HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-0013.Dunn.81-02-18Between: Mr. W. R: Dunn
. . . .._ :.. :
Before: ~-
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under The
CROWN EMPLOYEES, COLLECTIVE BAYGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE >ETTLEMENT BOARD
: i;' -. ?:. ,:
.' -'And.'- ,~. .'
The Crown in Right of Ontario
Ministry of Health
..~ .~ ,.., ,. ,., .)~ : ..,j( : .*I: ,.,.
_ Mr; M. Teplitskj, Q.c;. ;L;;e;hairman' :. .'
Mrs.B. Lanigan
Mr. I. Levack Member
For the Grievor:
. . ~....Mr. G. Richards, Grievance Officer
Ontario Public.Service Emplbyees .Union .'.
For the Employer:
Mr. I. Freedman, Counsel
Mr. J. Callas; Perso‘nnel, Penetang -
-- Mr. R. Rey, Personnel., Head Office
January 22nd. 1981
Mr. Dunn commenced employment on July 21, 1969 and resigned
'~, on July‘4,.1980.- He had launc.hed four grievances 'in .19?8'andl979 :.
which were heard together with th~eeconsent of the parties.
I propose'
to consider -these grievances in;chronological order.
The first grievance is dated November 14, 1978 and alleges
d ..~ 'L j.:z..-=.- =.;'c- that-the griever should have been .awarded the position of Chief' _ ,. ".
Attendant. '. This position, it isconceded, is not within the bargain-
ing unit. Mr. Callas submitted that the grievance was not arbitrable
> _. .,.
.' .' ---and- referred'us~ to*anaward' of Mr. .Jolliffe, .dated October"l4~"198D "' -
:, :.-' .involving Mr. J. A. Cunningham as grievor.
For the reasons which Mr. Jolliffe gave in his award,
.neither Articl~e 4.3:of the collective agreement nor Section 17(2)(b)‘
of the Act can he invoked by the grievor as a foundation for his
grievance.,, No,~other basis wa,sUsuggested.,i.n support, of, the grievance. ", . . . . :. ~,'.,., ,.,_, I ), (' : .
Accordingly, this ~gri~evance must--be denied.
! -.
The next grievance is dated December 12,, 1978. It alleges
that the grievor was wrongfully denied promotion to Group IV Ward
Supervisor. The grievor requested us to dismiss this grievance.
With the concurrence of the Union, we order this grievance dismissed.
_Illii.ynj_ _( ., _. ._-/ jl. 1j11, .~.,*,,The next,..gr-ievance'.,i.s. dated December 13. 1.978: . It-alleges I.:lr
an agreement between management and the Union to destroy secret per-
sonnel ,files. A preliminary objection was raised that this matter
-
was note arbitrable:. We -reserved our decision with respect to arbi-
trability. As the hearing progressed it became clear that even if the
matter were arbitrable, no relief could be granted to this grievor,
particularly given his abandonment of the December 12, 1978 grievance.
.: I .:
-'Mr; Richards:~was~ unable'to suggest'any 'appropriate reii~f.'~~ThZ;I;g~ieirorl-': :
was also unable to suggest_any.
It is obvious that this grievance was related to the griev-
ances of November 14, 1978 and December 12, 1978. Once these griev-
:_ z. .ances-were,both.dismis~sed, -it-became--inevitable that the grievanceof-
December 13, 1978 must also be dismissed and we-so ordered.
-.
The final grievance is dated August 2nd, 1979. It is
essentially a generalized complaint against management with no refer-
ence to any specific matter within that complaint which may have ;
affectedl~the interest of the grievor directly. We are all satisfied
.~' '~ ,~that in such-circumstances...it would be of no-benefit to the grievor.:'.~:,.,
to have this Board hear those complaints and accoidingly this griev-
ance, is.-,also, dismissed.,, : ,.. ~: ,: ;..:_ ;.A~ .;i-;,~. ., F' ,.
Dated at Toronto this 18th day of February 1981.
"I concur"
B. Lanigan Member
"I concur"
I. Levack Member