HomeMy WebLinkAboutP-2010-1944.Achampong.12-06-28 DecisionPublic Service
Grievance Board
Suite 600
180 Dundas St. West
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396
Commission des
griefs de la fonction
publique
Bureau 600
180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tél. : (416) 326-1388
Téléc. : (416) 326-1396
P-2010-1944, P-2011-0436
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE PUBLIC SERVICE ACT
Before
THE PUBLIC SERVICE GRIEVANCE BOARD
BETWEEN
Achampong Complainant
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Government Services) Employer
BEFORE Deborah J.D. Leighton Vice-Chair
FOR THE COMPLAINANT
Ethel Achampong
FOR THE EMPLOYER Jennifer Richards
Ministry of Government Services
Labour Practice Group
Counsel
SUBMISSIONS June 20, 2012.
- 2 -
Decision
[1] On June 6, 2012 Ms. Achampong sought an order from the board for $1500 in damages
for the employer’s alleged failure to pay the funds owing to her under Minutes of Settlement,
executed May 15, 2012 within a reasonable time. The complainant sought an additional $1000
for each week until the funds owing under the settlement were paid in full. Ms. Achampong in a
subsequent email to the board, in support of her request argued that the delay of three weeks in
paying the initial funds to her suggests bad faith.
[2] The employer strenuously opposes the complainant’s plea for additional monies, noting
that there was no time limit to pay the funds included in the Minutes of Settlement. More
importantly, the employer argued that the funds were paid out and reimbursements made upon
the receipt of proof of the expense from the complainant in a timely manner. The last monies
owing under the Minutes of Settlement were couriered to the complainant and a designated third
party on June 19, 2012.
[3] Having carefully considered the complainant’s request and the employer’s response I find
that the request must be denied. There has been no breach of the Minutes of Settlement. There
was no time limit included in the settlement document. However, the employer satisfied its
obligations in a reasonable time. The emails between the parties indicate that the employer
worked diligently to satisfy its obligations under the settlement. There was certainly no evidence
of any bad faith.
Dated at Toronto this 28th day of June 2012.
Deborah J.D. Leighton, Vice-Chair