Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-1987.Pollock et al.07-01-29 Decision Crown Employees Grievance Settlement Board Suite 600 180 Dundas Sl. West Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Fax (416) 326-1396 Commission de reglement des griefs des employes de la Couronne Nj ~ Ontario Bureau 600 180, rue Dundas Ouest Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tel. : (416) 326-1388 Telec. : (416) 326-1396 GSB# 2006-1987,2006-1991 UNION# 2006-0517-0028,2006-0517-0032 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT BETWEEN BEFORE FOR THE UNION FOR THE EMPLOYER HEARING DEADLINE FOR WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Pollock et al.) - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Barry Stephens Scott Andrews Grievance Officer Ontario Public Service Employees Union Pauline Jones Staff Relations Officer Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services November 23, 2006. January 12,2007. Union Employer Vice-Chair 2 Decision INTRODUCTION The parties have agreed to a Med-Arb Protocol, signed February 27, 2006. 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 "True Mediation-Arbitration" process, wherein each provides the vice-chair with submissions, which include the facts and authorities each relies upon. The process adopted by the parties provides for a canvassing of the facts during the mediation phase under the Protocol. Arbitration decisions are issued 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. Accordingly, the matter has been referred to me as a True Mediation/Arbitration decision under the Protocol. FACTS The grievors allege that the employer is reassigning them away from their "posted assignments" in an arbitrary manner on a regular and frequent basis. The employer responds that employees bid for their assignments roughly every two years, on the basis of seniority. However, from time to time, duty managers are required to make changes to the assignments on a day-to-day basis in order to cover work. The employer states that it instructs the line managers to refrain from deviating from the posted assignments if possible, but that changes are not uncommon. The employer further asserts the posted assignments are not guaranteed by the collective agreement or by any other agreement between the parties. 3 DECISION After considering the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, the grievances are dismissed. Dated at Toronto, this 29th day of January, 2007. Barry