HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-3291.Max.15-04-27 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#2014-3291
UNION#2014-0642-0034
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Max) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer
BEFORE Felicity D. Briggs Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Jackie Crawford
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER Caroline Markiewicz
Treasury Board Secretariat
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
HEARING April 21, 2015
- 2 -
Decision
[1] The Employer and the Union at the Monteith Correctional Centre agreed to
participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the
negotiated Protocol. Many of the grievances were settled through that process.
However, a few grievances remained unresolved and therefore require a decision
from this Board. The Protocol provides that decisions will be issued within a
relatively short period of time after the actual mediation sessions and will be
without reasons. Further, the decision is to be without prejudice and precedent.
[2] Ms. Simone Max filed a grievance alleging that she had been harassed and
discriminated against as evidenced by the Employer entering her locker without
her consent. She was of the view that she alone had her locker opened because the
Employer was discrimination against her because of her gender and her union
activity. Although she conceded that shortly after the incident the Employer had
told her the opening of the locker was a mistake and it apologized, she was
frustrated by the intrusion and as the result of differing reasons given for the error.
[3] According to the grievor she had made it known to the Employer that she was
taking over the use of a locker that had been used by a now retired Correctional
Officer. She told an Operating Manager and assumed that this had been
appropriately documented. The Employer did not take issue with this assertion but
stated that at the time the locker was opened, there was no record of Ms. Max now
using this locker.
[4] The grievance must be dismissed. There was absolutely no evidence of gender
discrimination or anti-union animus. I accept that the grievor put the Employer on
notice that she was utilizing the locker but unfortunately this was not
appropriately documented. However, that mistake does not bring about a violation
of the Collective Agreement or any employment related statute.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 27th day of April 2015.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice-Chair