Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-2418.Krzywonos.07-03-05 Decision Crown Employees Grievance Settlement Board Commission de reglement des griefs des employes de la Couronne Nj ~ Ontario Suite 600 180 Dundas Sl. West Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Fax (416) 326-1396 Bureau 600 180, rue Dundas Ouest Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tel. : (416) 326-1388 Telec. : (416) 326-1396 GSB# 2004-2418 UNION# 2004-0229-0017 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Krzywonos) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer BEFORE Barry Stephens Vice-Chair FOR THE UNION Stephen Giles and Scott Andrews Grievance Officers Ontario Public Service Employees Union FOR THE EMPLOYER Pauline Jones and Faith Crocker Staff Relations Officers Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services HEARING February 19,20 & 21, 2007. DEADLINE FOR WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS March 2, 2007. 2 Decision INTRODUCTION The Ministry and OPSEU have agreed to a Med-Arb Protocol, signed February 27, 2006. Although OCI is not one of the institutions covered by the protocol, the parties agreed on February 19,2007 to be bound by the terms of the protocol for this session. 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 On June 28, 2004, the grievor advised the employer that he would be returning to work following a medical absence. He was told that, as of that day, all of the shifts for the July 1st statutory holiday had been filled, so he would not be working his normal 12-hour shift that day. Some time prior to July 1S\ either June 29 or 30, the grievor was offered a six-hour shift for July 1st. The grievor declined the shift. The employer, after reviewing the matter, agreed that the grievor should have been scheduled for the day in question, and paid him an additional 10 hours. However, he was not paid the full loss as he had declined the six-hour shift. As a result, the grievor claims payment of the remaining 10 hours. 3 DECISION The grievor is to be paid four hours straight time. Dated at Toronto, this 5th day of March, 2007. Barry