GSB#2016-0300, 2016-0695, 2016-0696

UNION#2016-0234-0099, 2016-0234-0121, 2016-0234-0122

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Wiles)

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

Dan Sidsworth Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

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

HEARING

November 3 & November 25, 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.

7Mr. Joe Wiles was a classified Personnel Clerk who applied to for a fixed term Correctional Officer position. He obtained a leave of absence from that position and went through the Correctional Officer training. Upon completion he was accepted as a fixed term CO at Maplehurst Correctional Centre. He filed a grievance that his status as a Correctional Officer was fixed term and not classified. He was of the view that his service and seniority as a clerk entitled him to become a classified CO.

8The grievor also applied to be able to hold two positions within the OPS concurrently. He obtained the permission of the Superintendent and the Regional Director to hold both positions for a six month period. However, his request was not supported at the ADM level.

9Accordingly, at some point he was told that he must resign one of these positions in accordance with various policies. At that point he filed a grievance alleging he should not have been forced to yield his clerk position and another grievance alleging that the Employer should have paid for all of the cost and expenses associated with his training for the CO position.

10After consideration of the facts and submissions made by the parties, I am of the view that the three grievances must fail. There is no provision in the Collective Agreement or in any other agreement that entitles the grievor to be paid for the CO training. Further, there is no entitlement to “transfer” his service and seniority as a clerk to his new position as a Correctional Officer. Finally, the Employer is not obliged to allow the grievor to hold two different positions within the OPS. While such agreement can be given, it is not enshrined and this Board does not have the jurisdiction to review such a decision.

11For those reasons, the grievances are denied.