HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-1246.Stickle et al.17-05-29 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#2016-1246
UNION#2016-0229-0013
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Stickle et al) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer
BEFORE Ian Anderson Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Dan Sidsworth
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER David Marincola
Treasury Board Secretariat
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
HEARING May 25, 2017
- 2 -
Decision
[1] The Employer and the Union agreed to participate in the Expedited Mediation-
Arbitration process in accordance with the negotiated protocol. The majority of the
grievances are normally settled pursuant to that process. However, if a grievance
remains unresolved the protocol provides that the Vice Chair of the Board, based
on the evidence provided during the mediation session, will immediately decide the
grievance. The decision will be with no or minimal reasons, be without precedent
and prejudice and will be issued within fifteen working days of the mediation unless
the parties agree otherwise.
[2] On May 25, 2017 the parties at the Ontario Correctional Institute (“OCI”) agreed to
participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the
negotiated protocol.
[3] OCI consists of a number of treatment units which house “residents”. A unit
typically has a group of Correctional Officers (“COs”) regularly assigned to work in
it. This grievance relates to meetings two Operational Managers of the Employer
held with each Correctional Officer working on Unit 6. According to the email sent
to each CO directing them to attend the meeting, the stated purpose of the meeting
was: “to review expectations regarding work procedures. This meeting will also be
used as an opportune to discuss any issues or concerns that you may have as a
Case Manager working on Unit 6.” The Union asserts that the meetings were held
to investigate matters which may result in disciplinary action and that the members
were denied their choice of union representation contrary to the collective
agreement. The Employer denies the meetings were held for that purpose.
[4] The meetings in question took place within the context of a number of complaints
by Unit 6 COs against other Unit 6 COs. I understand that several of these
complaints became grievances which have been referred to arbitration under the
regular procedure. Accordingly, and notwithstanding that this decision is without
prejudice or precedent, I do not consider it advisable to provide any reasons for my
decision. Having carefully considered the representations of the parties, the
grievance is denied.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 29th day of May 2017.
Ian Anderson, Vice-Chair