GSB#2007-3533
UNION#2008-0234-0003
Additional Files listed in Schedule “A”
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
Under
THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT
Before
THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD
BETWEEN
Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Dumont et al)
Union
- and -
The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)
Employer
BEFORE
Felicity D. Briggs
Vice-Chair
FOR THE UNION
Stephen Giles Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Greg Gledhill Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Staff Relations Officer
HEARING
January 7, 2010, June 4, 2010.
Decision
1In September of 1996 the Ministry of Correctional Services notified the Union and employees at a number of provincial correctional institutions that their facilities would be closed and/or restructured over the next few years. On June 6, 2000 and June 29, 2000 the Union filed policy and individual grievances that alleged various breaches of the Collective Agreement including Article 6 and Article 31.15 as well as grievances relating to the filling of Correctional Officer positions. In response to these grievances the parties entered into discussions and ultimately agreed upon two Memoranda of Settlement concerning the application of the collective agreement during the “first phase of the Ministry’s transition”. One memorandum, dated May 3, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as “MERC 1” (Ministry Employment Relations Committee)) outlined conditions for the correctional officers while the second, dated July 19, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as “MERC 2”) provided for the non-correctional officer staff. Both agreements were subject to ratification by respective principles and settled all of the grievances identified in the related MERC appendices, filed up to that point in time.
2While it was agreed in each case that the settlements were “without prejudice or precedent to positions either the union or the employer may take on the same issues in future discussions”, the parties recognized that disputes might arise regarding the implementation of the memoranda. Accordingly, they agreed, at Part G, paragraph 8:
The parties agree that they will request that Felicity Briggs, Vice Chair of the Grievance Settlement Board will be seized with resolving any disputes that arise from the implementation of this agreement.
3It is this agreement that provides me with the jurisdiction to resolve the outstanding matters.
4Both MERC 1 and MERC 2 are lengthy and comprehensive documents that provide for the identification of vacancies and positions and the procedure for filling those positions as they become available throughout various phases of the restructuring. Given the complexity and size of the task of restructuring and decommissioning of institutions, it is not surprising that a number of grievances and disputes arose. This is another of the disputes that have arisen under the MERC Memorandum of Settlement.
5When I was initially invited to hear theses transition disputes, the parties agreed that process to be followed for the determination of these matters would be virtually identical to that found in Article 22.16.2 which states:
The mediator/arbitrator shall endeavour to assist the parties to settle the grievance by mediation. If the parties are unable to settle the grievance by mediation, the mediator/arbitrator shall determine the grievance by arbitration. When determining the grievance by arbitration, the mediator/arbitrator may limit the nature and extent of the evidence and may impose such conditions as he or she considers appropriate. The mediator/arbitrator shall give a succinct decision within five (5) days after completing proceedings, unless the parties agree otherwise.
6The transition committee has dealt with dozens of grievances and complaints prior to the mediation/arbitration process. There have been many other grievances and issues raised before me that I have either assisted the parties to resolve or arbitrated. However, there are still a large number that have yet to be dealt with. It is because of the vast numbers of grievances that I have decided, in accordance with my jurisdiction to so determine, that grievances are to be presented by way of each party presenting a statement of the facts with accompanying submissions. Notwithstanding that some grievors might wish to attend and provide oral evidence, to date, this process has been efficient and has allowed the parties to remain relatively current with disputes that arise from the continuing transition process.
7Not surprisingly, in a few instances there has been some confusion about the certain facts or simply insufficient detail has been provided. On those occasions I have directed the parties to speak again with their principles to ascertain the facts or the rationale behind the particular outstanding matter. In each case this has been done to my satisfaction.
8It is essential in this process to avoid accumulating a backlog of disputes. The task of resolving these issues in a timely fashion was, from the outset, a formidable one. With ongoing changes in Ministerial boundaries and other organizational alterations, the task has lately become larger, not smaller. It is for these reasons that the process I have outlined is appropriate in these circumstances.
9A group grievance was filed by a number of unclassified Correctional Officers at Maplehurst Correctional Centre. The grievance alleged that there was an inequity regarding the working conditions and the scheduling practices as between Classified and Unclassified staff.
10On behalf of the grievors the Union contended that this reduction of unclassified staff can lead to health and safety issues, training inadequacies, excessive overtime usage as well as other labour relation problems.
11The Employer asserted that it has an unfettered management right to determine the workforce and this Board has no jurisdiction to make an order as requested by the Union.
12While I understand the concerns set out by the Union, I am of the view that the Employer is right. I am without the jurisdiction to uphold these grievances. The grievances are denied.
Dated at Toronto this 18th day of June 2010.
Schedule “A”
Grievor
GSB Number
Union File Number
Lunario, Gutlmar
2007-3534
2008-0234-0004
Swierczynski, Albert
2007-3535
2008-0234-0005
Scane, Ronald
2007-3536
2008-0234-0006
Lowe, Jason
2007-3537
2008-0234-0007
Pyett, Sean
2007-3538
2008-0234-0008
Ochocinski, Alicia
2007-3539
2008-0234-0009
Cronin, Mark
2007-3540
2008-0234-0010
Fenn, Kerry
2007-3541
2008-0234-0011
Hudson, Wayne
2007-3542
2008-0234-0012
Jensen, Cole
2007-3543
2008-0234-0013
Crocker, Dustin
2007-3544
2008-0234-0014
Tracey, Chris
2007-3545
2008-0234-0015
Atkinson, Robin
2007-3546
2008-0234-0016
Foran, Rick
2007-3547
2008-0234-0017
Laderoute, Scott
2007-3548
2008-0234-0018
Seguin, Gary
2007-3549
2008-0234-0019
Wilson, Derek
2007-3550
2008-0234-0020
Felder, Zachary
2007-3551
2008-0234-0021
Johnson, James
2007-3552
2008-0234-0022
Akyoko, Felicia
2007-3553
2008-0234-0023
Graham, Ryan
2007-3554
2008-0234-0024
Andrews, Jeff et al
2007-3642
2008-0234-0057
Dearlove, Alison
2007-3643
2008-0234-0058
Blenkinsop, Shane
2007-3644
2008-0234-0059
Courtemanche, Celine
2007-3645
2008-0234-0060
Lowry, Anisia
2007-3646
2008-0234-0061
Murray, Catherine
2007-3647
2008-0234-0062
Young-Richards, Alexandra
2007-3648
2008-0234-0063
Petrus, Natasha
2007-3649
2008-0234-0064
Gordon, Monica
2007-3650
2008-0234-0065
Stavropoulos, Angela
2007-3651
2008-0234-0066
Nash, Sarah
2007-3652
2008-0234-0067
Szymczak, Monika
2007-3653
2008-0234-0068
Kitchen, Chris
2007-3654
2008-0234-0069
Groves, Maurice
2007-3655
2008-0234-0070
Donaldson, Shannon
2007-3656
2008-0234-0071
White, Zuri
2007-3657
2008-0234-0072
Di Giulio, Frank
2007-3658
2008-0234-0073
Ukrainer, Melanie
2007-3659
2008-0234-0074
Klinkhammer, Amber
2007-3660
2008-0234-0075
Ashley, Jason
2007-3661
2008-0234-0076
Prochownik, Eric
2007-3662
2008-0234-0077
Mironchuk, Terry
2007-3663
2008-0234-0078
Holland, William
2007-3664
2008-0234-0079
Serre, Jason
2007-3665
2008-0234-0080
Smith, Margaret
2007-3666
2008-0234-0081
Hagen, Paula
2007-3667
2008-0234-0082
Schaefer, Jeanifer
2007-3668
2008-0234-0083
Faulkner, Catherine
2007-3669
2008-0234-0084
Maltais, Melissa
2007-3670
2008-0234-0085
Grievor
GSB Number
Union File Number
MacDougall, Renee
2007-3671
2008-0234-0086
O'Hara, Shannon
2007-3672
2008-0234-0087
Frankenne, Diane
2007-3673
2008-0234-0088
Guichelaar, Jennifer
2007-3674
2008-0234-0089
Guichelaar, Roger
2007-3675
2008-0234-0090
Kelly, Shannon
2007-3676
2008-0234-0091
Saunders, Terri-Leigh
2007-3677
2008-0234-0092
Petranovic, Frank
2007-3678
2008-0234-0093
Figliola, Peter
2007-3679
2008-0234-0094
Cochrane, Christopher
2007-3680
2008-0234-0095
Webb, Vicki
2007-3681
2008-0234-0096
Muller, Marlena
2007-3682
2008-0234-0097
Cabral, Kevin
2007-3683
2008-0234-0098
Ewing, Christopher P.
2007-3684
2008-0234-0099
Aguiar, Jeffery
2007-3685
2008-0234-0100
Winn, Daniel
2007-3686
2008-0234-0101
Lepine, Corinne
2007-3687
2008-0234-0102
Drzazga, John Vojtek
2007-3688
2008-0234-0103
Guhbin, Warren
2007-3689
2008-0234-0104
Cashmore, Carrie
2007-3690
2008-0234-0105
Scott, Stacey et al
2007-4002
2008-0234-0108
Kuruc, Diana
2007-4003
2008-0234-0109
Sabourn, Chris
2007-4004
2008-0234-0110