GSB# 2019-1141

UNION#2019-0368-0213

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Codling)

Union

• and -

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

Employer

BEFORE

Gail Misra

Arbitrator

FOR THE UNION

Dan Sidsworth Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Ann Fowler Treasury Board Secretariat Employee Relations Advisor

HEARING

November 27, 2019

Decision

1The Employer and the Union at the Central East Correctional Centre (“CECC”) agreed to participate in mediation-arbitration in accordance with the Local Mediation-Arbitration Protocol that has been negotiated by the parties. Should mediation not result in resolution of a grievance, pursuant to the Protocol, they have agreed to a mediation-arbitration process by which each party provides the Arbitrator with their submissions setting out their respective facts and the authorities they may be relying upon. This decision is issued in accordance with the Protocol and with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement, so that it is without precedent or prejudice to any other matters between the parties, and is issued without written reasons.

2Robert Codling filed a grievance dated June 25, 2019 claiming that the Employer had violated Articles 2 and 3 of the Collective Agreement, as well as the Human Rights Code, other legislation, and policies regarding the Employer sharing confidential information with others without permission of the Grievor. In particular, Mr. Codling grieved that the Employer had met with his spouse, Ms. Codling, regarding the Grievor’s sick time, and the rationale for his not attending at work on that day, June 13, 2019.

3Having considered the submissions of the parties, including the evidence that in fact a member of management did meet with the Grievor’s spouse, who is also an employee at the CECC, to inquire about the Grievor’s health when Mr. Codling did not attend at work, I find that the Employer breached the Grievor’s right to privacy and confidentiality in regards to a medical leave.

4The Grievance is therefore upheld, and the Employer is ordered to pay to Mr. Codling $250 as damages for the breach of his confidentiality. Such payment, being in the nature of damages, is not subject to statutory deductions. I remain seized in the event there are any issues regarding the implementation of this award.