GSB#2014-0730

UNION#2014-0510-0009

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Ceastova)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Attorney General)

Employer

BEFORE

Gail Misra

Vice-Chair

FOR THE UNION

Seung Chi Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Stephanie Borcsok Treasury Board Secretariat Centre For Employee Relations Employee Relations Advisor

HEARING

February 13, 2015

Decision

1The parties referred this Grievance to mediation/arbitration in accordance with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement. At the outset of the proceeding the parties agreed that I had the jurisdiction to deal with this matter. They asked that I issue a decision without precedent or prejudice, and without written reasons.

2Ms. Irina Ceastova, a Financial Bookkeeper who works at the Small Claims Court located at 47 Sheppard Avenue in Toronto, filed a grievance dated March 3, 2014, alleging breaches of Articles 2, 9, 21, and 25 of the collective agreement. The grievance alleges that the employer wrongly denied Ceastova’s request for special and compassionate leave for December 23 and 24, 2013.

3In the aftermath of a severe ice storm in Toronto, the grievor had attended at the workplace on December 23, 2013, where she found that the building was closed as it had no power. Through a co-worker, the grievor learned that the workers were gathering at the Sheppard Centre pending further instructions. She therefore went to the Sheppard Centre and along with other workers, waited there for approximately two hours. The grievor’s supervisor was on vacation at the time. As there appeared to be no other supervisor present to indicate what the workers should do, at about 10 or 10:30 a.m. the Grievor went home.

4On December 24, 2013 the Grievor again attended at her workplace and on this occasion saw a sign on the door. It was addressed to the public, indicated that the courthouse was closed due to a power outage, and that if services for small claims or family matters were required, the public should go to the courthouse at 311 Jarvis Street. There was no indication what staff should do. The grievor tried the Hotline number that she had been given by a supervisor when she had started working at 47 Sheppard, and that number appeared to be incorrect as she got no message on it. The grievor therefore went home. She was unaware that employees had been assigned to work at 211 Jarvis as no one had told her so, and that information was not available to her on the Hotline number she had been given.

5The employer submitted that there was no violation of the collective agreement. It had carefully assessed each of the approximately 90 requests it had received for compassionate leave, and it had decided, pursuant to its management rights and the exercise of its discretion, to deny the grievor’s leave request.

6Having heard from the grievor, and carefully considered the submissions of the parties, I hereby grant the grievance and order the employer to reimburse the grievor for her loss of any pay or benefits on December 23 and 24, 2013.