Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-1671.Ashley.20-12-14 Decision Crown 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# 2019-1671 UNION# 2019-0234-0224 IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION Under THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT Before THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD BETWEEN Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Ashley) Union - and - The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of the Solicitor General) Employer BEFORE Gail Misra Arbitrator FOR THE UNION Dan Sidsworth Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer FOR THE EMPLOYER Michelle LaButte Treasury Board Secretariat Employee Relations Advisor HEARING September 28, 2020 and December 11, 2020 - 2 - Decision [1] Since the spring of 2000 the parties have been meeting regularly to address matters of mutual interest which have arisen as the result of the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (now, the Ministry of the Solicitor General) as well as the Ministry of Children and Youth Services restructuring initiatives around the Province. Through the MERC (Ministry Employment Relations Committee) a subcommittee was established to deal with issues arising from the transition process. The parties have negotiated a series of MERC agreements setting out the process for how organizational changes will unfold for Correctional and Youth Services staff and for non-Correctional and non-Youth Services staff. [2] The parties agreed that this Board would remain seized of all issues that arise through this process and it is this agreement that provides me the jurisdiction to resolve the outstanding matters. [3] Over the years as some institutions and/or youth centres decommissioned or reduced in size others were built or expanded. The parties have made efforts to identify vacancies and positions and the procedures for the filling of those positions as they become available. [4] The parties have also negotiated a number of agreements that provide for the “roll- over” of fixed term staff to regular (classified) employee status. [5] Hundreds of grievances have been filed as the result of the many changes that have taken place at provincial institutions. The transition subcommittee has, with the assistance of this Board, mediated numerous disputes. Others have come before this Board for disposition. [6] It was determined by this Board at the outset that the process for these disputes would be somewhat more expedient. To that end, grievances are presented by way of statements of fact and succinct submissions. On occasion, clarification has been sought from grievors and institutional managers at the request of the Board. This process has served the parties well. The decisions are without prejudice but attempt to provide guidance for future disputes. [7] Brett Ashley held the position of a Provincial Bailiff in the inmate transfer program. Mr. Ashley filed a grievance dated September 11, 2019, claiming that the Employer has violated various collective agreement provisions and policies when it made an arbitrary decision to disband the Offender Transportation Department and assign the work to others. By way of remedy the Grievor seeks full redress, financial compensation and any other appropriate remedies. [8] By a letter dated May 31, 2019, the President of the Union was advised that the Ministry of the Solicitor General was providing disclosure to the Union regarding a realignment of work within the Institutional Operations Branch, Institutional Services Division. In order to suit the Ministry’s business needs, the reporting relationship for - 3 - three OPSEU-represented positions was going to be changed. The Union was advised that there would be transfer of all duties from the Bailiff and Regional Transfer Coordinator positions into the Correctional Officer position, and was told of the number of OPSEU members who would be affected. The Employer indicated its commitment to work through the Employee Transition Unit and the Employee Transition MERC subcommittee, along with the Union, to ensure that the impacts on those affected would be minimized. Mr. Ashley was one of the affected employees. [9] In accordance with the terms of the collective agreement, and in order to minimize the effects of the changes on the workers affected, the parties reached a Memorandum of Agreement (“MOA”) dated August 14, 2019 regarding Provincial Bailiff 1’s and Provincial Bailiff 2’s. Each person affected in these classifications was to be given the opportunity to indicate the institution they wished to be assigned to as a Correctional Officer 2, and the MERC Transition sub-committee was to manage the placement of all such individuals. Transfers were to occur on September 9, 2019. In addition, the Bailiffs were to continue to be paid their respective salaries from their former positions, including salary progression to the maximum salary of those former positions. On January 1, 2021 the Provincial Bailiff 1’s were to be moved into corresponding steps in the Correctional Officer 2 wage grid. They were all to get training, orientation, uniforms and equipment. As well, the affected Bailiffs had the option of electing to exit the Ontario Public Service. [10] Based on the documents and submissions before me, and a review of the collective agreement, it is clear that the Employer was acting within its Management Rights in determining that it needed to realign work to suit its business needs. In this instance, it was a matter of changing the reporting relationships. There is no evidence to support a finding that this was an arbitrary decision. Furthermore, the Employer gave notice to the Union and to the affected employees. The parties negotiated a MOA for the members who were affected by the realignment, and the Grievor had the benefit of those provisions that enhanced the entitlements under the collective agreement. [11] Having considered the facts and the submissions of the parties, and for the reasons outlined above, this grievance is dismissed. Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 14th day of December, 2020. “Gail Misra” ________________________ Gail Misra, Arbitrator