The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2017-1142.Derjugin et al.20-11-02 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#2017-1142; 2017-1143; 2017-1144; 2017-1188; 2017-1189; 2017-1190; 2017-1191; 2017-1193; 2017-1194; 2017-1391; 2017-1392; 2017-1393; 2017-1533; 2017-1534; 2017-1535; 2017-1536; 2017-1537; 2017-1538; 2017-1539; 2017-1634 UNION#2017-0234-0112; 2017-0234-0113; 2017-0234-0114; 2017-0234-0115; 2017-0234-0116; 2017-0234-0117; 2017-0234-0118; 2017-0234-0120; 2017-0234-0121; 2017-0234-0129; 2017-0234- 0130; 2017-0234-0131; 2017-0234-0143; 2017-0234-0144; 2017-0234-0145; 2017-0234-0146; 2017-0234-0147; 2017-0234-0148; 2017-0234-0149; 2017-0234-0134 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Derjugin et al) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of the Solicitor General) Employer BEFORE Ken Petryshen Arbitrator FOR THE UNION Ruben Lindy and Amani Rauff (Co-Counsel) Dewart Gleason LLP FOR THE EMPLOYER Peter Dailleboust (Senior Counsel) Treasury Board Secretariat Legal Services Branch HEARING November 2, 2020 (by videoconference) -2- DECISION [1] I order as follows: 1. The Employer shall produce to the Union, on or before November 17, 2020, any arguably relevant documents, including, all documents in its possession, control, or power, relating to: a. complaints or concerns of any kind, including but not limited to occurrence reports and emails to management personnel, with respect to Mr. Pacheco’s conduct and/or harassment and/or an allegedly poisoned/unsafe working environment; b. any discipline of Mr. Pacheco for reasons relating to harassment and/or an allegedly poisoned/unsafe work environment and/or any other interactions with other employees in the OTO unit; c. any written communications, including emails, text messages, letters, etc., between the Employer and Mr. Pacheco or any other employees concerning any complaint, allegation, concern, etc., referred to at subparagraph (a) above, including communications between management personnel, including but not limited to Tom Dykstra, Adam Watson, Alan Quinn, Pam Fernandes, Jenny Cece, Brian O’Rourke, Rob Moxam, Pauline Jones, Daryl Pitfield, Christina Danylchenko, Jason Serre, etc.; d. any efforts by the employer to investigate or take corrective action to address any complaint, allegation, concern etc. referred to at subparagraph (a) above; e. complaints of any kind made by Mr. Pacheco with respect to any of the other employees in the OTO unit; f. any anonymous complaints received by the Employer with respect to OTO employees or management; g. any attempts on the Employer’s part to resolve disputes and/or concerns between employees in the OTO unit with regard to Mr. Pacheco’s conduct or an allegedly poisoned/unsafe working environment, including all records and notes relating to any mediation or other dispute resolution mechanism or meeting, including any discussions or decisions with respect to implementing the recommendations of such processes; h. any internal discussions, meetings, correspondence, etc., with regard to the decision to return Mr. Pacheco to the OTO unit as opposed to another Employer workplace and/or to require the grievors to continue working with Mr. Pacheco; and -3- i. any steps taken to address concerns about Mr. Pacheco’s conduct and/or tensions between Mr. Pacheco and others in the unit and/or for the protection of employees and managers in the OTO unit upon returning Mr. Pacheco to the workplace; and j. any documents related to mediation or dispute resolution processes in the OTO unit including the process led by Maureen Gauci. 2. If a document that falls within the scope of subparagraphs (a) to (j) was once but is no longer in the possession, control, or power of the Employer, the Employer shall advise the Union as to the nature of the document and the reason for which the document is no longer in the Employer’s possession, control, or power. 3. The Employer shall furnish the Union with a list of any documents over which it asserts privilege, and the reason for which privilege is asserted. 4. All documents that the Employer discloses are to be used by the Union for the sole purpose of this arbitration and any application for review, appeal, or other proceeding arising from any decision in this arbitration. 5. All documents disclosed by the Employer under the terms of this order will be delivered to Dewart Gleason LLP, the Union’s counsel in this arbitration. 6. With respect to any document disclosed by the Employer which contains the personal information of a bargaining unit employee or other person, Dewart Gleason LLP will: a. control the copying of any document which has been disclosed by the Employer under the terms of this order; b. collect all copies of any document made under Dewart Gleason LLP’s control at the conclusion of this arbitration or any subsequent proceeding arising from this arbitration except copies entered as exhibits in the arbitration and retained by the arbitrator and counsel for the Employer; c. except for a copy to be retained for its file, destroy all copies of the documents collected in accordance with subparagraph (b); d. after destruction confirm to counsel for the Employer that all copies, except for the retained filed copy, including electronic copies, have been destroyed. 7. This order extends to and includes any relevant and potentially relevant document, including any document in the Employer’s custody or under its control which contains the personal information of a bargaining unit -4- employee or other person, that is identified as relevant or potentially relevant at any time before the conclusion of this arbitration. [2] This order is not intended to compel disclosure of any document or portion of any document for which solicitor-client, litigation, or other privilege is complained. [3] In the event that there are any further disputes between the parties concerning production issues, I will convene a conference call on an expedited basis and determine the matter on the basis of the written record and the parties’ submissions. Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 2nd day of November, 2020. “Ken Petryshen” ______________________ Ken Petryshen, Arbitrator