GSB# 2006-0615
UNION# 2006-0517-0013
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union (McKie)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFORE
Barry Stephens
Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION
Dan Sidsworth Acting Grievance Officer Ontario Public Service Employees Union
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Faith Crocker Staff Relations Officer Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services
HEARING
June 20, 2006.
Decision
The parties have agreed to an Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol. It is not necessary to reproduce the entire Protocol here. Suffice it to say that the parties have agreed to an “True Mediation-Arbitration” process, wherein each provides the vice-chair with submissions, which include the facts and authorities each relies upon. The process adopted by the parties provides for a canvassing of the facts during the mediation phase, although the vice-chair has the discretion to request further information or documentation. Arbitration decisions are issued in accordance with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement, without reasons, and are without prejudice or precedent.
This grievance relates to an incident that occurred on Sunday, March 19, 2006. On that day, the grievor was scheduled to work an overtime shift starting at 14:45. This shift had been assigned to him the previous day, March 18. On the afternoon of March 19, the grievor went to a walk-in medical clinic in Burlington. After waiting for two hours, he realized he would not be able to attend work on time, so he called the workplace to speak to his supervisor, OM16 K. Vandenthillart. There is a dispute about the details of the conversation. The grievor contends that he advised Ms. Vandenthillart that he would be leaving the clinic immediately, without waiting for treatment, and that she asked him to report directly to her on his arrival. Ms. Vandenthillart states, in her incident report, that she advised the grievor during the phone call that his overtime shift was cancelled due to the fact that he could not report on time.
The grievor drove from the clinic to the workplace and reported to Ms. Vandenthillart, bringing along a union representative. There was a somewhat uncomfortable discussion, during which Ms. Vandenthillart advised the grievor that she had replaced him for the shift and he could go home.
After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, it is my conclusion that the grievance should be upheld in part. The employer is ordered to pay the grievor 6 hours straight time pay.
Dated at Toronto, this 25th day of July, 2006.