HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-2416.Bryan.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# 2005-2416
UNION# 2005-0229-0023
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Bryan)
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
The grievor reported to work on September 23, 2005 with an injured ankle. She believed she
could complete her shift, but her ankle became increasingly sore. She went to health care and
she was advised to report to the hospital to have her ankle x-rayed. Her immediate supervisor
approved of a plan to have another employee drive the grievor to the Peel Memorial Hospital,
which is a 15-20 minute drive from the facility. The grievor states that she advised her
supervisor that she did not want to go to the hospital on her own due to personal reasons. She
indicated that, if someone could drive her there and assist her into the building, she would then
be able to take care of herself. However, although the grievor's immediate supervisor appears to
3
have approved the plan, the deputy superintendent became aware of the circumstances and
decided it would not be appropriate for anyone to take the grievor to the hospital. Rather, she
was offered the choice of an ambulance or a taxi. The grievor declined both of these options
because of her personal issue. Instead, she called her husband, who arranged to take time off
work to take her to the hospital. The grievor waited approximately three hours for her husband
to arrive. The employer acknowledged that it is not unusual to offer a sick employee a ride home
when the individual is not in a condition to drive.
DECISION
The grievor is awarded three hours compensating time.
Dated at Toronto, this 5th day of March, 2007.
Barry