GSB#2015-1120

UNION#2015-5112-0089

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Lawrence)

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 and Nick Mustari Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officers

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Greg Gledhill Treasury Board Secretariat Centre for Employee Relations Employee Relations Advisor

HEARING

November 17, 2015 and March 8, 2016

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.

7Omar Lawrence is a Correctional Officer now working at Toronto South Detention Centre. He previously worked at the Toronto Jail and was rolled over to classified status in approximately 2008. He alleges that his Continuous Service Date is incorrect.

8The grievor asserts that he filed a grievance around the time of his roll over in this regard but there is no such grievance before this Board. When questioned, the Union conceded that it has no record of this grievance. Further, the Union informed the Board that the grievor did not provide a copy of a 2008 grievance.

9Mr. Lawrence contends that while he was an unclassified employee there were a number of weeks where he worked hours that should have been counted toward his CSD. However, no accompanying documents were provided by the Union despite its efforts in this regard.

10The Employer has no records of this time period for the grievor. However, it asserted that the grievor's hours for the purposes of his Continuous Service Date would have been taken into account at the time of his roll-over to classified status.

11Based on the lack of documentary evidence before this Board, the grievance must be dismissed.