Felicity D. Briggs

The grievor, a Library Technician 3 at Maplehurst Correctional Complex, filed a grievance alleging the employer violated Appendix 25 and Article 56 of the Collective Agreement by failing to convert her from unclassified part-time to regular part-time status.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that Appendix 25 only requires the parties to discuss the concept of conversion and does not provide an individual right to it.

Furthermore, the arbitrator held there was no jurisdiction to order the employer to provide full-time library services or to convert the grievor to classified status under the Collective Agreement.

The union filed a group grievance on behalf of correctional officers who were permanently assigned to a new correctional complex following facility closures.

The grievors claimed they were entitled to travel time and mileage, noting that some co-workers were receiving these benefits.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that under the transition agreement, travel time and mileage were only payable for temporary assignments.

Because the grievors were permanently assigned to the new facility, they were not entitled to the compensation.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, filed a grievance alleging he was improperly compensated for a temporary assignment at Maplehurst Correctional Complex and sought travel time and mileage.

The Grievance Settlement Board found that the grievor's assignment to Maplehurst was permanent, not temporary, as indicated in his assignment letter.

The grievance was denied.

The Union filed a grievance alleging that the Employer violated the collective agreement regarding the conduct of Ministry inspectors and investigators.

The Employer requested particulars, and the Union requested disclosure.

The parties disputed the order of proceedings, with the Union arguing that disclosure should precede further particularization, and the Employer arguing that sufficient particulars must be provided first.

The Grievance Settlement Board held that the Union had not provided sufficient particulars and ordered the Union to provide the 'who, what, where, when and how' of the allegations before the Employer's obligation to disclose information is triggered.

The Union brought the matter back before the Grievance Settlement Board, alleging the Employer's amended letter to the grievor's physician contravened a prior Board order.

The Board agreed, finding the Employer slavishly disregarded the order limiting inquiries to the meaning of 'absolutely no inmate contact'.

The Board ordered the offending letter be disregarded, drafted a specific letter for the physician to answer, and remained seized of the Union's request for damages.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, filed grievances alleging the Employer violated the Collective Agreement by failing to provide equal employment opportunities and proper notice regarding the closure of the Guelph Assessment and Treatment Centre (GATU) and his redeployment to Maplehurst.

The grievor claimed entitlement to travel time and mileage, arguing that other employees were allowed to remain at GATU longer.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievances, finding that the Employer was entitled to choose which employees remained at the closed institution by mutual agreement under the MERC transition agreement, and that there was no evidence of impropriety regarding schedule changes.

The grievor filed a grievance alleging his assignment to Maplehurst Correctional Complex was improper and claiming entitlement to travel time and mileage.

Following the closure of the Guelph Treatment and Assessment Unit, the grievor elected to take his rights under the collective agreement and was assigned to Maplehurst in June 2002.

He argued that had he known all remaining officers would later be assigned to Maplehurst in September 2003, he would have remained at his original location.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the grievor made a final election for a permanent assignment and the subsequent assignment of other officers did not constitute a violation of the collective agreement.

The parties previously entered into a Memorandum of Settlement regarding the grievor's permanent workplace accommodation.

Following a period of Long Term Disability, the grievor's physician indicated he could return to work with 'absolutely no inmate contact'.

The Employer sent a letter to the physician asking questions that the Union argued attempted to establish a new accommodation in violation of the settlement.

The arbitrator held that the Employer could not unilaterally alter the agreed accommodation and the physician need not respond to the offending letter, though the Employer could seek clarification on the meaning of 'absolutely no inmate contact'.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a maintenance mechanic who received a displacement notice during a period of workplace restructuring at a provincial correctional facility.

The grievor was subsequently reassigned to work at the same facility but argued the original displacement was improper and caused considerable stress.

The arbitrator reviewed the employment record and found no violation of the collective agreement or the relevant transition agreements.

The grievance was denied.

The union filed grievances on behalf of a cook alleging improper treatment during the restructuring and closure of provincial correctional institutions.

The Grievance Settlement Board found that the grievor was properly treated, informed of his rights throughout the transition process, and ultimately offered and accepted a displacement opportunity.

The grievances were denied as there was no violation of the Collective Agreement or the related Memoranda of Settlement.

The union filed five grievances on behalf of the grievor alleging violations of the collective agreement, including a claim for travel time and mileage during a temporary assignment.

The arbitrator found that the grievor was permanently assigned during the relevant period and was therefore not entitled to travel time and mileage.

The remaining four grievances were dismissed because the grievor failed to provide particulars of the allegations despite multiple requests, failing to discharge the onus of establishing a breach of the collective agreement.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer alleging the employer violated the collective agreement by failing to pay travel time and mileage during a temporary assignment at the Maplehurst Correctional Complex.

The arbitrator found that the grievor had been explicitly notified that compensation for travel, accommodation, and time credits would not apply to his temporary assignment.

The grievance was denied.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, filed a grievance alleging he should have received travel time and mileage because his assignment was temporary.

The Grievance Settlement Board found that the grievor was paid travel time and mileage until approximately July 13, 2003, due to a personal request concerning a medical issue.

However, once he was permanently assigned to the Vanier Centre for Women effective June 30, 2003, he was no longer entitled to travel time and mileage.

The grievance was denied.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of an employee who had requested and received a permanent relocation assignment to a different correctional facility on compassionate grounds.

The employee later argued that the assignment should have been considered temporary, which would have entitled him to travel time and mileage, because his original facility was closing and he would have been moved eventually.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the written agreement clearly stated the assignment was permanent and did not provide for travel time and mileage, and the employee had agreed to those terms.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer, alleging the employer improperly denied his request to remain at his work location until its closure and instead transferred him to an institution slated for closure.

The arbitrator found that under the applicable transition agreement, mutual agreement was required for an employee to remain at a work location after inmates had left.

As the employer did not agree and there was no evidence of bad faith or discrimination, the grievance was denied.

The grievor, a Rehabilitation Officer, filed a grievance alleging that the employer violated the collective agreement and MERC agreements during the restructuring and closure of the Whitby Jail.

The grievor claimed she was improperly denied a position at the Central East Correctional Centre and sought relocation costs and damages.

The Grievance Settlement Board found that the transition process was followed correctly, the grievor had insufficient seniority for the requested position, and she was properly provided with redeployment rights.

The grievance was dismissed.

Several classified Correctional Officers grieved that they were entitled to travel time and mileage for the period between receiving notice of a lateral transfer to a new institution and the actual commencement of their new assignment.

During this transition period, the grievors continued to work at their original home institution.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievances, finding that the grievors were working at their own institution due to operational requirements and were not deployed to a different institution, thus distinguishing their situation from previous cases where travel time and mileage were awarded.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of an unclassified Cook 2, alleging the employer violated the collective agreement by failing to convert her to classified status.

The arbitrator reviewed the hours worked during the relevant eighteen-month period.

Even accepting the grievor's own calculation of her hours, she fell short of the 2,868 hours required for conversion.

The grievance was denied.

The union filed grievances on behalf of two correctional officers alleging they were wrongfully displaced to the Ontario Correctional Institute during a period of facility closures and restructuring.

The grievors claimed the employer failed to properly determine staffing levels and assign positions fairly.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievances, finding that the employer has the express right to determine the staffing complement and there was no evidence that the applicable transition agreements were violated or that the employer acted in bad faith.

Nine Correctional Officers and a Cook filed grievances claiming entitlement to travel time and mileage during temporary assignments at the Millbrook Correctional Centre following its decommissioning.

The assignments were posted as voluntary opportunities to assist with the transition of operations.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievances, finding that the assignments were entirely voluntary and that the employees had applied for and accepted the work with advance notice that no travel time or mileage would be paid.