170 total
Parties directed to exchange written positions on monetary remedies prior to mediation.
The arbitrator issued a procedural direction requiring the Union and the Employer to prepare and exchange written outlines of their positions on the monetary value of any outstanding remedy, along with their rationale, prior to a scheduled mediation concerning grievances over compressed work agreement scheduling obligations.
Employer not required to backfill specific correctional officer positions when reassigning staff to other duties.
The Union filed grievances alleging the Employer breached a compressed work week agreement by failing to schedule 147 classified Correctional Officers to specific positions and failing to backfill those specific positions on a daily basis.
The Arbitrator found that previous decisions had already determined the issue, concluding that while the Employer must schedule 147 classified COs daily and backfill absences, the agreement does not restrict the Employer's inherent right to assign work or require backfilling when a CO is reassigned to other duties.
Grievance alleging age discrimination in denial of Transition Exit Initiative dismissed for lack of evidence.
The grievor applied for the Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) but retired before her application was approved.
The Union grieved the denial, alleging the Employer improperly considered her eligibility for an unreduced pension, amounting to age discrimination.
The Arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding no evidence that the Senior Management Team considered her retirement status.
The denial was based on the lack of ongoing transformation in her department and the need to maintain staffing levels.
The Arbitrator accepted the Employer's evidence that a manager's comment regarding her retirement eligibility was made sympathetically, not as the reason for the denial.
Arbitration proceedings adjourned pending completion of related criminal trial, with exceptions for procedural matters.
Counsel for one of the individuals involved requested an adjournment of the arbitration proceedings pending the completion of his criminal trial, citing potential impacts on the issues before the Board and bail conditions affecting his attendance.
The union argued that procedural matters and accommodation requests should proceed in the interim.
The employer opposed the adjournment.
The arbitrator granted an adjournment until September 15, 2019, noting the uncertainty of the criminal trial's completion date.
An exception was made for procedural issues that could be addressed via teleconference or in writing, though medical accommodation requests were deferred until after the adjournment period.
Arbitrator issued case management orders regarding document production and status of a related criminal trial.
The parties met to address case management issues.
The Arbitrator ordered a grievor to provide updates on his criminal trial, directed the parties to submit their positions on adjourning the matter pending the criminal trial and on accommodation requests, and ordered the Employer to produce specified documents to the Union.
Evidentiary objection to late-disclosed witness dismissed; employer ordered to provide advance declaration of evidence.
During a discharge arbitration, the Association objected to the Employer calling a late-disclosed witness, Colonel Stasyna, to testify about time sheet practices.
The Association argued the late disclosure was prejudicial and protracted the hearing.
The Arbitrator dismissed the objection, finding no prejudice to the Association's cross-examination of previous witnesses.
However, the Arbitrator granted the Association's alternative request, ordering the Employer to provide a declaration setting out the witness's evidence in chief prior to the next hearing date.
Arbitrator issues directions for submissions and documentation regarding grievors' accommodation requests.
During a case management conference call, the union requested accommodation for the grievors based on medical documentation.
The arbitrator outlined the quasi-judicial nature of the Grievance Settlement Board proceedings and the requirement for medical documentation to substantiate accommodation requests.
The arbitrator directed the union to provide specific accommodation requests and details of any accommodations provided in related criminal proceedings, and directed the employer to respond with any objections.
Grievance over denial of voluntary exit initiative dismissed as employer reasonably determined position was still required.
The union grieved the employer's decision to deny the grievor's request for a Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) prior to her retirement.
The union argued that the grievor's position had undergone a wholesale transformation and was effectively eliminated, making the denial an improper exercise of discretion.
The arbitrator found that while the grievor's duties had evolved significantly due to technological changes and reorganization, her position was not eliminated and her work was still required by the employer.
The arbitrator concluded that the employer reasonably exercised its discretion in denying the TEI request, as the initiative was intended to facilitate workforce reduction and avoid layoffs, not to serve as a general retirement allowance.
Arbitrator has jurisdiction to consolidate grievances assigned to different roster arbitrators because the Board is a single entity.
The Employer brought a motion to consolidate two sets of grievances (the Cody grievances and the MacDonald grievances) that arose from the same series of events involving alleged workplace harassment and assault.
The Union opposed the motion, arguing that the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to consolidate the grievances because another arbitrator was already seized with the MacDonald grievances.
The arbitrator held that, as a roster arbitrator acting as the Grievance Settlement Board, she had the jurisdiction to consolidate the grievances under the Board's Rules of Procedure, because the Board is a single entity.
The arbitrator granted the motion, finding that the grievances involved common factual issues and should be heard together to avoid conflicting rulings and ensure efficiency.
Adjournment of hearing dates granted with conditions due to unavoidable witness unavailability.
The employer requested an adjournment of two upcoming hearing dates because its advisor and current witness was unavoidably unable to attend.
The association opposed the request.
The arbitrator granted the adjournment, finding the witness's inability to attend unavoidable, and imposed conditions including directions for filing documents and a witness declaration.
Grievance over denial of Transition Exit Initiative dismissed; Employer reasonably required position to be maintained.
The grievor, a long-service Database Administrator, applied for a Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) under Appendix 46 of the collective agreement prior to retiring.
The Employer denied the application on the basis that there was an ongoing need for the grievor's position, despite the grievor's core duties diminishing due to technological changes.
The Union grieved the denial, arguing that the grievor's departure supported the transformation of the OPS.
The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the Employer reasonably exercised its broad discretion under Appendix 46 by limiting TEI approvals to circumstances where the departure would free up a position to be eliminated, consistent with the objective of workforce reduction.
Arbitrator ordered production of grievor's medical file subject to strict confidentiality and dissemination conditions.
In a grievance arbitration, the arbitrator ordered the grievor to obtain her complete medical file from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) and produce it to union counsel.
Union counsel was directed to produce the arguably relevant portions to employer counsel.
The disclosure was made subject to strict confidentiality conditions, limiting dissemination to key advisors on a need-to-know basis, prohibiting advisors from making copies, and requiring the destruction of all but one copy of the documents at the conclusion of the proceedings.
Arbitrator issued case management orders including production of an investigation report and scheduling a consolidation motion.
The matter was scheduled for a hearing on April 18, 2018, but the Employer advised it would bring a motion to consolidate the grievances of another employee, whose counsel was unavailable.
The arbitrator used the date for case management.
The arbitrator ordered the Employer to produce the CSOI Investigation Report to the Union and scheduled the motion to consolidate, along with any potential motion to stay proceedings pending a criminal trial, for June 26, 2018.
Procedural directions issued for filing evidence by declaration and setting examination time limits.
In a discharge grievance, the arbitrator issued procedural directions to accommodate a witness who was being assigned overseas.
The Employer was directed to file the balance of the witness's evidence in chief in the form of a declaration.
The arbitrator also set strict time limits for viva voce amplification, cross-examination, and re-examination, and directed the Association to advise whether it challenged the authenticity of certain documents.
Production of redacted time sheets and expense claims from third-party investigation report ordered.
In a discharge grievance involving allegations of time theft and dual employment, the Employer sought production of an investigation report prepared by the Department of National Defence (DND).
The Association argued the request was a fishing expedition.
The Arbitrator found the documents related to the days in question were arguably relevant and ordered the DND investigator to provide a redacted copy of the grievor's time sheets and expense claims, but not the full investigation report.
Arbitrator issued case management directions for document production and particulars in a termination grievance.
In a termination grievance, the Arbitrator issued case management directions ordering the Employer to provide full particulars of the facts relied upon for termination and to produce various documents, including the FIT file, communications with DND, and the complainant's work emails.
The Association was also directed to produce communications between the complainant and DND, notes from the allegation meeting, and any documents it intends to rely upon.
Grievance for conversion to full-time status dismissed as grievor was replacing an employee on leave.
The union filed a grievance claiming the employer violated the collective agreement by failing to convert the grievor to full-time status.
The grievor was a fixed-term employee replacing a regular employee on an authorized leave of absence.
The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the collective agreement explicitly excepted employees replacing regular employees on authorized leaves of absence from the conversion provision.
Employer's motion to strike portions of a Will Say Statement granted in part; grievor granted anonymity.
The employer brought a motion to strike portions of the grievor's Will Say Statement in an arbitration concerning workplace accommodation and termination.
The employer argued the evidence was irrelevant, unparticularized, and included privileged mediation discussions.
The union also requested that the grievor remain anonymous due to the personal medical information involved.
The Grievance Settlement Board granted the anonymity request and allowed the employer's motion in part, striking evidence regarding other employees, pre-disability events, post-grievance Stage 2 meetings, and confidential mediation discussions, while permitting some evidence of alleged differential treatment.
Fixed-term correctional officers are entitled to overtime when hours are added to scheduled backfill shifts.
The union filed a policy grievance regarding the entitlement of Fixed Term Correctional Officers to overtime pay under the collective agreement.
The Grievance Settlement Board previously ruled that overtime is payable when a fixed-term employee works in excess of a scheduled shift exceeding eight hours while backfilling for a regular employee.
In this decision, the Board applied that interpretation to five specific scheduling scenarios.
The Board found that overtime rates applied in four scenarios where hours were added to a scheduled backfill shift, regardless of whether the hours were added at the beginning or end, or with advance notice.
Overtime did not apply in the fifth scenario where the employee was scheduled for 'as needed' duties rather than backfilling a regularly scheduled shift.
Employer must make reasonable efforts to backfill significant partial-shift absences under compressed work week agreement.
The Grievance Settlement Board issued a supplementary decision regarding the interpretation of a Memorandum of Agreement on compressed work weeks at the Elgin Middlesex Detention Centre.
The Union sought clarification on whether the Employer was required to backfill positions when a Correctional Officer was absent for a portion of their shift, and whether accommodated officers counted towards the 147 required positions.
The Board held that the Employer must make reasonable efforts to backfill significant absences, but not short, last-minute absences.
The Board also clarified that accommodated officers count towards the 147 positions only if they are working in a Correctional Officer position.
