Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-2416.LeBlanc.88-07-05ONTAR, EMP‘OVES OS ‘4 COURONNE CROWNEMP‘OVEES OEL’ON%wO GRIEVANCE CQMMISSION .DE SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT 3ARD DES GRIEFS 2416/66 I# THE MATTER 08 AH ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOTEBS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD Between: OPSEU (LeBlanc) - and - The ? Crown in Right of Ontario (Min ,istry of Skills Development) Before: J. Forbes-Roberts J. Solberg I. Cowan For the Grievor: For the Emlover: Hearinss : Grievor Employer Vice-Chairman Member M. Cherney Counsel Gowling and Henderson Barristers and Solicitors A.R. Rae Senlor Staff Relations Officer Staff Relating Section Management Board of Cabinet January 6; 190% DECISION The grievor is an Enforcement Officer with Appren- ticeship Branch of the Ministry of Skills Develoment ("the Employer"). His place of employment is North Day. liis regular hours of work are *even and one-quarter hours (7 1,'4) per day, Monday through Friday. on Monday, November 24., 1986, he was reo-aired to attend a work related meeting in Toronto. The meeting commenced at 3:OO a.m.. It was acknowledged that this occurred 3 to 4 times Der year, and that these meetinqs constituted a "regular" portion of the grievor's duties. He rented a car, the cost of which was absorbed by the Employer, and drove to Toronto on Sunday, November 23, ISSE. The trip took approximately four and one-half (4 l/2) hours. The grievor was granted Thursday, November 21. l98G off as an unrelated "lieu day." :t was agreed that the grievor performed no insp the course of his travels on Sunday. The Employer viewed the fear and one-half (4 ii2 . . ctions in ~oiirs as travel time, and pursuant to Article 23 of the collective agreement, paid the grievor at straight time. The relevant portions of Article 23 state: ARTICX 23 - TiME CR~~ITS W~~it~ Travelling 23.: 2mployees shall be credited w:tti al; time spent in travelling outside of working hours when aiitkLorlzed bp the Mlillstry. 23.6 All trave:l:ng time shall be paid at tke employee's basic hourly rate or, where mutually agreed, by compensating leave. (emphasis added) The grievor viewed the four and one-half (4 1,':) hours as overtime and Jursuant to ArtlcLe 13 of the agreement requests payment a; the rate of time and one-half. A?tiCle i part: 13.1 The overtime rate for the ~ilrposes of this Agreement shall be one and one-half (1 1,';) times the employee's basic ho-xrly rate. Further clarifying or confusing the issue is the fact that the grievor is a Schedule A employee, and is consequently gsvsrnec? by the following provision from the part of the Agreement: (b; All hours worked on a dav that is not a regular day for the employee wi:: be treated as overti,me ar?d based on the rate he was receiving when the overtime was worked. It is at least common ground that Sunday was not a "regular tjorking day" for the grievor. The issue is obviously: over the course of the trip from Xorth 3ay and Toronto, was the grievor "travelling" or "working?" More properly, was the grievor "travelling" or "working" within the meaning of the collective agreement? Clearly getting from North 3ay to Toronto had to involve travel. The narrow issue becomes: did the trl-J involve any element of work? t'nlon counsel quite candidly acknowledged that cases of this nature are largely "line drawing" exercises. We agree with that characterlzation. Eowever in the instaat case, we can find no element of work present in the grievov's journey. Part of his regular duties (i.e. inspection) per force involves driving. One cannot peform an inspection unless one is at the location. This does not however mean t>at every time the grievor gets in his car that he is ",working.“ Swely this is precisely the circumstance contemplated by Article 23. The Ministry authorized Kr. Leblanc's trave::i?G to Toronto on Sunday to attend a meeting durzng re ular worliin hours on Monday. it is only proper that he should be compensated for the inconvenience to his personal life. Eow- ever, it would appear that in the form of Article 23, the parties have specifically turned the:r ‘minds to the agproprlate leve; of compensation (i.e.,straight time). The grievance Is hereby dis,missed. 4 Dated at Toronto this 5th day of ~JGy,, ~.’ ,T$)gf--- D.J. Forbes-Roberts, Vice Chariman -7’~ <;$;w.i-e.- r \ J. Solberg, Member -i I.