OGSB 2009

The grievor, an OAG 6, filed competition grievances alleging that the employer breached the collective agreement and constructively prevented his career advancement by denying him an interview and a position in two separate competitions.

The union argued this was a reprisal for a previous human rights complaint.

The employer submitted there was no evidence of improper purpose.

The parties referred the matter to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without written reasons.

The Vice-Chair denied the grievances, finding no violation of the collective agreement.

The Employer raised a preliminary objection regarding the Grievance Settlement Board's jurisdiction to issue prospective remedies following a previous decision that found transcript preparation to be bargaining unit work.

The Union argued the issue was already decided in a prior ruling and that the Board had broad remedial authority to prevent the Employer from unilaterally implementing a new transcript production model.

The Board held that the prior ruling did not decide the jurisdictional issue.

Furthermore, the Board concluded it lacked jurisdiction to order prospective relief because the Employer's new proposed regulatory model raised new facts and issues not encompassed in the original grievances, and any challenge to it must be brought through a new grievance.

The union filed two grievances on behalf of a correctional officer alleging breaches of the collective agreement regarding his work assignment and sick leave.

The matter proceeded through an expedited mediation-arbitration process.

The arbitrator found no violation of the collective agreement and dismissed the grievances without reasons, in accordance with the negotiated protocol.

The grievor, a black unclassified Administrative Support Clerk, alleged that the employer discriminated against him on the basis of race or colour when he was unsuccessful in job competitions for permanent and temporary positions, and when his temporary employment contract was not renewed.

The Grievance Settlement Board reviewed the evidence regarding the grievor's hiring, his treatment during employment, the conduct of the job competitions, and the reasons for non-renewal.

The Board found that the employer's actions were based on legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons, such as the grievor's performance in the job competition and the collective agreement rules regarding contract renewals.

The grievances were dismissed.

The union filed grievances on behalf of a correctional officer alleging discrimination due to the employer's ongoing failure to accommodate.

The matter proceeded through an expedited mediation-arbitration process where decisions are issued without reasons.

The arbitrator upheld the grievances in part and ordered the employer to pay the grievor $5,000 in damages.

The grievor, a Cook 4 at the Toronto Jail, alleged that the employer failed to exercise its management rights reasonably when posting schedules and failed to distribute overtime fairly.

The parties referred the grievance to mediation/arbitration under the collective agreement and requested a decision without written reasons.

The Vice-Chair denied the grievance.

The grievor filed three grievances alleging the Employer violated the Collective Agreement by failing to schedule her to work overtime.

The matter proceeded through the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process.

The grievances were denied as the grievor presented no evidence to support the claims.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of an unclassified Correctional Officer, alleging she should have been paid at overtime rates for hours worked in excess of forty.

The matter proceeded through an expedited mediation-arbitration process.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding no violation of the Collective Agreement in the peculiar circumstances of the case.

The union requested a hearing to direct the employer to withdraw a request for medical information from the grievor's physician.

The employer objected to the Board's jurisdiction, arguing that the request was based on new performance issues that arose after the Board's previous order restoring the grievor to full duties.

The Board upheld the employer's objection, finding that it lacked continuing jurisdiction over new management decisions affecting the grievor, except as they related to compliance with the earlier order.

The union's request was dismissed.

A correctional officer grieved that the employer violated the overtime protocol.

The parties referred the grievance to mediation/arbitration under the collective agreement and requested a decision without precedent or prejudice, and without written reasons.

The Grievance Settlement Board denied the grievance.

A correctional officer filed four grievances alleging the employer violated the health and safety articles of the collective agreement.

The parties referred the grievances to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without written reasons in accordance with their policy for expedited hearings.

The arbitrator denied the grievances.

The grievor, a correctional officer, filed a grievance alleging that the employer violated Articles 2 and 3 of the collective agreement and the Code of Ethics.

The parties referred the grievance to mediation/arbitration under Article 22.16 of the collective agreement.

The arbitrator issued a decision without precedent or prejudice and without written reasons, denying the grievance.

The grievor, a Caucasian male, filed a grievance alleging the Employer violated the Collective Agreement and the Human Rights Code by denying him attendance at a 'Race Matters' conference.

The entrance qualification for the conference excluded him based on his race.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that specifying attendance based on race for this particular conference did not violate the Collective Agreement or the Human Rights Code.

The Union filed nine grievances alleging the Employer violated the collective agreement by actions taken against the grievors regarding an alleged pattern of absences, and challenged the Employer's 'Best Practices' document.

The Employer raised a preliminary objection to the scope of the issues, arguing the document was not a formal policy and could only be challenged as applied to the individual grievors.

The Union acknowledged it would only challenge the aspects of the document applied to the grievors.

The Vice-Chair ruled that this concession obviated the need for a broader ruling on the preliminary motion, and deferred the issue of the scope of remedial jurisdiction as premature.

The grievor, a correctional officer, filed grievances alleging the employer wrongly disciplined him by removing him from his driver assignment after he was charged by police for running a red light and causing an accident.

The parties referred the matter to mediation/arbitration under the collective agreement and requested a decision without written reasons.

The Grievance Settlement Board denied the grievances.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer 2, filed a grievance alleging the Employer violated the Collective Agreement by failing to offer him overtime work.

The grievor was next in line for overtime based on hours worked, but the available work was for a Bailiff.

The Employer argued that although the grievor had a bus license, he lacked the additional training required to work as a Bailiff.

The Grievance Settlement Board agreed with the Employer and dismissed the grievance, finding the grievor was not eligible for the overtime work due to his lack of training.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer alleging various violations of the collective agreement.

During expedited mediation-arbitration, the employer conceded it breached its policy and expressed regret.

The arbitrator ordered the employer to pay the grievor $300 in general damages.

The union filed a grievance claiming benefits on behalf of the grievor.

The matter proceeded under an Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol.

After reviewing the submissions and the collective agreement, the Vice-Chair dismissed the grievance.

The union filed a grievance alleging that the employer violated the collective agreement by failing to offer overtime to the grievors before assigning it to temporary agency workers.

The employer maintained that the grievors normally worked the day shift, whereas the overtime in question was an extension of the night shift, and that its distribution method was consistent with long-standing practice.

The parties requested a without-precedent decision with no reasons.

The arbitrator found no violation of the collective agreement and dismissed the grievance.

The union filed a grievance alleging an improper lay off.

The parties agreed to an Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol.

After reviewing the submissions and the collective agreement, the Vice-Chair dismissed the grievance.