HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-3708.Union.21-01-18 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#2014-3708
UNION# 2014-0999-0140
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(Union) Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Treasury Board Secretariat) Employer
BEFORE Nimal Dissanayake Arbitrator
FOR THE UNION Tim Hannigan
Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP
Counsel
FOR THE EMPLOYER Benjamin Parry
Treasury Board Secretariat
Legal Services Branch
Senior Counsel
HEARING January 14, 2021
- 2 -
Decision
[1] The instant policy grievance was dated November 19, 2014, and first came
before the Board on October 14, 2016. By agreement, the parties put to the
Board different aspects of the grievance consecutively over multiple hearing
dates, and the Board issued several decisions.
[2] When the matter resumed on January 14, 2021, the parties jointly requested
that the Board mediate a number of issues. They provided additional
information and clarified the scope of the issues raised in the grievance.
[3] Following discussions with the Board’s assistance, the parties advised that they
had signed minutes finally resolving the grievance itself, as well as an
application for judicial review that had been filed with respect to one of the
decisions of the Board in this matter. The parties further advised that under
the terms of the minutes both matters are deemed withdrawn, subject to the
issuance of a further decision by the Board, taking into account the additional
information and clarification they had provided.
[4] Having regard to the joint position of the parties, it is hereby ordered as follows
with regard to the Board decision in this matter dated July 18, 2017.
(A) Paragraph 66 of that decision is deleted and replaced by the following:
“The consent form currently in use is too broadly worded. It should
be amended to be consistent with the requirements set out in the
answers to question 1 and 2 above, It must be ensured that any
references in the cover letter to the three “w’s”, are consistent with
the information in the corresponding consent form. Since the form
makes reference to the cover letter, it would be confusing to the
employee, if the manager uses language in the cover letter that
may be interpreted as broader than what is set out in the form
itself.”
(B) Paragraph 67 of the decision is deleted and replaced by the following:
“I will not address the broad issue in items (b) and (c) since they
related to what health information the employer is entitled to”.
[5] Upon the release of this decision, the Registrar shall deem the instant policy
grievance and the outstanding application for judicial review, Court File No.
- 3 -
029/15 filed on January 11, 2018 in relation to the Board decision dated July 18,
2017, withdrawn and update the Board records accordingly.
Dated at Toronto, Ontario this 18th day of January, 2021.
“Nimal Dissanayake”
Nimal Dissanayake, Arbitrator