Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-0163.Union Grievance.04-09-27 Decision Crown Employees Commission de ~~ Grievance Settlement reglement des griefs Board des employes de la Couronne ~-,... Suite 600 Bureau 600 Ontario 180 Dundas Sl. West 180 rue Dundas Ouest Toronto Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Fax (416) 326-1396 Telec. (416) 326-1396 GSB# 2002-0163 UNION# 2002-0999-0005 [02UI14] IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (Umon Gnevance) Grievor - and - The Crown III RIght of Ontano (Mimstry ofCommumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces) Employer BEFORE FelIcIty D Bnggs Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION Scott Andrews Gnevance Officer Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon FOR THE EMPLOYER Greg GledhIll Staff RelatIOns Officer Mimstry of Commumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces HEARING September 22, 2004 2 DeCISIon In September of 1996 the MmIstry of CorrectIOnal ServIces notIfied the UnIon and employees at a number of provmcIaI mstItutIOns that theIr facIlItIes would be closed and/or restnlctured over the next few years On June 6, 2000 and June 29, 2000 the UnIon filed pohcy and mdIvIdual gnevances that alleged vanous breaches of the collectIve agreement mcludmg ArtIcle 6 and ArtIcle 31 15 as well as gnevances relatmg to the filhng of CorrectIOnal Officer posItIOns In response to these gnevances the partIes entered mto dIscussIOns and ultImately agreed upon two Memoranda of Settlement concernmg the apphcatIOn of the CollectIve Agreement dunng the "first phase of the MmIstry's transItIOn" One memorandum, dated May 3, 2000 outlmed condItIons for the CorrectIOnal Officers wIllIe the second, dated July 19, 2001 provIded for the non-CorrectIOnal Officer staff Both agreements were subject to ratIficatIOn by respectIve prmcIples and settled all of the gnevances IdentIfied m the related MERC appendIces, filed up to that pomt m tun e The partIes contmued to negotIate and agree upon further condItIons regardmg the transItIOns matters MERC 3 was sIgned by the partIes on February 25,2003 As part of the overall transItIOn process sIgnIficant organIzatIOnal and structural changes at Maplehurst Complex the Employer announced a new staffing model Shortly thereafter the UnIon filed a pohcy gnevance allegmg a vIOlatIOn of ArtIcles 2, 6, 9 and 20 wIth respect to the CorrectIOnal Officer posItIOns at Maplehurst Complex 3 In an effort to resolve theIr dIfferences the partIes agreed to the folloWIng on December 4,2003 Re UnIon Pohcy Gnevance apphcatIOn regardIng classIfied CorrectIOnal Officer posItIOns, posts, health and safety wIth respect to shIft coverage to shIft coverage (SIC) at Maplehurst 1 The Employer shall complete a classIfied correctIonal officer workload analysIs at Maplehurst Complex no later than March 31, 2004 The Employer shall provIde the results of the workload analysIs an explanatIOn of how It was arnved at no later than March 31, 2004, to the MERC ImplementatIOn CommIttee 2 The PartIes agree to meet at least three (3) tunes between March 31, 2004 and Apnl 30, 2004 to attempt to resolve outstandIng Issues related to the gnevance specIfic to CorrectIOnal Officer Issues at Maplehurst Complex 3 The PartIes agree to schedule at least five (5) arbItratIOn dates wIth VIce-Chair F Bnggs from May 15, 2004 forward to be utIhzed If negotIatIOn process (SIC) falls to resolve the outstandIng Issues 4 The PartIes agree that the current CorrectIOnal Officer CWW Agreements In place at Maplehurst Complex shall remaIn In place untIl at least October 4, 2004, unless the partIes mutually agree to do otherwIse In accordance wIth the above Memorandum of Settlement the workload analysIs was completed and provIded to the UnIon DespIte negotIatIOns undertaken In good faith, the partIes were not able to resolve all of the outstandIng matters regardIng the appropnate CorrectIOnal Officer staffing complement at Maplehurst It IS through thIS unIque and agreed upon process that the Issue came before me for determInatIOn ThIS decIsIOn deals wIth the dIspute regardIng the CorrectIOnal Officer posItIOns at Maplehurst Complex 4 The partIes were not sIgnIficantly dIsparate m theIr VIews of the appropnate resolutIOn of tlllS matter I heard eVIdence regardmg the nature of the operatIOn, how the operatIOnal needs have changed m the last five years, the workload analysIs, the Employer's VIew of the appropnate staffing model and the UnIon's concerns m that regard. It IS not my mtentIOn to reVIew that eVIdence m any detail It IS sufficIent to say that any decIsIOn rendered herem IS pecuhar to these facts and wIll therefore have no apphcatIOn to any other mstItutIOn Further, thIS decIsIOn sets out the appropnate staffing complement for Maplehurst Complex as of the date of tlllS decIsIOn as the result of thIS process I begm by statmg that I find there has been no vIOlatIOn of ArtIcles 2, 6 or 20 Further, m my VIew I need not comment on any alleged vIOlatIOn of ArtIcle 9 because the partIes have agreed to thIS process Based on the eVIdence and submIssIOns of the partIes, I have detennmed that there should be two hundred and twenty three (223) classIfied CorrectIOnal Officer posItIOns for the Maplehurst Complex plus ten (10) classIfied communIty escort posItIOns I remIt the Issue of the staffing of the cnb back to the partIes to resolve Further, I remIt the schedulmg of the Maplehurst Complex staff back to the partIes for resolutIOn I rem am seIzed m the event of nnplementatIOn dIfficultIes or m the event the partIes have further Issues as consIdered m the December 4, 2003 Memorandum of Agreement 5 Dated III Toronto, thIS 2ih day of September, 2004 I F ehcIty D Bnggs VIce-Chair