Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-2114.Myke et al.23-12-04 Decision Crown Employees Grievance Settlement Board Suite 600 180 Dundas St. West Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Commission de règlement des griefs des employés de la Couronne Bureau 600 180, rue Dundas Ouest Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tél. : (416) 326-1388 GSB# 2021-2114 UNION# 2021-0165-0007 See Appendix A IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Myke et al) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Liquor Control Board of Ontario) Employer BEFORE Diane Gee Arbitrator FOR THE UNION Arielle Lewis Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer FOR THE EMPLOYER Mackenzie Anderson Liquor Control Board of Ontario Counsel HEARING June 21, 2023 -2 - Decision [1] Having heard the representations of the parties, and having accepted their request that this decision shall be without precedent and without prejudice to any future grievances arising under the Collective Agreement between the parties, I hereby determine this matter as follows. [2] This matter concerns four individual grievances arising out of a job posting for the position of Product Consultant posted in the summer of 2021 (“the 2021 Product Consultant Job Posting”). None of the grievors applied. [3] The job posting was for a single position. Two people, referred to herein as Jonathan and Michelle, were awarded the position. [4] The grievors challenge the job posting and awarding of the job to Michelle. The grievors alleged inter alia that Michelle should not have been screened in as she did not meet the minimum qualifications for the job having regard to her years of service and casual status. [5] The Employer does not contest the allegation that the process undertaken in connection with the posting and awarding of the Product Consultant position in 2021 was not in compliance with the terms of the collective agreement. The Employer further does not resist the imposition of the remedy that is usually awarded by the GSB when a determination is made that the process undertaken in connection with a job competition violated the terms of the collective agreement, namely the rerunning of the job competition. [6] Having regard to the foregoing, I hereby find and declare the way in which the Employer posted and filled the position of Product Consultant in 2021 to have violated Article 22.4 (a)(i) of the Collective Agreement. Having regard to the grievors’ stated desire that I not order the Employer to rerun the job competition, I do not make such an Order. [7] The Employer is hereby reminded of its responsibilities and obligations under the Collective Agreement with respect to the job competition process and the expectation that it will abide by same. Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 4th day of December, 2023. “Diane Gee” Diane Gee, Arbitrator -3 - Appendix A GSB File Number Grievor Union Grievance Number 2021-2114 Myke, Kelly 2021-0165-0007 2021-2115 Hutchison, Kathleen 2021-0165-0008 2021-2116 Edwards, Miranda 2021-0165-0010 2021-2307 Rodgers, Debbie 2021-0165-0009