Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Douglas) v. The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Children and Youth Services), 2014 CanLII 8298

GSB#2012-1480

UNION#2012-0290-0025

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Douglas)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Children and Youth Services)

Employer

BEFORE

Felicity D. Briggs

Vice-Chair

FOR THE UNION

Nick Mustari and Gregg Gray Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officers

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Karen Martin Ministry of Government Services Centre for Employee Relations Employee Relations Advisor

HEARING

September 17, 2013 and January 20, 2014

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.

7In October of 2005 and March of 2006 Mr. Iain Douglas filed a number of grievances with various allegations including unjust dismissal, improper surplus and discrimination. All of his grievances were dismissed because of the grievor's failure to provide any particulars despite repeated requests.

8The grievance now before the Board appears to be an allegation that during that period of time other employees were allowed to remain in the Ministry and he should have been afforded the same opportunity.

9Setting aside the matter of timeliness, this grievance must be dismissed because it is res judicata. Grievances were previously filed and denied that made the same allegations about the same time period.

10Accordingly, the grievance is dismissed.