Gail Misra

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, filed a grievance claiming the employer improperly noted his start date as March 12, 2018, rather than his original start date in the Ontario Public Service.

The grievor had previously worked as a fixed-term Food Service Helper and Cleaner 2, but resigned from his cleaner position to accept the fixed-term Correctional Officer role.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that under the collective agreement, the grievor's resignation terminated his continuous service, resulting in a break in service before he was rehired.

The grievor, a correctional officer, claimed his Continuous Service Date (CSD) was incorrectly calculated and that the failure to recalculate it using the method in the current collective agreement constituted age discrimination.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the new method for calculating CSD had no retroactive effect and that the grievor's CSD was correctly calculated under the collective agreement in place at the time.

The Board also found no basis for the claim of age discrimination.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer, alleging that the employer improperly calculated his Continuous Service Date (CSD) when he was rolled over from a fixed-term contract to a permanent full-time position.

The arbitrator found that the CSD was correctly calculated based on the number of weeks the grievor had worked 40 hours per week prior to his roll-over, and that weeks where he did not work 40 hours were properly excluded.

The grievance was denied.

The grievor, a fixed-term correctional officer, alleged that the employer circumvented the rollover process by secretly converting other fixed-term officers to permanent status and bypassing him.

The grievor believed that if he had been retroactively credited with 12 hours from a previous grievance settlement, he would have qualified for an earlier rollover.

The arbitrator found that the previous settlement had no retroactive effect.

Furthermore, even with the additional 12 hours, the grievor would not have had enough accumulated hours to qualify for the earlier rollover, as the individuals ahead of him on the seniority list had significantly more hours.

The grievance was dismissed.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, filed a grievance claiming the employer miscalculated his hours for the rollover from casual to permanent status in December 2011, resulting in an incorrect Continuous Service Date (CSD).

The union argued the CSD should be recalculated using the method in the current collective agreement.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the CSD was correctly calculated based on the collective agreement in force at the time of the rollover.

The arbitrator held that subsequent changes to the collective agreement regarding CSD calculation do not apply retroactively unless specifically agreed by the parties.

The grievor, a fixed-term correctional officer, alleged the employer incorrectly calculated her credited hours while she was on maternity leave.

The union argued she should be credited with 40 hours per week.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that under the established formula, the employer correctly calculated her credited hours based on the average of her hours worked in the 13 weeks prior to the commencement of her leave.

The grievor, a Probation and Parole Officer, filed a grievance alleging the Employer breached the collective agreement by denying her request for the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) before she retired.

The union argued the Employer delayed filling her position because it intended to use the vacancy for a lateral transfer.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding the Employer had no collective agreement obligation to fill a vacancy immediately and did not act in bad faith, as the position was ultimately filled and there was no reduction in staffing.

The Union filed a grievance alleging that the Employer at the Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre failed to calculate and provide fixed term employees with their hours on a quarterly basis, as required by Appendix COR8 of the collective agreement.

The Employer conceded that hours had not historically been prepared quarterly but stated its intention to comply moving forward.

The Arbitrator upheld the grievance, declaring that the Employer had breached the requirement to provide fixed term employees with their hours quarterly and the opportunity to dispute the calculations.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of an employee.

The grievor repeatedly failed to attend scheduled mediation-arbitration dates despite multiple notices and a prior arbitrator's order warning that failure to attend would result in the grievance being deemed withdrawn.

When the grievor failed to attend the September 2020 hearing, the arbitrator deemed the grievance withdrawn.

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

The grievor repeatedly failed to attend scheduled mediation-arbitration dates despite multiple notices and a prior arbitrator's order warning that failure to attend would result in the grievance being deemed withdrawn.

When the grievor failed to attend the September 2020 hearing dates, the arbitrator deemed the grievance withdrawn.

The grievor, a correctional officer, received a one-day suspension for abandoning his post, failing to sign out of the log book, and insubordination after refusing a direct order to return to his unit.

The grievor claimed he left his post due to stress over a scabies outbreak and to initiate a health and safety work refusal.

The arbitrator found that the grievor had abandoned his post without authorization and only initiated the work refusal hours later after repeated orders to return to work.

While just cause for discipline was established, the arbitrator concluded that a one-day suspension was too harsh given the grievor's clean disciplinary record and genuine distress over the scabies outbreak.

The penalty was reduced to a written reprimand.

The union grieved the employer's decision to deny a correctional officer's request for a paid compassionate leave day after she missed a 12-hour shift due to car trouble.

The employer noted that the grievor made no alternative arrangements to get to work and did not offer to come in after her car was repaired mid-shift.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the employer gave due consideration to the request and its decision to deny the paid leave was not arbitrary or unfair.

The grievor, a fixed term contract Correctional Officer at the Central East Correctional Centre, filed a grievance alleging that the Employer violated the collective agreement by allowing fixed term contract officers transferring from other institutions to retain their accumulated hours for the purpose of rollovers to regular classified status.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the grievor failed to provide any agreements supporting his claim and noting that standard Memoranda of Agreement require fixed term officers to be employed at the specific location for one year prior to qualifying for a rollover.

The Union requested an adjournment of the scheduled hearing date because the grievor provided a medical note indicating she was unable to attend for health reasons.

The Employer did not oppose the adjournment but sought an order regarding the deadline for production and particulars set in a previous decision.

The Arbitrator granted the adjournment and ordered the Union to provide all relevant production and particulars by a specified date, warning that failure to comply could preclude reliance on those documents.

The Employer brought a preliminary motion to strike certain paragraphs of the Union's particulars and requested production of the grievor's work and medical records from 2007 to the date of termination.

The Union objected to the breadth of the production requests.

The Arbitrator struck several paragraphs of the particulars, reserved decision on others pending further production, and limited the scope of the document production to records from 2013 and 2014 onwards.

The rulings were issued without reasons to expedite the proceedings.

The Union filed a policy grievance alleging that the Employer modified the Senior Financial Accountant (SFA) position without notice and that the position should no longer be excluded from the bargaining unit.

The Arbitrator found that the Employer had significantly modified the SFA job content and authority between 1997 and 2014, removing managerial and confidential labour relations duties, and failed to notify the Union as required by the collective agreement.

Finding that the SFA position no longer met the statutory or collective agreement criteria for exclusion, the Arbitrator ordered the Employer to move the position into the bargaining unit and pay union dues retroactive to the adoption of the 2014 job description.

The Union filed a grievance alleging the Employer improperly filled a posting for a management-level Segregation Sergeant position.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding no jurisdiction to address issues arising from the posting or filling of a position outside the bargaining unit, as the collective agreement only covers terms and conditions of employment for bargaining unit members.

The Employer brought a preliminary motion arguing that a grievance filed on June 26, 2017, regarding Short Term Sickness Plan entitlements from 2014, was untimely.

The Union argued the delay was due to the grievor's lack of knowledge of the grievance procedure, her medical leave, and fear of retribution from alleged harassment.

The Arbitrator applied the factors for extending time limits under section 48(16) of the Labour Relations Act and found the 2.5 to 3-year delay was extreme and unjustified.

The Arbitrator concluded the Employer would be substantially prejudiced by the delay and dismissed the grievance as untimely.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of an employee who claimed she was improperly denied a rollover from a fixed-term to a permanent Probation and Parole Officer position.

The grievor argued her time as a youth Probation Officer should count towards the 18-month requirement.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding the Memorandum of Agreement clearly required 18 continuous months in the specific Probation and Parole Officer position, which the grievor had not completed.

The union filed a grievance alleging that the employer violated the collective agreement by failing to fill three vacant probation officer positions at the North Toronto Probation Office.

The employer argued that it had the management right to determine staffing levels and that a significant drop in caseloads made filling the positions unnecessary.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding no evidence of bad faith and confirming that the employer was not obliged to fill vacancies when there was insufficient work available.