10 total
Grievance dismissed; termination of correctional officer upheld for excessive use of force on inmate.
The grievor, a correctional officer, was terminated for using excessive force on an inmate during an escort and for failing to wear a Ministry-approved face mask.
The arbitrator found that the employer had condoned the mask violation, but upheld the termination based on the use of force.
The arbitrator concluded that the grievor used an unnecessary and dangerous takedown technique contrary to his training, and unnecessarily struck the inmate in the face with a closed fist.
Given the grievor's prior disciplinary record for excessive use of force and lack of insight, the grievance was dismissed.
Non-suit motion granted; evidence insufficient to establish prima facie case of racial discrimination in acting assignments.
The Union filed a grievance alleging that the Employer systemically discriminated against the grievor, a racialized woman, on the basis of race by denying her temporary acting assignments that represented career development opportunities.
The Employer brought a non-suit motion, arguing the Union's evidence was insufficient to succeed.
The Arbitrator granted the non-suit motion, finding that even assuming the Union's evidence was true and drawing all reasonable inferences in its favour, the evidence did not support a conclusion on a balance of probabilities that the grievor's race was a factor in the Employer's decisions to place a non-racialized employee in the acting positions.
Grievor ordered to attend virtual hearings from employer premises due to repeated technical difficulties.
During a multi-day grievance arbitration held via videoconference, the grievor experienced repeated technical difficulties that prevented her from testifying.
The employer sought an order requiring the grievor to attend future hearing dates from a designated physical location with reliable internet.
The arbitrator granted the request, ordering the grievor to attend future scheduled hearing dates at one of two specified employer office locations where a private boardroom and internet connectivity would be provided.
Evidentiary objections upheld; will-say evidence relating to unparticularized claims and previously adjudicated issues excluded.
During an arbitration hearing, the employer objected to the admission of certain evidence contained in will-say statements disclosed by the union.
The arbitrator excluded portions of the grievor's will-say that related to allegations previously adjudicated by the board, finding that admitting them would allow relitigation of decided issues.
The arbitrator also excluded portions of will-say statements from two other employees that described their own experiences, as those experiences were not part of the grievance's particulars and would require the board to make findings of discrimination against employees who had not filed grievances.
Hearsay evidence within the admitted portions was allowed subject to weight.
Termination grievance upheld in part; damages awarded in lieu of reinstatement due to broken employment relationship.
The grievor, an Application Analyst/Developer, filed six grievances alleging workplace harassment, discrimination based on age, race, and disability, and unjust termination.
The employer terminated her for non-culpable inability to perform the core duties of her position, specifically coding.
The arbitrator dismissed the harassment and discrimination grievances, finding that the managers' actions were legitimate exercises of management rights and that the grievor's inability to code was not related to a medical condition.
However, the arbitrator upheld the termination grievance in part, finding that the employer failed to take reasonable steps to move the grievor into other work within her qualifications.
Due to the complete breakdown of the employment relationship and the grievor's lack of insight into her performance deficiencies, the arbitrator awarded damages in lieu of reinstatement, ordering the employer to pay 1.5 years of salary and $45,000 in damages.
Arbitrator ordered parties to exchange full written particulars and produce documents prior to hearing.
At a hearing convened for two grievances relating to job competitions and alleged discrimination, the parties agreed to use the day for mediation.
However, mediation was unlikely to be productive due to a lack of meaningful exchange of particulars or documents.
The Arbitrator ordered both parties to provide full written particulars of material facts and produce relevant documents according to a set timetable, and directed the employer to provide notice of any preliminary motions or objections.
Union ordered to provide particulars and production of documents in accommodation grievance.
The union filed a grievance alleging the employer failed to return the grievor to work with appropriate accommodation.
The parties previously agreed to a timeline for the exchange of particulars and production.
The employer brought a motion for an order compelling the union to provide particulars and production, as the union had not yet done so.
The Arbitrator ordered the union to provide written particulars and copies of documents by specified dates, and ordered the employer to provide its particulars and documents thereafter.
A related grievance was also consolidated into the proceeding.
Arbitrator amends prior order setting conditions for disclosure of grievor's medical documents.
The parties jointly requested amendments to an earlier decision dated April 15, 2021, regarding the disclosure and production of medical documents in a grievance arbitration.
The Arbitrator ordered the amendments, which updated the number of grievances and modified the conditions under which the Employer's counsel may share the grievor's medical documents with instructing clients, law students, disability accommodation specialists, and witnesses.
Employer's preliminary request for medical assurance of grievor's fitness to participate in arbitration denied.
At a grievance arbitration hearing, the Employer raised a preliminary concern regarding the Grievor's fitness to participate and face cross-examination.
The Employer requested an order requiring the Union to provide medical assurance from the Grievor's treating practitioner that she was medically fit to proceed.
The Union opposed the request, noting the Grievor was aware of the process and willing to proceed.
The Arbitrator denied the Employer's request, finding insufficient medical grounds or circumstances to warrant such an order.
Untimely harassment grievance dismissed; evidence of prior conduct limited to three years before filing.
The Employer brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the first of nine grievances alleging workplace harassment, bullying, and discrimination, arguing it was filed outside the collective agreement's time limits.
The Union argued the grievance was a continuing grievance and sought to adduce evidence of a pattern of harassment dating back to 2009.
The Arbitrator found the initial grievance was not a continuing grievance but a single act with continuing effects, and declined to extend the time limits under s. 48(16) of the Labour Relations Act due to substantial prejudice to the Employer.
The first grievance was dismissed, and the Union was precluded from adducing evidence prior to March 2016, striking paragraphs 2 to 26 of the Statement of Particulars.
