HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-2734.Metz et al.11-05-16 Decision
Commission de
YCrown Employees
Grievance
UqJOHPHQWGHVJULHIV
Settlement Board
GHVHPSOR\pVGHOD
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 7pO
Fax (416) 326-1396 7pOpF
GSB#2009-2734
UNION#2009-0375-0033
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Metz et al)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Liquor Control Board of Ontario)
Employer
BEFOREReva Devins Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNIONJean Chaykowsky
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYERRick Redwood,
Liquor Control Board of Ontario
District Manager
Camille Clements-Pitchkur
Liquor Control Board of Ontario
HR Manager
HEARING
May 12, 2011
- 2 -
Decision
[1]The parties have agreed to an expedited mediation-arbitration process to effect timely
disposition of grievances. The parties specifically agreed that this matter was properly
referred for expedited mediation-arbitration and that, after a failed mediation effort, the
Vice-Chair should issue a written decision that is without prejudice or precedent.
[2]The Grievors are casual employees. They grieve the increase in size of the full time
complement at their retail location, which has resulted in a reduction in hours assigned to
them. The Union does not dispute the right of management to determine complement,
KRZHYHUWKH*ULHYRUVEHOLHYHWKDWPDQDJHPHQW¶V decision is unfair and inconsistent with
staffing at other retail locations. They want management to review the full time
complement at their store and bring it in OLQHZLWKRWKHUµ$¶stores in the region.
Specifically, they seek the removal of one full time staff.
[3]The Employer submitted that it is entitled to determine complement and has done so in a
fair and consistent manner across the region. The assignment of full time staff is based on
the results of the PVR process and an analysis of the sales to staff ratio in individual stores.
Other factors are considered, which relate to store function and operational needs.
[4]Having considered the submissions of the parties, I have determined that there is no
evidence that the Employer acted in a manner that was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad
faith in determining the full time complementDWWKH*ULHYRUV¶VWRUH1RUKDYHWKH\
otherwise violated any provision of the Collective Agreement. Therefore, there is no basis
to interfere with their decision regarding the full time complement.
- 3 -
[5]The grievance is dismissed.
th
Dated at Toronto this 16 day of May 2011.
Reva Devins, Vice-Chair