GSB#2010-1685

UNION#2010-0163-0019

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (McIlwain)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Liquor Control Board of Ontario)

Employer

BEFORE

Reva Devins

Vice-Chair

FOR THE UNION

Val Patrick Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Michael O’Reilly Liquor Control Board of Ontario Director, HR Services Western Region

Lori Thorpe Liquor Control Board of Ontario HR Advisor, HR Services Western Region

HEARING

October 26, 2012.

Decision

1The parties have agreed to an expedited mediation-arbitration process to effect the timely disposition of grievances. The parties specifically agreed that this matter was properly referred for expedited mediation-arbitration and, after a failed mediation effort, that the Vice Chair should issue a written decision that is without prejudice or precedent.

2The Grievor is a long service casual employee. He requested a transfer in 1995 on compassionate grounds, from his then home store in Fergus to a store in Petrolia. The Employer considered his circumstances and declined to transfer him with full seniority. As was the practice at that time, he was advised that he would have to resign at the Fergus store and reapply in Petrolia. He was also told that he would be rehired in the new location, but that he would be treated as a new hire and would lose the seniority that he had accumulated in his previous location. The Grievor relocated to Petrolia and has periodically asked the Employer to reconsider its original decision.

3In a grievance dated July 21, 2010, the Grievor now grieves the Employer’s failure to grant him a compassionate transfer in 1995 and the attendant loss of seniority. He shared the personal reasons for his transfer request, some of which had been previously disclosed to management.

4The Employer submitted that it considered the Grievor’s request in 1995 and exercised its’ discretion in accordance with the standard practice at that time, which was to grant a transfer only where it determined that there were exceptional circumstances that had been documented by the employee. In this instance, management was not persuaded that there were extraordinary circumstance that warranted the exercise of its’ discretion. They subsequently discussed the matter with the Grievor on a number of occasions.

5Having considered the submissions of the parties, I have determined that there is no evidence that the Employer acted in a manner that was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Moreover, a very considerable period of time has elapsed between the date of the Grievor’s move and the filing of his grievance. Therefore, I am not persuaded that it would be appropriate to interfere with management’s refusal to transfer the Grievor with full seniority.

6The grievance is dismissed.