HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-0007.Amurao.12-04-16 Decision
Crown Employees
rieva
nce Settlement
oard
1Z8
l. (416) 326-1388
x (416) 326-1396
t des griefs
es employés de la
t
Z8
l. : (416) 326-1388
léc. : (416) 326-1396
UNION#2010-0542-0010, 2010-0542-0009
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
ETWEEN
G
B
Suite 600
180 Dundas St. West
Toronto, Ontario M5G
Te
Commission de
règlemen
d
Couronne
Bureau 600
180, rue Dundas Oues
Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1
Té
Té
Fa
GSB#2010-0007, 2010-0029
B
Ontario Public ployees Union
( Union
(Ministry of Community and Social Services) Employer
Service Em
Amurao)
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
BEFORE Joseph D. Carrier Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION
lmes LLP
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Sheila Riddell
Ryder Wright Blair & Ho
Barristers and Solicitors
Services
ractice Group
NCE CALL
Jennifer Richards
Ministry of Government
Labour P
Counsel
CONFERE April 5, 2012.
- 2 -
Decision
[1] The substantive issue in the matter before me is the grievance of Ms. Fidela Amurao
alleging that she was unjustly terminated.
[2] There have been significant delays in processing the termination grievance of Ms. Fidela
Amurao to hearing. The termination was confirmed on February 22, 2012. The matter was first
set down for hearing on February of 2011. For various reasons thereafter, including those
outlined in decisions of the Board on August 11, 2011 and March 9, 2012 it has yet to proceed
on the merits. There are currently scheduled several hearing days, when it was hoped that
evidence on substantive issues might commence, the first of those being April 23, 2012.
However, a further element has now been introduced which might lead to even further delay.
That issue was dealt with by teleconference as follow:
[3] This is to confirm the teleconference discussion I had with counsel, Ms. Riddell and Ms.
Richards on April 5, 2012.
[4] The Union, by Ms. Riddell, moved to adjourn the April and May hearing dates on the
basis that:
1. The Grievor would be unable to attend due to medical reasons
2. and due to the loss of a significant family member in February
[5] The employer opposed the adjournment for the time being pending production of the
existing medical note and, more importantly, a more comprehensive medical explanation of the
Grievor’s inability to attend.
[6] Although sympathetic to both issues, a more substantive medical would be required for
the employer’s consent.
- 3 -
[7] I ruled orally that there was as yet insufficient information available upon which to grant
the adjournment. The motion was declined on the understanding that the Union would produce
further medical information on or before Friday, April 13.
[8] In the event the information is not produced by then and/or is insufficient to elicit the
employer’s consent, the request to adjourn could be addressed at the next scheduled hearing day
in April (April 23).
Dated at Toronto this 16th day of April 2012.
Joseph D. Carrier, Vice-Chair