46 total
Employer ordered to pay $750 in damages for breaching payment deadlines in Minutes of Settlement.
The Union alleged that the Employer breached the Minutes of Settlement by failing to pay the grievor within the agreed-upon 60-day timeframe and failing to make best efforts to pay as soon as possible.
The Employer argued that the delay was due to an honest mistake and a postal strike, and that the breach was minor.
The Arbitrator found that the Employer failed to make best efforts to expedite payment and missed the absolute 60-day deadline, which caused significant distress to the unemployed grievor.
The Arbitrator declared that the Employer breached the settlement and ordered the Employer to pay $750 in damages to the grievor.
Arbitrator applies three-year rule guideline to limit scope of evidence in workplace harassment grievance.
In a grievance alleging a poisoned and toxic work environment, the parties disputed the permissible scope of evidence.
The Employer argued for a strict application of the Grievance Settlement Board's three-year rule, while the Union sought to introduce evidence dating back over seven years.
The Arbitrator applied the three-year rule as a guideline to balance the Union's need to establish a pattern of conduct against the Employer's right to defend against dated accusations.
The Arbitrator permitted the Union to call evidence starting approximately three and a half years prior to the grievance, along with specific earlier events related to subsequent particulars.
Arbitrator ruled incumbents need not re-compete in a re-run job competition.
The arbitrator previously ordered the employer to re-run a job competition.
The parties could not agree on the logistics.
The union insisted that the incumbents be compelled to re-compete for the jobs they were awarded four years ago.
The employer proposed to establish a benchmark score and place any successful grievors in the positions without requiring incumbents to re-compete.
The arbitrator agreed with the employer, finding no labour relations purpose in requiring incumbents to re-compete, and directed the employer to run the competition in accordance with the Board's jurisprudence.
Job competition ordered to be re-run pursuant to arbitrator's discretion under the collective agreement.
The Union filed a job-posting grievance regarding a competition for the Enforcement Services Officer position.
The arbitrator exercised discretion under Article 22.16 of the collective agreement to order a re-run of the job competition, noting that the best possible outcome for the grievors would be a re-run rather than direct placement into the positions.
The arbitrator remitted the logistics of the re-run to the parties.
Employer directed to produce unredacted workplace assessment documents subject to confidentiality conditions.
The union requested the production of unredacted documents relating to a workplace assessment conducted by James Docherty and Associates.
The employer agreed to produce the documents.
The arbitrator issued a direction ordering the production of the requested documents, subject to strict confidentiality conditions limiting their use to the current proceeding.
Procedural order issued for document production and particulars in a competition grievance.
The Grievance Settlement Board issued a procedural order in a competition grievance.
The employer was ordered to produce unredacted documents relating to specific candidates, scoring criteria, and performance ratings.
The union was ordered to provide full particulars of the alleged defects in the competition.
