K Petryshen

In an accommodation grievance regarding exposure to cigarette smoke in the workplace, the Employer requested the grievor's complete medical history and OHIP summary since June 2004.

The Union opposed the breadth of the request, proposing instead a specific medical report from the grievor's family doctor.

The Grievance Settlement Board found the Employer's request too invasive, as the grievor was not making a generalized claim that placed his entire medical history in issue.

The Board directed the grievor to provide a medical report responding to specific questions about his asthma, absences, and stress-related problems.

The Union filed a bargaining unit integrity grievance alleging that the Employer violated the collective agreement by using fee-for-service Native Inmate Liaison Officers (NILOs) to perform bargaining unit work.

Several third-party service providers sought intervener status in the arbitration.

The Grievance Settlement Board denied the request, finding that the service providers' interests were purely contractual and indirect.

Because the core dispute concerned whether the work belonged to the bargaining unit, the service providers did not have a direct interest grounded in labour or employment law sufficient to warrant standing.

The employer investigated widespread e-mail abuse involving the receipt and distribution of sexually explicit and offensive material.

Six employees were discharged and grieved their terminations.

In a preliminary assessment based on the employer's best case, the arbitrator held that the distribution of such material by e-mail could create a poisoned work environment in violation of the Workplace Discrimination and Harassment Prevention policy.

The arbitrator concluded that the misconduct was serious enough that discharge might be an appropriate response, and declined to reinstate the grievors at this preliminary stage.