Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-3265.Pace.05-11-23 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# 2003-3265 2004-1066 2005-0288 2005-1255 UNION# 2003-0234-0562,2004-0234-0305 2005-0234-0054 2005-0234-0156 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontano PublIc ServIce Employees Umon (Pace) Union - and - The Crown In RIght of Ontano (Mimstry ofCommumty Safety and CorrectIOnal ServIces) Employer BEFORE Loretta Mikus Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION John BrewIn Ryder Wnght Blair & Holmes LLP Bamsters and SOlICItorS FOR THE EMPLOYER SImon Heath Counsel Mimstry of Government ServIces CONFERENCE CALL November 21 2005 2 DeCISIon The gnevor Antonella Pace filed a gnevance allegIng, among other charges, the Employer had condoned and fostered a pOIsoned work envIronment and a vIOlatIOn of the WDHP PolIcy I was appoInted to hear that gnevance and our first heanng was In February of 2005 (GSB # 2003- 3265) We have two more days scheduled In December and two In January of2006 In 2004 the gnevor was suspended and she filed a gnevance allegIng unJust dIscIplIne (GSB # 2004-1066) That gnevance was to proceed before another Vice-Chair along wIth five other gnevances filed by the correctIOnal officers charged wIth Inmate abuse The gnevor's dIscIplIne does not anse dIrectly from the alleged abuse but rather from her actIOns subsequent to It. It IS my understandIng that those gnevances are not scheduled for a heanng untIl after the New Year and that the gnevor's complaInt, SInce It IS not dIrected towards the events gIVIng nse to the five other gnevances, wIll probably be heard after the five alleged abuse gnevances In 2005 the gnevor filed two addItIOnal gnevances, one allegIng unJust dIsmIssal, the other a breach of her nght to pnvacy The Umon brought forth a request to consolIdate the dIscharge gnevance wIth the harassment gnevance before me and to have the dIscharge proceed on the days scheduled to deal wIth the harassment gnevance ImtIally the Employer obJected to the consolIdatIOn of those gnevance but, In a conference call on November 21 2005 agreed to the Umon's request on the condItIOn that the prevIOUS dIscIplIne gnevance also be consolIdated wIth the dIsmIssal and that the two gnevances proceed In that order The Umon obJected on the grounds that J OImng these two gnevances would unduly extend the heanng on the dIscharge whIch wIll preJudIce the gnevor SInce she IS out of work. It IS my VIew that all four gnevances be consolIdated and be heard by me There IS ObvIOusly ment In the Umon's assertIOn that the dIscharge should be heard In a speedy and expedItIOus manner However I accept the Employer's submIssIOn that ItS decIsIOn to termInate the gnevor's servIces was based on her record at the tIme whIch contaIned the suspenSIOn. If I were 3 to find some cause for dIscIplIne In the dIscharge gnevance, I would be unable to determIne the appropnate penalty untIl the state of her dIscIplIne record had been determIned by another Board. That could only frustrate the goal of a speedy heanng If the ultImate deCISIOn on her status has to aWait a determInatIOn on the ments of a gnevance that has not been heard and, In fact, IS not scheduled to be heard for at least two or three months after thIS heanng. It IS my VIew that the dIscharge gnevance should proceed expedItIOusly but that, In order to make decIsIOns In the context In whIch they occurred, the suspenSIOn gnevance should precede the dIsmIssal gnevance SInce the facts gIVIng nse to the claim of a breach of the gnevor's nghts to pnvacy denve from the same facts as her dIsmIssal gnevance, It also makes sense that It be heard at the same tIme to aVOId the necessIty of another heanng on the same facts Therefore, It IS the order of the Board that gnevances # 2004-1066 2005-0288 and 2005-1255 be heard together commenCIng on December 12 and 13 2005 and that gnevance # 2003-3265 be adJourned untIl the completIOn of those proceedIngs SIgned at Toronto thIS 23rd day of November 2005 Loretta Mikus, Vice-Chair