HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-0615.McKie.06-07-25 Decision
Crown Employees
Grievance Settlement
Board
Suite 600
180 Dundas Sl. West
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396
Commission de
reglement des griefs
des employes de la
Couronne
Bureau 600
180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tel. : (416) 326-1388
Telec. : (416) 326-1396
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
Nj
~
Ontario
GSB# 2006-0615
UNION# 2006-0517-0013
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
BETWEEN
BEFORE
FOR THE UNION
FOR THE EMPLOYER
HEARING
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(McKie)
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Barry Stephens
Dan Sidsworth
Acting Grievance Officer
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Faith Crocker
Staff Relations Officer
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
June 20, 2006.
Union
Employer
Vice-Chair
2
Decision
The parties have agreed to an Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol. It is not necessary to
reproduce the entire Protocol here. Suffice it to say that the parties have agreed to an "True
Mediation-Arbitration" process, wherein each provides the vice-chair with submissions, which
include the facts and authorities each relies upon. The process adopted by the parties provides
for a canvassing of the facts during the mediation phase, although the vice-chair has the
discretion to request further information or documentation. Arbitration decisions are issued in
accordance with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement, without reasons, and are without
prejudice or precedent.
This grievance relates to an incident that occurred on Sunday, March 19, 2006. On that day, the
grievor was scheduled to work an overtime shift starting at 14:45. This shift had been assigned
to him the previous day, March 18. On the afternoon of March 19, the grievor went to a walk-in
medical clinic in Burlington. After waiting for two hours, he realized he would not be able to
attend work on time, so he called the workplace to speak to his supervisor, OM16 K.
Vandenthillart. There is a dispute about the details of the conversation. The grievor contends
that he advised Ms. Vandenthillart that he would be leaving the clinic immediately, without
waiting for treatment, and that she asked him to report directly to her on his arrival. Ms.
Vandenthillart states, in her incident report, that she advised the grievor during the phone call
that his overtime shift was cancelled due to the fact that he could not report on time.
The grievor drove from the clinic to the workplace and reported to Ms. Vandenthillart, bringing
along a union representative. There was a somewhat uncomfortable discussion, during which
3
Ms. Vandenthillart advised the grievor that she had replaced him for the shift and he could go
home.
After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, it is my conclusion
that the grievance should be upheld in part. The employer is ordered to pay the grievor 6 hours
straight time pay.
Dated '!.t Toropto, this 25th day of July, 2006.