HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-2388.Hawkes.10-08-17 Decision
Commission de
Crown Employees
Grievance Settlement
règlement des griefs
Board
des employés de la
Couronne
Suite 600 Bureau 600
180 Dundas St. West180, 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#2007-2388
UNION#2007-0302-0016
?Additional File Numbers listed in Appendix ?A?
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public ployees Union Service Em
(Hawkes)Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFOREDeborah J.D. Leighton Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNIONEd Holmes
Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP
Barristers and Solicitors
FOR THE EMPLOYERPeter Dailleboust
Ministry of Government Services
Legal Services Branch
Counsel
HEARING March 3, 2010.
- 2 -
Decision
[1]This order addresses the union?s application for interim relief in this matter. The
application was made well into the hearing on the merits of multiple grievances of Ms. Valerie
Hawkes, whose home position is as a Probation and Parole Officer with the Ministry.
The union seeks the following:
a)An order that the grievor be placed into a position in her home area outside of the
Ministry that meets her job qualifications and medical restrictions, and which is
commensurate with the pay and benefits she would have received if she was still
working at her home position, or
b)In the alternative, an order that the Ministry be required to pay the funding for an
extension of her temporary Part III Prosecutor position with the Ministry of
Revenue/Ministry of Finance, if her contract is not extended, or
c)A paid leave of absence.
[2] The union submits that this board has the jurisdiction to grant such interim relief and that
the evidence supports the order. The employer argues that the board lacks the jurisdiction to
grant what it considers to be substantive interim relief, rather than procedural orders permitted
under the Labour Relations Act. If the board has jurisdiction, the employer further submits that
the evidence does not support an order.
[3] Having carefully considered the submissions of the parties on the union?s motion for
interim relief in this matter, I have decided to deny the application. I have also decided not to
provide reasons for this interim ruling until the decision on the merits is issued at the end of the
- 3 -
hearing. I do this in part because of the nature of the case and in giving reasons for the interim
decision I would have to comment on evidence which is also before me for the case on the
merits.
th
Dated at Toronto this 17 day of August 2010.
Deborah J.D. Leighton, Vice-Chair
- 4 -
?Appendix ?A?
GSB Number OPSEU File Number
2007-23892007-0302-0017
2007-23902007-0302-0018
2007-23912007-0302-0019
2007-23922007-0302-0020
2007-23932007-0302-0021
2007-23942007-0302-0022
2007-23952007-0302-0023
2007-23962007-0302-0024
2007-23972007-0302-0025
2007-23982007-0302-0026
2007-23992007-0302-0027
2007-24002007-0302-0028
2007-24012007-0302-0029
2007-24022007-0302-0030
2007-24032007-0302-0031
2009-05462009-0302-0001
2009-05472009-0302-0002
2009-05482009-0302-0003
2009-05492009-0302-0004
2009-05502009-0302-0005
2009-05512009-0302-0007
2009-05522009-0302-0008
2009-05532009-0302-0009
2009-05542009-0302-0010
2009-05552009-0302-0011