HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-1322.Diruzza.17-03-22 Decision
Crown 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#2015-1322, 2015-1323
UNION#2015-0234-0120, 2015-0234-0121
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Diruzza) 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 Gregg Gray
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER Ann Fowler
Treasury Board Secretariat
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
HEARING March 7, 2017
- 2 -
Decision
[1] The Employer and the Union at the Maplehurst Correctional Centre agreed to
participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the
negotiated Protocol. A number of the grievances were settled through that
process. However, this grievance remained unresolved requiring 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. Aldo Diruzza is a Correctional Officer who filed two grievances regarding the
implementation of the Attendance Support and Management Program (ASMPP).
It was his allegation that because the program is not based on the calendar year
it has the potential to disadvantage him. He was of the view that because of the
timing of the program he might be discriminated against on the basis of a
disability contrary to the Human Rights Code.
[3] When the grievor was asked for instances where he had been put at a
disadvantage as the result of how the Employer has implemented the program,
he conceded that it has not yet happened but might at some time in the future.
[4] The Employer urged that there has been no violation of the Collective
Agreement.
[5] After consideration – including a review of the program – I am of the view that
there has been no violation of the Collective Agreement and therefore the
grievances are denied.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 22nd day of March 2017.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice Chair