HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-3167.McDonald.16-06-01 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#2015-3167
UNION#2015-0467-0030
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(McDonald) 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 Dan Sidsworth and Gregg Gray
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER Greg Gledhill
Treasury Board Secretariat
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
Linda Elliott
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
Employee Transition Coordinator
HEARING March 8, May 9, 2016
- 2 -
Decision
[1] Since the spring of 2000 the parties have been meeting regularly to address
matters of mutual interest which have arisen as the result of the Ministry of
Community Safety and Correctional Services as well as the Ministry of Children
and Youth Services restructuring initiatives around the Province. Through the
MERC (Ministry Employment Relations Committee) a subcommittee was
established to deal with issues arising from the transition process. The parties
have negotiated a series of MERC agreements setting out the process for how
organizational changes will unfold for Correctional and Youth Services staff and
for non-Correctional and non-Youth Services staff.
[2] The parties agreed that this Board would remain seized of all issues that arise
through this process and it is this agreement that provides me the jurisdiction to
resolve the outstanding matters.
[3] Over the years as some institutions and/or youth centres decommissioned or
reduced in size others were built or expanded. The parties have made efforts to
identify vacancies and positions and the procedures for the filling of those
positions as they become available.
[4] The parties have also negotiated a number of agreements that provide for the
“roll-over” of fixed term staff to regular (classified) employee status.
[5] Hundreds of grievances have been filed as the result of the many changes that
have taken place at provincial institutions. The transition subcommittee has, with
the assistance of this Board, mediated numerous disputes. Others have come
before this Board for disposition.
[6] It was determined by this Board at the outset that the process for this disputes
would be somewhat more expedient. To that end, grievances are presented by
way of statements of fact and succinct submissions. On occasion clarification has
- 3 -
been sought from grievors and institutional managers at the request of the Board.
This process has served the parties well. The decisions are without prejudice but
attempt to provide guidance for future disputes.
[7] Morgan McDonald is a Correctional Officer at Quinte Detention Centre. She
alleged that the Employer has violated the Collective Agreement because her
sick time was not included towards forty hour work weeks while she was a fixed
term employee. It was noted on the grievance that such hours for 2015 were
included but she requested that all hours back to 2008 be counted.
[8] Hours of work provided are provided to each fixed term employee each time
there is a rollover of fixed term employees to full time status. Those hours are
provided to allow people to challenge the hours and to make clear the most
senior employees who will be rolled over. In every instance employees are told to
check the figures and have five days to challenge the hours set out in the listing.
The grievor did not challenge her hours until the filing of her grievance in late
2015.
[9] In 2015 the grievor provided medical certificates for her absences during that
year and the Employer gave credit for sick time accordingly. The Union urged
that the Employer should have gone further back and counted all of the sick
absences of the grievor.
[10] The Employer took the view that every fixed term employee has an opportunity to
challenge their hours when those hours are provided during the roll-over process.
To allow them to go back years later and make adjustments has the potential to
skew the relative seniority of those eligible for roll-over.
[11] I am of the view that the Employer’s view must prevail. Fixed term employees are
informed of their hours during each roll-over process and are specifically told to
ensure the correctness of the Employer’s calculations. It makes sense that all are
notified that they are entitled to make such a challenge during this time because
- 4 -
it may be that eligible hours not counted would make the difference between
remaining fixed term or being rolled over into classified status.
[12] The Employer is entitled to rely on the calculations it arrived at in the absence of
a challenge from an employee. Indeed, major decisions are made regarding
employee status based solely upon these numbers. The Employer does not want
to later face challenges from employees that the roll-over process was wrong and
should be undone or redone.
[13] I am of the view that the challenging of hours that were provided during the roll-
over process is limited to the hours worked since the last roll-over process.
[14] Accordingly, the grievance is denied.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 1st day of June 2016.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice Chair