55 total
Board orders production of human rights complaint, denies adjournment, and defers decision on abandonment.
The Union brought motions for the production of the grievor's human rights complaint and for a six-month adjournment because the grievor had lost confidence in the system.
The Employer brought a motion to dismiss the remaining grievances as abandoned.
The Grievance Settlement Board ordered the Employer to produce the human rights complaint, finding it relevant.
The Board denied the adjournment request, noting that the grievor's lack of faith in the process was not a valid reason.
The Board deferred its decision on the Employer's motion to dismiss until the next hearing date, stating that the remaining grievances would be dismissed as abandoned if the grievor failed to attend and provide an undertaking to participate.
Union ordered to provide particulars of damages claimed by grievors regarding email account modifications.
The employer sought particulars from the union regarding the alleged damages or losses claimed by over 200 grievors.
The grievances alleged that the addition of a 'z' to their email accounts and/or being added to the Tracking Protocol breached the collective agreement.
The Grievance Settlement Board ordered the union to provide the requested particulars by April 15, 2008.
Union's request to consolidate recent grievances into a 2003 proceeding denied to avoid inconsistent findings.
The Union filed a grievance in 2003 regarding the conduct of Ministry inspectors during Section 22 investigations.
After years of proceedings and narrowing the scope to one specific investigation, the Union requested to consolidate two recent grievances involving different investigations into the current proceeding.
The Employer objected, arguing that one of the new grievances was already before another Vice-Chair and the other involved an incomplete investigation.
The Grievance Settlement Board denied the Union's request, finding that consolidation would increase the risk of inconsistent findings and create an inappropriate overlap of jurisdiction.
Adjournment granted on consent, conditional on employer being absolved of financial liability during the delay.
The union requested an adjournment of a scheduled hearing because the grievor had secured new employment and was participating in a training program.
The employer consented to the adjournment on the condition that it be absolved of any financial liability for the period of the adjournment.
The Grievance Settlement Board granted the adjournment on that condition.
Union ordered to provide written particulars and produce documents relied upon in grievance arbitration.
In a grievance arbitration under the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act, the Grievance Settlement Board issued an order for particulars and production following a mediation.
The union was ordered to provide the employer with written particulars of all allegations of fact relied upon, along with copies of all supporting documents.
The order specified that the particulars must detail what was done, when, where, and by whom, without needing to describe the evidence itself.
Failure to comply would preclude the union from introducing the documents or testimony without leave.
Union ordered to provide further particulars and produce grievor's diary; medical records production deferred.
In a grievance arbitration concerning the denial of sick leave and unfair dismissal, the Employer raised preliminary issues regarding the venue of the hearing, the sufficiency of the Union's particulars, and the production of documents.
The Grievance Settlement Board ordered that the hearing be convened in Peterborough on the day the Union's medical expert testifies.
The Board also ordered the Union to provide further particulars for specific paragraphs of its assertions.
Regarding document production, the Board ordered the production of meeting notes and the grievor's personal diary, but declined to order the production of further medical records at this stage of the proceedings.
Grievance over job competition dismissed; employer's assessment of qualifications and ability was reasonable and unbiased.
The union grieved the result of a job competition for two Program Analyst positions, alleging the competition was flawed and unfair to the grievor.
The grievor claimed she was disadvantaged during the software aptitude test due to computer difficulties and that the interview process was rushed and biased.
The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding no evidence of bias, that the interview and testing processes were reasonable and consistent, and that the grievor's failure to report alleged computer difficulties at the time undermined her claim.
The successful candidates were demonstrably more qualified and able.
Employment relationship found irreparably damaged; Memorandum of Settlement ordered into effect to resolve grievances.
The grievor, a Lab Attendant, filed grievances alleging harassment, discrimination, and unjust dismissal after her employment was terminated for failing to return to work or provide a medical certificate.
After numerous hearing days, the parties agreed to have the Board decide the matter based on the evidence heard to date under Article 22.16 of the Collective Agreement.
The Board found that the employment relationship was irreparably damaged and ordered the terms of a Memorandum of Settlement into effect, with minor alterations regarding career transition support and tuition payments.
Procedural order modified to extend deadlines and allow grievor access to personnel file before providing particulars.
The Grievance Settlement Board issued modifications to a prior procedural order in a grievance arbitration.
The Vice-Chair directed that the grievor is entitled to review his personnel file before providing particulars.
Deadlines for the union to provide particulars, for the employer to respond to a consolidation request, and for the employer to notify the union of preliminary objections were all extended.
Board issued procedural directions regarding document production, particulars, consolidation, and preliminary objections.
The Grievance Settlement Board issued procedural directions in a grievance arbitration between OPSEU and the Crown.
The directions ordered the employer to allow the union access to the grievor's personnel file, required the union to provide further particulars regarding existing and additional grievances sought to be consolidated, set a deadline for the employer's response to the consolidation request, and established a deadline for the employer to notify the union of any preliminary objections.
Judicial review dismissed; labour arbitrator has implied authority to uphold grievance when employer destroys crucial documents.
The applicant sought judicial review of a Grievance Settlement Board decision that upheld a union grievance after the employer's consultant destroyed interview notes.
The Board found that the destruction of these documents irreparably prejudiced the union's case and prevented a fair hearing.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, holding that the Board did not deny natural justice by deciding the matter on a preliminary fairness issue without hearing the merits.
The Court further held that the Board had the implied statutory authority to enforce disclosure obligations by allowing the grievance.
Union ordered to provide particulars; individual grievor denied independent counsel as Union has carriage.
At a preliminary hearing for three grievances raising pension issues, the Employer requested particulars.
The Union consented, and the Board ordered the Union to provide written particulars of the remedies sought and the facts relied upon.
Additionally, an individual grievor attended with independent counsel.
The Board ruled that the Union has carriage of the grievances and the individual grievor does not have the right to be represented by independent counsel.
Motion to dismiss grievances for failure to appear denied; adjournment granted with strict conditions.
The employer brought a motion to dismiss a series of grievances after the grievor failed to provide particulars by the agreed-upon date and failed to appear at a scheduled hearing.
The Grievance Settlement Board declined to dismiss the grievances, noting the grievor's prior attendance and potential confusion regarding the process.
However, the Board ordered the union to provide particulars within three weeks, warned that future unexcused absences would result in dismissal, and directed that any future damages awarded to the grievor be reduced to reflect the delay caused by his conduct.
Procedural order issued setting schedule for exchange of particulars and document production.
The Grievance Settlement Board issued a procedural order requiring the union and the employer to exchange written particulars of all allegations of fact and to produce all documents on which they intend to rely.
The order established a schedule for the exchange of particulars, productions, and reply particulars, and stipulated that failure to comply would preclude a party from introducing the undisclosed evidence without leave.
Union directed to provide particulars in a grievance regarding training.
In a grievance alleging the Employer contravened the management rights provision by not providing certain training to a pilot, the Employer requested particulars.
The Grievance Settlement Board directed the Union to provide the requested particulars to the Employer.
