HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-0014.Smith et al.88-01-20File # 14/80, 30180, 45/80,.
46180, 48180, 72180,
75180, 82180, 83180,
98/,8O, 100/80, 143180
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEWENT BOARD
BETWEEN:
OPSEU (Smith et al)
and
The Crown in Right of Ontario
(Ministry of Correctional Services)
BEFORE :
FOR THE GRIEVOR:
FOR THE EMPLOYER:
DATE OF HEARING:
O.B. Shime Vice Chairman
J. McManus Member
D. Wallace Member
A. Ryder
Counse 1
Gowling and Henderson
Barristers and Solicitors
J. F. Benedict
Manager
Staff Relations & Compensation
Ministry of Correctional Services
November 13, 1987
. . .
DECISL.ON
There is very little dispute about the facts in this case. They
.I
essentially arise out of a strike in the Province of Ontario on December 3,
4, 5, 1979 by employees in the Correctional Institutions. It is
acknowledged that the strike is unlawful.
On December 5, 1979, the strike was settled by an agreement between the
parties and on December 12, 1979 a letter was sent to all employees of the
Ministry of Correctional Services who participated in the strike including
those who were on the picket line during their time off but tiho did not
withdraw their services. This arbitration is concerned with all or the
remaining grievances arising from that strike that have not been dealt with
by previous panels of this Board.
The evidence indicated that other employees who were not in the Ministry of
Correctional Services and who had walked on the picket line during their
time off but who had not withdrawn their services were not disciplined. It
is on that basis that the counsel for the union claimed that the
disciplinary notices.of December 12, 1979, were discriminatory with respect
to those employees of the Ministry of Correctional Services who had not
withdrawn their services but who had joined the picket line. The employer
submits that the penalty was minimal and patently reasonable and that
discipline was contemplated in the Memorandum of Agreement signed by the
parties which ended the strike.
2
Having regard to the evidence and to the submissions of the parties it is
our view that when the parties signed the Memorandum of Settlement ending
the strike special consideration was given to the circumstances surrounding
those employees in the Ministry of Correctional Services where the work
stopage originated. It was contemplated that since the Ministry of
Correctional Services was the focus of the strike that employees of that
Ministry would be disciplined.
Accordingly it is our view that in the particular circumstances of this
Case including the Memorandum of Settlement that the distinction made
between the employees of the Ministry of Correctional Services and other
ministries was not inapp;opriate and accordingly the grievances are
dismissed.
DATED at Toronto, Ontario this 20thday of January, 1988.
D. Wallace, Member