GSB# 2002-2566
UNION# 2003-0218-0034
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Gilham)
Grievor
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Public Safety and Security)
Employer
BEFORE
Felicity D. Briggs
Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION
Scott Andrews Grievance Officer Ontario Public Service Employees Union
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Greg Gledhill Staff Relations Officer Ministry of Public Safety and Security
HEARING
September 29, 2003.
DECISION
In September of 1996 the Ministry of Correctional Services notified the Union and employees at a number of provincial correctional institutions that their facilities would be closed and/or restructured over the next few years. On June 6, 2000 and June 29, 2000 the Union filed policy and individual grievances that alleged various breaches of the collective agreement including article 6 and article 31.15 as well as grievances relating to the filling of correctional officer positions. In response to these grievances the parties entered into discussions and ultimately agreed upon two Memoranda of Settlement concerning the application of the collective agreement during the “first phase of the Ministry’s transition”. One memorandum, dated May 3, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as “MERC 1” (Ministry Employment Relations Committee)) outlined conditions for the correctional officers while the second, dated July 19, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as “MERC 2”) provided for the non-correctional officer staff. Both agreements were subject to ratification by respective principles and settled all of the grievances identified in the related MERC appendices, filed up to that point in time.
While it was agreed in each case that the settlements were “without prejudice or precedent to positions either the union or the employer may take on the same issues in future discussions”, the parties recognized that disputes might arise regarding the implementation of the memoranda. Accordingly, they agreed, at Part G, paragraph 8:
The parties agree that they will request that Felicity Briggs, Vice Chair of the Grievance Settlement Board will be seized with resolving any disputes that arise from the implementation of this agreement.
It is this agreement that provides me with the jurisdiction to resolve the outstanding matters.
Both MERC 1 and MERC 2 are lengthy and comprehensive documents that provide for the identification of vacancies and positions and the procedure for filling those positions as they become available throughout various phases of the restructuring. Given the complexity and size of the task of restructuring and decommissioning of institutions, it is not surprising that a number of grievances and disputes arose. This is one of the numerous decisions dealing with disputes under the MERC Memoranda of Agreement.
Ms. Sheila Gilham, a Correctional Officer at Burtch Correctional Centre filed a grievance that alleged that she has not been treated by the Transition Team in the same fashion as other employees in regard to job trades and temporary assignments.
The grievor was surplussed on November 21, 2001 and she opted to take an assignment beyond forty kilometers. Accordingly she was assigned to work at the Stratford Jail.
As mentioned in earlier decisions, the Brantford Jail was told that its closing would be delayed until 2005 or later. After that announcement the parties agreed to a Memorandum of Settlement signed on May 3, 2001 that amended some of the earlier arrangements. For instance, employees who were surplussed but did not yet have new assignments could now be assigned into vacant positions at the Brantford Jail. The grievor would not have been covered by this agreement as she had already elected to take a new position at Stratford.
Accordingly, she was treated differently than some of the other employees but she was not treated in violation of any agreement between the parties. The grievance is denied.
Dated in Toronto this 31st day of October 2003.