GSB#2014-4860

UNION#2015-0467-0005

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (McArthur)

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

Gregg Gray Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officers

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Sia Romanidis Treasury Board Secretariat Centre for Employee Relations Employee Relations Advisor

HEARING

March 22, 2016

Decision

1The Employer and the Union at the Quinte Detention Centre agreed to participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the negotiated Protocol. A number of the grievances were settled through that process. However, this grievance remained unresolved requiring a decision from this Board. The Protocol provides that decisions will be issued within a relatively short period of time after the actual mediation sessions and will be without reasons. Further, the decision is to be without prejudice and precedent.

2Robert McArthur is a Correctional Officer at QDC who filed a grievance that alleged the Employer violated the protocol regarding the assignment of Community Escort Duties on January 23, 2015. In particular he alleged that he had the highest number of “Heat” (escort hours worked) hours and should not have been assigned escort duties that day. Further, he said that he could have been assigned to the Admission and Discharge area because he has been trained to work in that area.

3There is no dispute that the grievor had the highest number of Heat hours. However the Employer contended that the assignment of escort duties to regular correctional officers is “subject to local operational needs”. The Employer noted that while the grievor has been trained in A & D he has seldom worked in that area in the last number of years. It was the Employer assertion that given that the day in question was a Friday – which means that there would be an influx of intermittent inmates admitted – it was not operationally feasible to have one of the two officers in that area on that day unfamiliar with the work routine. The Employer provided the Board with the statistics of the A & D department for the week in question which revealed a much higher volume of inmates being processed through A & D. Finally, the Employer informed the Board that on January 23, 2015 there were three different escorts to be assigned.

4I accept the Union’s view that the protocol is an important tool to be followed for the assignment of escort duties. However, the assignment of duties to regular correctional officers is subject to operational needs and in this instance the Employer convinced me that its operational needs were such that assigning the grievor was necessary.

5Accordingly the grievance is dismissed.