Jasbir Parmar

In a grievance arbitration concerning the termination of a bus driver for impaired driving, the union brought a motion for the production of documents related to the employer's proposed expert witness.

The union sought the expert's retainer letter, contracts between the expert and a third-party testing company, and the employer's requests for proposals for its drug testing program, citing concerns about the expert's independence.

The arbitrator granted the motion in part, ordering the production of the retainer letter as it contained foundational instructions to the expert and any litigation privilege was waived by putting the expert forward.

The requests for the third-party contracts and RFPs were dismissed as the employer did not control the expert's contract and the other documents lacked sufficient relevance.

The Union appealed the denial of long-term income protection (LTIP) benefits for a Corrections Officer who ceased working following a workplace injury.

The central issue was whether the employee met the definition of total disability during the qualification period.

The arbitrator found that the employee's medical restrictions, primarily related to overhead activities and lifting, did not prevent them from performing the essential duties of their permanently accommodated, largely sedentary position in the Control Room.

The appeal was dismissed.

The Union filed a job posting grievance on behalf of a member who was denied a full-time position due to his attendance record, which he alleged was impacted by a mental health disability.

After the grievor failed to attend the scheduled arbitration hearing, the Union sought an adjournment sine die, providing a medical note stating the grievor was unable to attend due to severe nervousness and insecurity.

The Employer moved to dismiss the grievance.

The Arbitrator denied the adjournment and dismissed the grievance, finding that the medical evidence indicated no reasonable prospect that the grievor would ever be able to participate in the proceeding, and that further indefinite delay would prejudice the Employer.

The Union (Cody Group) brought a motion for production of documents in a grievance arbitration concerning allegations of workplace assault and harassment.

The requested documents included a manager's personnel file, communications regarding a prior investigation, and all communications between the manager and the accused grievor.

The Arbitrator dismissed the motion, finding that the requested documents were not arguably relevant to the core issue of whether the alleged misconduct occurred, and that the request for all communications amounted to an impermissible fishing expedition.

The employer brought a motion to dismiss the grievance on a preliminary basis after the grievor failed to attend a scheduled hearing, instead attending work.

The union brought a cross-motion to adjourn the matter sine die due to the grievor's mental health condition.

The arbitrator declined to dismiss the grievance at this stage, noting the grievor may have been misguided by a union steward who inappropriately acted as an intermediary.

The arbitrator also denied the union's request for an indefinite adjournment, instead ordering the union to obtain specific medical documentation regarding the grievor's ability to participate in the proceedings.

The Union sought preliminary orders regarding hearing accommodations, document production, and grievance consolidation.

The accommodation request, which sought specific security measures and separation from another individual due to medical reasons, was contested by the Employer and the other individual.

The Arbitrator found the medical documentation unclear and subject to legitimate challenge.

However, noting an existing peace bond against the other individual, the Arbitrator ordered alternative hearing procedures allowing the grievors to participate via video conference, rendering the accommodation request moot.

The Arbitrator also ordered the Employer to produce requested documents and confirmed the consent consolidation of certain grievances.

The grievor failed to attend the scheduled arbitration hearing and was found to be at work instead.

The arbitrator adjourned the hearing, ordering the grievor to provide a written explanation and supporting medical documentation, if applicable, for his absence.

The employer retained the right to bring a motion to dismiss based on the failure to attend.

Counsel for one of the individuals involved requested an adjournment of the arbitration proceedings pending the completion of his criminal trial, citing potential impacts on the issues before the Board and bail conditions affecting his attendance.

The union argued that procedural matters and accommodation requests should proceed in the interim.

The employer opposed the adjournment.

The arbitrator granted an adjournment until September 15, 2019, noting the uncertainty of the criminal trial's completion date.

An exception was made for procedural issues that could be addressed via teleconference or in writing, though medical accommodation requests were deferred until after the adjournment period.

The parties met to address case management issues.

The Arbitrator ordered a grievor to provide updates on his criminal trial, directed the parties to submit their positions on adjourning the matter pending the criminal trial and on accommodation requests, and ordered the Employer to produce specified documents to the Union.

During a case management conference call, the union requested accommodation for the grievors based on medical documentation.

The arbitrator outlined the quasi-judicial nature of the Grievance Settlement Board proceedings and the requirement for medical documentation to substantiate accommodation requests.

The arbitrator directed the union to provide specific accommodation requests and details of any accommodations provided in related criminal proceedings, and directed the employer to respond with any objections.

The Employer brought a motion to consolidate two sets of grievances (the Cody grievances and the MacDonald grievances) that arose from the same series of events involving alleged workplace harassment and assault.

The Union opposed the motion, arguing that the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to consolidate the grievances because another arbitrator was already seized with the MacDonald grievances.

The arbitrator held that, as a roster arbitrator acting as the Grievance Settlement Board, she had the jurisdiction to consolidate the grievances under the Board's Rules of Procedure, because the Board is a single entity.

The arbitrator granted the motion, finding that the grievances involved common factual issues and should be heard together to avoid conflicting rulings and ensure efficiency.

The matter was scheduled for a hearing on April 18, 2018, but the Employer advised it would bring a motion to consolidate the grievances of another employee, whose counsel was unavailable.

The arbitrator used the date for case management.

The arbitrator ordered the Employer to produce the CSOI Investigation Report to the Union and scheduled the motion to consolidate, along with any potential motion to stay proceedings pending a criminal trial, for June 26, 2018.

The employer brought a motion to dismiss the grievance after the grievor failed to attend a hearing.

The arbitrator had previously ordered the grievance dismissed unless the grievor provided good and sufficient cause for his non-attendance by a specified deadline.

The grievor submitted an unsigned medical note past the deadline.

Upon inquiry, the union confirmed the purported doctor did not exist and did not work at the named hospital.

The arbitrator found the grievor failed to demonstrate good and sufficient cause and dismissed the grievance due to the late filing and the fraudulent nature of the medical document.

The Employer brought a motion to dismiss the grievance after the grievor failed to attend a scheduled mediation and subsequently failed to fully comply with the conditions of an adjournment.

The arbitrator found that the grievor did not provide the required medical documentation from an addiction specialist confirming enrollment in a treatment plan on the earliest available date, nor did he provide the required status update.

Given the grievor's non-attendance and failure to comply with the strict conditions of the adjournment, the arbitrator ordered the grievance dismissed unless the grievor could demonstrate good and sufficient cause for his non-attendance by a specified deadline.

The grievor's long-term income protection (LTIP) benefits were terminated by the insurer for alleged non-compliance with a mandatory rehabilitation program.

The union appealed the termination to the Grievance Settlement Board's Claims Review Subcommittee.

The arbitrator found that the insurer's recommended rehabilitation plan, which required a gradual return to work after only four sessions of cognitive behavioural therapy, was arbitrary and contradicted the independent medical examination's recommendations.

Because the rehabilitation plan was arbitrary, the grievor's failure to comply did not justify the termination of benefits.

The appeal was allowed.

The Union requested an adjournment of a mediation scheduled for August 4, 2017.

The Employer agreed to the adjournment only with conditions.

The Arbitrator granted the adjournment on the condition that the Association provide medical documentation confirming the Complainant is following an addiction treatment plan, along with updates and a written undertaking from the Complainant to attend and participate in the proceedings.