HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-0092.Aumont.15-04-28 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#2014-0092
UNION#2014-0642-0011
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Aumont) 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 Nick Mustari
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER Anne Fowler
Treasury Board Secretariat
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
HEARING April 22, 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] Mr. Jacques Aumont is a long service Correctional Officer who received a twenty-day
suspension as the result of an incident that took place in the workplace on February 18,
2014. The grievor filed a grievance alleging that the discipline was without just cause and
asked it be rescinded.
[3] The facts that brought about this suspension are not in dispute. In particular, the grievor
did not – at any time – take issue with the Employer’s allegation.
[4] It is not necessary to set out the facts but it is important to note that I must find that the
incident that brought about this discipline was of a serious nature. However, there are a
number of mitigating factors including the grievor’s length of service, his lack of prior
discipline and the fact that he accepted full responsibility from the outset. There was no
premeditation of this activity. Indeed, it is understandable why the grievor described it as
a “momentary lapse in judgment.” In addition the grievor had some personal stresses in
his life at the time.
[5] Accordingly, I order that the discipline be reduced to a twelve-day suspension and Mr.
Aumont should be compensated appropriately for the difference.
[6] I remain seized.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 28th day of April 2015.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice-Chair