GSB#2014-3679

UNION#2014-0499-0114

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Clark)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Liquor Control Board of Ontario)

Employer

BEFORE

Janice Johnston

Vice-Chair

FOR THE UNION

Frank Inglis and Lori Davis Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officers

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Mark Upton Liquor Control Board of Ontario HR Consultant

HEARING

April 5, 2016

Decision

1The Employer and the Union agreed to participate in the expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement found in Appendix 2 to the collective agreement. The majority of the grievances dealt with in this process are normally settled. However, if where a mediated agreement is not attainable and the grievance remains unresolved, the Memorandum of Agreement provides that the GSB Arbitrator shall issue a decision. The decision issued by the Arbitrator shall be applicable only to the case heard and shall not be used as a precedent for future cases and is not appealable. Any decision rendered must be issued within two weeks of the date of the hearing.

2On April 5 and 6, 2016 the parties at the Ottawa Retail Service Centre agreed to participate in the expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement found in Appendix 2 to the collective agreement. The grievance that is the subject of this decision was one of the grievances that the parties agreed to deal with.

3On October 17, 2014 the grievor was given a Letter of Reprimand for engaging in an unsafe act while working. The grievor was operating a Transporter when a co-worker jumped on the forks. The co-worker remained on the forks while the grievor continued to drive. The grievor does not deny that this occurred and that it was dangerous. However, the grievor asserts that at first he was not aware that the co-worker had remained on the forks and when he became aware he stopped in a gradual fashion.

4After carefully considering the evidence and submissions of the parties I have concluded that although a Letter of Reprimand was warranted at the time, given the acknowledgement of the grievor regarding his conduct and his assertion that it will not occur again, I have concluded that the Reprimand should be removed from his file on October 31, 2016. Accordingly I direct the Employer to do so.

5The grievance is therefore upheld in part.

6In the event that the parties have any difficulties with the interpretation or implementation of this award I shall remain seized.