David Wright

The parties disputed the interpretation of compressed work week (CWW) agreements at the Whitby Mental Health Centre.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued declarations clarifying that the CWW agreements do not require an annual review unless requested or if termination is contemplated, specified voting procedures if a review occurs, clarified that team leaders are not always required to work 8-hour shifts, stated that up to 15% of staff may be required to work 8-hour shifts if operationally necessary, and confirmed that pre-existing shift change policies are not altered.

The grievances were terminated.

The union filed grievances alleging that the employer's decision to temporarily assign only Water Group Leaders as Acting Geoscientist 4, and not Air Quality Analysts, was arbitrary, discriminatory, and motivated by improper considerations including reprisal for union activity.

After the union closed its case, the employer moved for a non-suit.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the motion, finding that the union had met the low threshold of presenting 'some evidence' to support its claims, thereby requiring the employer to answer the case.

The grievor, a communications officer at an ambulance dispatch centre, was found to be in a conflict of interest in 1996 because her husband operated a private non-emergency patient transfer business.

Following the Ministry's divestment of land ambulance services to municipalities in 2000, the Union argued the conflict no longer existed as the Ministry was no longer in competition with the husband's business.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the core of the conflict—the grievor's access to information that could benefit her husband's business—remained unchanged despite the divestment.

The union filed grievances alleging the employer failed to properly accommodate the grievor's asthma and sensitivity to cigarette smoke at a youth centre.

Prior to the hearing, the employer requested the grievor's complete decoded OHIP summary and clinical notes from all medical practitioners since June 2004.

The union opposed the breadth of the request, arguing it violated the grievor's privacy rights, and proposed providing a specific medical report from the grievor's family doctor instead.

The Vice-Chair dismissed the employer's broad request, finding it too invasive as the grievor was not making a generalized claim placing his entire medical history in issue.

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

The employer brought preliminary motions to dismiss three group grievances regarding the evaluation of a compressed work week agreement.

The employer argued the grievances were not arbitrable due to prior Minutes of Settlement and were untimely.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed both motions, finding that the union's 'acknowledgement' of the employer's evaluation criteria in the settlement did not constitute 'agreement' to them, and that the grievances were timely as they were filed shortly after the employer announced the review.

During an arbitration hearing, a dispute arose over certain requests for documents listed in a summons issued to a witness.

The Grievance Settlement Board heard submissions and ordered the witness to produce call records, ownership documents, and an employee list for MedStat Emergency Medical and Transfer Services, finding the documents arguably relevant to the issues in dispute.

The employer brought a motion to compel the attendance of a witness who failed to attend an arbitration hearing after being duly summoned.

The witness had been advised by counsel that he did not need to attend because he was not a Crown employee.

The Grievance Settlement Board held that under the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act and the Labour Relations Act, it has the authority to summon and enforce the attendance of any witness, including third parties, provided they live in Ontario and their testimony is relevant.

The Board ordered the witness to attend the next hearing date, noting that he could still object to producing requested documents at that time.

At the outset of a hearing before the Grievance Settlement Board, a preliminary issue arose regarding the order of proceeding.

The union argued the employer must proceed first as it was a disciplinary matter, while the employer argued the union must proceed first as the grievor allegedly failed to comply with an earlier Board decision regarding a conflict of interest.

The Vice-Chair ruled that the employer must proceed first, finding that the matter could be characterized either as disciplinary or as an alleged breach of an earlier decision, and under either characterization, the onus rests with the employer.

The Union filed a group grievance alleging the Employer fostered an unsafe and poisonous work environment due to the threatening behaviour of a co-worker.

The Employer raised preliminary objections, arguing the Grievance Settlement Board lacked jurisdiction or should defer to the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) because some grievors had filed a concurrent complaint under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The Employer also argued the grievance was untimely and failed to disclose a prima facie case.

The Vice-Chair dismissed the preliminary objections, finding the Board had concurrent jurisdiction and no legislative direction required deferral.

The historical allegations were deemed admissible to establish a pattern, and the pleadings were found sufficient to disclose a prima facie case.

The employer brought a preliminary motion arguing that the union's grievances regarding temporary assignments were in substance classification grievances, which fall outside the Grievance Settlement Board's jurisdiction.

The union alleged that the employer acted in bad faith and discriminatorily by granting temporary assignments to Water Group Leaders but not to Air Quality Analysts, partly as a reprisal for union activity.

The Board found that the union was not seeking a reclassification but rather challenging the exercise of management rights.

Because the union alleged that the employer's actions violated the collective agreement's non-discrimination clause, the Board held it had jurisdiction to hear the grievances on their merits.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued a direction regarding the placement of the grievor at the Brookside Youth Centre.

The Board directed the grievor to attend MSA training and, upon successful completion, commence duties as a Youth Services Officer starting with two weeks of orientation.

The Employer brought a preliminary motion to prohibit the Union from leading evidence related to events predating a June 2002 Memorandum of Settlement.

The Union sought to introduce this evidence to establish a pattern of discrimination against the grievor.

The Grievance Settlement Board held that the Union was precluded from presenting evidence about the facts and circumstances underlying the previously settled grievances, emphasizing the importance of preserving the sanctity of final settlements.

However, the Union was permitted to lead evidence about events occurring between the filing of the settled grievances and the current grievance, including evidence that the settlement itself was breached.

Four correctional officers filed grievances claiming travel time after the closure of L'Original Jail and their relocation to the Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre.

The employer objected that the grievances were untimely.

The Grievance Settlement Board found that the claim arose from a March 2001 settlement and was not a continuing grievance.

The grievances were filed over three months late.

Applying the Becker Milk factors, the Board declined to exercise its discretion under section 48(16) of the Labour Relations Act to extend the time limits, finding the grievors were not diligent and deliberately delayed filing until they received mileage payments.

The grievances were dismissed.

The union filed grievances alleging sexual harassment by a managerial employee and sought his termination or reassignment.

The parties agreed to a preliminary procedure to determine three issues based on assumed facts.

The Grievance Settlement Board held that the union's pleadings disclosed a prima facie case of sexual harassment.

The Board further affirmed its jurisdiction to direct the employer to discipline or discharge a managerial employee in exceptional cases where absolutely necessary to effect a remedy.

However, the Board concluded that while the primary remedy of termination was not absolutely necessary in this case, the alternative remedies of removing the manager's supervisory powers or reassigning him might be appropriate.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer with asthma requiring a smoke-free workplace, was previously determined to be appropriately accommodated at the Brookside Youth Centre.

However, no vacancies existed.

Following the closure of other facilities, positions were transferred to Brookside, leaving one unfilled.

The Union sought to have the grievor placed in this unfilled position.

The Employer argued that the position was unfunded and that it had no obligation to create a job.

The Grievance Settlement Board held that placing the grievor in the unfilled transferred position did not amount to creating a new position and would not cause the Employer undue hardship.

The Employer was directed to place the grievor in the position.

The Grievance Settlement Board previously determined that the grievor, a Correctional Officer with asthma and sensitivity to cigarette smoke, should be placed at the Brookside Youth Centre to accommodate his medical needs.

Following the transfer of several positions to Brookside, one position remained unfilled.

The Union argued the grievor should be placed in this unfilled position, while the Employer opposed.

The Vice-Chair concluded that placing the grievor in the unfilled position was consistent with the Employer's duty to accommodate and did not constitute undue hardship.

The grievor, who has asthma, had been accommodated with steady day shifts for many years.

The employer sought to have the grievor try shift work and presented expert medical evidence indicating that the only way to determine if the grievor could tolerate shift work was to have him try it.

The union relied on past medical notes but did not call medical witnesses.

The arbitrator accepted the employer's expert evidence and concluded that the grievor should try shift work, subject to further medical review if it adversely affected his condition.

The Union brought a motion requesting that the Employer be directed to canvass certain employees about their interest in transferring to the Toronto East Detention Centre.

This was to facilitate the placement of the grievor, who required accommodation at the Brookside Youth Centre due to asthma and smoke sensitivity.

The Employer argued this was an unreasonable burden.

The Vice-Chair granted the motion, finding the request reasonable and consistent with the Employer's duty to accommodate.

The Employer raised a preliminary objection that the Union's grievance concerning the transfer of the Lakehead Psychiatric Hospital to St. Joseph's Care Group was untimely.

The Union alleged that the transfer agreement did not comply with the collective agreement regarding terms and conditions of employment and financial incentives.

The Grievance Settlement Board found that the time for filing the grievance began to run when the Union received the transfer agreement in February 2000, not when it was advised in April 2003 that the financial incentive had not been paid.

The grievance was dismissed as untimely.

A third party, Mr. Keating, was granted full participation rights in the grievance proceedings.

Having recently retained counsel, the third party requested an adjournment of several scheduled hearing dates.

Over the union's objection, the Vice-Chair granted the adjournment for the immediate hearing date and a subsequent date by agreement, but denied the request to adjourn dates scheduled for April, which had been set for some time.