GSB#2009-0723
UNION#2009-0530-0028
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 (Khan 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
Tim Mulhall Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer
FOR THE EMPLOYER
Greg Gledhill Ministry of Government Services Centre for Employee Relations Staff Relations Officer
HEARING
March 14 and April 2, 2013.
Decision
1Since the spring of 2000 the parties have been meeting regularly to address matters of mutual interest which have arisen as the result of the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services as well as the Ministry of Children and Youth Services restructuring initiatives around the Province. Through the MERC (Ministry Employment Relations Committee) a subcommittee was established to deal with issues arising from the transition process. The parties have negotiated a series of MERC agreements setting out the process for how organizational changes will unfold for Correctional and Youth Services staff and for non Correctional and non Youth Services staff.
2The parties agreed that this Board would remain seized of all issues that arise through this process and it is this agreement that provides me the jurisdiction to resolve the outstanding matters.
3Over the years as some institutions and/or youth centres decommissioned or reduced in size others were built or expanded. The parties have made efforts to identify vacancies and positions and the procedures for the filling of those positions as they become available.
4The parties have also negotiated a number of agreements that provide for the “roll-over” of fixed term staff to regular (classified) employee status.
5Hundreds of grievances have been filed as the result of the many changes that have taken place at provincial institutions. The transition subcommittee has, with the assistance of this Board, mediated numerous disputes. Others have come before this Board for disposition.
6It was determined by this Board at the outset that the process for this disputes would be somewhat more expedient. To that end, grievances are presented by way of statements of fact and succinct submissions. On occasion clarification has been sought from grievors and institutional managers at the request of the Board. This process has served the parties well. The decisions are without prejudice but attempt to provide guidance for future disputes.
7A group of Correctional Officers working at the Toronto West Detention Centre and Vanier Correctional Centre filed grievances alleging that the Employer violated the Collective Agreement by failing to convert them in accordance with Article 31.A.15. Some of the grievors were of the view that they have worked “on the same line” in Admitting and Discharge for a period in excess of 18 months and so they should be converted. Others worked in positions that were not “back-filling” for another employee.
8The Employer suggested that the complete answer to this issue is to be found at Appendix COR 9. In that provision the parties agreed that during the term of that Collective Agreement the Employer would “roll-over” thirty Youth Workers and 220 Correctional Officers to Regular Service or classified status. It also states:
For greater clarity, this complements and extends the MCSCS MERC Agreement signed February 12, 2008 to the end of this collective agreement (December 31, 2012).
9At Paragraph 4 of the February 12, 2008 Memorandum of Agreement it was stated, in part:
The parties further agree that no additional grievances pertaining to Article 6; 31.A.5; and Appendix 20 will be advanced for the duration of this collective agreement.
10After considering the facts and submission in these matters, I am of the view that the Employer is correct. The parties agreed in February of 12, 2008 to a specific number of Correctional Officer (and Youth Officer) positions to be “rolled-over” during the term of the Collective Agreement. This agreement was not dependent upon any criteria as might be found at Article 31.A.5. and, presumably for that consideration, the Union agreed that “conversion” grievances would not be advanced.
11Accordingly, I am without jurisdiction to determine these grievances and they are dismissed.
Dated at Toronto this 23rd day of April 2013.
SCHEDULE “A”
GSB Number
Grievor Name
OPSEU #
2011-3135
Digiacinto, Katrina
2011-0234-0114
2011-3136
Gomes, Ashley
2011-0234-0115
2011-3137
Hagen, Paula
2011-0234-0113
2011-3138
Holwell, Pauline
2011-0234-0116
2011-3139
Marinucci, Sarah
2011-0234-0117
2011-3140
Smith, Margaret
2011-0234-0118
2011-3169
Frankenne, Diane
2012-0234-0002
2011-3857
Schaefer, Jeanifer
2012-0234-0036
2012-0832
Baynham, Steven et al
2012-0517-0025
2012-1384
Manes, John
2012-0517-0026
2012-2544
Ramroop-Graziano, Anisa
2012-0517-0065
2012-2545
Balcerzyk, Jakub
2012-0517-0066
2012-2546
Baynham, Steven
2012-0517-0067
2012-2547
Beerdat, Alicia
2012-0517-0068
2012-2548
Bradbury, Brandon
2012-0517-0069
2012-2549
Brooks, Michael
2012-0517-0070
2012-2550
Dhaliwal, Bir Surinder Kaur
2012-0517-0071
2012-2551
Francis, Jay
2012-0517-0072
2012-2552
Gregory, Monique
2012-0517-0073
2012-2553
Hastings, Andrew
2012-0517-0074
2012-2554
Hricky, Stephen
2012-0517-0075
2012-2555
Lunario, Bruce
2012-0517-0076
2012-2556
McCallum, Daniel
2012-0517-0077
2