GSB# 2005-1768
UNION# 2005-0517-0043
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Stellato)
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 a “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, 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 Frank Stellato. Mr. Stellato has been an acting OM16 since November 2004. The OM16 positions are management positions outside of the collective agreement. Since transferring to the Acting OM16 position, Mr. Stellato has been paid a rate calculated on the basis of the OM16 rate that is at least 3% higher than his previous CO2 rate. Mr. Stellato grieves that his rate of pay as an OM16 is set by Art. 7.1.2 of the collective agreement, and has not been adjusted to keep pace with the increases he would have received had he remained in the CO2 position. He argues that the “3% rule” should be re-applied whenever his former rate is adjusted, and that he should be compensated accordingly.
The employer responds that the matters at issue are beyond the jurisdiction of the GSB, as they deal with pay matters for the grievor in his capacity as a manager, outside the bargaining unit, and outside the ambit of the collective agreement.
After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, it is my conclusion that I do not have the jurisdiction to rule on this grievance.
Dated at Toronto, this 23rd day of May, 2006.