GSB# 2005-1311
UNION# 2005-0517-0029
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Stevens)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFORE
Barry Stephens
Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION
Scott Andrews Grievance Officer Ontario Public Service Employees Union
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Faith Crocker Staff Relations Officer Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services
HEARING
May 17, 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.
The grievance in this case relates to Glen Stevens. Mr. Steven states that in 2003 he found out through talk in the institution that he was the subject of a WDHP complaint and an IIU investigation. He alleges that in 2005 he discovered that he was also the subject of an ongoing human rights complaint with respect to the 2002 incident, but that he had never been advised of this fact. He claims a breach of proper procedures and protocol, and seeks compensation for the damage to his reputation.
The employer responds that the grievor was advised in July 2003 that the allegations against him had been investigated and that the investigators had concluded that the allegations had not been substantiated. Further, the employer states that there is an ongoing human rights complaint involving the same complainant, but that that matter does not involve Mr. Stevens.
After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, it is my conclusion that the grievance should be dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 23rd day of May, 2006.