OGSB 2013

The grievor, a full-time Customer Service Representative at the LCBO, was discharged after being caught on surveillance video stealing over $4,000 worth of liquor on six separate occasions.

She pled guilty to criminal charges and paid restitution.

The union grieved the discharge, arguing that the grievor's actions were mitigated by severe depression and alcoholism following the deaths of her husband and brother.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding no independent medical evidence of alcohol addiction or rehabilitation, and noting that the thefts were premeditated and executed with accomplices.

The Board concluded that the union failed to establish compelling mitigatory circumstances to rebut the prima facie appropriateness of discharge for theft.

The Union filed grievances alleging improper surplussing of employees at the Rideau Regional Centre and Huronia Regional Centre.

The Employer raised a preliminary objection, arguing the grievances should be summarily dismissed for failing to establish a prima facie case of a collective agreement violation.

The Union argued the Employer violated various provisions by failing to provide accurate information about options, including leaves of absence to bridge to an unreduced pension under the Surplus Factor 80 program, and by treating the grievors differently from other employees.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the Employer's motion, finding that the grievances raised substantive issues of contract interpretation and bad faith that fell within its jurisdiction to determine on the merits.

The grievor applied for three compassionate days of leave to travel to Cuba to assist her spouse, who had been granted permission to enter Canada, in preparing for and accompanying him on his journey.

The employer denied the leave request on the basis that it did not meet the requirements for special and compassionate days, without specifying those requirements.

Following an expedited mediation-arbitration process, the Grievance Settlement Board upheld the grievance without issuing formal reasons, in accordance with the negotiated protocol.

The union brought an interim motion asking the Grievance Settlement Board to determine its jurisdiction to find the employer vicariously liable for the tort of 'intrusion upon seclusion' committed by a co-worker against the grievor.

The employer opposed the motion, arguing there was no collective agreement basis for such liability.

The Vice-Chair declined to rule on the jurisdictional issue at this interim stage, finding no compelling reason to do so before the conclusion of the evidence, and reserved the decision for final submissions.

The Union sought interim relief to halt the Employer's new expedited bumping practices during a period of organizational change, arguing it caused irreparable harm to employees who were bumped before their notice periods expired.

The Employer argued the Board lacked jurisdiction to grant substantive interim relief and that the balance of harm favoured the Employer.

Assuming jurisdiction without deciding it, the Vice-Chair dismissed the application, finding that the Union failed to establish that the balance of harm favoured granting the relief, as any harm could be adequately addressed with a remedial response at the conclusion of the proceeding.

The grievor requested three compassionate leave days with pay to attend a family vacation due to extenuating circumstances.

The Employer denied the request, granting the leave without pay instead, citing the non-emergent nature of the request and the time available to make other arrangements.

The Grievance Settlement Board found no evidence of arbitrariness or bad faith in the Employer's decision.

The grievance was dismissed.

The Union filed a grievance alleging the grievor was verbally assaulted by a manager, seeking $50,000 in general damages for emotional harm.

The Union intended to call the grievor's psychotherapist, who reported the incident triggered pre-existing PTSD.

The Employer brought a motion for production of the psychotherapist's clinical notes from 2003 and 2004.

The Union opposed, arguing the historical notes were irrelevant and highly personal.

The Grievance Settlement Board ordered production, finding the notes relevant due to the pre-existing condition and holding that the Employer's right to a fair hearing outweighed the grievor's privacy concerns, subject to strict confidentiality conditions.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, filed two grievances alleging his schedule was changed without sufficient notice and sought premium pay for the changed shifts.

The Employer provided evidence that a memorandum notifying the grievor of the shift change was placed in his personal mailbox well in advance.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the grievance, finding that the Employer notified the grievor in an acceptable format more than 120 hours in advance.

The union filed a grievance regarding the denial of a mileage claim for the grievor's use of his personal vehicle to attend a meeting.

The grievor had informed his manager by email of his intention to use his personal vehicle, and the manager responded without raising concerns or stipulating that mileage could not be claimed.

The employer argued that specific advance approval was required.

The arbitrator upheld the grievance, finding that the manager's response amounted to approval, and ordered the employer to compensate the grievor for the mileage.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of the grievor.

Following a hearing and review of documentary evidence, the Grievance Settlement Board ordered that the grievor be placed in a regular full-time Probation Officer vacancy arising in the Thunder Bay office within the next six months.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer, alleging that the employer breached the collective agreement when his transfer was rescinded.

The parties referred the matter to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without precedent or prejudice, and without written reasons.

The Vice-Chair considered the submissions and denied the grievance.

The grievor, an Assistant Office Manager at the Toronto Jail, alleged that the employer breached the collective agreement.

The parties referred the grievance to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without precedent or prejudice, and without written reasons.

The Grievance Settlement Board denied the grievance.

The union brought grievances on behalf of a former regular part-time nurse alleging breaches of the collective agreement regarding scheduling, overtime, and staffing.

The grievor failed to attend the scheduled hearing, despite multiple efforts by the union to contact her.

The employer requested that the grievances be dismissed due to her non-attendance.

The arbitrator denied the grievances because the grievor failed to attend the hearing.

The grievor, a Personnel Clerk at the Toronto Jail, filed two grievances alleging the employer breached Articles 2, 3.1, and 7.1 of the collective agreement.

The parties referred the grievances to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without precedent or prejudice, and without written reasons.

The Grievance Settlement Board denied the grievances.

The grievor, a Duty Chaplain, filed a grievance alleging the employer failed to pay her shift differential for weekend work pursuant to the collective agreement, seeking compensation back to 2009.

The parties referred the grievance to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without precedent or prejudice and without written reasons.

The Vice-Chair granted the grievance in part, awarding the grievor $96.00 in shift differential.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, filed two grievances alleging that the employer failed to provide a healthy and safe workplace due to harassment.

The parties referred the grievances to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without written reasons.

The Vice-Chair denied the grievances, finding no violation of the collective agreement.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, grieved that the employer breached the collective agreement by not posting the schedule.

The employer submitted that the schedule had been posted electronically.

The parties referred the grievance to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without precedent or prejudice, and without written reasons.

The Vice-Chair found no violation of the collective agreement and denied the grievance.

The grievor, a fixed term contract employee at the Sudbury Jail, filed a grievance alleging the employer breached the collective agreement by failing to pay an attendance bonus to fixed term employees under the Attendance Support Management Program.

The employer maintained that only classified Correctional Officers were entitled to the bonus.

The parties referred the matter to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without written reasons.

The arbitrator found no violation of the collective agreement and dismissed the grievance.

The grievor, a Correctional Officer, alleged that the employer breached the collective agreement by failing to accommodate her.

The parties referred the grievance to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without precedent or prejudice, and without written reasons.

The Vice-Chair found no violation of the collective agreement and denied the grievance.

The grievor, a Finance Clerk at the Toronto Jail, filed two grievances alleging the employer breached Articles 2, 3.1, and 7.1 of the collective agreement.

The parties referred the grievances to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without precedent or prejudice, and without written reasons.

The Grievance Settlement Board denied the grievances.