HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-1814.Comeau.08-12-05 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#2007-1814
UNION#2007-0108-0058
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Comeau)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFOREVice-Chair
Barry Stephens
FOR THE UNION
Scott Andrews, Frank Inglis & Greg McVeigh
Grievance Officers
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Karen Martin, Greg Gledhill & Brian Scott
Staff Relations Officers
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
HEARINGNovember 27, 2008.
2
Decision
[1]The parties have agreed to an Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol. It is not
necessary to reproduce the entire Protocol here. Suffice it to say that the parties have
agreed to a ?True Mediation-Arbitration? process, wherein each provides the Vice-Chair
with submissions, which include the facts and authorities each relies upon. This decision
is issued in accordance with the Protocol and with Article 22.16 of the collective
agreement, and is without prejudice or precedent.
[2]The grievor received a letter of reprimand for insubordination related to a dispute over
the delivery of canteen to inmates. Aramark, a private company, has contracted with the
ministry to provide canteen services to the institution. It is not unusual that some canteen
items remain undistributed after Aramark?s distribution process. In this case, the grievor
was directed to complete the distribution of the canteen that had been left behind by
Aramark. He refused the order. The grievor takes the position that the distribution of
canteen has been contracted out and is not the responsibility of members of the
bargaining unit. The employer responds that the distribution of canteen to inmates is
appropriate work for corrections officers and, further, the grievor is required to obey all
orders, and to grieve after if he believes the order in some way contravenes the collective
agreement.
3
[3]After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, it is my
conclusion that the grievance should be dismissed.
th
Dated at Toronto this 5 day of December, 2008.
Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair