Felicity D. Briggs

The Grievance Settlement Board heard a strike-related grievance concerning the balancing of hours for Correctional Officers working a compressed workweek.

Following a previous decision ordering the local Employee Relations Committee (ERC) to meet and discuss the issue, the local union ERC members refused to make a decision, arguing they lacked legal authority and faced a conflict of interest.

The Vice-Chair held that the local union must canvass the wishes of its membership and present a position to the Employer, as intended by the parties' Memorandum of Agreement.

The local ERC was ordered to meet within sixty days to fulfill this obligation.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer acting as a Recreation Officer, was surplussed due to the closure of the Toronto Youth Assessment Centre.

He claimed he should have been allowed to bump a less senior co-worker who returned from a WSIB leave and was placed in a Recreation Officer position at the Vanier Centre.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that both employees were surplussed, meaning the grievor could not bump his co-worker.

The Board concluded that the Employer properly offered each employee the best available opportunity at the time of their respective surplus.

The union filed a group grievance on behalf of correctional officers alleging that the Cornwall Jail was closed prematurely while the Pembroke Jail remained open, creating temporary assignments at the Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre.

The grievors sought mileage and travel expenditures.

The arbitrator found that the grievors could not deem their positions at OCDC as temporary and that there was no violation of the MERC 3 agreement, as 'surplus date' and 'closure date' have different meanings.

The grievance was denied.

The union filed grievances regarding the restructuring and closure of provincial correctional institutions.

The parties entered into Memoranda of Settlement to manage the transition, which appointed the Vice-Chair to resolve implementation disputes.

The union brought a dispute regarding rollovers at the Maplehurst Complex.

The Vice-Chair ordered the employer to fill 24 classified Correctional Officer positions at the complex in accordance with the parties' prior agreements.

The Union filed grievances regarding the restructuring and closure of provincial correctional institutions.

The parties entered into Memoranda of Settlement to resolve transition issues, which included a dispute resolution mechanism before the Grievance Settlement Board.

A dispute arose concerning rollovers at the Owen Sound Jail.

The arbitrator ordered the Employer to fill two classified Correctional Officer positions at the Owen Sound Jail in accordance with the process agreed to by the parties.

Following a policy grievance regarding the staffing model and shift coverage at the Maplehurst Complex, the parties agreed to a process involving a workload analysis and arbitration if negotiations failed.

The arbitrator determined that there should be 223 classified Correctional Officer positions plus 10 classified community escort positions, remitting the issues of crib staffing and scheduling back to the parties.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of an employee alleging that she should have been given an OAG 10 position instead of another employee with lesser seniority during a restructuring process.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that both employees were properly assigned and the fact that the employee with lesser seniority was working in a higher rated classification was merely a function of the transition process, not a violation of the collective agreement.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer alleging he was improperly denied travel time and mileage following the restructuring and closure of provincial correctional institutions.

The parties agreed the grievor was entitled to travel time and mileage but disputed the duration.

The arbitrator determined the grievor was entitled to travel time and mileage commencing thirty days prior to the filing of his grievance up to and including May 1, 2003.

The grievor, a former classified correctional officer who was surplussed and later rehired as an unclassified employee, grieved the calculation of her continuous service date for the purpose of unclassified seniority.

The union argued that under Articles 18.3 and 20.2.5 of the collective agreement, her prior service should be included.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the MERC Memorandum of Agreement specifically provided that unclassified seniority for rollover purposes is calculated in accordance with Appendix 24 back to the first break in employment greater than 13 weeks, and that Articles 18 and 20 apply to classified employees, not unclassified employees seeking to become classified.

The grievor, a correctional officer, filed a grievance claiming entitlement to travel time and mileage for overtime shifts he accepted and worked at a different correctional centre.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the overtime was offered and accepted voluntarily, and that overtime is not the type of work assignment contemplated by Articles 13 and 14 of the collective agreement.

The union filed grievances on behalf of an employee who was surplussed due to a lack of funding for a print shop she was setting up.

The employee was redeployed to a vacant position at TRILCOR in Guelph, but argued she should have been offered a position at Maplehurst.

The arbitrator found no violation of the collective agreement or transition memoranda, as both locations were within 40 kilometers of her original workplace and the employer had the right to fill the vacant position at TRILCOR first.

A related grievance alleging discrimination based on disability was also dismissed for lack of evidence.

The grievor, a Housekeeper 2, was surplussed due to the closure of the Guelph Correctional Centre.

He bumped into a Housekeeper 1 position at another facility and grieved that he should have been placed in a Housekeeper 2 position at Maplehurst.

He also grieved that he should have been allowed to remain at his original facility until all operations were moved.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding no Housekeeper 2 positions were available at the time he was surplussed, and the Employer complied with the Memorandum of Agreement regarding the timing of his relocation.

The grievor, a former classified Correctional Officer, resigned his position pursuant to a Memorandum of Agreement signed in October 2001.

He subsequently worked in other capacities and eventually sought reinstatement as a classified employee with his original continuous service date, while keeping his severance package.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the remedies requested were the very matters settled by the final and binding October 2001 Memorandum of Agreement, which could not be re-opened.

The Union filed a grievance alleging the Employer breached a Memorandum of Agreement regarding the transfer of unclassified Correctional Officers following the closure of the Guelph Treatment Centre.

The grievor was assigned to Maplehurst but temporarily worked at OCI.

The Employer started new CO-Starts at Maplehurst before transferring the grievor, contrary to the agreement.

The Grievance Settlement Board found a violation of the Memorandum of Agreement and ordered the Employer to pay the grievor travel time and mileage for the period of the breach.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer alleging constructive dismissal, harassment, and a poisoned work environment.

The grievor claimed she was forced to resign under duress after being presented with a surplus package, alleging management misled her about potential vacancies.

The Grievance Settlement Board found that the grievor was given notice of surplus in accordance with an agreed-upon memorandum governing facility restructuring.

The Board concluded the grievor was not singled out or treated differently from other surplussed employees, and dismissed the grievance.

The grievors, correctional officers, filed grievances alleging they were not given proper credit for full seniority after returning to the Ontario Public Service from working at the privately operated Central North Correctional Centre (CNCC).

The Union argued there was no real break in service because the work, inmates, and training were similar and the facility was government-owned.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievances, finding that CNCC is not operated by the Ontario government and its employees are not members of the Ontario Public Service, meaning the grievors experienced a break in service.

The union filed multiple grievances arising from the August 2003 widespread power outage and subsequent provincial emergency.

The parties agreed to a consent award establishing that the period was not a strike, lockout, or public holiday, and that employees requested not to report to work would be paid.

The arbitrator resolved several individual disputes regarding vacation credits and sick leave, dismissing the majority of the grievances but upholding a few, ordering days to be taken as vacation or restored to sick leave banks.

The union filed a grievance alleging the employer failed to implement a Memorandum of Settlement regarding the grievor's classification and pay rate following a restructuring.

The employer's local management had not implemented the agreement without providing a rationale.

The arbitrator ordered the employer to implement the original Memorandum of Settlement but declined to award additional compensation for the delay.

During a restructuring process, a correctional officer entered into a job trade with another employee.

After the paperwork was completed and the trade was concluded, the officer sought to revoke his agreement.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, holding that under the collective agreement and general labour relations principles, a finalized job trade cannot be revoked, as such job changes have significant impacts on other employees in the transition process.

Three correctional officers filed grievances alleging that the Employer violated the collective agreement by failing to provide the exact date of their headquarters relocation when they were notified of their assignment to a new facility following institutional closures.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievances, finding that a subsequent Ministry Employment Relations Committee (MERC) agreement explicitly superseded the previous requirement and allowed the Employer to determine the effective date of relocation at a later time.

The Board noted that the grievors were given proper notice in accordance with the parties' agreement.