170 total
Employer directed to provide accounting of TEI benefit payments owed to grievor following prior award.
Following a May 2025 award allowing a grievance and ordering the Employer to pay TEI benefits to the grievor, an ongoing dispute arose regarding the payment of those benefits.
Given the considerable delay, the Arbitrator directed the Employer to provide a complete breakdown of its calculation of the payment obligations and an accounting of what has and has not been paid by March 31, 2026.
The Arbitrator remained seized of the matter.
Binding settlement agreement found based on union counsel's email acceptance despite grievors' refusal to sign.
During mediation of a harassment and discrimination grievance, counsel for the union accepted a settlement proposal from the employer via email.
The grievors subsequently refused to sign the Minutes of Settlement and attempted to renegotiate the terms.
The employer and the union both requested an order finding a binding agreement.
The arbitrator held that the email exchange between counsel created a clear, unambiguous, and binding settlement agreement, which could not be undone by the grievors' subsequent refusal to sign.
Employer's motion to dismiss grievances for delay denied; 3.5-year delay not unreasonable in circumstances.
The Employer brought a motion to dismiss seven grievances filed between 2010 and 2016 on the basis of delay and laches.
The grievances had been adjourned sine die in 2017 pending collective bargaining, which concluded in May 2020.
The Union sought to reactivate the grievances in September 2023.
The Arbitrator found that the 3.5-year delay from May 2020 to September 2023 was not unreasonable given the circumstances, including the retirement of counsel and the arbitrator.
The Arbitrator also concluded that the prejudice to the Employer did not outweigh the grievor's interest in having the significant issues heard on the merits.
The motion was dismissed.
Arbitrator finds senior correctional officer threatened co-workers with a knife, substantiating workplace violence allegations.
Three correctional officers filed grievances alleging that a senior co-worker engaged in a long-term pattern of workplace violence, bullying, and harassment, including repeatedly threatening them with a knife.
The employer investigated, substantiated the allegations, and terminated the co-worker, who then grieved his dismissal.
In this preliminary decision on the facts, the arbitrator found the complainants' evidence credible despite the delay in reporting, which was attributed to the correctional 'Code of Silence'.
The arbitrator concluded on a balance of probabilities that the co-worker did carry a knife in the institution and had threatened the grievors with it on multiple occasions.
Grievances regarding health and safety struck as impermissible collateral attack on labour inspector's prior decisions.
The Employer moved to strike portions of two union grievances concerning health and safety issues at a correctional facility, arguing issue estoppel and collateral attack.
The grievances arose after correctional officers initiated work refusals due to inmates possessing makeshift weapons.
Ministry of Labour inspectors had investigated the work refusals, determined there was no right to refuse, and declined to issue orders.
The Arbitrator found that the inspectors' decisions finally determined the health and safety issues under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
Allowing the grievances to proceed on those issues would constitute an impermissible collateral attack on the inspectors' decisions.
The Employer's motion was allowed.
Grievance over denial of Transition Exit Initiative request dismissed as employer properly exercised its discretion.
The union grieved the employer's decision to deny the grievor's request to exit the Ontario Public Service under the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI).
The employer determined that the grievor's exit would not assist with the transformation of the public service and that there were no plans to reduce Verification Officer positions.
Applying established principles regarding the employer's broad discretion under Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement, the arbitrator found no improper exercise of discretion and dismissed the grievance.
Employer violated collective agreement by denying senior employee's Transition Exit Initiative request while on leave.
The grievor requested a 12-month leave of absence to pursue employment with a police service, which the employer granted.
Shortly after, the grievor applied to exit the Ontario Public Service under the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI).
The employer denied the request, determining the grievor was no longer eligible due to the approved leave, and instead granted TEI to a more junior employee.
The Grievance Settlement Board found that the employer violated Appendix 46 of the collective agreement, which requires TEI determinations among eligible employees to be based on seniority.
The grievance was allowed, and the grievor was awarded the full TEI benefit.
Grievance over denial of Transition Exit Initiative dismissed; Employer properly exercised its broad discretion.
The Union grieved the Employer's denial of the Grievor's request for the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) under Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement.
The Union argued that the decision-makers relied on irrelevant facts, pointing to an error made by a Director during a meeting.
The Arbitrator found that the Director's error was an innocent mistake and that the Grievor's actual position was properly considered.
The Arbitrator also found that the Grievor's position was not eliminated but converted and filled after his retirement.
Applying established principles regarding the Employer's broad discretion under Appendix 46, the Arbitrator concluded the discretion was properly exercised and dismissed the grievance.
Grievance over denial of Transition Exit Initiative request dismissed as Employer properly exercised its discretion.
The grievor, a Program Administrator, submitted a request for the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) which was denied by the Employer.
The Union grieved the denial, arguing it was unfair and discriminatory as others had been approved.
The Employer maintained the grievor's position was required and no TEI applications had been granted since 2020.
The Arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the Employer properly exercised its broad discretion under Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement to determine whether an employee's exit supports the transformation of the public service.
Grievance over denial of Transition Exit Initiative application dismissed as Employer properly exercised its discretion.
The grievor, a Senior Auditor, applied for the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) prior to his retirement.
The Employer denied the application, and the grievor challenged the fairness of the decision-making process.
The arbitrator found that the Employer properly exercised its broad discretion under Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement, noting that TEI is not a general retirement allowance and the Employer had no plans to reduce positions in the grievor's office at the time.
The grievance was dismissed.
The Union grieved the Employer's denial of the Grievor's application for the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) under Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement.
The Grievor, a Parole and Probation Admin Support staff member, argued her exit would have supported transformation.
The Employer maintained there were no plans to reduce positions in her office and her position was filled upon departure.
The Arbitrator found that the Employer properly exercised its broad discretion in denying the request, consistent with previous jurisprudence establishing that TEI is not a general retirement allowance.
Grievance over denial of Transition Exit Initiative request dismissed as employee was on long-term disability.
The Grievor, a former Union steward on long-term disability, grieved the Employer's denial of his request for the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) prior to his retirement.
The Union argued the denial was unfair and motivated by his union activity.
The Arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding no evidence of bad faith or discrimination.
Applying previous jurisprudence, the Arbitrator held that the Employer properly exercised its broad discretion under Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement, as the Grievor no longer occupied a home position from which he could exit to support the transformation of the public service.
Grievance over denial of Transition Exit Initiative benefits dismissed as Employer properly exercised its discretion.
The Grievor, a Corridor Management Planner with 31 years of service, applied for enhanced benefits under the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) prior to her retirement.
The Employer denied the request, maintaining that her position was still required and that granting TEI would not support the transformation of the Ontario Public Service.
The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the Employer properly exercised its broad discretion under Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement and that the case was indistinguishable from previous decisions upholding the Employer's discretion to deny TEI requests.
The Grievor, a Probation and Parole Officer with 33 years of service, applied for enhanced benefits under the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) prior to his retirement.
His application was not approved, and he filed a grievance challenging the fairness of the Employer's decision-making process.
The Arbitrator found that the Employer properly exercised its broad discretion under Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement, noting that TEI is not a general retirement allowance and the Employer is not required to approve all requests.
Grievance over denial of Transition Exit Initiative dismissed; Employer properly exercised its discretion.
The Union grieved the Employer's decision to deny the grievor's application for the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) prior to his retirement.
The grievor argued the Employer's decision-making process was unfair and relied on assurances that best efforts would be made to approve requests supporting organizational transformation.
The Arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the Employer properly exercised its broad discretion under Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement.
The Arbitrator noted that a TEI application does not survive an employee's departure from the public service and that the approval of another employee's request after the grievor's retirement did not establish improper conduct.
Grievances over denied Transition Exit Initiative applications dismissed as Employer properly exercised its discretion.
The Union filed multiple grievances on behalf of employees who applied for but were not approved to receive enhanced benefits under the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) pursuant to Appendix 46 of the Collective Agreement.
The arbitrator applied principles established in earlier cases, confirming that the Employer retains broad discretion to determine whether granting a TEI request supports the transformation of the Ontario Public Service.
Finding no improper exercise of discretion, the arbitrator dismissed all the grievances.
Grievances over denial of Transition Exit Initiative benefits dismissed as Employer properly exercised its discretion.
The Union filed grievances on behalf of several employees who were denied enhanced benefits under the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI).
The Arbitrator applied principles established in earlier decisions, confirming that the Employer has broad discretion to approve or deny TEI requests based on whether the exit supports the transformation of the Ontario Public Service.
Finding no improper exercise of discretion, bad faith, or discrimination, the Arbitrator dismissed the grievances.
Employer ordered to produce arguably relevant employee medical and employment records subject to privacy conditions.
The Union requested the production of employment and medical related documentation for certain employees in relation to a grievance claiming entitlement to the Custodial Responsibility Allowance.
The Arbitrator found the requested documentation arguably relevant to the issues in dispute and directed the Employer to disclose it forthwith, subject to strict privacy conditions restricting its use and dissemination.
The Union filed grievances on behalf of several employees who applied for enhanced benefits under the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) before retiring from the Ontario Public Service.
The Arbitrator applied established principles regarding the Employer's broad discretion to approve or deny TEI requests based on whether an employee's exit supports the transformation of the public service.
Finding no material facts to distinguish these grievances from previously dismissed cases, the Arbitrator concluded the Employer properly exercised its discretion and dismissed the grievances.
The Union filed grievances on behalf of several employees who applied for but were denied enhanced benefits under the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) before retiring from the Ontario Public Service.
The arbitrator applied established principles regarding the Employer's broad discretion to approve or deny TEI requests based on whether the exit supports the transformation of the public service.
The arbitrator found that the Employer properly exercised its discretion in all cases, including those where the Union alleged junior employees were granted TEI, noting that in some instances the junior employees were in different positions or classifications.
The grievances were dismissed.
