GSB#2022-6767

UNION#2022-5112-0288

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (Tovilo)

Union

• and -

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

Employer

BEFORE

Brian P. Sheehan

Arbitrator

FOR THE UNION

Gregg Gray Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Emily Lewis Treasury Board Secretariat Employee Relations Advisor

HEARING

September 15, 2022

Decision

1The Employer and the Union at the Toronto South Detention Centre agreed to participate in the Expedited Mediation/Arbitration process in accordance with the negotiated Protocol. It is not necessary to reproduce the entire Protocol. Suffice to say, that the parties have agreed to a True Mediation/Arbitration process wherein each party provides the Arbitrator with their submissions setting out the facts and the authorities they respectively will rely upon. This decision is issued in accordance with the Protocol and with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement, and, as such, it is without prejudice or precedent.

2The grievor is employed as a Correctional Officer 2 at the Toronto South Detention Centre. He has been employed with the Employer since October 2017.

3In terms of his disciplinary record, he had a Letter of Reprimand on file.

4The grievor received a one-day suspension on June 24, 2022. The disciplinary letter alleged that the grievor engaged in unprofessional conduct by: (1) dropping an inmate’s meal on the floor; and (2) failing to report that other officers have dropped inmates’ meals on the floor.

5With respect to the first allegation, on the morning of May 30, 2022, the grievor was distributing breakfast meals (the contents of which were contained in a bag) to inmates in a segregated unit. It was the first time the grievor had worked on that unit. It was asserted in an Appendix attached to the grievance that the breakfast meal was placed on the cell floor, and that the inmate had been previously noncompliant by holding onto the hatch of the door. During the Mediation/Arbitration proceeding, the grievor’s version of the incident was that he reached down through the hatch of the door and gently released the bag close to the floor of the cell.

6A review of the video of the incident affirms that the grievor opened the hatch and casually dropped the breakfast bag. It was neither released gently, nor was it released in close proximity to the cell's floor. Given that determination, the Employer’s decision to discipline the grievor was warranted.

7It has been concluded, however, that the penalty should be reduced to a Letter of Reprimand. A key reason for the reduction of the penalty is that the Employer completely rescinded the second allegation that formed the basis of the one-day suspension. Additionally, there was no apparent malice associated with the grievor’s behaviour.

8In conclusion, the one-day suspension issued to the grievor is reduced to a Letter of Reprimand, and the Employer shall make the grievor whole by compensating him eight hours' pay.