Brian P. Sheehan

The Grievance Settlement Board held a Med-Arb session to resolve numerous outstanding overtime grievances between the union and the employer.

Following the presentation of facts and submissions by both parties, the arbitrator issued a bottom-line decision without reasons, as agreed by the parties.

The attached appendix details the disposition of each individual grievance, with some being upheld and others dismissed.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, received a one-day suspension for allegedly arriving late to her assigned post and using her cell phone in a secure area without authorization.

The grievor acknowledged the improper cell phone use but disputed the allegation of arriving late.

The arbitrator found that the acknowledged improper cell phone use was a sufficient basis for the one-day suspension, making it unnecessary to address the late arrival allegation.

The grievance was dismissed.

The union brought multiple overtime grievances on behalf of several employees at the Brantford Jail arising from a pilot project regarding the E-Roster computer scheduling system.

The parties utilized an agreed-upon Med/Arb process to resolve the disputes.

The arbitrator issued a bottom-line decision without reasons, upholding several grievances and awarding 12 hours at the overtime rate, while dismissing the remaining grievances.

The union filed a group grievance alleging that the employer violated Article 22.3 of the collective agreement by failing to hold grievance meetings regarding E-Roster scheduling grievances.

The employer did not dispute that certain meetings may not have taken place.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that under relevant jurisprudence, the failure to hold a grievance meeting or respond in a timely manner is deemed a negative response to the grievance.

This allows the union to move the grievance to the next step in the process, but does not in itself warrant any independent remedial relief.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued a decision resolving multiple overtime grievances through a Med/Arb process established by the parties.

The arbitrator reviewed the facts and submissions for each grievance, dismissing several and upholding others with specific awards of overtime hours or double time.

The grievor filed four grievances relating to missed overtime opportunities for ICIT deployments, denial of Administrative Compensating Leave (ACL) credits, and the early termination of a temporary assignment.

The arbitrator dismissed the ICIT deployment grievances as untimely, declining to exercise discretion under s. 48(16) of the Labour Relations Act to extend the time limits.

The ACL grievance was dismissed because the grievor was on a temporary assignment outside the bargaining unit on the qualifying date.

The temporary assignment grievance was dismissed as the collective agreement did not restrict the Employer's right to terminate the assignment early for operational reasons.

The union filed multiple grievances on behalf of a correctional officer regarding missed overtime opportunities for Institutional Crisis Intervention Team (ICIT) deployments, denial of Administrative Compensating Leave (ACL) credits, and the early termination of a temporary assignment outside the bargaining unit.

The arbitrator dismissed the ICIT deployment grievances as untimely, finding no reasonable explanation for the delay and potential prejudice to the employer.

The ACL grievance was dismissed because the grievor did not meet the eligibility criteria while on temporary assignment.

Finally, the arbitrator found no collective agreement violation in the early termination of the temporary assignment, as the employer had legitimate operational reasons to recall the grievor.

The grievor, a Rehabilitation Officer, returned to work on an accommodation plan involving a work hardening program.

During this program, she was not offered an overtime opportunity that arose on November 26, as her work hardening program was not scheduled to end until November 29.

The union grieved the missed overtime opportunity, arguing she could have completed the work within the required 7-day period.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding the employer's decision not to offer the overtime was reasonable given the limited time the grievor would have had to perform the work while still under the work hardening restrictions.

The union filed a grievance alleging that the employer breached the Overtime Protocol by assigning a discharge assessment for a general population inmate to a social worker instead of offering it as an overtime opportunity to the grievor, a classification officer/discharge.

The union argued that the work exclusively belonged to rehabilitation officers for inmates in the institution for less than 180 days.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the work in question was not overtime work and therefore the Overtime Protocol was not breached.

The Union filed grievances alleging the Employer breached the Overtime Protocol by failing to offer the grievor overtime opportunities while she was absent due to illness.

The Arbitrator found that the Employer breached the protocol by not offering a 5-hour overtime opportunity on April 3, and that a subsequent offer on April 4 did not rectify the breach.

The grievance regarding the 5-hour opportunity was upheld and the Employer was ordered to pay 5 hours of overtime.

A second grievance regarding an 8-hour opportunity was dismissed on agreement.

The grievor, a General Duties Officer, volunteered to work one hour prior to her scheduled shift to assist with inmate releases.

She was paid one hour of overtime.

The Union grieved, arguing she was entitled to four hours of 'Call Back' pay under Article COR 9.1 because she had not indicated availability for part-shift overtime on the scheduling system.

The Arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that working an extra hour contiguous to the start of a regular shift constitutes a shift extension, not a call back, as it does not involve the inconvenience of an additional trip to and from work.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of the grievor, who subsequently failed to attend two scheduled mediation/arbitration proceedings.

The arbitrator noted that a grievor must make reasonable efforts to participate in the adjudication of their grievance, and failure to attend can be viewed as abandonment.

The arbitrator ordered the grievor to attend the next scheduled session, failing which the grievance would be deemed withdrawn.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer.

The grievor failed to attend two scheduled mediation/arbitration proceedings despite receiving notice.

The arbitrator noted that a failure to attend can be viewed as an abandonment of the grievance.

The arbitrator ordered the grievor to attend the next scheduled session, failing which the grievance would be deemed withdrawn.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer.

The grievor failed to attend two scheduled expedited mediation/arbitration proceedings despite receiving notice.

The arbitrator ordered the grievor to attend the next scheduled session, failing which the grievance would be deemed withdrawn.

The grievor failed to attend two scheduled mediation/arbitration proceedings regarding her grievance.

The arbitrator noted that a grievor must make reasonable efforts to participate in the adjudication of their grievance, and failure to attend can be viewed as abandonment.

The arbitrator ordered the grievor to attend the next scheduled session, failing which the grievance will be deemed withdrawn.

The grievor failed to attend two scheduled mediation/arbitration proceedings regarding his grievance.

The arbitrator noted that a grievor must make reasonable efforts to participate in the adjudication of their grievance, and failure to attend can be viewed as abandonment.

The arbitrator ordered the grievor to attend the next scheduled session, failing which the grievance will be deemed withdrawn.

The grievor failed to attend scheduled mediation/arbitration proceedings regarding her grievance.

The arbitrator ordered the grievor to attend the next scheduled session, failing which her grievance would be deemed withdrawn.

The parties engaged in a med-arb process to resolve outstanding overtime grievances at various institutions within the Ministry of the Solicitor General.

Following hearings over several days, the arbitrator issued a bottom-line award detailing the disposition of numerous individual grievances, with some upheld for specific hours of overtime and others dismissed.

The union filed two grievances on behalf of a correctional officer alleging mistreatment by management at the Kenora Jail.

The first grievance alleged a superintendent created a poisoned work environment, while the second alleged an operational manager publicly mocked the first grievance, breaching the grievor's privacy.

The matter proceeded via expedited mediation/arbitration.

The grievor did not attend the hearing and no further particulars were provided.

The arbitrator dismissed both grievances, finding an insufficient factual basis to establish any wrongdoing by management.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, requested time off which was denied.

The grievor subsequently booked off sick for the same days.

The Employer requested a medical note, suspecting sick leave abuse, and the grievor complied.

The grievor sought reimbursement of $40.00 for the cost of the note.

The Arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that under Article 44.10 of the collective agreement, the Employer had a reasonable basis to request the note and was not obligated to cover its cost.