HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-2650.Sokol et al.09-10-16 Decision
Commission de Commission de
Crown Employeess
Grievance Settlement Grievance Settlement
règlement des griefs règlement des griefs
BoardBoard
des employés de la des employés de la
Couronne Couronne
Suite 600 Suite 600 Bureau 600 Bureau 600
180 Dundas St. West 180 Dundas St. West 180, rue Dundas Ouest 180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tel. (416) 326-1388 Tél. : (416) 326-1388 Tél. : (416) 326-1388
Fax (416) 326-1396 Fax (416) 326-1396 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396 Téléc. : (416) 326-1396
GSB#2006-2650 GSB#2006-2650
UNION#2006-0229-0017UNION#2006-0229-0017
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
UUnnddeerr
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTHE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT TIVE BARGAINING ACT
BBeeffoorree
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEENBETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
èÏÔÎÏ
(Sokol et al)
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFOREVice-Chair
Felicity D. Briggs
FOR THE UNION
Laura Josephson
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYERBrian Scott
Ministry of Community Safety and
Correctional Services
Staff Relations Officer
HEARINGOctober 8, 2009.
DECISION
[1]The Employer and the Union at the Ontario Correctional Institute agreed to
participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance
with the negotiated Protocol. Most of the grievances were settled through
that process. However, a few remained unresolved and therefore require a
decision from this Board. The Protocol provides that decisions will be
issued within a relatively short period of time after the actual mediation
sessions and will be without reasons. Further, the decision is to be without
prejudice and precedent.
[2]A group grievance was filed on behalf of a number of Correctional Officers.
These officers were rolled over in accordance with an agreement between
the parties. The grievors allege that they are entitled to a variety of benefits
because the Employer allowed too much time to pass between the decision
to roll over these officers and the actual roll over date.
[3]Facts virtually identical to those set out by the Union in this case have been
argued before this Board and rejected in the past. For reasons stated in an
earlier decision (GSB #2003-3817 issued on November 23, 2006 and
GSB#2006-0604 issued on June 10, 2009) I am denying this grievance.
th
Dated at Toronto this 16 day of October 2009.
Felicity D. Briggs, Vice-Chair