HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-2901.Tsangaris.19-06-27 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# 2009-2901; 2010-0671
UNION# 2009-0530-0151; 2010-0530-0065
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Tsangaris) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services) Employer
BEFORE
Gail Misra
Arbitrator
FOR THE UNION
Dan Sidsworth
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER James Cheng
Treasury Board Secretariat
Employee Relations Advisor
HEARING June 26, 2019
-2-
DECISION
[1] The Employer and the Union at the Toronto South Detention Centre (TSDC)
agreed to participate in mediation-arbitration in accordance with the Local
Mediation-Arbitration Protocol that has been negotiated by the parties. Should
mediation not result in resolution of a grievance, pursuant to the Protocol, they
have agreed to a mediation-arbitration process by which each party provides the
Arbitrator with their submissions setting out their respective facts and the
authorities they may be relying upon. This decision is issued in accordance with
the Protocol and with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement, so that it is
without precedent or prejudice to any other matters between the parties, and is
issued without written reasons.
[2] Emmanouel Tsangaris worked at the Toronto Jail as a Cook 4, or Head Cook, in
the Kitchen. Since the Toronto Jail closed some time ago, any outstanding
grievances from that facility are dealt with through the TSDC.
[3] Mr. Tsangaris filed a grievance dated December 23, 2009, claiming that he
should have been scheduled for work on December 25, 2009 in accordance with
his compressed work week rotating schedule and was not. The Grievor claims
that his schedule was changed without notice, and he was “laid off” for his 12
hour shift on December 25, 2009. Mr. Tsangaris states that he made himself
available for recall in accordance with a local agreement, but was bypassed and
not “hired” for that date. The Employer had a Cook 2 fill in for him while he was
off work on the statutory holiday. As such he was deprived of being able to work
on a statutory holiday, and being paid at premium rates accordingly.
[4] It later became clear that the Grievor had also been given the statutory holiday
on January 1, 2010 off, and was claiming that he should have been scheduled to
work that statutory holiday as well, and paid accordingly.
[5] Mr. Tsangaris filed a second grievance regarding the same issue on April 28,
2010, claiming that he was not given the opportunity to be “recalled” on three
statutory holidays, as per a local agreement: April 2, 2010 (Good Friday), April 4,
2010 (Easter Monday), and May 24, 2010 (Victoria Day).
[6] Although on March 8, 2010 the Grievor had advised the Toronto Jail that he
would be resigning from his position effective May 31, 2010, he maintains that he
remained available to be “recalled” for the statutory holidays outlined in his
second grievance.
[7] The Employer does not dispute that the Grievor’s schedule was changed to
ensure that he did not have to work on the five statutory holidays in question in
these two grievances. However, that was done in accordance with the terms of
the collective agreement between the Union and Employer.
-3-
[8] There is no evidence before me of any local agreement regarding the Kitchen
department that would override the terms of the collective agreement which
entitles employees like the Grievor to have statutory holidays off. As well, the
Grievance Settlement Board has addressed this issue in the past, and has held
that certain types of employees are entitled to paid statutory holidays off from
work, and that there is no requirement that the Employer keep a regularly
scheduled worker on a statutory holiday shift, and pay them premium rates of
pay, unless there is a requirement for that worker’s services because someone
else is not available to do the work.
[9] Having considered the submissions of the parties, I find no breach of the
collective agreement in these two grievances, and they are hereby denied.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 27th day of June, 2019.
“Gail Misra”
______________________
Gail Misra, Arbitrator