Brian P. Sheehan

The grievor, a warehouse worker, received a Letter of Reprimand after striking a pillar while operating a forklift in reverse.

The union grieved the discipline, arguing the grievor was not looking backwards for as long as alleged and had not received refresher training upon returning from maternity leave.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding the discipline was reasonable as the grievor should not have needed a reminder of the fundamental safety rule to be aware of obstacles while operating a forklift in reverse.

The Grievance Settlement Board held a Med/Arb session to resolve outstanding overtime grievances between the union and the employer at a correctional institution.

Following the presentation of facts and submissions, the arbitrator issued a bottom-line decision without reasons, upholding certain grievances with orders for overtime compensation and dismissing others, as detailed in the attached appendix.

The union filed grievances arguing that the newly created Correctional Supervisor position should be treated as the vacant CO3 position, allowing CO2 employees to advance to it based on length of service.

The employer had previously assigned excluded Sergeants to the new position, which a prior arbitration found to be a 'new position' requiring posting.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievances, finding that the Correctional Supervisor position was not the CO3 position and had not been treated as such by the parties, noting the union's own prior argument that it was a new position requiring posting.

The union filed grievances arguing that the newly created Correctional Supervisor position should be treated as the vacant CO3 position, which would allow CO2s to advance to it based on length of service.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievances, noting that in a previous arbitration, the union had successfully argued that the Correctional Supervisor position was a 'new position' under the collective agreement and should be posted.

Because the Correctional Supervisor position is not the CO3 position, there was no basis to find a violation of the collective agreement.

The grievor, a registered nurse, alleged that the employer improperly deducted a full two hours of Compensation Time Off (CTO) credits for WSIB-approved absences, rather than the 15% top-up amount required to supplement the 85% WSIB reimbursement.

Following an expedited mediation/arbitration process, the arbitrator reviewed the relevant records and determined that the employer had correctly allocated the appropriate amount of CTO credits to top up the grievor's wages.

The grievance was dismissed.

The grievor, a correctional officer, was issued a 10-day suspension after an investigation found he entered a unit alone without backup and left a door unlocked while responding to an inmate assault.

The union grieved the discipline.

In an expedited mediation/arbitration, the arbitrator found the 10-day suspension excessive and reduced it to a 2-day suspension, citing mitigating factors including the grievor's lack of prior discipline, his intent to assist the assaulted inmate, and his acknowledgment of misconduct.

Two correctional officers grieved five-day suspensions issued for an incident involving an inmate during a strip search.

The employer alleged the officers used excessive force by striking the inmate in the face and subsequently submitted false Use of Force Occurrence Reports to justify their actions, claiming the inmate was attempting suicide by ingesting drugs.

After reviewing video evidence, the arbitrator found the video did not support the officers' claims that the inmate ingested anything, and concluded the strikes were unnecessary and excessive.

The arbitrator also found the officers' reports were fundamentally inconsistent with the video and failed to mention that both officers had struck the inmate.

The grievances were dismissed and the suspensions upheld.

The grievor, a correctional officer with over thirty years of discipline-free service, received a three-day suspension for failing to file a Use of Force Occurrence Report following an incident involving an inmate.

The arbitrator found that the grievor did not witness the most serious use of force and that a superior officer had explicitly told other involved officers not to file reports.

The grievance was upheld, and the suspension was substituted with a coaching letter.

The grievor, a correctional officer, was issued a five-day suspension following the death of an inmate.

The employer alleged the grievor failed to seek medical assistance for the inmate and submitted an inaccurate occurrence report.

The arbitrator found the employer was justified in disciplining the grievor but reduced the suspension to three days, noting the grievor's limited contact with the inmate, his acknowledgment of his errors, and his lack of prior discipline.

The Union filed a grievance regarding the Employer's decision to discontinue a 30-year practice of allowing shift exchanges between Correctional Officers in the Property Post position, which sometimes resulted in double shifts at straight time pay.

The parties participated in an Expedited Mediation/Arbitration process.

The Arbitrator found that the Employer was estopped from discontinuing the long-standing practice and ordered the Employer to allow the shift exchanges as mutually agreed upon.

The parties participated in a Med/Arb process to resolve outstanding overtime grievances within the Ministry of the Solicitor General.

Following a hearing, the arbitrator issued a bottom-line decision without reasons, as agreed by the parties in their Memorandum of Agreement.

The decision resolved 67 individual grievances, dismissing the majority and upholding several others with specific awards of overtime hours or straight time.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a cook who worked 22 two-hour after-hours assignments to provide meals for an inmate observing Ramadan.

The employer paid four hours of call back pay for the first assignment and two hours of regular overtime for the remaining 21.

The union argued all 22 assignments should be compensated as call backs under the collective agreement.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the 21 assignments were pre-arranged overtime, not call backs, because the grievor was not called back to work after leaving the workplace.

The parties participated in a Med/Arb process to resolve outstanding overtime grievances at various institutions, pursuant to a 2011 Memorandum of Agreement.

The arbitrator reviewed 25 individual grievances during a session on December 5, 2024.

The decision sets out the disposition of each grievance in an attached appendix, with some grievances upheld for specific hours of overtime or double time, and others dismissed.

The Union filed grievances on behalf of two Correctional Officers with medical restrictions, alleging the Employer breached its duty to accommodate by bypassing them for overtime opportunities on the night shift.

The Union argued the Employer should have accommodated the grievors by assigning them on an over-complement basis or by bundling duties to create viable overtime shifts.

The Arbitrator dismissed the grievances, finding that the Employer properly applied the Provincial Overtime Protocol, which included a mechanism for switching assignments to accommodate restrictions.

The Arbitrator held that the duty to accommodate does not require an employer to assign unproductive work or to create above-complement positions, particularly at premium overtime rates.

The parties participated in a Med/Arb process to resolve outstanding overtime grievances at various institutions within the Ministry of the Solicitor General.

Following a hearing on May 28, 2024, the Arbitrator issued a bottom-line decision resolving 102 individual overtime grievances.

Several grievances were upheld with specific overtime hours awarded, while the majority were dismissed.

The union filed grievances on behalf of three fixed-term correctional officers who were sent home from their pre-scheduled day shifts and directed to work night shifts due to staff shortages.

The union argued this violated the collective agreement's overtime and scheduling provisions.

The arbitrator found no violation regarding the overtime protocol, as the employer was not obligated to assign available work to fixed-term employees over those already working overtime.

However, the arbitrator held that the employer violated the collective agreement by failing to verbally confirm the shift changes in advance, granting declaratory relief.

The parties engaged in a Med/Arb process to resolve outstanding overtime grievances at various institutions.

Following a hearing on December 7, 2023, the Arbitrator issued a decision without reasons, as agreed by the parties, detailing the disposition of 23 individual overtime grievances.

Several grievances were upheld with specific hours of overtime awarded, while others were dismissed.

The grievor, a correctional officer, completed an online mental health training program at work.

The employer had offered 12 hours of overtime compensation for employees who completed the program at home on a non-workday.

The grievor claimed she completed the program a second time at home on her smartphone and sought the overtime compensation.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the grievor had already completed the course at work and was paid for doing so, and there was no basis for her to receive additional compensation for completing it a second time.

The parties engaged in a Med/Arb process to resolve outstanding overtime grievances.

Following a hearing on June 20, 2023, the Arbitrator issued a bottom-line decision without reasons, as agreed by the parties.

The majority of the grievances were dismissed, while a few were upheld with specific overtime hours awarded to the grievors.

The grievor, a correctional officer, received a 3-day suspension for allegedly failing to contact the Health Unit regarding an inmate's medication needs, uttering racial slurs, and failing to report the incident.

The arbitrator found insufficient corroborating evidence to substantiate the allegation of racial slurs.

However, the arbitrator concluded that the grievor did fail to contact the Health Unit as requested by the inmate, which warranted a modest disciplinary response.

The grievance was upheld in part, and the 3-day suspension was reduced to a written warning with the grievor to be made whole for lost wages and benefits.