GSB#2007-3749, 2007-3750

UNION#2007-0252-0027, 2007-0252-0028

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Balogh/Narhi)

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

Anastasios Zafiriadis Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Greg Gledhill Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Staff Relations Officer

HEARING

January 19, 2010.

Decision

1The Employer and the Union at the Niagara Detention Centre agreed to participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the negotiated Protocol. Most of the grievances were settled through that process. However, a few remained unresolved and therefore require a decision from this Board. The Protocol provides that decisions will be issued within a relatively short period of time after the actual mediation sessions and will be without reasons. Further, the decision is to be without prejudice and precedent.

2Mr. Tim Balogh and Mr. Roger Narhi are Correctional Officers. On November 7, 2007 both were called to work twelve hours of overtime in accordance with the Overtime Protocol. By all accounts, the purpose of the overtime was to relieve other Officers who were on Hospital Escort duty. After approximately nine hours of the overtime the other Correctional Officers returned to the Detention Centre because their Escort Duty had concluded. As a result, the Operational Manager asked Mr. Balogh and Mr. Narhi to go home. According to the documents provided, the “HOT” hours of the protocol were adjusted for each grievor to show that they just worked nine hours of overtime.

3The Union asserted that the Employer was obliged to utilize and pay the two grievors for the full period of the twelve hour overtime shift because that is what they signed up for, were asked and agreed to do. Further, Mr. Balogh stated that this was the very first time that he was sent home short of completing an overtime shift that he had agreed to work.

4The Employer contended that it has the right to manage the work in accordance with its Management’s Rights. When there was no longer an operational need for the grievors to remain at work they can be sent home. It was urged that there is nothing in the Provincial Overtime Protocol that precludes the Employer from sending the grievors home at any point prior to the completion of the full twelve hour shift.

5When asked to do so, the Employer provided documentation to show that it is not unusual for Correctional Officers to be sent home short of a full overtime shift.

6It is noted that there is nothing directly on point in the Protocol (July 7, 2006) that contemplates the cancellation of overtime. However, in the “questions and answers” attached to the Protocol it is stated that “if the employer cancels an overtime shift” the hours do not count towards the employee’s total hours.

7After considering the facts and submissions of the parties I am of the view that these grievances must fail.