GSB#2013-1225

UNION#2012-0546-0085

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Arista)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Finance)

Employer

BEFORE

Ken Petryshen

Vice-Chair

FOR THE UNION

Lesley Gilchrist Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Benjamin Parry Ministry of Government Services Legal Services Branch Counsel

HEARING

May 7, 2014

Decision

1In a grievance dated February 21, 2012, Mr. P. Arista claims that the Employer contravened the Collective Agreement when “Extra vacation days carried forward to 2012 due to the fact that the WIN error was not resolved until Feb. 2012.” The remedy the Union seeks is 3.5 days vacation pay for Mr. Arista. The grievance was referred to arbitration by the Union on July 2, 2013.

2There is no dispute that the grievance was not referred to arbitration within the mandatory time limits set out in the Collective Agreement. The Employer takes the position that the late referral means that the GSB is without jurisdiction to hear and determine the grievance. The Union takes the position that the circumstances should compel the Board to hear the merits of the grievance.

3The arbitral jurisprudence is clear that an arbitrator does not have the jurisdiction under section 48(16) of the Labour Relations Act to extend the time for an untimely referral to arbitration. The same result can be found in GSB decisions. See, OPSEU (Johnston) and Ministry of Attorney General (2010), GSB No. 2009-1147 (Dissanayake); OPSEU (Goring) and Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (2010), GSB No. 2008-1661 et al. (Briggs); and, OPSEU (Nitsotolis) and Ministry of Government Services (2013), GSB No.

2012-1337 et al. (Nairn).

4The case law compels me to conclude that I do not have the jurisdiction to hear and determine this grievance given the untimely referral to arbitration. Accordingly, the grievance filed by Mr. Arista dated February 21, 2012, is hereby dismissed.