Kumail Karimjee

In a grievance alleging harassment and failure to accommodate, both parties brought preliminary motions regarding the production of the grievor's medical records.

The Employer sought full disclosure of the treating physician's file, while the Union sought strict restrictions on the dissemination of the records, including prohibiting the Employer's instructing client from viewing them.

The Arbitrator ordered the Union to produce the complete medical file to its external counsel for vetting and redaction of irrelevant information, rather than allowing the grievor to vet the records herself.

The Arbitrator also ordered strict safeguards limiting the dissemination of the medical records to specific Employer representatives and requiring their destruction at the conclusion of the proceedings.

During mediation of a harassment and discrimination grievance, counsel for the union accepted a settlement proposal from the employer via email.

The grievors subsequently refused to sign the Minutes of Settlement and attempted to renegotiate the terms.

The employer and the union both requested an order finding a binding agreement.

The arbitrator held that the email exchange between counsel created a clear, unambiguous, and binding settlement agreement, which could not be undone by the grievors' subsequent refusal to sign.

The Employer brought a motion to strike paragraphs from the Union's statement of particulars in a harassment grievance, seeking to limit evidence to the three years prior to the filing of the grievance.

The Arbitrator applied the Board's three-year rule, finding no unique or exceptional circumstances to justify a departure.

The motion was granted, striking the impugned paragraphs and limiting the evidence to events within three years of the grievance, subject to the admission of basic background facts.

The Union filed group grievances challenging the Employer's new requirement that Employment Standards Officers work in-person a minimum of three days per week, limiting remote work to two days.

The Union argued this was an unreasonable workplace rule under the KVP standard, while the Employer maintained it was an unfettered exercise of management rights.

The Arbitrator dismissed the grievances, finding that even if the KVP reasonableness standard applied, the three-day in-person requirement was reasonable as it was rationally connected to the Employer's legitimate business objectives of ensuring consistency across regions and fostering team culture, belonging, and mentorship.

In a grievance concerning the non-renewal of a fixed term Corrections Officer's contract due to availability issues, the Union sought production of schedules and warning letters for 10 other fixed term employees.

The Union argued this would show whether the grievor was treated differently.

The Arbitrator denied the request, finding the documents were not arguably relevant because the Union's particulars alleged discrimination based on disability and failure to accommodate, not differential treatment compared to other employees.

The request improperly sought to discover a case not asserted.

The parties engaged in case management discussions regarding two grievances involving allegations of harassment, discrimination, unfair exercise of management rights, health and safety violations, and unfair discipline.

On consent, the arbitrator issued case management directions setting deadlines for the Union to provide particulars and productions, and for the Employer to respond and advise of any preliminary issues.

The parties mediated a grievance alleging a violation of Appendix COR 14 of the OPSEU Correctional Bargaining Unit Collective Agreement regarding the implementation of an Occupational Stress Injury module within a training program.

The parties agreed to a consent order wherein the employer acknowledged contravening the collective agreement by failing to provide the OSI Sub-Committee an opportunity to review the training content and provide feedback prior to implementation.

The consent order requires the employer to comply with the collective agreement for any future modifications to the module.