Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-3760.Guthrie.07-02-06 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 Bureau 600 180, rue Dundas Ouest Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tel. : (416) 326-1388 Telec. : (416) 326-1396 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under Nj ~ Ontario GSB#2005-3760 UNION#2006-0368-0014 THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT BETWEEN BEFORE FOR THE UNION FOR THE EMPLOYER HEARING Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Guthrie) - 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 Karen Martin Staff Relations Officer Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services December 14,2006 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 grievor is an OAG4. She claims she was denied an overtime opportunity on February 8, 2006. On that day, another employee in reception was absent due to illness. The grievor states the employer assigned a supervisor to perform the work. The grievance claims that the employer should have called the grievor to offer her the overtime shift. The employer responds that the shift in question was filled for a period of one hour, not the entire shift. The employer asserts it is not required to create an overtime opportunity if it can cover the work in some other manner consistent with the terms of the collective agreement. The grievance is dismissed. Dated at Toronto, this 6th day of February, 2007 I Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair