GSB# 2012-1031

UNION# 2011-0617-0018

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Mayer)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Community Safety and Correctional Services)

Employer

BEFORE

Felicity Briggs

Vice-Chair

FOR THE UNION

Nick Mustari Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Gary Wylie Ministry of Government Services Employee Relations Advisor

HEARING

February 27, 2013.

Decision

1The Employer and the Union agreed to participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the negotiated Protocol for grievances filed on behalf of or by Bailiffs. A number 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.

2Serge Mayer is a Correctional Officer in Sudbury who, at one time, worked as a backfill for Bailiffs. On January 31, 2011, he filed a grievance that alleges “the Employer has denied me the opportunity to work as a Provincial Bailiff Backfill by contravening the HPRO policy” as well as the collective agreement. By way of remedy he want “full restitution of all prior and future Bailiff Duties”.

3Notwithstanding how individuals were chosen for Bailiff Backfill duty previously, in March of 2010 the Employer posted an expression of interest for Correctional Officers who wanted to be utilized as Bailiff Backfill. According to the grievor, he applied a day late for this expression of interest.

4The Employer raised the issue of timeliness regarding this grievance but was content to have it decided on the merits.

5After having reviewed the documentation, including the expression of interest, and after a consideration of the submissions, I am of the view that there is no violation of the collective agreement or any other ancillary document.

6The grievance is dismissed.