GSB#2016-0745, 2016-2634

UNION#2016-5112-0071, 2017-5112-0023

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Bromwich)

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

James Cheng Treasury Board Secretariat Centre for Employee Relations Employee Relations Advisor

HEARING

February 23, 2017

Decision

1The Employer and the Union at the Toronto South 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, this grievance 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.

2Lauren Bromwich filed two grievances. The first alleged that the Employer violated the Collective Agreement by “failing to provide a notice of garnishment of wages” which caused financial stress.

3There was no dispute that the Employer was obliged to follow a garnishment order regarding payment of certain monies resulting from a student loan. However, the grievor was of the view that she should have been notified in advance by the Employer that monies were about to be deducted from her pay. While I appreciate that it would have been less stressful for the grievor had the Employer told her in advance of the garnishment I can find no violation of the Collective Agreement and therefore the grievance is denied.

4The second grievance was regarding placement in the ASMPP. Prior to coming to TSDC the grievor worked at Roy McMurtry Youth Centre. She transferred to TSDC at the time of its opening in 2014. In approximately December of 2015 the grievor was told that she was at level 1 of the program. When she attended the Level 1 meeting she was told that she was at Level 4 of the program.

5After speaking with both the Employer and the Union it would appear that TSDC was not given all of the physician’s notes that the grievor provided to RMYC. Indeed, it would appear that there was some mismanagement with respect to the grievor’s attendance status.

6After a review of various documents, it is apparent that the Employer had sufficient information to remove the grievor from the ASMPP on January 6, 2016 but did not do so until April. Ms. Bromwich should have been notified immediately of her removal from the program.

7In discussions with the Employer regret was expressed regarding this matter although it was suggested that there was no violation of the Collective Agreement. There seemed to be an appreciation for the concern that this situation caused the grievor.

8I agree that there has been no violation of the Collective Agreement and therefore the grievance is denied. I would hope that in the future when people are removed from the program – particularly in the event they think they are at Level 4 of the program – they are promptly notified.