Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-2882.Simpraga.07-11-28 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# 2006-2882 UNION# 2007-0135-0002 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 (Simpraga) - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Reva Devins Scott Andrews Grievance Officer Ontario Public Service Employees Union Karen Martin, Brian Scott Staff Relations Officers Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services November 20,2007. Union Employer Vice-Chair 2 Decision The parties have agreed to use the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol to resolve grievances at the Windsor Jail. It is not necessary to reproduce the entire Protocol here. It is sufficient to state that the parties have agreed that this matter is to be decided as a "True Mediation-Arbitration". The Vice-Chair, based on the evidence provided during the mediation session, is required to immediately resolve a grievance following a failed mediation. The Vice- Chair's decision will be without reasons, without precedent and prejudice and issued within 15 days. In this case, the grievance asserts that the grievor was improperly denied holiday pay for work performed on November 12, 2006. The Grievor was scheduled for a shift that commenced at 2300 hours on November 11 and ended at 0700 hours on November 12. In accordance with Article COR4.1, the entire shift was paid the applicable holiday rate. The Grievor also agreed to work from 0700 to 1500 on November 12 and was paid at the applicable overtime rate. The Grievor seeks payment for this shift at the holiday rate as an unbroken extension of the shift which began no November 11. The Employer disagreed that this constitutes an 'extension' of the grievor's shift. In the Employer's submission, the additional hours were part of a regularly scheduled shift which began on November 12 and for which the Grievor is only entitled to overtime, not holiday pay. Having considered the submissions of the parties I have determined that there has been no violation of the Collective Agreement. The Grievor was paid at the applicable holiday rate for the shift that commenced on November 11. He was not entitled to receive holiday pay for the second shift that commenced on November 12. The grievance is dismissed. ~. Dated at T~ day of November 2007 ~ - . - _..~ -. ~. ".. - I ~-;: . i' . ,- ,: . . " "::-_ iii> "- ; ~~ ~ '" - , " - .'- ,- " ~ Reva Devins Vice-Chair