64 total
Employer's motion for production of documents and further particulars in discharge grievance partially granted.
In a discharge grievance, the Employer sought pre-hearing production of documents and further and better particulars from the Union.
The Employer's request for medical records related to the grievor's pregnancy leave was denied as it related to a collateral fact.
The Employer's request for further particulars regarding the Union's defence of condonation was partially granted.
The arbitrator held that while general assertions of condonation were sufficiently particularized, the Union must provide specific particulars if it intends to rely on specific instances of condonation.
Union ordered to provide list of remaining grievances by June 7, 2021.
The Union undertook to provide a list of remaining grievances to the Employer by June 7, 2021.
The Arbitrator noted that if the Union fails to do so, submissions will be heard regarding whether all the grievances should be dismissed.
Hearing adjourned for 21 days to allow union to contact absent grievor.
The grievor failed to attend the scheduled videoconference arbitration hearing, and the union was unaware of the reason for his absence.
The arbitrator granted the union 21 days to contact the grievor, provide sufficient reasons for his non-attendance, and seek assurances of his future participation.
If the grievor fails to do so, the parties will provide written submissions on how to proceed, including whether the grievance should be dismissed.
Grievances for overtime pay dismissed as the collective agreement unambiguously excluded the grievors' classification from the claimed schedule.
Six Correctional Officers filed grievances alleging the employer violated the collective agreement by failing to pay them overtime based on an annual balancing of hours under Schedule A. The employer brought a motion to dismiss, arguing the grievors are classified as CO2 under Schedule 4.7, not Schedule A. The Arbitrator upheld the employer's motion, finding the collective agreement unambiguously places CO2s in Schedule 4.7, and applying Schedule A would effectively amend the collective agreement.
The grievances were dismissed.
Procedural directions issued for grievance arbitration regarding termination of employment.
The Grievance Settlement Board issued procedural directions following a case management session for a grievance relating to the termination of the grievor's employment.
The Arbitrator set deadlines for filing an Agreed Statement of Facts, declarations in lieu of examination-in-chief, and a joint Book of Documents.
Time limits were also established for opening statements, supplementary oral evidence, cross-examination, and final arguments.
Motion to strike portions of Statement of Particulars partially granted where allegations lacked sufficient detail.
The Employer brought a motion to strike specific paragraphs of the Union's Statement of Particulars on the basis that they contained allegations that were not properly particularized.
The Arbitrator reviewed the challenged paragraphs to determine whether they provided sufficient information (the 'when', 'where', 'how', and 'who') for the Employer to know the case it had to meet.
The Arbitrator struck several sentences and portions of paragraphs that were vague or lacked necessary details, while declining to strike others where the context or inferences provided sufficient particularity.
Grievor ordered to pay $6,314.64 to employer for breaching terms of grievance settlement.
The parties resolved a grievance via a Memorandum of Settlement, under which the employer paid the grievor $22,000 and the grievor was required to repay $6,314.64 to the employer.
The employer fulfilled its obligation, but the grievor failed to make the required repayment.
The union did not oppose the employer's request for enforcement.
The arbitrator, remaining seized of the matter, found the grievor in breach of the settlement and ordered the grievor to pay the employer $6,314.64 within 30 days.
Arbitrator ruled union cannot introduce prior job descriptions not before the original decision-makers.
In an interim decision regarding a grievance over a Targeted Direct Assignment (TDA) process, the arbitrator determined whether the Association could introduce the complainant's prior job descriptions as evidence.
The parties had agreed to an expedited protocol requiring the Association to provide a chart demonstrating how the complainant met the entry-level qualifications.
The arbitrator ruled that it was not appropriate for the Association to include prior job descriptions that were not before the decision-makers when the complainant was initially found not to have met the entry-level qualifications.
Arbitrator dismisses some unparticularized grievances and strikes irrelevant particulars, ordering strict deadlines for unredacted medical disclosure.
The Employer brought motions to dismiss several grievances without a hearing, strike paragraphs from the Union's particulars, and preclude the Union from adducing medical evidence due to delayed and redacted disclosure.
The Arbitrator dismissed some grievances for lack of particulars or lack of jurisdiction over free-standing management rights claims, but allowed others to proceed where sufficient particulars were pled.
Several paragraphs of the Union's particulars were struck for irrelevance or being outside the scope of the grievances.
The Arbitrator declined to dismiss all grievances or preclude medical evidence entirely, but ordered the Union to provide complete, unredacted medical disclosure by specified deadlines, failing which they would be barred from adducing medical evidence.
Grievance dismissed; discharge upheld for workplace harassment and reckless expiry of inmate non-association alert.
The Complainant, an Operational Manager at a correctional facility, was dismissed for cause following allegations of workplace harassment against a female colleague and the unauthorized expiry of a non-association alert between two high-risk inmates.
The Public Service Grievance Board found that the Complainant engaged in a pattern of harassing conduct that poisoned his colleague's work environment.
Furthermore, the Board concluded that his expiry of the non-association alert was reckless, unauthorized, and placed staff and inmates at risk.
Given the Complainant's lack of remorse and failure to take responsibility, the Board upheld the dismissal and dismissed the grievance.
Production of grievor's note books ordered subject to deemed undertaking and specific use restrictions.
The Union sought production of note books kept by the grievor during his employment as a correctional officer.
The Employer agreed to produce them provided restrictions were imposed, similar to a previous order regarding log books, to prevent the grievor from publicly discussing his allegations of harassment and discrimination.
The Arbitrator ordered production subject to specific restrictions, noting that the deemed undertaking applies to the produced documents but does not extend to information the grievor already possessed before receiving the productions.
Arbitrator sets schedule for document production and finalization of particulars in grievance arbitration.
The Employer brought a motion to strike paragraphs of the Union's statement of particulars for being insufficiently particularized.
The Union argued it needed production of log books before finalizing particulars.
The Union also sought production of the grievor's note books, which the Employer agreed to produce subject to restrictions.
The Arbitrator issued an interim order setting a schedule for the production of documents, including log books and note books, and the subsequent provision of final particulars by the Union, with a conference call scheduled to address any remaining objections.
Arbitrator resolves preliminary issues on document production and declines to strike post-grievance particulars.
In a grievance arbitration, the parties raised several preliminary issues regarding document production and the striking of particulars.
The arbitrator ordered the employer to produce unredacted log books subject to strict confidentiality conditions, and ordered the grievor to return Ministry notebooks.
The arbitrator declined the employer's request to strike paragraphs of the union's particulars that detailed events occurring after the grievance was filed, finding that the post-grievance events were potentially relevant to establishing a pattern of harassment and assessing damages.
Employer's advisor and instructor permitted to review grievor's medical file subject to strict confidentiality conditions.
In an interim decision regarding multiple grievances, the Employer requested authorization for its advisor and instructor to review the grievor's redacted medical file.
The Union objected on the basis of medical privacy.
The Arbitrator granted the Employer's request, finding that the Employer's counsel could not properly prepare for the litigation without seeking guidance from her advisor and instructor regarding the medical facts.
The Arbitrator ordered the production of the medical records pursuant to s. 48(12)(b) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995, subject to strict confidentiality conditions, limiting use solely to the hearing, and requiring the return or destruction of the documents upon completion of the case.
Grievance alleging abuse of management rights regarding unequal caseloads dismissed as employer retains work allocation rights.
The union filed a group grievance alleging an abuse of management rights regarding the caseloads of Victim Witness Service Workers at the Brampton office compared to other offices, and the employer's refusal to provide workload statistics.
The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that even if the allegations were true, they would not amount to a violation of the collective agreement, as the employer retains the right to determine work allocation and is not obligated to equalize work or provide statistics.
Arbitrator directs timetable for exchange of particulars and documents in grievance arbitration.
In a grievance arbitration involving seventeen grievances filed by the Union, the Employer requested full particulars and documents prior to the hearing.
The parties agreed on a timetable for the exchange of information.
The Arbitrator issued an interim decision directing the Union to provide particulars and documents by August 31, 2018, and the Employer to respond by November 30, 2018.
The Arbitrator declined the Employer's request to preemptively dismiss the grievances if the Union missed the deadline, noting it was premature, but warned that failure to comply could lead to dismissal.
Arbitrator orders production of confidential videos and discipline letters subject to strict restrictions and issues hearing management directions.
In a grievance arbitration concerning discipline and alleged reprisal, the Union requested the production of videos and discipline letters relating to the incident.
The Employer contested the order due to confidentiality concerns.
The parties reached an agreement, and the Arbitrator ordered the production of the materials subject to strict confidentiality restrictions.
The Arbitrator also issued procedural directions for the management of the hearing, including the exchange of statements of facts and limitations on witness testimony, to ensure the matter proceeds expeditiously.
Union ordered to produce grievor's medical documents prior to arbitration hearing or face dismissal.
In preparation for a grievance arbitration hearing scheduled for July 2018, the Arbitrator ordered the Union to produce all arguably relevant medical documents regarding the grievor's return to work following a 2012 WSIB injury.
The Union was directed to provide the documents by May 11, 2018, failing which the grievances could be dismissed.
A confidentiality order was also imposed limiting disclosure of the medical information.
Motion to strike granted; Board lacks jurisdiction over accommodation claims arising during employment with separate employer.
The Employer moved to strike particulars from a grievance alleging a failure to accommodate the grievor's back issues.
The disputed particulars related to a period when the grievor took a leave of absence to work for the Patient Ombudsman, a separate employer.
The Grievance Settlement Board granted the motion, finding it lacked jurisdiction to consider allegations of failure to accommodate while the grievor was employed by a different employer, as the Employer's duty to accommodate did not continue during that period.
Consent order issued to protect confidentiality and redact personal information in produced materials.
The Grievance Settlement Board issued a consent order regarding the confidentiality of materials produced by the Health Board Secretariat.
The order requires the employer to redact personal identifying and medical information of non-parties prior to production.
The union's counsel is restricted from disclosing the materials beyond those who need to know for the hearing, and all copies must be returned or destroyed at the conclusion of the proceedings.
