HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-0296.Berry.15-08-25 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#2015-0260
UNION#2015-0440-0007
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Berry) 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 Treasury Board Secretariat
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
SUBMISSIONS June 12, July 2 & July 16, 2015
- 2 -
Decision
[1] Recently the parties held a one-day Med/Arb session at the St. Lawrence Valley
Correctional and Treatment Centre. During that session the parties agreed that
written submissions would be forwarded to this Board regarding two individual
grievances. It was further agreed that the decision for each of these grievances
would be in accordance with the Med/Arb protocol – that is to say that the
decisions will be without precedent or prejudice.
[2] Both parties provided fulsome written submissions regarding the facts.
Supporting documentation such as emails and policies were also provided.
[3] Mr. Keith Berry is a Correctional Officer at SLVCTC. He filed a grievance on
January 18, 2015 alleging that he was improperly bypassed on eight occasions
for overtime opportunities. It was his contention that he was not offered these
overtime shifts because of his accommodation needs.
[4] The dates that Mr. Berry contended he should have been offered overtime work
on were August 9, 27 & 28, 2014; September 21, 2014; October 5, 2014; and
November 18, 21 & 22, 2014.
[5] The parties met to discuss this grievance on February 12, 2015 and at that time
the Employer raised a timeliness objection. The same preliminary objection was
raised in the Employer’s written submissions and it was contended that the
grievance should be dismissed on that basis. It was also noted that there was no
reasonable explanation offered by the grievor for the delay.
[6] The Employer asserted that the grievance was filed well beyond the mandatory
time limits set out in the Collective Agreement. Indeed, some of the dates the
grievor was claiming the Collective Agreement and HPRO agreement was
violated occurred approximately five months before the grievance was filed.
[7] The Employer urged this Board not to exercise its statutory jurisdiction to extend
the time limits for the filing of this grievance “as there is no justifiable reason why
the grievor could not have filed grievances relating to the 8 alleged violations in a
timely manner, 30 days within each alleged occurrence.”
[8] In response to the Employer’s preliminary objection the Union submitted, on the
grievor’s behalf, that Mr. Berry believed the Employer to be acting in good faith
and in compliance with the Collective Agreement. Accordingly he did not need to
continuously check HPRO to ensure that he was being offered all of the shifts to
- 3 -
which he was entitled. In January of 2015 when he became aware that there
were shifts he should have offered he reviewed HPRO and found eight violations
dating back to August of 2014. He promptly filed a grievance at that time.
[9] After considering the facts and submissions regarding the Employer’s preliminary
objection I am of the view that I must dismiss the grievance due to timeliness.
None of the dates the grievor claims he was entitled to overtime were grieved in
compliance with the mandatory time limits of the Collective Agreement. Further, I
agree with the Employer that there was no reasonable explanation for the delay
offered by the grievor that would cause me to exercise my jurisdiction to extend
the time limits.
[10] Accordingly the grievance is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 25th day of August 2015.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice-Chair