OGSB 2020

The Grievor failed to provide particulars by the deadline directed in a previous Board decision and did not communicate with the Board.

As a result, the grievances were dismissed.

The union grieved a two-day suspension imposed on the grievor for using profanity in the workplace in the presence of children and a third-party contractor, and for disparaging the employer.

The matter proceeded via an expedited mediation-arbitration process.

The arbitrator found that discipline was warranted and declined to substitute a lesser penalty.

The grievance was dismissed.

The parties attended a mediation regarding a grievance which did not result in a settlement.

The arbitrator issued a procedural order setting a timetable for the exchange of particulars and the production of documents.

The hearing was adjourned to a later date.

The Association sought pre-hearing production of documents, including an unredacted Underwriting Agreement between the Employer and Canada Life, in a grievance concerning the dismissal of an employee for allegedly submitting false benefits claims.

The Employer and Canada Life argued the redacted portions contained proprietary and irrelevant information.

The Arbitrator ordered the Employer to produce the current insurance policies and documents delineating the responsibilities and risk allocation between the Employer and Canada Life, while permitting the Employer to redact privileged or irrelevant/sensitive information provided it supplies a written description of the basis for each redaction.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a bailiff whose position was eliminated when the employer disbanded the Offender Transportation Department and reassigned the duties to correctional officers.

The employer had provided notice of the realignment and the parties had negotiated a Memorandum of Agreement to manage the transition of affected employees.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that the employer acted within its management rights to realign work for business needs, the decision was not arbitrary, and the grievor received the enhanced entitlements negotiated in the Memorandum of Agreement.

The grievor, a Provincial Bailiff, filed a grievance alleging the Employer violated the collective agreement by arbitrarily disbanding the Offender Transportation Department and transferring duties to Correctional Officers.

The Employer had provided notice of the realignment to suit business needs and negotiated a Memorandum of Agreement with the Union to minimize impacts on affected employees, including the grievor.

The Arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding the Employer acted within its management rights to realign work and reporting relationships, and there was no evidence the decision was arbitrary.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a fixed-term correctional officer seeking conversion to regular status as an Industrial Officer.

The collective agreement required an employee to perform the same work in a fixed-term capacity for at least 18 months before conversion could occur.

The arbitrator found that the grievor had only worked in the temporary assignment for 16 months before returning to his regular position, and had not filed the grievance while in the temporary position.

The grievance was dismissed.

The employer requested the Grievance Settlement Board to convene after the union failed to provide particulars regarding an overtime scheduling grievance, as previously agreed.

The Arbitrator ordered the union to provide full written particulars of the material facts on which it relies by January 11, 2021, failing which the union may be barred from introducing evidence or the grievance may be dismissed summarily.

The Employer requested an order requiring the Union to provide written particulars of the allegations advanced in the grievances, specifically the 'who, what, when, and where' of each allegation.

The arbitrator granted the request, directing the Union to provide detailed particulars, including what was alleged to have been done, when, where, by what means, and by whom, and identifying any individuals whose actions were attributed to an organization.

The hearing date was adjourned on consent.

The grievor challenged the outcome of a job competition for a Senior Food Services Officer (Cook 3) position.

The employer relied exclusively on interview scores to select the successful candidate, failing to consider the grievor's years of actual experience performing the duties of the posted position.

The arbitrator found that this exclusive reliance on interview scores, without considering demonstrated ability, violated the collective agreement's requirement to give primary consideration to qualifications and ability.

The arbitrator ordered the competition to be re-run, noting that the interview format also disadvantaged the grievor as a non-native English speaker.

The union and the employer engaged in mediation to resolve compensation issues following an employee's reinstatement.

The parties exchanged emails agreeing to a Memorandum of Agreement that settled all compensation issues for a gross amount.

The union subsequently argued that the settlement did not include a separate payout of vacation credits, and that it would not have agreed to the settlement had it known the vacation credits were subsumed.

The arbitrator held that the clear language of the Memorandum of Agreement settled all issues relating to compensation, including vacation, and that the email exchange constituted a binding and enforceable settlement.

The union appealed the denial of Long Term Disability Benefits for the grievor's any-occupation period beginning July 15, 2015.

Following a hearing, the arbitrator directed that the claimant receive LTIP any-occupation benefits from July 15, 2015, to December 14, 2020.

The insurer was directed to continue administering the claim in accordance with the collective agreement, and the claimant retained the right to appeal any future denial.

The Employer sought production of documents in the Union's possession that the grievor received from the Waterloo Regional Police in September 2013, pertaining to her allegations regarding a workplace incident on October 28, 2011.

The Arbitrator ordered the Union to produce the documents to the Employer.

The Union undertook to provide a list of remaining grievances to the Employer by June 7, 2021.

The Arbitrator noted that if the Union fails to do so, submissions will be heard regarding whether all the grievances should be dismissed.

The Grievor's employment was terminated after he called in sick or requested a shift change for family care on five occasions, but instead worked at a second job for the City of Toronto.

The Grievor also left a rescheduled shift early, claiming illness, which the arbitrator found to be a further act of dishonesty.

The Union grieved the termination, arguing the Employer failed to use progressive discipline and lulled the Grievor into a false sense of security.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding the Grievor's repeated dishonesty regarding his absences constituted just cause for discharge and that no mitigating factors warranted a lesser penalty.

The Union appealed the denial of long-term income protection (LTIP) benefits for a Corrections Officer who ceased working following a workplace injury.

The central issue was whether the employee met the definition of total disability during the qualification period.

The arbitrator found that the employee's medical restrictions, primarily related to overhead activities and lifting, did not prevent them from performing the essential duties of their permanently accommodated, largely sedentary position in the Control Room.

The appeal was dismissed.

The parties consented to an order requiring the union to provide further and better particulars to the employer regarding the August 15, 2018 grievance.

The particulars must include the facts supporting the alleged breach of the collective agreement, including what was done, when, where, by whom, and with what motivation.

The particulars are to be treated as confidential and provided by February 1, 2021.

The Union filed grievances alleging the Employer violated the collective agreement and Compressed Work Week Agreements by requiring correctional officers to attend mandatory training on their regular days off (RDOs) and paying them at straight time rates.

The Arbitrator found that mandatory training constitutes work time.

The Employer breached the collective agreement by failing to provide two consecutive days off and by failing to pay overtime rates for work performed on scheduled days off.

The grievances were upheld, and the Employer was directed to compensate affected employees.

In a preliminary decision regarding six grievances alleging health and safety violations, the Employer challenged four of the Union's remaining particulars as expanding the scope of the grievances.

The Arbitrator applied a balancing approach, striking particulars that went beyond what was reasonably contemplated by the grievance forms (such as demanding physical searches of clients when the grievance only sought clarity on prohibited items, and raising new hire training issues in a grievance about policies for violent offenders).

However, the Arbitrator allowed particulars relating to the assessment of collateral contacts and the training of managers, finding them sufficiently encompassed by the broad terms of their respective grievances.

The Union sought the production of documents from the Employer in preparation for a scheduled grievance arbitration hearing.

Following a conference call, the Arbitrator found the requested documents to be arguably relevant and ordered their production, including investigation reports, manager notes, personnel files, and documents the Employer anticipated relying on.

The Employer retained the right to argue privilege or relevance.