Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Levesque 11-01-05
INTHEMATTEROFANARBITRATION BETWEEN: SaultCollegeofAppliedArtsandTechnology, Employer, -and OntarioPublicServiceEmployeesUnion, Union BEFORE: MichaelBendel,Chair BobHurly,Employernominee PierreMartin,Unionnominee APPEARANCES:FortheUnion: EricdelJunco,Counsel LorriFoley,ChiefSteward SusanLevesque,grievor FortheEmployer: J.LynnThomson,Counsel JaniceBeatty,VicePresident,HumanResourcesandStudentServices RickWebb,Director,HumanResources LindaRyan,Director,EmploymentSolutions JanineTimmermans,Manager,EastAlgomaJobConnect HeardinSaultSte.Marie,Ontario,onDecember6,2010. 2 ARBITRALAWARD Inhergrievance,Ms.SusanLevesque,aCEPClerk,allegesthattheemployerviolatedthe collectiveagreementbydenyinghertherightofelectionunderArticle15.4.4.2ofthecollectiveagreement followingherreceiptofanoticeoflay-off. Thecollectiveagreementprovides,inArticle15.4.3,thatanemployeeidentifiedforapos siblelay-off,isentitledtobumpinaccordancewithadetailedprocedure.Itthenprovides,inArticle15.4.4.2, that,wherethepositionidentifiedastheoneintowhichtheemployeemaybumpismorethan40kms.away fromtheemployee'snormalplaceofwork,theemployeehasa"furtherrightofelection",wherebyheorshe maybumpintoapositionwithin40kms.fromthenormalplaceofwork.Article15.4.4.2readsasfollows: Wherethepositionidentifiedinaccordancewiththeabovesequenceisinexcessofforty(40)kilo metresfromthelocationatwhichtheemployeeisnormallyassigned,theemployeeshallhavea furtherrightofelection.TheCollege,byagainfollowingthesequenceinArticle15.4.3,shallidentify thefirstposition,ifany,withinforty(40)kilometresofthelocationatwhichtheemployeeisnormally assignedandthenoticeprovidedinaccordancewith15.4.4.1shallidentifybothpositionsifa secondpositionisidentified.TheemployeeshallelectinaccordancewithArticle15.4.4.1totake eitherthejobidentifiedwhichisinexcessofforty(40)kilometresortotakethejobidentifiedwhich iswithinforty(40)kilometresortobelaidoff. Thereisnodisputeaboutthefacts,whichcanbesummarizedasfollows: •Thegrievor,whosesenioritydateisOctober13,1987,workedattheElliotLakeofficeoftheJob Connect-EastAIgomaprogram; 9 seniorityshouldbeconstruedsothatdoubtfullanguage enhancesthoserights. isinterpretedinawaythatpreservesand Intheabsenceofanylanguageintheagreementitselfthatwouldenabreustochoose betweenthetwocompetinginterpretationsofAdicle15.4.4.2,wehaveconcludedthatthisgrievanceshould beresolvedinaccordancewiththeopinionofarbitratorPicherinReNorthernTelecom,namelythatthe interpretationthatenhancesindividualrightsbasedonseniorityshouldprevail.Sincetheunion'sinterpreta tionwouldallowsenioremployeesinthegrievor'ssituationtoexercisetheirfurtherrightofelection,an importantrightbasedonseniority,whereastheemployer'swoulddenythemthatright,weprefertheunion's interpretation. Thegrievanceisthereforeallowed.Weherebydeclarethattheemployerviolatedthe collectiveagreement;weorderittoofferthegrievorthepositioninBlindRiver;weorderittocompensate thegrievorforanylossresultingfromtheviolation;andweremainseizedintheeventofanydisagreement relatingtotheimplementationofthisaward. DATEDatThornhill,Ontario,this5tdayofJanuary2011. !ihl, Chair loesuF/Idissent (Dissentattached)BobHurly, EmployerNominee Iconcur/lissent PierreMartin, UnionNominee DissentofBobHurly,EmployerNominee Withallduerespect,IfindImustdisagreewiththefindingofthearbitrator. WhileIrecognizetheimportanceofthematterandprincipleofsenioritytothebargainingunit,inthis instance,itismyviewthatwheresimilarlanguageorphraseshavebeeninterpretedtothebenefitor 'greatergood'ofallbargainingunitmembersinfourdifferentarticlesofthecurrentsupportstaff collectiveagreement,Icannotagreethatafiftharticle,withthesameorsimilarlanguageshouldhavea 'standalone'interpretationwithoutdistinctivelanguagetojustifythatinterpretation. Ithereforewouldprefertheemployer'sinterpretationof"practicaldistance-thedistancethatone wouldreasonablyexpecttotravelingoingfromonepointtoanother"tocarrytheday,andassuch, wouldfindthatnoviolationofthecollectiveagreement.