Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-1052.Patterson.05-12-15 Decision Crown Employees Commission de Nj 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# 2002-1052 UNION# 2002-0608-0018 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (Patterson) Union - and - The Crown In RIght of Ontano (Mimstry ofCommumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces) Employer BEFORE FelIcIty D Bnggs Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION Stephen GIles Gnevance Officer Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon FOR THE EMPLOYER Greg GledhIll Staff RelatIOns Officer Mimstry of Commumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces HEARING November 15 2005 2 DeCISIon From March 13th to May 6th 2002, the UnIon and Its members were engaged m a legal strike Pnor to the begmnmg of tlus actIOn the partIes had negotIated a Memorandum of Agreement regardmg the condItIons of work m the event of a stnke or a lockout (heremafter referred to as the "CondItIons Document") In that agreement It was provIded that "all collectIve agreement prOVISIOns apply to essentIal and emergency workers wIthout mterruptIOn, save only that AppendIx 9 and AppendIx 18 shall not apply" The CondItIons Document also expressly provIded the UnIon's contmued nght under ArtIcle 22 13 of the CollectIve Agreement to file UnIon gnevances on behalf of employees who were perfonnmg essentIal and emergency servIces Dunng the course of the strike approxImately 5000 gnevances were filed by UnIon members across the Ontano PublIc ServIce As part of the negotIatIOns that ended the work stoppage, the partIes negotIated a Return to Work Protocol That agreement contemplated vanous prOVISIOns mcludmg how contmuous servIce, pensIOn, credIts and senIonty would be affected as a result of the stnke AddItIonally, the partIes addressed other Issues such as repnsal, dIscIplIne and the mechanIcs of the actual return of the bargammg UnIt members to the workplace It was further agreed these "strike related" gnevances would be treated separately and lItIgated m an efficIent manner To that end, on June 27, 2002, OPSEU and the MmIstry of PublIc Safety and Secunty (heremafter referred to as "MPSS") met to dISCUSS a process m order to resolve the outstandmg stnke related gnevances Followmg that meetmg a letter, dated October 11, 2002, confirmed the agreement that 3 In order to deal wIth the stnke related gnevances m a proactIve, expedItIOus and effectIve manner, the partIes have agreed to the followmg . No stage 2 heanngs . No filmg of strike related gnevances at GSB, untIl agreed otherwIse . WaIvmg oftllne hmIts . RespectIvely assIgnmg dedIcated resources to deal wIth the volume ApproxImately 4500 gnevances were filed by members employed by the MPSS The partIes agreed to a DIspute ResolutIOn Protocol for MPSS that mcluded Tenns of Reference It IS not necessary to provIde all of that agreement It IS sufficIent to say that the partIes agreed to an expedIted process wherem each party provIdes to the VIce Chair wntten submIssIOns whIch mclude the facts, prOVISIOns of the CollectIve Agreement, the EssentIal ServIces Agreement, legIslatIOn or any other document alleged to have been vIOlated, arguments and requested remedy Oral eVIdence would not be called although It was allowed that I could request further clanficatIOn If necessary In the event of any confusIOn regardmg the facts of the matter or the underlymg ratIOnale, I wIll dIrect the partIes to speak agam wIth theIr prmcIples NotwIthstandmg that some gnevors mIght wIsh to attend and provIde oral eVIdence, tlus process has been efficIent and has allowed for a thorough canvassmg of the facts and arguments wIth respect to the vanous Issues Other procedural Issues were addressed to ensure that gnevances would be dealt wIth m a tImely fasluon The Terms of Reference also provIded that I would remam seIzed of all outstandmg strike related gnevances filed by members workmg m MPSS ThIS process was developed m consIderatIOn of ArtIcle 22 16.2 of the collectIve agreement It states The mediator/arbItrator shall endeavour to assIst the partIes to settle the gnevance by mediatIOn If the partIes are unable to settle the gnevance by medIatIOn, the mediator / arb 1 trator shall determme the gnevance by arbItratIOn When detennmmg the gnevance by arbItratIOn, the medIator/arbItrator may hmIt the nature and extent of the eVIdence and may Impose such condItIons as he or she consIders appropnate The 4 medIator/arbItrator shall gIve a SUCCInct deCISIOn wIthIn five (5) days after completIng proceedIngs, unless the partIes agree otherwIse The maJonty of the 4500 gnevances dealt wIth one of the folloWIng Issues . An allegatIOn of delayed retroactIve payments wIth a request for Interest OWIng, . An allegatIOn of failure to pay appropnate holIday pay for Good Fnday and Easter Monday, . EntItlement to call back, . On-Call and Standby Issues for emergency workers Those matters were separately lItIgated at the Gnevance Settlement Board and decIsIOns eIther have been Issued or are pendIng In accordance wIth the agreement of the partIes a number of heanng days were scheduled to hear and detennIne the outstandIng strike related gnevances Many of the gnevances have been resolved through mediatIOn Dunng the course of the heanngs Into these matters It became apparent that reasoned decIsIOns were no longer necessary The major Issues between the partIes had been canvassed, lItIgated and decIded In varIOUS awards and settlements It was also clear that tune constraInts were such that the outstandIng Issues had to be detennIned In a more expedItIous faslllon and therefore the partIes agreed that the remaInIng matters would be decIded wIthout reasons It should be noted that In settIng out my rulIng below I have provIded a remedy that IS less that what was beIng requested by the gnevor However, the remedy I have ordered reflects the appropnate result In each CIrcumstance Ms JulI Patterson was a CorrectIOnal Officer at the Sudbury JaIl She filed a gnevance regardIng certaIn dIscIplIne that was Imposed. After heanng the facts and submIssIOns of the partIes, I order that the suspenSIOn Ms Patterson be 5 reduced to ten eIght hour ShIftS To be clear, the suspenSIOn should be eIghty hours m total She IS entItled to any compensatIOn that flows from tlllS rulmg and the record shall be amended accordmgly I rem am seIzed m the event that there are any llnplementatIOn dIfficultIes Dated m Toronto, the 15th day of December, 2005 I F ehcIty D Bnggs VIce-Chair