OGSB 2009

The union grieved a five-day suspension imposed on the grievor for insubordination.

The matter proceeded via an Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol.

The Vice-Chair allowed the grievance in part, reducing the discipline to a four-day suspension.

The grievors were declared surplus and opted to be redeployed.

While awaiting redeployment, their schedules were changed to Monday to Friday day shifts, resulting in a loss of shift premiums, overtime, and statutory holiday pay.

The union filed grievances alleging violations of the Collective Agreement.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievances, finding that the employer is entitled to schedule employees as long as the schedule does not violate any provision of the Collective Agreement, and there was no prohibition against scheduling an employee to work eight hours from Monday to Friday.

In a supplemental decision following a November 2006 ruling that allowed grievances regarding travel time and mileage, the Grievance Settlement Board addressed the outstanding issue of whether interest should be paid on those monies.

The Board ordered the employer to pay interest to the grievors, thereby disposing of several related grievances.

The grievor, a Storekeeper, was scheduled to be bumped from his position due to workplace restructuring but was injured at work on the day the bumping was to occur.

When he briefly returned to work a year later, the Employer attempted to serve him with the bumping notice, which he refused to accept before leaving work due to illness.

The grievor filed a grievance alleging the Employer's actions were discriminatory and harassing.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding no evidence of discrimination or harassment in the Employer's attempt to serve the notice.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, sought relocation expenses after accepting a lateral transfer to the Quinte Detention Centre.

He alleged he received inaccurate information from the Workforce Adjustment Unit during the Ministry's restructuring and facility closures.

The Grievance Settlement Board found no evidence of inaccurate information and noted the grievor voluntarily accepted the lateral transfer.

The grievance was denied as there was no violation of the Collective Agreement or the related Memorandum of Settlement.

In a mediation-arbitration process concerning grievances over a poisoned work environment, the Grievance Settlement Board issued a procedural decision for the remaining unresolved individual grievances.

Pursuant to the collective agreement, the Board imposed limitations on evidence and set conditions for the arbitration.

To avoid lengthy litigation, the Employer accepted liability for negligence solely for the purpose of these cases.

The Board established a timeline for the exchange of updated will-say statements and written particulars of remedies sought, and directed that no oral evidence would be heard unless directed by the Vice-Chair.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued an update to its previous decisions regarding objectives and action plans to improve the work environment at the Toronto Jail.

The Board amended several objectives, including the process for the Coordinating Committee to address unresolved issues of racism, sexism, or sexual orientation, and directed the Ministry to provide written proposals regarding paid parking and managerial appointments.

The Board also updated the responsibilities for certain action plans and appointed new members to the Coordinating Committee.

The union filed a grievance relating to scheduling.

The parties proceeded under an Expedited Mediation-Arbitration Protocol.

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

The parties reached a settlement regarding grievances arising from the Expenditure Management Branch staffing reductions.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued a consent order dismissing two grievances and incorporating a memorandum of settlement that resolved two other grievances with a $500 payment to each grievor.

The Vice-Chair remained seized of the implementation of the settlement.

The union requested the Grievance Settlement Board to convene a further hearing regarding claims from a 1983 decision.

The employer raised preliminary objections.

The Board ordered a schedule for the exchange of amended particulars and documents between the parties regarding the preliminary objections and disputed facts.

The union brought a motion seeking damages for non-compliance with minutes of settlement and requested an order for the production of documents.

The employer did not oppose the request.

The Grievance Settlement Board ordered the employer to produce all documents concerning its relationship with two individuals, including secondment agreements and documents related to termination and classified positions.

The WSIB disciplined the grievor, a union president, for inappropriate comments made to a union steward while they were off-duty and engaged in union business.

The union grieved the discipline and brought a preliminary motion arguing the employer had no authority to discipline for off-duty conduct.

The Grievance Settlement Board also considered a motion for production of documents related to a human rights complaint.

The Board ordered the production of the human rights pleadings.

On the main preliminary issue, the Board held that the conduct occurred entirely within the union committee and had no nexus to the employer's legitimate interests.

The employer therefore had no authority to discipline the grievor, and the discipline was set aside.

The grievor, a Client Services Representative, grieved the Employer's decision not to offer her a temporary assignment as Acting Trial Co-ordinator, a position she had previously held permanently.

The temporary assignment was for less than six months and did not require posting.

The Grievance Settlement Board found that the Employer had unfettered discretion in making such assignments, reviewable only for bad faith or discrimination.

The Board concluded the decision was made for a valid operational reason—cross-training staff—and dismissed the grievance.

Three correctional officers (escort officers) were disciplined following the escape of an inmate from a transport bus.

The union grieved the discipline, arguing it was void due to double jeopardy (as they were initially suspended with pay pending investigation) and delay.

The arbitrator found the discipline was not void, as the initial suspension was not a final determination and the delay was not unreasonable.

On the merits of the penalties, the arbitrator upheld a 20-day suspension for the driver, reduced a 20-day suspension to 10 days for an officer who had not been properly trained on the specific rule violated, and substituted a 3-month suspension for the discharge of the senior officer, noting his lengthy discipline-free record and eventual acceptance of responsibility.

The union filed grievances alleging that the employer failed to provide appropriate staffing between 1500 and 1900 hours, following a schedule change prompted by a Ministry of Labour health and safety order.

The employer argued that scheduling and staffing levels are management rights and that it was in full compliance with the order.

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

The grievor, a Youth Services Officer with asthma requiring accommodation from cigarette smoke, sought a lateral transfer to the Central East Correctional Centre (CECC).

The Employer denied the transfer, relying on a 2003 arbitration decision that placed the grievor at Brookside Youth Centre as the best accommodation option at the time.

The Grievance Settlement Board allowed the grievance, finding that the prior placement decision did not waive the grievor's transfer rights under the Collective Agreement.

By denying the transfer without claiming an inability to accommodate the grievor at the CECC, the Employer effectively denied him a right because of his disability, breaching the non-discrimination clause.

The union filed grievances claiming the employer breached the collective agreement by continuing to use a Compressed Work Week Agreement (CWWA) schedule after it was initially rejected in a ratification vote, seeking overtime pay for hours worked beyond eight hours per day.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievances, finding that the temporary scheduling arrangement did not automatically terminate upon the rejection vote.

The agreement required 90 days' written notice to terminate, which the union did not clearly provide, and the CWWA was ultimately ratified before any such notice period would have expired.

The Union requested an adjournment sine die of a hearing scheduled for August 21, 2009, due to the grievor's disruptive conduct in a previous hearing which made it impossible to proceed.

The Employer opposed the adjournment and requested that the case be completed by written argument.

The Vice-Chair granted the adjournment but refused to adjourn the matter sine die, instead fixing a new hearing date to address the Employer's preliminary objections regarding res judicata and abuse of process.

The Union requested an extension of time to file particulars, citing the grievor's illness, though it could not provide specific details of the illness or explain the delay.

The Grievance Settlement Board granted a two-week extension to September 11, 2009, ordering that the grievance would be dismissed if particulars were not provided by that date, subject to the Union's right to show cause for reinstatement based on exceptional circumstances.

The employer requested an order directing a witness to attend the hearing after he failed to appear despite being served with a summons.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued an order directing the witness to attend the scheduled hearing dates until his attendance is no longer required.