GSB# 2017-1165

UNION# 2017-0368-0249

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Canning)

Union

• and -

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

Employer

BEFORE

Brian Sheehan

Arbitrator

FOR THE UNION

Dan Sidsworth Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Sia Romanidis Treasury Board Secretariat Centre for Employee Relations Employee Relations Advisor

HEARING

April 12, 2018

Decision

1The Employer and the Union at the Central East Correctional Centre agreed to participate in the Expedited Mediation/Arbitration process in accordance with the negotiated Protocol. It is not necessary to reproduce the entire Protocol. Suffice to say, that the parties have agreed to a True Mediation/Arbitration process wherein each party provides the Arbitrator with their submissions setting out the facts and the authorities they respectively will rely upon. This decision is issued in accordance with the Protocol and with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement; and it is without prejudice or precedent.

2The facts in this matter are straightforward and not in dispute.

3The grievor is employed as a Rehabilitation Officer at the Central East Correctional Centre.

4On June 7, 2017, the grievor attended a Correctional Services Recognition Ceremony in Kingston, whereupon she received recognition for her years of service with the Employer.

5The gist of the grievance is that the grievor seeks to be compensated for her attendance at the June 7, 2017 ceremony, notwithstanding the fact that this day was a regular day off from work for the grievor.

6The grievor’s husband, who also works at the the Central East Correctional Centre, attended the recognition ceremony as the grievor’s guest. As he was scheduled to work on the day in question, he was paid for that day by utilizing a credited leave day. [7] The grievor was also subsequently paid for the mileage expense associated with her travel to and from Kingston on the day in question.

8While at one level the view of the grievor that she should be compensated for attending a ceremony conducted by the Employer recognizing her years of service is appreciated, it is my view that the decision of the Employer not to pay her for the day in question is reasonable; and more importantly, does not, in any manner, constitute a violation of the collective agreement. In this regard, the day in question was a regular day off for the grievor and her attendance at the recognition ceremony was not mandated or ordered by the Employer. There is, therefore, no basis to suggest that she was “at work” or working on behalf of the Employer on June 7, 2017; and as such, she is not entitled to be compensated by the Employer for her attendance at the recognition ceremony.

9In light of the above reasoning, the grievance is, hereby, dismissed.