M.V. Watters

In a grievance concerning the termination of a former correctional officer, the union sought a production order for medical documentation relating to a specific incident.

The Grievance Settlement Board determined that the union's request was appropriate and directed the employer to provide any medical documentation under its care and control relating to the incident.

The Union filed grievances on behalf of Transportation Enforcement Officers 2 at the Essex South Truck Inspection Station, claiming they were entitled to overtime for work performed by a special Truck Response Unit (TRU) brought in from outside the district.

The TRU members worked more than 7.25 hours per day but did not claim overtime, as they were operating under their own Compressed Work Week Agreements (CWWAs) which allowed for flexible scheduling up to 362.5 hours over a 10-week period.

The Union argued the CWWAs did not follow the TRU members to the new geographic location and that the excess daily hours constituted overtime that should have been distributed equitably to the local officers.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievances, finding that the CWWAs did follow the employees to the new location, no overtime was actually worked or authorized, and the Employer had valid operational reasons for assigning the work to the out-of-town officers without incurring overtime costs.

The Union filed grievances alleging the Employer violated the collective agreement by failing to offer overtime to local employees when an external team was brought in for a special project.

During the hearing, the Employer brought a motion for non-suit, arguing there was insufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case.

By agreement of the parties, the Vice-Chair dismissed the non-suit motion without providing reasons, to avoid giving the moving party an unfair advantage.

The Vice-Chair also declined the Union's request to issue a general direction regarding the provision of particulars in future non-suit motions.

The grievor, a customer service representative at the LCBO, was discharged after stealing a case of cognac.

He pleaded guilty to theft under $5,000.

At arbitration, the union argued that the grievor suffered from a gambling addiction that caused the theft, and requested that the discharge be substituted with an unpaid suspension under s. 48(17) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding insufficient medical or expert evidence to establish that a gambling problem caused the theft or to demonstrate a positive prognosis for rehabilitation.

The Board concluded that the grievor's actions constituted a fundamental breach of trust justifying discharge.

The grievor, a customer service representative at the LCBO, was discharged after stealing a case of cognac.

He subsequently pleaded guilty to theft under $5,000.

At arbitration, the union argued that the grievor's misconduct was caused by a gambling addiction and sought reinstatement with a substituted penalty under s. 48(17) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding insufficient medical or expert evidence to establish that a gambling problem caused the theft or to demonstrate a positive prognosis for rehabilitation.

The Board concluded that the trust necessary for the employment relationship had been irreparably broken.