who had worked as an Operator
on a temporary basis before to perform the work and paid him the Operator?s rate of pay
for the day. The Employer stated by scheduling this way, they avoided the need for the
Grievor to work a double shift and pay overtime to the Grievor.
[3] At the outset of the hearing, the parties agreed that I had jurisdiction to deal with this
matter. Following extensive and well presented details of the facts and circumstances
surrounding this dispute by both parties? representatives, I am of the view that it is not
necessary to set out their positions in any further detail. Accordingly, I will render a
succinct ?bottom line decision? disposing of this matter.
[4] Having carefully considered the submissions made by the parties during the course of our
mediation-arbitration session and after a review of all of the documentary evidence
presented, the grievance is hereby dismissed.
rd
Dated at Toronto this 23 day of September 2010.
Gerry Lee, Vice-Chair