HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-0167.MacDonald.10-12-09 Decision
Commission de
Crown Employees
Grievance
UqJOHPHQWGHVJULHIV
Settlement Board
GHVHPSOR\pVGHOD
Couronne
Suite 600 Bureau 600
180 Dundas St. West 180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388 7pO
Fax (416) 326-1396 7pOpF
GSB#2010-0167
UNION#2010-0369-0018
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
(MacDonald)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFOREBarry Stephens Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNIONScott Andrews, Tim Mulhall
Grievance Officers
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
FOR THE EMPLOYERKaren Martin, Brian Scott
Ministry of Government Services
Employee Relations Division
Staff Relations Officer
HEARING
November 26, 2010.
- 2 -
Decision
[1]The parties have agreed to an Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol. It is not
necessary to reproduce the entire Protocol here. Suffice it to say that the parties have
DJUHHGWRD³7UXH0HGLDWLRQ$UELWUDWLRQ´SUocess, wherein each provides the Vice-Chair
with submissions, which include the facts and authorities each relies upon. This decision is
issued in accordance with the Protocol and with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement,
and is without prejudice or precedent.
[2]The grievance in this case relates to the grieYRU¶VFODLPWRRSWRXWof escort training in
accordance with the protocol negotiated between the parties on July 11, 2004. The
Questions and Answers document related to that protocol, which is itself a jointly agreed
GRFXPHQWVWLSXODWHVWKDWD³RQHWLPHRSSRUWXQLW\´WRRSWRXWRIPDQGDWRU\HVFRUWWUDLQLQJ
was available to all correctional officers who ZHUH³FODVVLILHGDVRI-XO\´7KH
grievor argues that she should have this right, either as a result of the fact that she was a
classified CO prior to July 11, 2004, or that it became retroactively applicable to her when
CNCC was transferred to the jurisdiction of the OPS on November 9, 2006.
[3]The employer responds that the agreement between the parties governing the transfer of
CNCC to the OPS, dated September 18, 2006, is silent on the one-time opportunity offered
under the escort training protocol. The latter protocol language is clear, however, and
states that the one-time opportunity was available only to employees who were classified
Correctional Officers on July 11, 2004. On that date the grievor was not an employee of
the OPS and clearly did not hold the position of a classified CO within the OPS. Moreover,
although the grievor worked for the OPS in the past, she left the OPS prior to
- 3 -
July 11, 2004 in order to take a position at CNCC when it was not part of the OPS. Her
status as an OPS employee has no bearing on the fact that she was not a classified CO on
July 11, 2004. Moreover, the employer argues, the required status was not conferred
retroactively on the grievor by the transition agreement or otherwise.
[4]After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, it is my
conclusion that the grievance should be dismissed.
th
Dated at Toronto this 9 day of December 2010.
Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair