HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-0681.McCool.11-11-09 DecisionCommission de
Crown Employees
Grievance Settlement
UqJOHPHQt des griefs
Board
dHVHPSOR\pVGHOD
Couronne
Suite 600 Bureau 600
180 Dundas St. West180, rue Dundas Ouest
Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8 Toronto (Ontario) M5G 1Z8
Tel. (416) 326-1388 7pl. : (416) 326-1388
x (416) 326-1396 7pOpF
Fa
GSB#2010-0681
UNION#2010-0122-0002
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
(McCool)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Children and Youth Services)
Employer
BEFORE Barry Stephens Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNIONFrank Inglis and Tim Mulhall
Ontario Public Service Employees Union
Grievance Officers
FOR THE EMPLOYERNicholas Sapp
Ministry of Government Services
Centre for Employee Relations
Employee Relations Advisor
HEARING
August 19, 2011.
- 2 -
Decision
???
The parties agreed to present this grievance in accordance with Article 22.16 of the
collective agreement, and this decision is without prejudice or precedent.
???
The grievance in this case relates to a claim for compassionate leave. The grievor states
that on March 17, 2010, after a number of problems related to plumbing work done at her house,
her shower door shattered. Her lawyer advised her she should contact the plumber who had done
the work and have that person effect repairs. She then called the employer and advised she
needed the day off to deal with the problem. She applied for compassionate leave to deal with a
domestic emergency. The employer denied the request, taking the position that the grievor could
have found someone else to fix the shower, and that, even if she chose otherwise, the work was
not the type emergency that required leave since no further damage was being done to the house
while she was waiting for repairs.
???
After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, I accept the
HPSOR\HU¶VYLHZZDVUHDVRQDEOHLQDOORIWKHcircumstances. I am not persuaded that the
plumbing work in question was of such a nature that there was an urgent and pressing need for
compassionate leave. While I can appreciate the JULHYRU¶VIUXVWUDWLRQZith the circumstances, I
am required to balance the problem she faced with the requirement to apply compassionate leave
to events that meet appropriate criteria. In the context of a household emergency it is reasonable
to consider whether the dilemma faced by the employee poses imminent risk of greater harm or
damage such that it requires immediate attention. In other words, the risks presented by the
emergency should at least entail that it would be unreasonable to expect the employee to attend
- 3 -
work. It is my conclusion that the circumstances of this case do not meet that test and the
grievance is therefore dismissed.
th
Dated at Toronto this 9 day of November 2011.
Barry Stephens, Vice-Chair