The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003-1221.Koster.03-10-28 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# 2003-1221 2003-1222,2003-1223 2003-1224 2003-1225 2003-1226 2003-1228 2003-1229 UNION# 2003-0263-0008 2003-0263-0009 2003-0263-0010 2003-0263-0011 2003-0263-0012, 2003-0263-0013 2003-0263-0015 2003-0263-0016 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (Koster) Grievor - and - The Crown In RIght of Ontano (Mimstry of PublIc Safety and Secunty) 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 PublIc Safety and Secunty HEARING August 11 2003 2 DECISION Mr Mike Koster was a classIfied correctIOnal officer employed at the Guelph CorrectIOnal Centre m 2001 He filed eIght gnevances allegmg vanous Improper MmIstry actIOns The UnIon set out the facts that would be called m the event thIS matter necessItated Vlva voce eVIdence In June of 2001, m reponse to a letter Issued under Part B of the MERC 1 Agreement, Mr Koster accepted a lateral transfer to a number of correctIOnal mstItutIOns He set out an order of preference subJect to aVaIlabIhty on the basIs of senIonty He chose to accept transfers m the followmg order, Sudbury JaIl, Stratford JaIl, Waterloo DetentIOn Centre and so on for a total of eleven chOIces m all In accordance wIth the MERC 1 Agreement Mr Koster was granted a lateral transfer to Ius first chOIce, Sudbury JaIl He accepted that transfer Accordmg to the UnIon, shortly after Mr Koster's lateral transfer was confirmed famIly Issues made It Impossible for hIm to relocate to the Sudbury JaIl The gnevor enqUIred about lateral transfer opportunItIes to mstItutIOns wItlun commutmg dIstance of hIS home m the KItchener-Guelph area and found none aVailable InItIally he was unable to arrange a temporary assIgnment to allow hIm to rem am m the KItchener-Guelph area. However, followmg March of 2002, he successfully arranged a temporary assIgnment to the Stratford JaIl ThIS assIgnment began June 10,2002 Dunng the summer months of 2002 wlule at the Stratford JaIl Mr Koster was mvolved m a WDHP mvestIgatIOn The allegatIOns were not substantIated 3 Dunng tlus tllne Mr Koster traded Jobs wIth another correctIOnal officer at the InvIctus Y C m an effort to remam m southwestern Ontano In November of 2002 the gnevor was told to report to InvIctus Y C to begm a Young Offender trammg whIch he needed pnor to begmnmg the work The trammg program actually started 2 earher but he was told he could catch up on the trammg he had mIssed Mr Koster dId not attend the course statmg that he was not gIven proper notIce In January 2002, Mr Koster was agam told to attend the Young Offender course Accordmg to the UnIon, the gnevor was encountenng chIldcare dIfficultIes and he was unable to attend Subsequently, he was gIven two weeks notIce to report to InvIctus Y C wIthout the trammg He was further told he was needed at InvIctus Y C and that he was to report to hIS home posItIOn Accordmg to the UnIon, there was at least one other correctIOnal officer who owned a posItIOn at InvIctus Y C who had receIved the Y 0 trammg who dId not report to that facIhty untIl July 2003 Upon hIS arrIval at InvIctus Y C Mr Koster was told that management was not ready and he was not assIgned to work. Three days later, the supenntendent at InvIctus offered the gnevor a temporary assIgnment to OCI or HamIlton Wentworth DetentIOn Centre Mr Koster was not allowed to return to the Stratford JaIl He refused the assIgnment offers It was the UnIon's submIssIOn that argumg wIth the employer and bemg told dIfferent thmgs by management over the followmg three-week penod caused Mr Koster such stress that Ius doctor told hlln to take sIck leave He has not returned to work. 4 All of the gnevances were filed on Febnmry 3, 2003 Each alleged a dIfferent vIOlatIOn of the collectIve agreement I wIll reVIew these m summary fasluon and set out my decIsIOn and bnef reasons Mr Koster alleged a vIOlatIOn of artIcle 2 because was not afforded an opportunIty to obtam a posItIOn at GA TU PosItIOns at GA TU became aVailable after he accepted the lateral transfer to Sudbury JaIl He ought to have been gIven an opportUnIty to obtam a GATU posItIOn as more JUnIor persons were able to access those posItIOns He was mcorrectly mfonned that there were no vacanCIes at Stratford JaIl Two correctIOnal officers were assIgned to Stratford Jail on temporary assIgnments after the gnevor was told there were no posItIOns aVailable He was also refused a temporary assIgnment to GATU recently despIte the fact that employees wIth AppendIx 18 employment extensIOns wIth less senIonty were workmg there It was the gnevor's assertIOn that because at least one of those AppendIx 18 employees IS takmg operatIOnal manager courses whIch wIll broaden Ius career the refusal to gIve hIm a temporary assIgnment to GA TU has the result that he was unable to broaden Ius career as a possible actmg operatIOnal manager Another gnevance alleges a vIOlatIOn of artIcles 3 and 21 It was the gnevor's posItIOn that he has been dIscnmmated agamst by the Employer because of the vanous WDHP allegatIOns The mCIdent was mvestIgated and Mr Koster was cleared of any wrong domgs However, because of the allegatIOns and mvestIgatIOns Mr Koster has been constnlctIvely dIscIplmed due to the WDHP complamt by hIS removal from Stratford JaIl The thIrd gnevance before me alleged a vIOlatIOn of artIcles 6 and 19 In 2001 two unclassIfied correctIOnal officers were assIgned to the Stratford JaIl "untIl closure" 5 These posItIOns were not posted for classIfied correctIOnal officers at Guelph C C who were about to be dIsplaced from Guelph due to the pendmg closure nor were the posItIOns IdentIfied for lateral transfer under the MERC 1 Agreement UltImately the two correctIOnal officers were converted to full tIme classIfied status and one was promoted m November 2001 HIS vacated posItIOn should have been posted or made aVailable for lateral transfer The gnevor would have seIzed upon the opportUnIty to take one of these two posItIOns had they been made aVailable as they should have for competItIOn or lateral transfer The gnevor also alleged a vIOlatIOn of artIcle 8 Two correctIOnal officers were assIgned to Stratford Jail on temporary assIgnments after Mr Koster was told no posItIOns were aVailable Further, he was refused a temporary assIgnment to GATU recently despIte the fact that other employees who were workmg appendIx 18 employment extensIOns wIth less senIonty were so assIgned. Another gnevance cIted a vIOlatIOn of artIcle 9 because the III treatment that he has receIved by vanous management personnel has caused hIm to be on sIck leave Both Ius personal health and Ius famIly hfe have been detnmentally affected. DECISION There can be no doubt that the closmg of vanous mstItutIOns has cause many employees, mcludmg those outsIde the bargammg UnIt varymg degrees of dIfficulty and personal angst However, nothmg set out m the facts before me would have me find that the Employer, or any or the representatIves of the Employer, caused the gnevor to be III eIther dIrectly or mdIrectly That IS not to say that I dIsbeheve that vahdIty of the gnevor's Illness Indeed, I have no eVIdence before me m that regard. Assummg, for the moment, JunsdIctIOn to do so, for tlus Board to make a findmg 6 that an employee was caused to be III at the hands of the Employer would reqUIre clear and cogent eVIdence and It sImply does not eXIst m the mstant matter The remedy sought, amongst other requests, IS for a permanent assIgnment to the Stratford Jail In my VIew, tlus IS a remedy to whIch he IS not entItled. In Ius decIsIOn deahng wIth the RFP process at Guelph, VIce Chair Brown found that employees at Guelph at that tIme were to be consIdered AppendIx 18 employees Mr Koster sought and accepted a lateral transfer to Sudbury whIch was not a closmg mstItutIOn Accordmgly, he had no further surplussmg nghts and therefore all of the nghts and entItlements under appendIx 18 ended F or those reasons, the gnevances are dIsmIssed. Dated at Toronto thIS 28th day of October 2003 I .r'" . ;; VIce-Chair