GSB#2017-0132

UNION# 2016-0526-0055

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Halls)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of the Attorney General)

Employer

BEFORE

Stephen Raymond

Arbitrator

FOR THE UNION

Lori Davis Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Daria Vodova Treasury Board Secretariat Counsel

HEARING

July 13, 2018

Decision

1The parties submitted this grievance to be determined by way of mediation/arbitration in accordance with Article 22.16 of the Collective Agreement. At the outset of the hearing, the parties agreed that I had the jurisdiction to deal with this matter. Attempts at mediation were unsuccessful.

2Mr. Peter Halls, a Customer Service Representative with the Family Law Office, Court Services of the Ministry of the Attorney General, filed a grievance on December 8, 2016, alleging, among other things, that the employer breached the Collective Agreement by issuing him a three day suspension without pay. Articles 2, 3 and 21 of the Collective Agreement were cited. The grievor seeks full redress, damages, to have the discipline removed from his record and to be re-assigned to his original workstation.

3The grievor was issued the above noted three day suspension on November 28, 2016 for violations of the Respectful Workplace Policy, including for sending inappropriate emails to a female mediator who at the time worked in the same office as the grievor. The emails in question were highly offensive, inappropriate and included multiple derogatory words used towards women, specifically “cunt”, “bitch” and “skank”. The grievor does not dispute having sent the emails. Further, the grievor did not show any remorse for having sent the emails.

4Having reviewed all the material provided to me by the parties including material brought by the grievor, I have no hesitation in determining that the grievor engaged in behaviour worthy of discipline. The three day suspension was modest given the material that I reviewed and I have no hesitation in upholding the discipline as just in these circumstances.

5Having carefully considered the submissions of the parties, the jurisprudence of this Board, and the documents submitted, I find that there has been no violation of the Collective Agreement.

6The grievance is, accordingly, dismissed.