GSB#2010-3022, 2011-1094, 2011-1095, 2011-1151, 2011-1160, 2011-1329, 2011-2490

UNION#2011-0719-0018, 2011-0719-0052, 2011-0719-0053, 2011-0719-0054, 2011-0719-0055,

2011-0719-0058, 2011-0719-0072

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Richards/McPhail)

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

Sheila Riddell Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP Barristers and Solicitors

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Susan Munn Ministry of Government Services Labour Practice Group Counsel

CONFERENCE CALL SUBMISSIONS

March 22, 2013. April 4^th and April 8^th, 2013.

Decision

1Barbara Richards and Caley McPhail have filed seven grievances, all of which are before this Board. The grievances allege numerous violations of the Collective Agreement including denial of sick leave, harassment and discriminatory treatment on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, disability, family status and marital status.

2At the first day of hearing into this matter the parties attempted to resolve the issues through mediation. Those efforts were unsuccessful. One of the complicating factors at that time was that each grievor had also filed complaints with the Ontario Human Rights Commission regarding the discrimination allegations set out above.

3At the conclusion of the mediation I asked both parties and the grievors to consider agreeing to put the outstanding Human Rights issues before this Board for determination.

4In a conference call held on March 22, 2013, the Employer said that it was in agreement with all matters including the human rights issues to be part of this litigation. The Union also informed the Board that both grievors and the Union were content that the outstanding human rights issues would be part of the proceedings before this Board.

5The Human Rights Tribunal has deferred its proceedings pending the results of the matters heard by this Board.

6The Employer made a request, which was not opposed by the Union, to formalize this agreement in a decision.

7As discussed in our teleconference, the Union is to fully particularize the human rights issues.

8The parties have also discussed the possibility of agreeing upon an expedited process. The grievors are presently reluctant to participate in such a process. However, the Employer has expressed an interest in some effort to truncate the upcoming litigation. I informed both counsel that I would like to discuss this matter further in an effort to avoid dozens of days of hearing. We will have that discussion after further particulars have been provided.

9In the meantime, hearing dates are being scheduled.

10I remain seized.