GSB# 2016-0135; 2016-0265; 2016-0690; 2016-1216; 2016-1356; 2016-1357; 2016-1358; 2016-1359; 2016-1364; 2016-1365; 2016-1366; 2016-1367; 2016-1368; 2016-1440; 2016-1509; 2016-1510; 2016-1531; 2016-1532; 2016-1720;

2016-1911

UNION# 2016-0229-0002; 2016-0229-0004; 2016-0229-0008; 2016-0229-0012; 2016-0229-0022; 2016-0229-0023; 2016-0229-0024; 2016-0229-0025; 2016-0229-0017; 2016-0229-0018; 2016-0229-0019; 2016-0229-0020; 2016-0229-0021; 2016-0229-0027; 2016-0229-0029; 2016-0229-0030; 2016-0229-0031; 2016-0229-0032; 2016-0229-0037;

2016-0229-0039

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Cody et al)

Union

• and -

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

Employer

BEFORE

Jasbir Parmar

Arbitrator

FOR THE UNION

Christopher Bryden (Counsel) Ryder Wright Blair & Holmes LLP David Ragni (Counsel) Koskie Minsky LLP

FOR THE EMPLOYER

George Parris (Counsel) Treasury Board Secretariat Legal Services Branch

SUBMISSIONS

April 12, 2019

Interim Decision

1This is an interim decision addressing the issue of an adjournment of these proceedings.

2Counsel for Mr. MacDonald submits these proceedings should be adjourned pending completion of Mr. MacDonald’s criminal trial, which is presently scheduled to be completed in June 2019. It was submitted this would not delay the arbitration proceedings (which are not scheduled to reconvene until January 2020); that the outcome of the trial could significantly impact the issues before the Board; and that it was prudent to await completion of the trial given Mr. MacDonald’s bail conditions which impact his ability to attend the current proceedings.

3Counsel for Cody et al. asserts that it should have the right, if Mr. MacDonald’s criminal trial is not completed in the timeframe expected, to seek to have the current proceedings begin as scheduled in January 2020. Furthermore, it is submitted that in the interim period, procedural matters, including the accommodation requests of Messrs. Cody, Wong and Durocher, should be addressed. It is submitted that these procedural matters can be addressed by way of teleconference and/or written submissions and need not await the conclusion of the criminal proceedings.

4Counsel for the Employer does not agree that the current proceedings should be adjourned pending completion of the criminal trial.

5Having considered the matter, I have determined the arbitration proceedings will be adjourned until September 15, 2019, pending one exception noted below. While the criminal trial is expected to be completed in June 2019, there is no guarantee that it will. Thus, it is difficult to assess at this time whether granting an adjournment pending completion of the trial will or will not cause an undue delay. After September 15, Mr. MacDonald, if necessary, may renew his request for an adjournment, and that request will be determined on the basis of the circumstances at that time.

6The exception to this adjournment is the determination of any procedural issues which can be determined via conference call or in writing in advance of the hearing.

7This does not include the accommodation requests. Both counsel for Mr. MacDonald and counsel for the Employer have indicated those parties will be challenging whether the need for a medical accommodation has been medically substantiated. I also note that Mr. MacDonald’s bail conditions may impact how the arbitration proceedings will be conducted. The proper method for resolution of the accommodation issue must still be determined and it may well include viva voce evidence. In my view, it makes sense to delay addressing that issue for now.

8I note the most recent medical documentation provided in support of the accommodation request is from January 2019. As this issue will not be addressed until October 2019, if Messrs. Cody, Durocher, and Wong wish to rely on any more current medical documentation, such documentation must be produced to the Board no later than September 6, 2019.

9Any party seeking an order in respect of a procedural issue to be addressed via teleconference or in writing should write to the Board, giving notice of the nature of the issue. At that time, a conference call will be arranged to address the issue.

10The Board will also arrange a conference call for after September 15, 2019 to address the accommodation issue. At that time, the parties will have an opportunity to make submissions on how the accommodation issue should be addressed (i.e. whether viva voce evidence should be required).