HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-3656.Stephenson.05-05-03 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# 2003-3656
UNION# OLB028/04
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontano LIqUor Boards Employees' Umon
(Stephenson) Union
- and -
The Crown In RIght of Ontano
(LIqUor Control Board of Ontano) Employer
BEFORE Gerry Lee Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION Dave Loney
Gnevance Officer
Ontano LIqUor Boards Employees' Umon
FOR THE EMPLOYER Pat HoulIhan
Consultant
LIqUor Control Board of Ontano
HEARING February 23 & 24 2005
2
DeCISIon
The partIes referred the above captIOned gnevance to medIatIOn/arbItratIOn In accordance wIth
ArtIcle 22 11 and AppendIx 2 of the CollectIve Agreement. The gnevor In thIS matter alleges
that the employer faIled to appoInt hIm to fill a temporary vacancy In the Warehouse
Foreman/Woman classIficatIOn contrary to artIcles 1 1 1 3 & 21 of the collectIve agreement.
The employer stated that the salary and classIficatIOn schedules outlIned In the collectIve
agreement clearly show dIVIdIng lInes that desIgnate the vanous classIficatIOns that constItute a
class senes When It IS decIded that It IS necessary to make a temporary appoIntment to fill a
temporary vacancy whIch wIll last five workIng days or more, the employer said that they are
reqUIred to appoInt the most semor employee In the next lowest classIficatIOn In the same class
senes as reqUIred by artIcle 21 5 of the collectIve agreement. The employer stated that they dId
not appoInt the gnevor to the Warehouse Foreman/Woman posItIOn as the gnevor IS classIfied as
a Clerk Grade 3 a posItIOn that IS not In the same class senes
At the outset of the heanng, the partIes agreed that I had JunsdIctIOn to deal wIth thIS matter and
they requested that I Issue a "wIthout precedent" decIsIOn wIth no reasons
HavIng carefully revIewed the submIssIOns of the partIes, I have concluded that there IS no
vIOlatIOn of the collectIve agreement. AccordIngly the gnevance IS dIsmIssed.
Dated at Toronto thIS 3rd Day of May 2005