The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010-2654.Pacheco.18-12-17 Decision Crown Employees Grievance Settlement Board Suite 600 180 Dundas St. West Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Fax (416) 326-1396 Commission de règlement des griefs des employés de la Couronne Bureau 600 180, rue Dundas Ouest Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tél. : (416) 326-1388 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396 GSB#2010-2654 UNION#2010-0234-0283 Additional grievances noted in Appendix “A” IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Pacheco) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer BEFORE Ken Petryshen Arbitrator FOR THE UNION John Brewin Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP Counsel FOR THE EMPLOYER Suneel Bahal Treasury Board Secretariat Legal Services Branch Senior Counsel HEARING November 23, 2018 - 2 - DECISION [1] I have a number of discipline grievances before me filed on behalf of Mr. J. Pacheco, a Bailiff. The hearing is at the stage where the Employer is still calling its evidence. This is a decision dealing with the finalization of certain production issues. I will address the issues with reference to a November 2018 ten page document (“the Report”) and a second document entitled “Union Summary of Outstanding Items” (“Summary”), which provides a summary of the issues contained in the Report. The Report and the Summary were prepared by the Union. I amended the Summary after the parties removed the only item in section D to another section. The Summary now consists of 4 sections - A to D (the current D was formerly section E). Each section deals with the following matters. Section A records the documents requested by the Union that the Employer asserts have never existed. Section B records the documents requested by the Union that the Employer was unable to locate and cannot say ever existed. Section C records the requests for documents which the Union has withdrawn, on a without prejudice basis to submissions the Union may make. And section D contains items that are referred to the Arbitrator for a decision. I note that during discussions with counsel on the items referred to in the Report, some items were removed from one section of the Summary and placed in another section. [2] The following items in section A of the Summary are documents which the Employer indicated have never existed: items 6 and 12 on page 2 of the Report; items 16, 17, 23, 24 and 25 on page 3 of the Report; items 11 B, C, D and J on page 4 of the Report; item 4 in the January 28, 2017 request on page 5 of the Report; items 9 and 2 on page 6 of the Report; item 6 at the top of page 7 of the Report; and item 29 on page 9 of the Report. [3] The following items in section B of the Summary are documents the Employer was unable to locate and cannot say ever existed: items 11A and 12 on page 4 of the Report; item 8 on page 5 of the Report (moved from the former section D) – the Employer’s position is that it cannot locate the requested document and it does not exist now; item 8 on page 8 of the Report (re January 13, 2016 key press data: the - 3 - explanation was that it existed but that the data was overridden and is no longer available); item 26 on page 9 of the Report (moved from the former section E). [4] The following items in section C of the Summary have been withdrawn by the Union, without prejudice to subsequent submissions: item 7 on page 2 of the Report; item 4 in the March 24, 2017 request at page 5 of the Report; item 13 at page 6 of the Report; item 7 and item 12 D on page 7 of the Report; item 7 on page 8 of the Report; item 9 on page 9 of the Report; and, item 32 on page 10 of the Report. [5] There are a few production requests set out in section D that the parties were unable to resolve. Item 15 on page 7 of the Report references a second request by the Union for the production of the MHCC main control logbook for January 21, 2016, between 0700-1200 hours. I had previously addressed an earlier request for this document in a decision dated April 5, 2018, at paragraph 9 as follows: [9] In item 15, the Union requests the Maplehurst main control logbook for January 21, 2016, between 0700-1200 hrs, in order to either establish the time of a Code Blue that day or to link the Code Blue to Mr. Powis leaving the workplace that day. In addressing this production request, I have considered Mr. Watson’s email to Mr. Dykstra dated January 21, 2016, and in particular the notation about “an ongoing code within the institution.” For what it is worth, I do not read the email as suggesting that Mr. Powis left the workplace that day for any reason other than he claimed he was not feeling well. The time of a Code Blue on that day is a collateral issue and not arguably relevant. I therefore will not direct the Employer to produce the Maplehurst main control logbook for January 21, 2016, between 0700-1200 hrs. The Union renewed its request for the document based on the subsequent testimony of Mr. Watson. The Union argued that confirmation of the timing of a Code Blue on January 21, 2016, is arguably relevant to the issue of Mr. Watson’s credibility. Upon a review of the evidence in question and a further consideration of this request, my view of this matter remains the same. The time of a Code Blue between 0700-1200 hours is a collateral matter and not arguably relevant to the central issues in dispute. [6] The last two requests set out in section D are for log book entries. In item 6 on page 7 of the Report, the Union requests the logbook details for a May 4, 2015 OT trip - 4 - by Mr. Bozzelli and Mr. Murphy (MHCC-CNCC-MHCC). In a decision dated June 21, 2017, I directed the Employer to provide the Union with the logbook entry relating to the overtime worked by Mr. Bozzelli and Mr. Murphy on May 4, 2015. In item 34 on Page 10 of the Report, the Union requests the production of the Sprinter #4 logbook. In the same decision, I recorded that the Employer indicated that the Sprinter #4 logbook could not be located. If the Employer is in possession of the requested May 4, 2015 logbook entry and the Sprinter #4 logbook, I direct it to produce these items to Union counsel as soon as reasonably possible. Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 17th day of December 2018. “Ken Petryshen” Ken Petryshen, Arbitrator - 5 - Appendix A GSB Number OPSEU File Number 2012-0727 2012-0234-0066 2013-3214 2013-0234-0359 2014-0350 2014-0234-0061 2014-3305 2014-0234-0458 2014-3846 2014-0234-0508 2014-4854 2015-0234-0030 2015-0390 2015-0234-0058 2015-0494 2015-0234-0069 2015-0495 2015-0234-0070 2015-0496 2015-0234-0071 2015-0913 2015-0234-0085 2015-0914 2015-0234-0086 2015-0915 2015-0234-0087 2015-0916 2015-0234-0088 2015-1310 2015-0234-0108 2015-1311 2015-0234-0109 2015-1312 2015-0234-0110 2015-1313 2015-0234-0111 2015-1314 2015-0234-0112 2015-1315 2015-0234-0113 2015-1316 2015-0234-0114 2015-1317 2015-0234-0115 2015-1318 2015-0234-0116 2015-1319 2015-0234-0117 2015-1320 2015-0234-0118 2015-1321 2015-0234-0119