HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-1494.Wallace.06-10-10 Decision
Commission de
Crown Employees
Grievance Settlement
règlement des griefs
Board
des employés de la
Couronne
Suite 600 Bureau 600
180 Dundas St. West 180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tél. : (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396
GSB# 2001-1494
UNION# 2001-0530-0065, 2001-0530-0069
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Wallace)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFORE Vice-Chair
Barry Stephens
FOR THE UNION Scott Andrews
Grievance Officer
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
FOR THE EMPLOYER Karen Martin & Faith Crocker
Staff Relations Officers
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
HEARING
September 28, 2006.
2
Decision
INTRODUCTION
The parties have agreed to a Med-Arb Protocol, signed February 27, 2006. Although the
Toronto Jail was not specifically covered by that protocol, at the outset of our session on
September 27, 2006, both the union and the employer agr eed to follow the protocol as closely as
possible. It is not necessary to reproduce the entire Protocol here. Suffice it to say that, as part of
the Protocol, the parties have agreed to a ?Tru e Mediation-Arbitration? process, wherein each
provides the vice-chair with s ubmissions, which include the fact s and authorities each relies
upon. The process adopted by the parties provid es for a canvassing of the facts during the
mediation phase under the Protocol. Arbitration decisions are issu ed in accordance with Article
22.16 of the collective agreement, without reasons, and are without prejudice or precedent. The
parties were unable to resolve this matter in mediation. A ccordingly, the matter has been
referred to me as a True Mediation/Arbitration decision under the Protocol.
FACTS
The grievor filed two grievances.
The first grievance concerned a denial of compa ssionate leave to permit the grievor to attend the
funeral of his wife?s grandmother. The employe r advised the grievor at the time that he should
exhaust his vacation leave before requesting co mpassionate leave for such a purpose. The
second grievance deals with th e employer?s denial of the gr ievor?s request for temporary
accommodation. He had injured his hand during an off-duty incident when he attempted to
prevent a purse snatching. He advised the employe r that the injury made it difficult for him to
3
drive long distances and he requested the opportunity to work at CECC, wh ich is nearer to his
home, until he had recovered from his injury. Th e employer denied the request, and the grievor
was on short-term sickness for a total of 17 shifts. The grievor used his leave credits to top-up
his sick benefits, and lost approximately 4-5 da ys of pay. The employer took the position that
the grievor?s request was unreasonable, and that, as an alternative, he could have driven to work,
taking breaks at the side of the road whenever his hand became sore.
DECISION
After considering the facts and the submissions of the parties, the grievor is awarded 48 hours
compensating time off. I remain seized to deal with any issues arising from the implementation
of this award.
th
Dated at Toronto, this 10 day of October, 2006.
________________________
Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair