GSB#2017-1166

UNION# 2017-0617-0021

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (McCandless)

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 and Dan Sidsworth Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officers

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

August 27, 2017 and November 1, 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.

7Ms. Trace McCandless began working as a cook at the Sudbury Jail in 1998. She wanted to become a Correctional Officer and was ultimately successful after training at Bell Cairn. She resigned as a cook when her training was complete and began her work as a fixed term CO in 2011. After she was rolled over into regular full time she was informed that her Continuous Service Date is April 18, 2011. She is of the view that her previous service as a cook should be taken into account for the purposes of her CSD.

8This Board has most recently dealt with this matter in Re MCSCS-OPSEU (Atandi) 2016-1093. In that decision the same argument was put forward by the grievor This Board said the following:

• In April of 2016 Ms. Atandi was rolled over into a classified P&P position. She is of the view that there was no break in her service and that all of her time working in the OPS should be taken in account for the purposes of her CSD. The Union urged that in accordance with Article 18.1 of the Collective Agreement there has been no break in service.

• According to Article 18.4 of the Collective Agreement, continuous service is deemed to have terminated if “an employee resigns or retires”. The grievor elected to resign her position with MGS in order to continue her work as a P&P officer. That break in service leaves the Board with no option but to deny the grievance.

9For the same reasons, this grievance is denied.