GSB#2017-0270; 2017-0271

UNION# 2017-0108-0011, 2017-0108-0012

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Easter)

Union

• and -

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

Employer

BEFORE

Felicity D. Briggs

Arbitrator

FOR THE UNION

Gregg Gray Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

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

HEARING

October 4, 2017

Decision

1The Employer and the Union at the Elgin Middlesex Detention Centre agreed to participate in the Expedited Mediation-Arbitration process in accordance with the negotiated Protocol. A number of the grievances were settled through that process. However, these grievances remained unresolved requiring a decision from this Board. The Protocol provides that decisions will be issued within a relatively short period of time after the actual mediation sessions and will be without reasons. Further, the decision is to be without prejudice and precedent.

2Bradley Easter is a classified Correctional Officer who filed two grievances in 2017. One alleged that he was improperly assigned to an administrative schedule thereby disentitling him to certain provisions regarding statutory holiday pay.

3Mr. Easter was injured at work on December 30, 2016 and was absent on WSIB for a two-week period. He returned on January 18th to modified duties. He received January 1st, one of the named Paid Holidays under the Collective Agreement, off with pay but claims that because he was originally scheduled to work that day, his entitlement is greater.

4The Employer was of the view that irrespective of whether the grievor was assigned to work an administrative schedule, the grievor did not work on the Paid Holiday due to his work place injury and consequently there is no violation of the Collective Agreement given that he received the Paid Holiday off with pay.

5After reviewing the provision of both the Unified and COR provisions of the Collective Agreement I must agree with the Employer. There has been no violation and therefore the grievance is dismissed.

6The second grievance filed by Mr. Easter asserted that the Employer violated the Collective Agreement and a Memorandum of Agreement between the parties setting out provisions for the “Compressed Work Week Schedules, Vacation Protocol and Post Selection Process” at EMDC. In particular, he claimed that the Employer knew in February that a new group of COs were about to be rolled over into classified positions and therefore it should have, in effect, alter the vacation selection schedule. By failing to do this, the quota for the number of CO hours available for vacation requests increased just as the COs with the greatest amount of seniority were to make selections thereby reducing the grievor’s opportunity for vacation time in prime summer months.

7I have reviewed both the Memorandum of Agreement and all of the documents relating to the vacation selection process and I must dismiss the grievance. The Employer followed the protocol without exception. Having said that, I certainly understand why the grievor was frustrated by the fact that he – and others in the same range of seniority – were not the first to benefit from the increase in CO vacation hours that occurred due to an increased number of classified COs.