GSB#2016-1220

UNION#2016-5112-0091

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Ferneyhough)

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 25, 2016; February 3, 2017

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. Robert Ferneyhough is a Correctional Officer at Toronto South Detention Centre who filed a grievance that alleges the Employer has violated the Collective Agreement by failing to recognize his past service with other Ministries for the purpose of his Continuous Service Date ("CSD").

8The grievor worked as a fixed term employee with the Ministry of Natural Resources from June 22, 2012 until September of 2012. He was next hired into the OPS on a fixed term with MCSCS on December 16, 2013. He continued in that capacity until the fall of 2016.

9On September 8, 2016 the parties signed a Memorandum of Agreement outlining the roll-over of twenty-five Correctional Officers. An Expression of Interest was posted and after responding to the EOI, the grievor was rolled over into classified status as of September 26, 2016.

10The grievor was of the view that his service with MNR should count toward his CSD. It was urged that Article 16.5.2 of the Collective Agreement provides that right. The Employer contended that because there was more than a thirteen week period between the end of his fixed term contract with MNR and the beginning of his fixed term contract with MCSCS, there is no entitlement to have his previous service taken into account for the purposes of CSD.

11After consideration, I am of the view that the Employer's position must prevail. Indeed, this decision is in line with a number of previous decisions regarding the same issue. It is my view that the approximate fifteen month break in service between the grievor's employment with MNR and MCSCS leads to a dismissal of the grievance. Such a break cannot be considered "continuous" for the purposes of CSD.

12Accordingly, the grievance is denied.