GSB#2017-0061

UNION# 2017-5112-0054

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Gillard)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services)

Employer

BEFORE

Felicity D. Briggs

Arbitrator

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

Al. J. Quinn Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Senior Employee Transition Advisor

HEARINGS

July 11, 2017 and August 28, 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 these 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.

7Courtney Gillard is a fixed term Correctional Officer at Toronto South Detention Centre. She filed a grievance that alleged the Employer violated various provisions of the Collective Agreement by failing to roll her over into a classified position.

8In January of 2017 the parties agreed to roll over thirty fixed term officers into classified status. As usual when this occurs, the Employer's Transition Unit issued an Expression of Interest to be posted to enable interested Correctional Officers to apply. The EOI was posted in the workplace from February 3, until February 10, 2017.

9On February 13, 2017 the grievor contacted the Deputy Superintendent of TSDC and explained that she had attempted to send an email making known her interest in the roll over process. However, according to the grievor she found out that morning that her email had not been sent. When she logged into her email on February 13, 2017 she noted that there was an email pending to be sent but she deleted it – thinking it to be of no importance. She later realized that it was the email wherein she expressed an interest in being rolled over that was deleted. She attempted to retrieve the email but was unable to find it in her sent email, deleted items or in the "recover deleted items".

10She asked to be considered for the roll-over despite not meeting the deadline for expressing interest. The Deputy Superintendent responded quickly noting that "unfortunately, as a specific process was established with specific guidelines, we cannot make an exception with this process. We need to be fair and transparent for all those staff who did meet the criteria."

11While it is – as noted by the Deputy Superintendent – most unfortunate that the grievor did not meet the deadline, there is no violation of either the Collective Agreement or the MERC agreement that brought about the rollovers.

12Accordingly, the grievance is dismissed.