Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-3022.McIlwain et al.12-11-01 DecisionCrown Employees Grievance Settlement Board Suite 600 180 Dundas St. West Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Fax (416) 326-1396 Commission de règlement des griefs des employés de la Couronne Bureau 600 180, rue Dundas Ouest Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tél. : (416) 326-1388 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396 GSB#2011-3022 UNION#2011-0163-0035 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (McIlwain et. al) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Liquor Control Board of Ontario) Employer BEFORE Reva Devins Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION Val Patrick Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer FOR THE EMPLOYER Michael O’Reilly Liquor Control Board of Ontario Director, HR Services Western Region Lori Thorpe Liquor Control Board of Ontario HR Advisor, HR Services Western Region HEARING October 26, 2012. - 2 - Decision [1] The parties have agreed to an expedited mediation-arbitration process to effect the timely disposition of grievances. The parties specifically agreed that this matter was properly referred for expedited mediation-arbitration and, after a failed mediation effort, that the Vice Chair should issue a written decision that is without prejudice or precedent. [2] The Grievors are seeking recognition of their service as casual employees in the computation of entitlement to vacation credits under Article 8. The Employer calculates entitlement based on the date that an employee becomes a permanent employee, whereas the Grievors submit that ‘years of service’ includes the period as a casual employee. [3] Article 8.6 (a) provides that permanent full time employees will accumulate vacation credits pro rata for each month of service at the rate of one and one quarter days per month for up to and including 8 years of service, one and two thirds days per month after 8 years of service, two and one twelfth days per month after 16 years of service and two and a half days per month after 26 years of service. [4] The Grievors maintain that casual employees frequently work for the LCBO for many, many years before they are hired as permanent employees. In accordance with Article 31.3 of the Collective Agreement, casual employees are excluded from the application of Article 8, and receive monthly vacation pay calculated as a set percentage of their gross pay. Nonetheless, it was argued that the LCBO recognises the service of casuals in many other respects, for example sending them letters of appreciation for their years of service as casual employees. In these circumstances, it was argued that “service” in Article 8 should mean all years that an employee has worked for the LCBO. - 3 - [5] The Employer submitted that it has consistently calculated vacation credits by reference to service commencing with the date that an employee becomes a permanent full time employee. This is a province wide practice that has never been challenged and has been in operation for decades. [6] Having considered the submissions of the parties, I have determined that the Employer’s application of Article 8 is not in violation of the Collective Agreement. Years of service in the context of Article 8 is properly interpreted as commencing from the date that an employee is hired as a permanent employee. [7] I have considered the case submitted by the Grievors1, however, I am not persuaded that it is applicable. In that case, the Board of Arbitration contrasted the service of full time employees with that of part time employees. Both the full time and part time employees, however, were part of the permanent complement. That is not true for casual employees working for the LCBO. Casuals are treated very distinctly under the Collective Agreement from permanent staff. [8] I consider the fundamentally different status of permanent and casual staff to be critical to the proper interpretation of Article 8. Article 31.3 specifically excludes casuals from the application of Article 8. It would require much clearer language to treat the number of years that a casual employee worked before becoming a permanent employee as equivalent to those that are worked afterwards for the purposes of Article 8 and the calculation of vacation credits. 1 St. Joseph’s Health Services of Sarnia v. London and District Service Workers’ Union, Loc. 220, [1997] O.L.L.A. No. 156. - 4 - [9] The grievance is dismissed. Dated at Toronto this 1st day of November 2012. Reva Devins, Vice-Chair