Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-2446.Hartley et al.01-01-24 Decision o NTARl 0 EMPLOYES DE LA Cm_'RONNE CROWN EAIPLOYEES DE L "ONTARIO -- GRIEVANCE COMMISSION DE SETTLEMENT REGLEMENT BOARD DES GRIEFS 180 DUNDAS STREET WEST SUITE 600 TORONTO ON M5G 128 TELEPHONElTELEPHONE, (416) 326-1388 180 RUE DUNDAS OUEST BUREAU 600, TORONTO (ON) M5G 128 FACSIMILElTELECOPIE (416) 326-1396 GSB #2446/96 OPSEU#97B088 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano Pubhc ServIce Employees U mon (Hartle, et al.) Gnevor - and - The Crown m RIght of Ontano (Mimsm of TransportatIon) Employer BEFORE Barn FIsher V Ice Chair FOR THE Robm Gordon GRIEVOR Gneyance Officer Ontano Pubhc ServIce Employees Umon FOR THE Fateh Sahm, Counsel EMPLOYER Legal ServIces Branch Management Board Secretanat HEARING Januan 22,2001 AWARD The gnevors were all employees who were surplused m 1996 They were gIven the chOIce of eIther workmg out the 6 months notIce penod (m whIch case they would have been covered by benefits) or acceptmg pay m heu of notIce (and thus not bemg covered by benefits) They all chose to accept pay m heu of notIce, and thus were not covered by benefits. They subseque ntly filed gnevances saymg that they should have been covered for benefits, presumably for the maXImum 8 week penod under the Employment Standards Act. HaVIng thoroughly mvestIgated the legal aspects of thIS matter, the Umon IS of the opmIOn that there eXIsts no dIspute between the partIes to the CollectIve Agreement, that IS between the Umon and the Employer As there eXIsts no dIspute between the partIes, I have no JunsdIctIOn over thIS matter The gnevance IS therefore dIsmIssed. Dated at Toronto, thIS 24th day of January, 2001 Barry B Fisher, Vice ChaIr