Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-2208.Porter.11-10-25 DecisionCommission de Crown 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#2010-2208 UNION#2010-0502-0051 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Porter) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care) Employer BEFORELoretta Mikus Vice-Chair FOR THE UNIONLesley Gilchrist Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer FOR THE EMPLOYERKylie Humphries Ministry of Government Services Centre for Employee Relations Employee Relations Officer HEARING June 1, 2011. - 2 - Decision [1]The grievor, Anita Porter, has been employed in the Correspondence Services Unit of the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, as a Correspondence Clerk since 1987. She grieves that the Employer has violated Articles 2, 3 and 9 of the collective agreement by imposing unreasonable working arrangements on her that has caused her undue stress. She also alleged that the Employer has discriminated against her for union activity. She asks that her previous hours of work be reinstated. [2]The parties referred this grievance to mediation/arbitration in accordance with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement. The parties have also agreed that I have the jurisdiction to decide this matter and asked for a decision without prejudice and precedent and without reasons. [3]7KHJULHYDQFHDULVHVIURPWKH(PSOR\HU¶VGHcision in July of 2008 to set the hours of work for all employees in the Unit from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30. The grievor had worked from 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. for 23 years and had adjusted her life to those hours. She is a diabetic and, she stated, must prepare particular meals at particular times and avoid stress. These new hours interfere with her orderly life plan. She had been able to avoid the stresses and delays of commuting to work by joining a car pool but has been unable to make alternative arrangements. She attends doctor appointments twice a month and is about to participate in a program with weekly meetings. These new hours do not allow for those appointments or to make up the time to attend. [4]She provided me with a medical note from her attending physician in which she stated that it was imperative that the grievor be accommodated in her work by scheduling her from 7:a.m. to 3 p.m. She stated that thHKRXUVVHWE\WKH(PSOR\HU³DUHSRVLQJDVHULRXV ongoing health problem for her and impacting on her ability to work efficiently in her job DQGMREUHODWHGDFWLYLWLHV´$GGLWLRQDOO\VKe stated that the new hours do not allow her enough time to prepare meals and eat early enough in the evening to exercise and get enough sleep. [5]The Employer takes the position that the change in the hours of work was prompted by valid business concerns. It receives numerous calls after 3 p.m. and requires all clerks to be available to handle these calls. In the hour that the grievor works before 8:30 a.m. there are no incoming calls and after 3:30 p.m. other clerks have to handle work that should have been done by her. [6]Additionally, the Employer submitted it had given the grievor 3 months to make alternative arrangements and adjust her new schedule. It has also allowed the grievor to make up her hours of work between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. and has tried to accommodate WKHJULHYRU¶VFRQFHUQV [7]Having considered the submissions of the parties I have decided to dismiss this grievance. There is insufficient rationale in the medical note to explain the strict requirement to continue her previous schedule. It is without question that numerous diabetics work full time hours without such rigid conditions. I cannot accept the - 3 - SK\VLFLDQ¶VRSLQLRQZLWKRXWPRUH explicit details regarding the relationship between the JULHYRU¶VPedical condition and her hours of work. [8]The grievance is dismissed. th Dated at Toronto this 25 day of October 2011. Loretta Mikus, Vice-Chair