OGSB 2021

The Union requested an order permitting service of a summons by email on a witness after attempts at personal service failed.

The Employer did not object to the request.

The Arbitrator granted the order, directing that the summons served by email would have the same legal effect as one served personally.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a correctional officer disputing the employer's calculation of his Continuous Service Date (CSD) upon his rollover from fixed-term to regular status.

Following a review of the records, it became apparent that the employer had incorrectly calculated the grievor's work weeks in 2018 and 2019 based on an old collective agreement formula.

The arbitrator directed the employer to adjust the grievor's CSD to reflect the correct calculation of his work weeks.

The union filed a group grievance alleging the employer made errors in calculating the continuous service dates (CSD) for several employees when they were rolled over into classified status at the Toronto South Detention Centre.

The parties reviewed the records and agreed on recalculated dates.

The arbitrator directed the employer to amend the CSDs for the affected individuals as agreed, noting that while some dates moved earlier and some later, no further grievances could be filed regarding the impact of these specific changes.

The parties jointly requested amendments to an earlier decision dated April 15, 2021, regarding the disclosure and production of medical documents in a grievance arbitration.

The Arbitrator ordered the amendments, which updated the number of grievances and modified the conditions under which the Employer's counsel may share the grievor's medical documents with instructing clients, law students, disability accommodation specialists, and witnesses.

At a grievance arbitration hearing, the Employer raised a preliminary concern regarding the Grievor's fitness to participate and face cross-examination.

The Employer requested an order requiring the Union to provide medical assurance from the Grievor's treating practitioner that she was medically fit to proceed.

The Union opposed the request, noting the Grievor was aware of the process and willing to proceed.

The Arbitrator denied the Employer's request, finding insufficient medical grounds or circumstances to warrant such an order.

The grievor, a Probation and Parole Officer, filed a grievance alleging the employer violated the collective agreement by denying his Transition Exit Initiative (TEI) request while approving a less senior employee's request.

Following the filing of the grievance, the grievor's TEI request was granted during a modernization process.

The union subsequently advised the employer that the grievor agreed to withdraw the grievance.

Although the grievor later claimed he did not want to withdraw it, the arbitrator found that the grievance was moot because the grievor had already received the exact remedy sought.

The grievance was dismissed.

The union filed a grievance on behalf of a fixed-term correctional officer, alleging the employer improperly calculated her seniority under Appendix COR24 of the collective agreement.

The grievor sought credit for time previously worked at a youth centre and a municipality.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance, finding that neither previous employer was part of the Ontario Public Service, and therefore the time worked could not be included in her hours of service for seniority purposes.

The union filed a grievance alleging the employer violated the collective agreement by failing to maintain a smoke-free environment in the workplace, exposing the grievor to second-hand smoke.

The parties agreed to settle the grievance and requested a consent order.

The arbitrator upheld the grievance, declaring that the employer breached the health and safety provisions of the collective agreement by failing to prevent exposure to residual smoke in the garage and fleet vehicles.

The Union filed a grievance challenging the Employer's use of surveillance cameras to monitor the performance of correctional officers, alleging it breached Appendix COR10 of the collective agreement.

The Arbitrator found that the Employer's use of surveillance video to investigate serious incidents and incidentally discovering unrelated misconduct did not violate the agreement.

However, the Arbitrator ruled that live monitoring of an officer during a Code Blue and conducting spot checks of surveillance video to ensure compliance with shift changeover procedures breached the collective agreement, as the Employer failed to establish the reasonable necessity of these privacy intrusions.

In a grievance arbitration scheduled for hearing, the Employer requested particulars from the Union to prepare for the hearing.

The Union did not oppose the request but failed to provide the particulars.

The Arbitrator issued an interim decision directing the Union to provide full particulars to the Employer by a specified date.

The union filed a grievance alleging that the employer violated the Human Rights Code and the collective agreement, seeking lost wages and damages.

The parties participated in an expedited mediation-arbitration process.

During mediation, the employer offered to pay the grievor five days' wages.

The arbitrator concluded this was a fair and reasonable offer, directed the employer to pay the five days' wages, and terminated the grievance.

The Association grieved the Employer's decision to declare a long-service employee to have abandoned her position after she failed to provide updated medical information to substantiate her ongoing absence.

The arbitrator found that, given the unique facts including the nature of the disability and the medical information already provided, the Employer should have placed the employee on an approved unpaid leave of absence rather than declaring job abandonment.

The grievance was allowed, and the employee was reinstated to an unpaid leave of absence until her intended retirement date.

During a mediation, a production issue arose regarding a Workplace Discrimination and Harassment Prevention (WDHP) report involving the grievor.

The Arbitrator directed the Employer to produce the relevant WDHP report to the Union.

The employer brought a preliminary motion to dismiss four grievances regarding overtime assignments because the union failed to provide requested particulars and documents.

Despite multiple requests from the employer and warnings that the hearing could not proceed, the union did not provide the particulars or offer any explanation for the delay.

The arbitrator granted the employer's motion and dismissed the grievances, noting that the union's failure compromised the ability to proceed and undermined the efficiency of the grievance arbitration system.

The union grieved on behalf of a correctional officer that the employer breached the collective agreement by denying her application for a temporary assignment to a pilot project.

The parties referred the grievance to mediation/arbitration and requested a decision without precedential value and without written reasons.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievance.

In an arbitration proceeding, the employer requested a subpoena for a patient's medical records from a hospital.

The hospital's representative agreed to release the records upon receipt of a written order and authorization.

The union did not oppose the arrangement.

The arbitrator found the materials arguably relevant and ordered the hospital to disclose the records to employer counsel, who would then provide a copy to union counsel.

The union filed grievances on behalf of an employee who suffered electrical shocks at work, seeking $10,000 in damages for the employer's failure to maintain a safe workplace and a declaration of breach.

The employee had already received benefits under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (WSIA).

The employer brought a preliminary motion to strike the claims.

The arbitrator allowed the motion, finding that the Board lacked jurisdiction to award monetary damages for injuries compensable under the WSIA's no-fault scheme.

The arbitrator also dismissed the request for a declaration as moot, since the employer had already resolved the electrical hazard and no further incidents had occurred.

The Grievance Settlement Board issued case management directions regarding 34 grievances filed by employees at the Ministry's Windsor office.

The Union was directed to file particulars and detail its disclosure request by December 1, 2021.

The Employer was directed to respond to the disclosure request and indicate any preliminary issues by January 17, 2022, ahead of the next hearing date.

The representative for a group grievance failed to attend the scheduled hearing.

The employer requested that the grievance be dismissed, while the union requested time to contact the representative.

The arbitrator ordered the representative to provide an explanation and supporting documentation for his non-attendance by a specified deadline, failing which the grievance would be dismissed.

The grievor, a correctional officer, was assaulted by an inmate and suffered serious injuries.

The union filed a grievance alleging the employer failed to provide a safe workplace, breaching the collective agreement and the Occupational Health and Safety Act, and sought declarations and $20,000 in damages.

The employer acknowledged its failure to provide a safe workplace but argued the Board lacked jurisdiction to order damages.

The arbitrator granted the grievance in part, issuing declarations that the employer breached its legal obligations under the collective agreement and the Act, but declined to order damages.