Ontario Public Service Employees Union (MacVicar) v. The Crown in Right of Ontario (Liquor Control Board of Ontario), 2017 CanLII 47119

GSB#2014-4095, 2014-4096

UNION#2014-0499-0134, 2014-0499-0135

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (MacVicar)

Union

• and -

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

Employer

BEFORE

Janice Johnston

Vice-Chair

FOR THE UNION

Brodie MacRae Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Erin Charbonneau Liquor Control Board of Ontario HR Manager

HEARING

June 8, 2017

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 are normally settled pursuant to that process. However, where a mediated agreement is not attainable and the grievance remains unresolved, the parties have agreed that the Vice-Chair will determine the matter without formal proceedings. The process provides that the Vice-Chair shall issue a decision which shall be applicable only to the case heard, shall be without prejudice, 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 and shall provide only brief reasons, if any.

2On June 8, 2017, the parties at 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 grievances that are the subject of this decision were ones that the parties agreed to deal with.

3The grievances before me deal with two letters of reprimand issued to the grievor.

4The first is dated May 23, 2014. Pursuant to Article 27.2 of the collective agreement as this letter is more than three years old it may no longer be used in a subsequent disciplinary proceeding. Accordingly, the employer is directed to remove it from the grievor’s file.

5The second letter of reprimand is dated December 5, 2014. Given the length of time that has passed since it was issued, I direct the employer to convert the letter of reprimand to a letter of counsel dated the same date.

6Therefore, Grievance Number 2014-0499-0134 is upheld in part and Grievance Number 2014-0499-0135 is dismissed.