Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-0146.Randhawa.08-02-29 Decision Commission de Crown Employees Grievance Settlement règlement des griefs Board des employés de la Couronne Suite 600 Bureau 600 180 Dundas St. West 180, rue Dundas Ouest Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tél. : (416) 326-1388 Fax (416) 326-1396 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396 GSB# 2004-0146 UNION# 2004-0517-0029 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Randhawa) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer BEFOREVice-Chair Marilyn A. Nairn FOR THE UNION Stephen Giles Grievance Officer Ontario Public Service Employees Union FOR THE EMPLOYER Pauline Jones Staff Relations Officer Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services HEARING February 20, 2008. 2 Decision This decision flows from a mediation-arbitration session held on February 19 and 20, 2008, for bargaining unit employees at the Metro West Detention Centre. Going into the session, there was agreement that the parties were to utilize a process reflected in a mediation-arbitration protocol negotiated between them. That protocol contemplates the use of an expedited mediation-arbitration process to determine grievances brought forward during that session. The process contemplates that the parties will attempt to resolve matters through mediation, failing which, they have agreed that the Vice-Chair will determine the matter based on the material presented by both parties during the mediation-expedited arbitration session, without the need for further formal proceedings. The protocol stipulates and the parties are agreed that any award issued in this process will be without reasons, does not constitute a precedent, and is without prejudice to the positions of the parties in any other matter. In rare cases, if it becomes apparent to either party, or to the Vice-Chair, that the issues involved are of a nature that cannot appropriately be dealt with through this expedited process, the case may be processed through ?regular? arbitration. Such was not the case here. Although individual grievors often wish to provide oral evidence at arbitration, the process adopted by the parties provides for a thorough canvassing of the facts and leads to a fair and efficient adjudication process. This grievance asserted that the employer had incorrectly calculated the length of the grievor?s continuous service. Having regard to the material submitted by the parties, I find that Sandeep Randhawa?s continuous service date is appropriately determined to be September 30, 1999. These proceedings are hereby concluded. th day of February, 2008. Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 29 Marilyn A. Nairn, Vice-Chair.