The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-1269.Campbell et al.18-12-18 DecisionCrown 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# 2016-1269; 2016-2845; 2017-1012; 2017-1517; 2017-2879;2017-1500 UNION# 2016-0368-0147; 2017-0368-0022; 2017-0368-0198; 2017-0368-0324; 2017-0368- 0520;2017-0368-0320 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Campbell et al) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer BEFORE Ian Anderson Arbitrator FOR THE UNION Mike Biliski Koskie Minsky LLP Counsel FOR THE EMPLOYER Joohyung Lee Treasury Board Secretariat Legal Services Branch Counsel HEARING December 11, 2018 -2- DECISION [1] Article 22.16 of the collective agreement provides for a mediation/arbitration procedure applicable to all grievances except those “concerning dismissal, sexual harassment, and/or human rights, and Union grievances with corporate policy implications”. Grievances concerning those matters are to be referred to regular arbitration unless both parties agree to utilize the mediation/arbitration procedure. In the matters before me, there is no dispute that Board File Nos. 2016-2845, 2017-1012 and 2017-1517 which relate to meal allowance claims by Dan James and Board File No. 2017-1500 which relates to a claim for a custodial responsibility allowances (“CRA”) by Mr. James properly fall within Article 22.16. [2] Board File No. 2017-2879 relates a claim for a CRA by Terry Campbell. It raises the same issues as those raised in Mr. James’ CRA grievance, Board File No. 2017-1500. The Union asserts that in addition Mr. Campbell’s CRA grievance raises certain human rights issues which are related to another grievance filed by Mr. Campbell, Board File No. 2016-1269. The Employer asserts that this constitutes an expansion of the grounds of Board File No. 2017-2879. The parties agree that to the extent Mr. Campbell’s CRA grievance (Board File No. 2017-2879) raises the same issues as Mr. James’ CRA grievance (Board File No. 2017-1500), they are to be determined together pursuant to the expedited mediation/arbitration procedure of Article 22.16. The parties further agree that this is without prejudice to the Union’s right to seek to argue Mr. Campbell’s CRA grievance raises certain human rights issues and the Employer’s right to object to that as an expansion of grounds. The parties agree that for this purpose Mr. Campbell’s grievance in Board File No. 2017-2879 is to be listed with his grievance in Board File No. 2016-1269 for a regular hearing at a later date. [3] Mediation efforts were unsuccessful in resolving the matters referred to me pursuant to Article 22.16. Article 22.16 provides for an expedited arbitration process in the event mediation is unsuccessful. Decisions are to be issued within five days and the reasons are to be succinct. In this case, the parties jointly requested no reasons be provided for the decisions. The decisions are without precedential value unless the parties agree otherwise. Meal Allowance Grievances [4] Mr. James is a Motor Vehicle Operator at the Central East Regional Centre (“CERC”). He transferred there in 2008. From that time until in or around July 2016 he was paid a meal allowance when he took a meal during the normal meal period while more than 24 km from the CERC. In July 2016, Mr. James was seconded to a position at another facility. He has returned to the CERC in January 2017. Since that time, the Employer has denied all claims which he has submitted for meals taken during the normal meal period while more than 24 km from CERC. His grievances relate to these claims. -3- [5] Having considered the representations of the parties, the meal allowance grievances are allowed. The Employer is directed to consider Mr. James’ claims. I remain seized in the event the parties are unable to agree on whether or not a particular claim should be paid. Custodial Responsibility Allowance Grievances [6] Appendix UN 2 to the collective agreement provides for payment of Custodial Responsibility Allowance (“CRA”) to employees responsible for the custody of inmates in their charge and who meet certain other conditions listed in the Appendix UN 2. When Mr. James transferred as a Motor Vehicle Operator to the CERC in 2008 he was told that he would receive the CRA. A similar representation was made to Mr. Campbell when he transferred as a Motor Vehicle Operator to CERC in 2003. Both Mr. James and Mr. Campbell were in fact paid the CRA until 2017, at which point the Employer ceased paying it. There is no dispute that for most if not all of the time that Mr. James and Mr. Campbell were paid the CRA, they did not meet all of the conditions under Appendix UN2. Their grievances claim an ongoing entitlement to the CRA. [7] Having considered the representations of the parties, the CRA grievances are denied, subject to the right, described above, of the Union to seek to argue that Mr. Campbell’s CRA grievance raises certain human rights issues and the Employer’s right to object to that as an expansion of grounds. Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 18th day of December, 2018. “Ian Anderson” ______________________ Ian Anderson, Arbitrator